carlosthejackal
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 4,465
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
Try watching Khaldoons part 2 interview
Try watching Khaldoons part 2 interview
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Has City explained the logic of buying other football clubs?
- Thread starter Marvin
- Start date
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
I know Soriano and Txixi are competent at what they do. This is more a strategic decision. I'd guess it's not really about a return of capital, and making the most efficient use of City's resources, and more a case of the UAE and our owner wanting to make as big a global statement as possible for his football project. Football is almost by definition parochial. NY City may work as it's a new club launch, but taking over or partnering foreign clubs, that's a difficult concept.
But it's a bit different from taking over MCFC, handing over £300m to the manager and building new stands and training grounds. You appoint the best coach and architects for that. This is something that's not been done in football. A foreign club establishing a network of satellite clubs.blueinsa said:Marvin said:OK brains, let's hear your explanation.blueinsa said:On a day like today with some of the shit spouted this without a doubt takes the fucking biscuit.
Honest to fucking god!
There are plenty of examples of Companies moving into America eg Tesco the Kings of Retail, with all kinds of grandiose plans, and then 3-4 years later they sell up.
No need to be in awe of people jus because they are incredibly rich. many inherit wealth or just got lucky.
Given the success both on and off the field in just 6 short years, don't you think we owe it to our owner to have some faith and believe, with justification that they do know what they are doing?
They have a proven track record in global business and they have hired Ferran and Txiki who have a proven track record in building football clubs.
I know what I will stick with.
I know Soriano and Txixi are competent at what they do. This is more a strategic decision. I'd guess it's not really about a return of capital, and making the most efficient use of City's resources, and more a case of the UAE and our owner wanting to make as big a global statement as possible for his football project. Football is almost by definition parochial. NY City may work as it's a new club launch, but taking over or partnering foreign clubs, that's a difficult concept.
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
UEFA and City already agreed that we can't include transactions within the Group in our own FFP accounts. But if it's a success it could help Manchester City. It might not count towards the UEFA Breakeven calc, but it could still help our cashflow, or alternatively damage it.roaminblue said:Maybe some of the accountants might be able to answer this.
But with the acquisition of other football clubs, would their reports be consolidated into our own for the purposes of FFP? Potentially help with our own revenues, and not suffer the burden of having to meet FFP seeing as though they are not going to be playing in Europe?
Or would City's accounts have to be taken into consideration on a stand alone basis?
roaminblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 2,991
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
Cheers mate.
But internal transactions aside, typical group structures result in a consolidated income statement. This takes into account revenues (and losses) generated by different brands, franchises, minority interests in the group. I was wondering whether we are under obligation to report our statements on a consolidated basis, and if so would it be the statements for the group that are taken into consideration, or just mcfc.
Marvin said:UEFA and City already agreed that we can't include transactions within the Group in our own FFP accounts. But if it's a success it could help Manchester City. It might not count towards the UEFA Breakeven calc, but it could still help our cashflow, or alternatively damage it.
Cheers mate.
But internal transactions aside, typical group structures result in a consolidated income statement. This takes into account revenues (and losses) generated by different brands, franchises, minority interests in the group. I was wondering whether we are under obligation to report our statements on a consolidated basis, and if so would it be the statements for the group that are taken into consideration, or just mcfc.
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
think its more about commercial tie-ins and feeder clubs .... like bases of operations for talent. CFG is heavy on player development.
All the top clubs have feeder clubs, City are taking them one step further and building commercial links with them too.
think its more about commercial tie-ins and feeder clubs .... like bases of operations for talent. CFG is heavy on player development.
All the top clubs have feeder clubs, City are taking them one step further and building commercial links with them too.
ChicagoBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 10 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 18,203
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
As we will see with Nissan in the near future, and other GLOBAL brands, this is all part of a GLOBAL BRANDING EFFORT, plus local marketing of local brands in CFG's local markets/regions.
One last time....."The Project" is NOT just making City into CL winners, but about creating a sustainable, profitable and global commercial success from football. In each market, the owners have used the same philosophy....a well-supported, but underperforming, quality team which their professionalism and commercial savvy will assist I growing exponentially from where they are today. Cover the major FIFA regional cross pollinate management and possibly players, and develop GLOBAL talent to generate sustainable players for each global market.
In short, "The Project" is a business centered around the success of a team in the biggest domestic league in the world and playing in the biggest international club tournament in the world with the richest commercial returns. An investment in global commercial brand development. We are going to do (with 40+ global brands) what UEFA has done with a small handful (GazProm, Heineken, etc...) and start printing money. It has already started and is only going to accelerate as long as the CFG is made up of successful teams.....and the owners will spend the money necessary (as they already have done with the Mother Ship) to MAKE that happen.
As we will see with Nissan in the near future, and other GLOBAL brands, this is all part of a GLOBAL BRANDING EFFORT, plus local marketing of local brands in CFG's local markets/regions.
One last time....."The Project" is NOT just making City into CL winners, but about creating a sustainable, profitable and global commercial success from football. In each market, the owners have used the same philosophy....a well-supported, but underperforming, quality team which their professionalism and commercial savvy will assist I growing exponentially from where they are today. Cover the major FIFA regional cross pollinate management and possibly players, and develop GLOBAL talent to generate sustainable players for each global market.
