Media Discussion - 2023/24

hammocity said:
The myth is we still spend what we want, how many times do we get the Man City can buy anyone they want without the truth of the past 5 years spending and our willingness to walk away from deals when transfer fee exceeds our maximum valuation? Cucurella being last seasons example, but we’ve had plenty more as we all know.

It’s not just here, we were talking to a few Ajax fans on the train back from Dortmund last year, they were all under the impression we were “cheats” wonder who fed them that line.

We told them about the hateful 8, all cunts. We had a good laugh with them, as we got off the train, one of them said, “Liverpool, cunts”. Made my day.
Click to expand...
We went to Berlin after the Dortmund match and joined a load of Ajax fans in a sports bar for their Union Berlin game.

The regular "scarfers" were sound and all respected City, even though they idolise Tent Peg.

10 mins before the game the Ajax Ultras turned up and took over the cellar bar. Probably 100 of 'em. Didn't engage with them after being advised not to by the scarfers. When Union Berlin put the first half penalty away they kicked the living shit out of about a dozen Berlin fans. The riot police locked them in the cellar, turned the power off and kettled them out at full time.

Absolute nutters.
 
the-ecstacy-of-eight said:
Why do people ALWAYS use lazy, bullshit comparisons to make a point?
I don't live in the USA, why should I care what their service is like?
It's simply not relevant to the discussion.
Click to expand...
It’s called context. Which comparison would you prefer? The UK has historically had one system, other countries have theirs. It is a valid comparison when the point I’m making is some people think the bbc should be stopped. My point was just because it has faults that’s not an argument for stopping it, because I think if that happened most people would regret it afterwards, and not realise what they’d missed.

Maybe a referendum’s needed. I’m sure that would settle it …
 
Last edited:
Just watched on Sky an interview with the Peterborough chairman (irish scouser) from Dubai. He was asked about transfers and Liverpool and he was almost effusive about our business model and generally thought we were great and how we don't mess about with clubs and negotiations are fair. Interesting.

They've just taken one of our kids on loan.

I'm really split about Sky now. They have their matchday affiliated shows where Neville and Spitty dominate with others but then they have younger 'experts ' on during the day talking sense and begrudgingly complimentary.
Also the diversity is pretty good. It may not be your cup of tea listening to a young Asian woman in a hijab talking sense on football but they employ all types now. There is a young woman called Emma I think who I think must have been down west ham with her Dad as a kid as she talks far too much common sense and asks the right questions of managers pre kick off. Course the 'experts ' in the studio ignore the stuff she is saying,
 
Prophet of Doom said:
Do you really think City’s PR department have any sway over what newspapers or TV channels spew out.

The media pump out whatever gets the most engagement / clicks / makes them more cash - and unfortunately that’s snide City stories or lots of positive pieces about teams in red.

Effective PR wouldn’t change a thing. The only way it will improve is when pro-City pieces get the same engagement as the teams in red - but that ain’t gonna be anytime soon cause we have a lot of catching up to do.

Globally will be a lot quicker - but will take years in this country
Click to expand...
But what they could do is put out stuff on social media on the lines of "Pep Guardiola is the UEFA coach of the year. Had you noticed @BBCSport?" Embarrass the twats.
 
chesterbells said:
If you’ve never watched any of their output, not listened to any of their radio nor read any of their online output, then maybe follow the example of some others on here who say they don’t pay the licence fee either. I honestly think the % of people in your position must be a really small proportion of the population.

At £13 month it provides fabulous value for me in terms of enjoyment and learning, and has done for decades. In the era before the ability to easily fast forward through commercials it was great to actually just watch listen to the programme!

I see it as part of the communal or greater good of a society. Folk who never send their kids to a state school still have to pay for it through their common taxation.
I’ve never needed treatment for many many conditions that the health service provide, but I’m happy to pay for it rather than rely on Bupa etc. They aren’t directly comparisons necessarily, but I’m just trying to illustrate the point that a highly individualist system where you only pay for exactly what you directly use and nothing else, isn’t one for me.

I couldn’t care less about Lineker as an individual, and if you start getting worked up about the salary of the rich and famous, you’re on a road to nowhere, but like most on here I do think their football coverage is a shocker. In terms of that, what I can’t understand is, as it’s so obvious re their online output in particular, and that their Head of Online Sport has close MUFC links, why our club hasn’t gone with a complaint about and above him to the overall head of sport or head of all online if needed.
Click to expand...
If I want to watch City live on tv then I have to buy a licence, so I continued to buy one. I no longer subscribe to sky or bt but I have an Amazon subscription and will be expected to continue paying an organisation I detest and have no need for if I wish to watch live sport on that channel. As for the communal benefit, most kids get their entertainment elsewhere and many will resent the left wing propaganda that makes up the vast amount of its output when the time comes that they have to fund it.

Continually feeding misleading globalist shite does absolutely nothing for any community, whether your views favour the left or right, and lineker's salary wouldn't be a problem if he worked elsewhere and we're not subsidised those who can least afford it. The corporation are that clueless they actually asked radio four listeners why they thought their once excellent flagship programmes have ratings with record low audiences. I'm just surprised they didn't ask Diane Abbott.
 
Fuming. On BBC national news just now, implied clubs are spending just to keep up with us. Ok they are in a way, but it would be interpreted as trying to keep up their spending to the level of " big spending Manchester City ". Apparently, they have to keep within FFP spending limits, something "Manchester City have been accused of breaking" (not mentioned United and Liverpool both have definitely failed FFP). Sinister background music as they zoom in to the Etihad from a distance.
 
Last edited:
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.