City & FFP | 2020/21 Accounts released | Revenues of £569.8m, £2.4m profit (p 2395)

Double like on the Garry Cook bit.

What were Everton saying/asking for in their emails (if you can share?)?. God I imagine they’re kicking themselves.
Probably a bit of tax-free hard cash in hand, nudge nudge wink wink don't involve the taxman or the dole office :)
 
Double like on the Garry Cook bit.

What were Everton saying/asking for in their emails (if you can share?)?. God I imagine they’re kicking themselves.
They were being asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, as a condition of ADUG undertaking due diligence. They were stalling and making alternative suggestions. It was made clear to them by Amanda Staveley that these things were non-negotiable and she was getting increasingly impatient with them. I remember seeing an email where she said something like "What do these people not understand? They either do it our way or not at all. They are so unprofessional".

Those weren't the exact words but that was the tone.
 
but his wealth is the reason we could outspend everyone if spending was unrestricted, this is hypothetically speaking of course. I don't think it's a good idea to allow that.
No matter how much money you have, it's no guarantee of signing the best players
We tried signing Kaka and failed
When spending was unrestricted, Chelsea tried buying everyone with some success but they weren't dominating everything
 
No matter how much money you have, it's no guarantee of signing the best players
We tried signing Kaka and failed
When spending was unrestricted, Chelsea tried buying everyone with some success but they weren't dominating everything
Chelsea were extremely dominant for a while until we came along


Chelsea couldn't compete financially with us and now we are dominant. If City didn't get money there is no reason to think Chelsea wouldn't have been getting our players and continuing the domination.

Nobody can compete financially with City in a free market. Maybe PSG
 
Chelsea were extremely dominant for a while until we came along


Chelsea couldn't compete financially with us and now we are dominant. If City didn't get money there is no reason to think Chelsea wouldn't have been getting our players and continuing the domination.

United were more successful than Chelsea during that period. Chelsea won back to back titles but United followed it up with three in a row + a CL.
 
United were more successful than Chelsea during that period. Chelsea won back to back titles but United followed it up with three in a row + a CL.
it says it right there - Chelsea won more trophies than anyone. It's in an article with a graph. I don't know how much more I can do for you fella
 
since 2003-04 season when Abramovich started spending they've won 16

including 3 European titles.
When we were taken over, Chelsea had won 2 titles and a few domestic cups. The rags had won 2 in a row and a champions league and were about to add their third title in a row. When we won our first title, the rags had 4 of the last 5 and Chelsea had 3 in 9 years. Even now after years of the rags being shit, they've still won as many leagues as Chelsea since RA took over (as have we if we win this season). If it wasn't for us, the rags would have two more titles and would be on course to win another.
 
When we were taken over, Chelsea had won 2 titles and a few domestic cups. The rags had won 2 in a row and a champions league and were about to add their third title in a row. When we won our first title, the rags had 4 of the last 5 and Chelsea had 3 in 9 years. Even now after years of the rags being shit, they've still won as many leagues as Chelsea since RA took over (as have we if we win this season). If it wasn't for us, the rags would have two more titles and would be on course to win another.
I reckon Chelsea would have been the club to get our players and would have dominated without our investment, although you can't legislate for Abramovich going mental either.
 
Most PL owners are billionaires.....

Sheikh Mansour | Man City | $20bn
Roman Abramovich | Chelsea | $11.3bn
Stan Kroenke | Arsenal | $10bn
Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha & family | Leicester City | $6bn
Joe Lewis & Daniel Levy | Tottenham | $6bn
Nassef Sawiris | Aston Villa | $5.8bn
Guo Guanchang | Wolves | $5.6bn
Glazer family | Manchester United | $5bn
Joshua Harris | Crystal Palace | $4.3bn
Mike Ashley | Newcastle United | $2.8bn
John W. Henry & Thomas C. Werner (FSG) | Liverpool | $2.7bn
 
it says it right there - Chelsea won more trophies than anyone. It's in an article with a graph. I don't know how much more I can do for you fella

That graph is from the takeover in 2003 until 2019.

You were talking about from the 2003 takeover until we came along and started spending:

“Chelsea were extremely dominant for a while until we came along”

United were in fact more successful during that period.
 
That graph is from the takeover in 2003 until 2019.

You were talking about from the 2003 takeover until we came along and started spending.
from 2003 to 2010 - when we won our first trophy - they won 8 domestic titles. they interrupted a 2 team league at the time really and upset the apple cart in a big way. There was an awful amount of vitriol towards them and the money too.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top