La Liga official complaint about City

Saddleworth2 said:
ok let me try and clarify. Maybe it’s me that is confused.
when someone says City are ‘state owned’ what do they mean? Owned by what state? UAE which is the country or AD which is an emirate?
It is SM’s position within UAE that is most often cited and he is not an absolute monarch of UAE. Or do you think state owned means owned by AD where, yes he is an absolute monarch.
Click to expand...
I'm with you on this one, I don't get it either.

One of Sheik Mansour's brothers is the leader/monarch of the UAE, and another has the same role in Abu Dhabi. Sheik Mansour seems to have had lot's of government roles over the last 25 years, so he is influential. However, he and his descendants will be sidelined in much the same way as Princess Margaret's line has, Prince Andrew's and so on. So to depict him as a ruler or the state confuses me?

It is clear Sheik Mansour bought the club and owns (now most) of it, and not Abu Dhabi.

Liverpool and United are owned by Americans and all their sponsors are now American when they weren't before, so why is it odd that City have lots of deals with UAE based businesses?

The club is worth a lot more than he has invested now, so he's turning a nice coin out if it.

I totally get that the club has been bought in part to help promote tourism to Abu Dhabi (just look at the match magazine!) and a luxury airline, but why is that odd? Emirates sponsored Chelsea then Arsenal?
 
cookster said:
Do they?
Pretty certain they can report on what the dickhead said as news without having an opinion.
I'm not defending them BTW but I don't think they have a duty even as the national broadcaster.
Click to expand...
Could maybe have asked us for a quote. Maybe they did
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
They don't need an opinion but they do have to be fair, balanced, accurate, and impartial. BBC online is regulated by Offcom. They are required to put both sides of any story so to carry Tebas's comments they have to put them into context. Tebas has a reputation for lying and a quick check on Google will prove that some his quotes are just not true. He is entitled to an opinion but not to promote lies. The BBC is usually careful to challenge and scrutinise comments by Boris Johnson for example. For some reason they give Tebas a free pass.

Click to expand...
Like another poster has said maybe they asked us for a comment and we declined.
 
halfcenturyup said:
If I may, I can't really speak for the press as I imagine there are more people who don't like Liverpool, than support them. So logic says they should be wanting the majority to click more. I suppose a smaller, rabid fanbase is more likely to click than a larger, docile population.

As far as UEFA is concerned, they have been manipulated for too long by the top clubs with the threat of a breakaway. Maybe one good thing that will come out of the ESL fiasco is a stronger UEFA who won't take any more shit from the top clubs.

For the PL, we all know Liverpool and United have too much influence. Don't know why the other 17 clubs don't make a fuss.
Click to expand...
I think it's a lot simpler than that.

Controversy sells.

When City first had the money, everyone (even Liverpool fans) desperately wanted us to usurp United, win the league etc. All the rivalry/controversy was with United.

However, City have knocked the ego of supporters of Arsenal, Liverpool and United who now all genuinely hate TBTITLAATW.

In the UK, there's a lot more of them than us, so it's easy to slag City off in the media and get lots of interest, clickbait etc.
 
TedofChume said:
I wish the BBC would check their facts, you know use something like BBC FACT-CHECKED?

www.bbc.co.uk

Man City and Paris St-Germain putting European football in danger, says La Liga boss

La Liga president Javier Tebas says European football is "in danger" unless clubs such as Manchester City and Paris St-Germain can be controlled.
www.bbc.co.uk

Tebas added: "At one point, Man City had 68% of their revenue from commercial income. Real Madrid was 54%. That is impossible. Man City as a brand is not worth that much."


Impossible? yes because it has never happened.


From Deloitte Football Money League % of revenue that is commercial and actual amounts:

2022 (report of 20/21 season)
48% €308m City
50% €321m Real Madrid

2021
52% €249m City
54% €382m Real Madrid

2020
43% €261m City
47% €354m Real Madrid

2019
47% €265m City
47% €356m Real Madrid

2018
44% €230m City
45% €301m Real Madrid

2017
46% €178m City
42% €263m Real Madrid

2016
49% €228m City
43% €247m Real Madrid

2015
48% €198m City
43% €231m Real Madrid

2014
53% €166m City
41% €211m Real Madrid

2013
49% €138m City
36% €187m Real Madrid

2012
38% € 64m City
36% €172m Real Madrid

2011
37% € 57m City
34% €150m Real Madrid

2010
21% € 21m City
34% €150m Real Madrid

2009
25% € 26m City
35% €129m Real Madrid

2008
City not in top 20

2007
36% € 31m City
43% €125m Real Madrid

2006
32% € 29m City
45% €124m Real Madrid

This is what I'm reduced to at 2.45pm on a Saturday afternoon in the closed season!
Click to expand...
He's quoting a percentage as an absolute amount anyway which is total nonsense.
 
NorthamptonBlue said:
Are they still involved in any meaningful way? I think BP was founded in Iraq but I’m not sure if the western oil majors have a significant presence now. Happy to be corrected, I haven’t checked.
Click to expand...

Quoted from Financial Post, November 2020:

“The company is a major producer in countries such as Iraq, where it operates the world’s third-largest oil field of Rumaila, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. It’s focusing on their low-cost oil, while also boosting output of gas, according to Stephen Willis, BP’s senior vice president for the Middle East.”

It's pretty easy to track down, honestly. It's true that shale oil has been catching up, and Canadian shale oil imports now account for the lion's share of imports of crude specifically to the U.S. alone (Canada also has gigantic natural gas reserves). Haven't tracked Exxon and Texaco, but they're in there, i.e. the Middle East, in an important way too.
Saudi Arabia is the Middle East's largest oil producing country. Who has been the Saudis' staunchest ally, for a very long time? The United States of America. (The U.K. has been pretty friendly with the Saudis, too, for a long time, so there's nothing smug about my comment). Who supplies most of their arms and specialised military training? The U.S. of A. The weapons and military training that have been fighting a filthy war in Yemen for the last eight years. A war that has cost thousands of civilian lives.
See folks, I'm just making this point — context is everything. This “dirty oil” business leaves a lot of people with their hands dirty.
 
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.