City launch legal action against the Premier League | City win APT case (pg901)

Keeper! said:
Wrong.

He wants to see a return on that investment and he needs to invest and he should not be prevented from doing so.

What he has just said has blown apart all the hate against OUR club, this is a huge moment.

I welcome a strong rags as it will make us even stronger and push our owner to make us even better.

Today is a huge day for the PL and the decade long attack against our club
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Very significant that Ratcliffe is saying this publically. He is the first major PL Director to break rank and essentially defend City's position. Confirms what has been said on this forum for months: namely that there has been a sea change in the relationship between City and United off the field. The Omar Berrada appointment was a pragmatic decision by Ratcliffe. It is a smart move by Ratcliffe who is trying to attract external investment (perhaps some public money as well) for a new stadium. With Labour Councils in Trafford, Salford, and Manchester, and a likely Labour Government, Ratcliffe will be pushing against an open door. He is also pushing the multi-club model. I think this is is a big moment. I wonder if he cleared his comments with the Glazers.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I agree with this. Very significant that Ratcliffe is saying this publically. He is the first major PL Director to break rank and essentially defend City's position. Confirms what has been said on this forum for months: namely that there has been a sea change in the relationship between City and United off the field. The Omar Berrada appointment was a pragmatic decision by Ratcliffe. It is a smart move by Ratcliffe who is trying to attract external investment (perhaps some public money as well) for a new stadium. With Labour Councils in Trafford, Salford, and Manchester, and a likely Labour Government, Ratcliffe will be pushing against an open door. He is also pushing the multi-club model. I think this is is a big moment. I wonder if he cleared his comments with the Glazers.
Click to expand...
He already has a business relationship with Mansour and Khaldoon, Mubadla have a joint venture in Canada with Ineos called Ineos Nova
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I agree with this. Very significant that Ratcliffe is saying this publically. He is the first major PL Director to break rank and essentially defend City's position. Confirms what has been said on this forum for months: namely that there has been a sea change in the relationship between City and United off the field. The Omar Berrada appointment was a pragmatic decision by Ratcliffe. It is a smart move by Ratcliffe who is trying to attract external investment (perhaps some public money as well) for a new stadium. With Labour Councils in Trafford, Salford, and Manchester, and a likely Labour Government, Ratcliffe will be pushing against an open door. He is also pushing the multi-club model. I think this is is a big moment. I wonder if he cleared his comments with the Glazers.
Click to expand...
The Glazer's and many of the other Yanks are history, unless they want to invest in their clubs.
 
Keeper! said:
Do you really think he gives a F?

This guy is a serious dude sadly, the days of comedy gold rags are sadly coming to an end.
Click to expand...
Of course not.
Once his agreed investment was being constrained he reverted to how dare they mode.

"Never trouble trouble until trouble troubles you" , seems to have well and truly been triggered.
 
Gordyola said:
He already has a business relationship with Mansour and Khaldoon, Mubadla have a joint venture in Canada with Ineos called Ineos Nova
Click to expand...
That will work to our advantage in the short term, to them in the longer term. Maybe they become more competitive to us on the field, but off it he’s right and an ally.
 
hammocity said:
That's far too accurate for an Accountant, if you ask a real one "what's 5 + 5, they'll answer "what do you want it to add up to".
Click to expand...
That’s not correct. The correct response is “who’s asking?”

Because if it’s the shareholders it’s 10, if it’s investors the answer is 12 and if it’s the taxman the answer is 3.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.