City removing seats

ancoats said:
the simple rule and correct me if am wrong if city fans are losing 1000 plus seats then the away allocation should be reduced by the same about

for me the bottom levels of the stadium should be for all city fans and newcastle and united do it and others also have fans at the top levels out of the way ? so give the city fans the bottom level of the away fans take up
Click to expand...
Away allocation wont change its 3000 or 10% whichever is lower.
 
bluesmith said:
Because 3000 is lower than 10%?
Click to expand...

The 3000 rule was brought in because of complaint's from United. They successfully argued that it wasnt fair because they had a bigger stadium than everyone else, go figure !!!

They also reduce clubs allocations on the basis that some club's, ie City are guilty of persistent standing. Sunderland did the same to them a few years earlier. They reduced United away allocation to a little over 1000... obvs they cried all the way to the FA.
 
WRicko said:
And as for the comment on what investors want why do you think virtually all investments provide both ? Be it bonds property stocks and shares ? Also you have to put it in perspective the Sheik has invested a huge amount and so needs a bigger return to make it worth while
Click to expand...

You do know what I do for a living don't you? I'm an investment adviser, focusing on high net worth clients, based in the Middle East.

Less than 2% of people choose to take their dividends or coupon yields from stocks or property or bonds as the vast majority understand compound growth on reinvestment is of far greater worth over the long term than an annual income.

When you then consider that Mansour is not exactly cash poor and has no need for that income, then you will realise how foolish he would be to take a dividend rather than reinvesting the profits into the playing staff (which are basically assets that increase future earnings) and increasing the capital value of the club(s). All you are doing is supposing that City can't/won't be spending £100m on a player to replace Aguero based on your own false hypothesis that a) City would need a profit of £100m from the previous year to fund said transfer and b) that Mansour will want and/or deserves a dividend from CFG when he has shown no inclination for doing so in the previous 12 years.

So yeah, I will stick by every comment I've sent your way.
 
Last edited:
SWP's back said:
You do know what I do for a living don't you? I'm an investment adviser, focusing on high net worth clients, based in the Middle East...
Click to expand...
You could have just dropped the mike and walked away at that point ;)



With any luck you'll finally get him to shut up and stop boring everybody.
 
SWP's back said:
You do know what I do for a living don't you? I'm an investment adviser, focusing on high net worth clients, based in the Middle East.

Less than 2% of people choose to take their dividends or coupon yields from stocks or property or bonds as the vast majority understand compound growth on reinvestment is of far greater worth over the long term than an annual income.

When you then consider that Mansour is not exactly cash poor and has no need for that income, then you will realise how foolish he would be to take a dividend rather than reinvesting the profits into the playing staff (which are basically assets that increase future earnings) and increasing the capital value of the club(s). All you are doing is supposing that City can't/won't be spending £100m on a player to replace Aguero based on your own false hypothesis that a) City would need a profit of £100m from the previous year to fund said transfer and b) that Mansour will want and/or deserves a dividend from CFG when he has shown no inclination for doing so in the previous 12 years.

So yeah, I will stick by every comment I've sent your way.
Click to expand...

How am I meant to know what you do for a living ? Why should I care ? I wont tell you about myself whilst not as impressive I am no novice. I am aware of compounding and amortisation despite your false claims to contrary. It might well be that a lot of people do not take a dividend but I am not sure your clients are a typical. but even if they are. It can be much safer assuming the companies are sound to look for a company or bond providing a dividend I would certainly be looking at it as a reason to pick between to investment options. Even if I chose to reinvest the dividend as I do with all my own personal investments which are doing nicely.

Your claims of knowledge would go down better if you did not make assumptions about people that I am sure you would not make in your professional life but maybe I could have communicated better.I am have not said city wont or carnt spend 100 million or need to make 100 million profit. What I am saying is that we cannot be relying on amortisation and selling players to buy other players It does not really stack up financially to sell for example Rodri for a loss but an accounting profit and then spend 100 million replacing him but not being worried about it because its spread out over however many years. Our player purchases funds need to come mostly from revenue like advertising etc like this proposal.

I stand by my point that the Sheik deserves a dividend even if he should not take it. Probably as you say best he does not.

Also best he does not take the profit from the sale of stakes in CFG since it needs to be and will be according to many on here reinvested in stadiums clubs campus etc. Even more reason to get revenues as high as possible from advertising as he is still not getting the benefit as such from the capital appreciation at least not in his pocket though it is paying for new investments leading to more capital appreciation
 
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.