In short, "The Project" is a business centered around the success of a team in the biggest domestic league in the world and playing in the biggest international club tournament in the world with the richest commercial returns. An investment in global commercial brand development. We are going to do (with 40+ global brands) what UEFA has done with a small handful (GazProm, Heineken, etc...) and start printing money. It has already started and is only going to accelerate as long as the CFG is made up of successful teams.....and the owners will spend the money necessary (as they already have done with the Mother Ship) to MAKE that happen.
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
As far as UEFA are concerned I think that they are purely interested in the Football License for MCFC to enter European competition, and they have made clear that with respect to the breakeven calculation that they will not consider the sale of assets from City to a related City club as allowable income. So I doubt that we could include income, or expenses for that matter of any of our group clubs
City produce accounts at the moment as Manchester City Limited with the parent group being City Football Group Limited.
I am guessing that Manchester City Limited accounts will continue as present but that the Group accounts will take into account all global activities including MCFC?
Someone else might like to correct me as I really don't know what I am talking about here (even more so than usual)
I'd be guessing if I tried to answer that, but I'll have a stab at it! It's only a poorly educated guess though which will become obviousroaminblue said:Marvin said:UEFA and City already agreed that we can't include transactions within the Group in our own FFP accounts. But if it's a success it could help Manchester City. It might not count towards the UEFA Breakeven calc, but it could still help our cashflow, or alternatively damage it.
Cheers mate.
But internal transactions aside, typical group structures result in a consolidated income statement. This takes into account revenues (and losses) generated by different brands, franchises, minority interests in the group. I was wondering whether we are under obligation to report our statements on a consolidated basis, and if so would it be the statements for the group that are taken into consideration, or just mcfc.
As far as UEFA are concerned I think that they are purely interested in the Football License for MCFC to enter European competition, and they have made clear that with respect to the breakeven calculation that they will not consider the sale of assets from City to a related City club as allowable income. So I doubt that we could include income, or expenses for that matter of any of our group clubs
City produce accounts at the moment as Manchester City Limited with the parent group being City Football Group Limited.
I am guessing that Manchester City Limited accounts will continue as present but that the Group accounts will take into account all global activities including MCFC?
Someone else might like to correct me as I really don't know what I am talking about here (even more so than usual)
Blue Haze
Well-Known Member
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
We will have to segregate our activities when presenting accounts. I don't think it would help us anyway, these other clubs won't be making significant profits in aggregate any time soon.
It's a way to promote the brand and identify youth, I think.
We will have to segregate our activities when presenting accounts. I don't think it would help us anyway, these other clubs won't be making significant profits in aggregate any time soon.
It's a way to promote the brand and identify youth, I think.
Re: Has City explained the logic of buying other football cl
Well just because CFG bough these clubs I wont follow them. I never cared about USA football or Australian football and the reason wasnt that City didnt have a "sister" team there.
Once I did put money on Japanese football and couldnt get one match right, that was enough.:)
Will all these clubs change to sky blue shirt in the near future? Because I dont like that idea. To buy existing clubs change their name maybe also their colours. New York FC ok, as thats basically a club built from nothing.
Also we agreed in FFP that any incomes from this CFG transactions wont count. So that wouldnt help us in the future. Only maybe if these clubs can get sponsors and somehow they want to sponsor MCFC too not only Yokohama. If its not Mansour's other company as a sponsor that could work maybe.
One big advantage could be if we could build or improve these club's current academy and youth system and then in years get some of their best talents to MCFC. But thats more of a feeder system than a partner system.
Maybe with scouting help we could get the best Australian talents to Melbourne Heart and give them a better football education than they would get otherwise. But this is a lot of work we would have to have lot of new coaches around the world up to the job also facilities etc.
Also those scouts would have to put in lot of extra work in specific areas and that wouldnt really benefit MCFC in the short term. So its not the goal probably.
Well just because CFG bough these clubs I wont follow them. I never cared about USA football or Australian football and the reason wasnt that City didnt have a "sister" team there.
Once I did put money on Japanese football and couldnt get one match right, that was enough.:)
Will all these clubs change to sky blue shirt in the near future? Because I dont like that idea. To buy existing clubs change their name maybe also their colours. New York FC ok, as thats basically a club built from nothing.
Also we agreed in FFP that any incomes from this CFG transactions wont count. So that wouldnt help us in the future. Only maybe if these clubs can get sponsors and somehow they want to sponsor MCFC too not only Yokohama. If its not Mansour's other company as a sponsor that could work maybe.
One big advantage could be if we could build or improve these club's current academy and youth system and then in years get some of their best talents to MCFC. But thats more of a feeder system than a partner system.
Maybe with scouting help we could get the best Australian talents to Melbourne Heart and give them a better football education than they would get otherwise. But this is a lot of work we would have to have lot of new coaches around the world up to the job also facilities etc.
Also those scouts would have to put in lot of extra work in specific areas and that wouldnt really benefit MCFC in the short term. So its not the goal probably.