dadnlad
Well-Known Member
dont want owners that reinvest money made wheres the fun in that
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
FFP set to be scrapped by UEFA.
And Gill will make the premier ffp more sever.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,076
And Gill will make the premier ffp more sever.
I am not sure what they can do on the financial front. That ship has sailed, I think. That's why the usual suspects are changing tack to outlawing state-ownership, and when that fails in our case (as it will because we legally aren't state-owned, or state-backed, a new iteration), to fit and proper tests for the owners. The problem for them is that this will also fail while the UAE is an ally which it will be for many years at least.
What I am trying to say is: relax. We have arrived and we aren't going away.
The UAE was a stooge state like most colonies but it was never going to stay that way. Economically and technically it faces towards Asia and it is best described as none aligned. Their major political concern is Iran and hence the UAE armed forces have been in Yemen and Libya. A decade ago, when Sheikh Mansour took over City, the UAE was a firm British ally but the world is changing fast, and Britain is in the slow lane. They are not opposed, they are irrelevant but they do make good weapons.I am not sure what they can do on the financial front. That ship has sailed, I think. That's why the usual suspects are changing tack to outlawing state-ownership, and when that fails in our case (as it will because we legally aren't state-owned, or state-backed, a new iteration), to fit and proper tests for the owners. The problem for them is that this will also fail while the UAE is an ally which it will be for many years at least.
What I am trying to say is: relax. We have arrived and we aren't going away.
Wardley Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Mar 2021
- Messages
- 135
- Team supported
- Manchester City
And that is what really hurts them. Enjoy their tears!I am not sure what they can do on the financial front. That ship has sailed, I think. That's why the usual suspects are changing tack to outlawing state-ownership, and when that fails in our case (as it will because we legally aren't state-owned, or state-backed, a new iteration), to fit and proper tests for the owners. The problem for them is that this will also fail while the UAE is an ally which it will be for many years at least.
What I am trying to say is: relax. We have arrived and we aren't going away.
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,076
The UAE was a stooge state like most colonies but it was never going to stay that way. Economically and technically it faces towards Asia and it is best described as none aligned. Their major political concern is Iran and hence the UAE armed forces have been in Yemen and Libya. A decade ago, when Sheikh Mansour took over City, the UAE was a firm British ally but the world is changing fast, and Britain is in the slow lane. They are not opposed, they are irrelevant but they do make good weapons.
Not really the thread for it, but you have said a few times that the UAE is "facing towards" Asia and I am not quite sure what you mean. Trying to understand. You mean China? Russia? India? Or you mean generally reducing their positioning with the west, militarily or economically, or in terms of spreading investment risk/reward?
I mean who it trades with and who it forms high value strategic projects with e.g., India, South Korea, the rest of the Middle-east and China.Not really the thread for it, but you have said a few times that the UAE is "facing towards" Asia and I am not quite sure what you mean. Trying to understand. You mean China? Russia? India? Or you mean generally reducing their positioning with the west, militarily or economically, or in terms of spreading investment risk/reward?
halfcenturyup
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 12,076
Fair enough, but don't see it affecting a western slant to diplomatic relations myself. Perfectly logical to enter into strategic projects with China and India for example, as part of their diversification strategy, but I am sure the west will continue to make a pig's breakfast out of the Middle East so that Iran can continue its destabilising behaviour and the UAE can keep buying arms from, and can keep investing in, the west. For a generation at least. I will be dead by then so I don't care :)I mean who it trades with and who it forms high value strategic projects with e.g., India, South Korea, the rest of the Middle-east and China.
I take it you are not a Burkian.Fair enough, but don't see it affecting a western slant to diplomatic relations myself. Perfectly logical to enter into strategic projects with China and India for example, as part of their diversification strategy, but I am sure the west will continue to make a pig's breakfast out of the Middle East so that Iran can continue its destabilising behaviour and the UAE can keep buying arms from, and can keep investing in, the west. For a generation at least. I will be dead by then so I don't care :)
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
How do you know he's called Ian?I take it you are not a Burkian.