Pep's correct in what he said, "we've spent a lot of money and bought some great players"
Now for all the media twats who frequent bluemoon, why don't you ask yourself the following questions..
1. Have City complied with FFP and spent within their means ?
2. Do the dippers and rags generate more income than City ?
3. Do other so called 'big' PL clubs generate similar incomes to City, teams such a spuds, chelski and the tarquins ?
4. In fact, the dippers, rags, tarquins and chelski all have players in their squads in excess of £70M whereas nobody in our squad comes anywhere near this number..
The rags spent even more than this on the dabber, slabhead, lukaki, wasted millions on the piano player, Tia Maria and memphis meat pie to name but a few..
We are a fkin well run, well managed, superbly owned club that plays brilliant football that any true football fan would appreciate their team churning out week in, week out..
So the media can get fucked and suck it up..
Write the fkin real headlines here you fkin bunch of cowards and ask the real questions like, 'why haven't any of the other so called big teams in the PL invested as well as City.'. ?
Cnuts..!
Moaning, whinging twats..
Indeed, indeed, indeed..
'PrestwichBlue' and others have mentioned elsewhere on here that City's rise up the rankings of income amongst Europe's footballing elite was INEVITABLE once the early investment by The Sheik yielded success on the field. In addition, they've catalogued how that success INEVITABLY would generate yet more success and therefore attract yet further investment from a whole host of corporate sponsors etc.
Taking that investment and income generated under the UEFA/Premier League rules that have applied at any given time in the past decade, City has developed the playing squad to the level it now currently is operating at. As you say to the media lurkers and supporters of other teams who visit here, City has SPENT the majority of the money it has earned on its core value product.. the squad.
And (1) not only that, City has spent the money wisely for the most part, recruiting the right players with the right technical skills and the right personal attitudes to fit in with the ethos that Guardiola has created since picking up the project from where Mancini and Pellegrini had taken it to.
And (2) as you ask, why aren't the scribblers in the media asking about their favoured English clubs' spending, both in terms of the amount they're spending given what they've been earning and also the value-for-money achieved over the past decade or so since City emerged as a threat to their cosy cartel?
They might take a stroll on Google down through the history provided by
Deloitte's 'Football Money League' which ranks the top 30 or so clubs' earnings since the turn of the 21st century:
In 2007..
City was turning over c.89M euros per year. Compare that to Spurs (107M), Liverpool (176M), Arsenal (177M), Chelsea (221M) and United (242M). Eventually, around 2013-14, Deloitte notes that City, Borussia Dortmund, Napoli and PSG had begun their 'meteoric rises' up the table of earnings.
The latest table (2020)..
shows City's annual earnings at 610M euros (6th highest in Europe), overtaking Arsenal (446M), Chelsea (513M), Tottenham (521M), Liverpool (605M) while United are still ahead with an annual income of 711M euros.
Clearly it doesn't require quoting every year's turnover to show each club has earned loads of moolah, especially in comparison with the rest of the Premier league teams and those they're competing with in Europe..
'PB' and others have noted that The Sheik hasn't put his hand in his pocket for more than a decade now, apart from the cash input that helped finance the Laporte transfer, which was subsequently turned into equity. UEFA/Premier League standards and requirements for financial prudence and probity have been more than met by City for many years now (thank you for confirming this, CAS!). What comes into the club is, by any definition, generated by the club as a business entity which has been standing on its own two feet for almost a decade now, in line with the original goals set by The Sheik at the time of the takeover.
All of those English clubs favoured by our venal sports media may have been superseded by City in the money stakes but they have been earning a great deal more than City has for a lot longer according to Deloitte. And they still continue to earn a fair wedge each year, having taken advantage of the Premiership's ascendancy over the rest of European football as an income generator.
So, the questions beg to be asked of these favoured clubs.. 'Where has all that income gone?' and 'Why have you spent money so badly in supporting your core product, i.e. the squad?'
Given the business model that applies to our friends in Red at either end of the East Lancs, as well as with those cheeky Cockney chappies in N London, I think we can guess as to exactly where most of the ackers have gone to. As 'Deep Throat' might have told Woodward and Bernstein at the time of the Watergate scandal, 'Follow the money.. to Bermuda and Wall Street..'
But I don't expect the f*ckwits in the football media or the tribal clowns on social media have either the nous or the nerve to ask such questions of their favoured media darlings/their own clubs..
