To be honest I was expecting a few questions after listening to Mancini’s speech, although I did not expect this sort of inquisition (cue Monty Python jokes)!
Damocles, I thought the ownership structure has already been explained before, but I guess this was the reason why I signed up to Bluemoon in the first place so let me try to
make myself clear this time.
City is owned by Sheikh Mansour.
Khaldoon Al Mubarak is Chairman.
Mohamed Mubarak Al Mazrouei is on the Board.
The latter two work directly for the Crown Prince, this can be seen clearly from the positions they hold in Abu Dhabi, they are in effect his right hand men. They are at City to keep an eye on things and ensure that the ‘Project’ runs smoothly.
There is no way that Sheikh Mansour could have woken up one day and said hmmm this football ownership business looks like a hoot, where is my chequebook? Everything would have to be approved by the Royal Family and in particular Sheikh Mansour’s older full brother Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed (the Crown Prince).
The actual idea of owning an English football club was given to Sheikh Mansour by his father-in-law Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum (the ruler of Dubai) who as people are probably aware failed in a bid to purchase Liverpool via the Dubai SWF DIC. When other football clubs became available Sheikh Mohammed (the Dubai ruler) was made aware of this by Amanda Staveley (an advisor who is close to several Middle East Royal Families via here acquaintance with Prince Andrew). As he was no longer interested in buying a football club at this time (various reasons for which there is no reason to get into at this time) he recommended the notion to his son-in-law.
The overall plan for Manchester City will not be decided by one man alone, but if important decisions need to be made (no not like buying Torres or Dzeko) they will be discussed by other people and have to be approved by the Crown Prince (think investment in and development of East Manchester).
As to sponsorship deals, it is common to use local sponsors. For example in Abu Dhabi, Al Jazira of which Sheikh Mansour is President and Vice Chairman (note how another of his full brother’s is Honourary Chairman and that they play in the “Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Stadium” –most things in Abu Dhabi are collaborations) have IPIC and Aabar emblazoned across their shirts. Although Sheikh Mansour is Chairman of IPIC (which in turn is the majority stakeholder in Aabar) he does not own the investment vehicle, it is a SWF. You will find the same situation with Etihad, one person does not own these companies they are government entities, not personal businesses. Although the distinction is a fine one when you consider that the Royal Family is the government, it is nonetheless an important one. All City’s sponsors have paid market value for the deals, there are no, nor will there be any ridiculous sponsorship deals, it just does not make any financial sense, especially when you consider that major companies like Aldar and Etihad have been struggling to break even and receive a lot of government support just so that they can manage their day to day affairs. All major companies whether Barclays or BP have marketing budgets and Middle-East companies are no different. Although City was not purchased as a marketing vehicle for Abu Dhabi over time the leadership has realised that it can in some small way be used as such. City was not purchased to save Abu Dhabi for when oil runs out (very long time before that happens) or to put them on the map, the club makes up one small part of a larger sector (Sports and Media) which Abu Dhabi are concentrating on to diversify their economy (read the Abu Dhabi 2030 plan if you are interested).
Now onto the tricky questions. The UAE like many countries has had its problems with Human Rights, this is not in dispute. However, many of the issues have been exaggerated and steps are constantly being taken to prevent such abuses from ever happening again. Nobody approves of human trafficking, abuse of labourers, prostitution etc, however, it is one thing to disapprove and another to stop them. The UAE is a new country and obviously has had some teething problems, however, in terms of the indigenous population, apart from Qataris, they are among the best treated locals in the world and the Royal Family unlike most governments are held in high esteem by the people. What I fail to understand is that there are no problems with Sheikh Mansour owing City but if it were his brother than it is unacceptable! Maybe, this is to do with the false notion that people seem to have of Sheikh Mansour just being a businessman who personally owns most Abu Dhabi linked businesses, be they Etihad or Ferrari*! Obviously people make money because of the positions they hold, whether that be a politician or a member of the Royal Family. Many members of the Royal Family hold government positions and run government entities but they also have their own personal wealth (again fine distinction but an important one).
Mancini is a clever man, his time in Italy has made him politically savvy. He knew exactly who he was talking about (he had a written speech for crying out loud, it was hardly as if blurted something out of the top of his head). The bottom line is that without the Crown Prince City would not be in the position they are in today, Mancini simply acknowledged that fact.
I hope that clears up a few misconceptions.
*Sheikh Mansour does not own, nor did he ever own any part of Ferrari. Mubadala (one of the SWF) bought a 5% stake to show Bernie Ecclestone that Abu Dhabi was serious about F1, the stake has since been sold back to Fiat for a (very) small profit
