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

Not true.

The Glaziers have been good owners, the only issue is they have probably been to easy going and trusted the judgment of the execs/management far too much in the face of obvious incompetence.

Whatever your opinion of Woodward he was exceptional at bringing commercial deals into the club, but in pure footballing terms he was a nightmare and incompetent.

The rags are the victim of a single man (Ferguson) having complete and utter control of a club for 20 years and having no structure in place when he left, the loss of Gill was also a huge loss.

Having money is no guarantee of success, Everton are a classic example of that, 500million spent and a shambles of a club.
Where you could credit or criticise the owners it is in their appointment of their executive and spot on about the Man Utd executive. That was wiped out through the departure of Ferguson and Gill. An investment banker came into Man utd to fill their shoes, and failed. Square pegs in round holes. City on the other hand did it right. But beyond that there are huge systemic advantages to the successful clubs and they can not be ignored.
 
It's not a meritocracy. Man Utd and a number of clubs were the architects of the Premier League and Champions League that stratified football and created what has become known as the top 4 who have huge financial and therefore footballing advantage.

City bought into that closed shop and now it operates to our advantage hence City's budget completely dwarfs most rivals.

As for Man Utd, their budget is similar. Their ownership made the mistake in relying on an investment banker to run their football operation. Both City, and Man Utd's football operation were similarly financed. Once produced winning results, the other crashed. The success of each was down not to the ownership but the executives who run each operation.

City's owner is an owner in absentia. Likewise the Glazers. They do not micromanage the clubs. And yes City's monopoly of football does indeed owe much to the framework that Gill and co drew up. You simply have to compare the footballing world of Peter Swales where a Derby, Forest or Villa could win the football league to the era of the Premier League which a small group of clubs has monopolised for years.

Economic power allows an owner to invest in shrewd operators but it is a pre-condition for success. Once you are successful you should remain successful
Wealth is a precondition, but not a guarantee. Big difference. At the start of your exegesis you maintained that wealth equalled success, which is clearly not so.Even in your post above you say "financial advantage and therefore football advantage". There is your non sequitur. Despite your shift you are still conflating the differing effects of ffp, the PL model, management activity and so much more. To analyse what works and what doesn't, you have to disaggregate all the factors and not assume a straight line of cause and effect. It is a polynomial. Good luck with that one.
If it were as simple as you suggest, everybody would be doing the same thing, with their competence at it the only difference between success and failure.
Have a look at Brentford's strategy, it is quite different from most and incredibly successful. Google Brentford Moneyball Policy or similar, I know there are articles on it.
 
Last edited:
Chicago. As a legacy Luddite, eSports is a mystery to me. Is it all streaming or could the arena also become a games and competition venue for eSport in the future?
Imagine this: e-sports played in a meta Etihad with 50,000 baying spectators.
Virtual reality gone mad.
 
Wealth is a precondition, but not a guarantee. Big difference. At the start of your exegesis you maintained that wealth equalled success, which is clearly not so.Even in your post above you say "financial advantage and therefore football advantage". There is your non sequitur. Despite your shift you are still conflating the differing effects of ffp, the PL model, management activity and so much more. To analyse what works and what doesn't, you have to disaggregate all the factors and not assume a straight line of cause and effect. It is a polynomial. Good luck with that one.
If it were as simple as you suggest, everybody would be doing the same thing, with their competence at it the only difference between success and failure.
Have a look at Brentford's strategy, it is quite different from most and incredibly successful. Google Brentford Moneyball Policy or similar, I know there are articles on it
Knocking out the pre-eminent club is not easy. It requires £1Billion and its fraught wirh risk. City had the good fortune of going up against Utd at the changing of their managerial guard, and now the position has been ring-fenced against new entants (FFP). It's not a free-market. Anything but.
 
Knocking out the pre-eminent club is not easy. It requires £1Billion and its fraught wirh risk. City had the good fortune of going up against Utd at the changing of their managerial guard, and now the position has been ring-fenced against new entants (FFP). It's not a free-market. Anything but.
Key issue: Ffp does not preclude spending by any club that is willing to take the risk of borrowing.
 
Knocking out the pre-eminent club is not easy. It requires £1Billion and its fraught wirh risk. City had the good fortune of going up against Utd at the changing of their managerial guard, and now the position has been ring-fenced against new entants (FFP). It's not a free-market. Anything but.

We did win the fa cup and the league while fergie was still there boss!
 
Chicago. As a legacy Luddite, eSports is a mystery to me. Is it all streaming or could the arena also become a games and competition venue for eSport in the future?
It’s home streaming that captures the players, then it’s places like the new arena that puts them all under one roof!

They fill arenas with the eSports being conducted on huge screens for all to see.

Wouldn’t surprise me to see the FIFA eWorld Cup in Manchester in the near future!

Demographically, it is a premium marketing cohort that is both rabid about their “likes” and full of leading edge influencers.
 
Last edited:
The rags are the victim of a single man (Ferguson) having complete and utter control of a club for 20 years and having no structure in place when he left, the loss of Gill was also a huge loss.
Correct, ferguson left them deep in the shit, and he knew it, wouldn't be surprised if gill knew it was coming as well.
 
It’s home streaming that captures the players, then it’s places like the new arena that puts them all under one roof!

They fill arenas with the eSports being conducted on huge screens for all to see.

Wouldn’t surprise me to see the FIFA eWorld Cup in Manchester in the near future!

Demographically, it is a premium marketing cohort that is both rabid about their “likes” and full of leading edge influencers.
I can hardly wait.

(yawn)
 
Not sure if this has been posted but there's a nice compilation of City finance data on this twitter thread:



Nice work, if you're on here. Just one request though, change the "related" column of Etihad's sponsorship to "No"(surely you know better than that?). Failing that, change the heading of the column to "Abu-Dhabi/UAE based". If that's what you meant.
 
Key issue: Ffp does not preclude spending by any club that is willing to take the risk of borrowing.
I don’t think it matters where the money comes from - debt or owners pockets - what FFP does is more or less tie your spending to your existing turnover.

In other words it seeks to limit investment for growth without distinguishing between safer/committed money and risky debt, even though it it is obvious that debt is more likely to lead to the exact result FFP is supposedly trying to prevent.
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top