Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
If they are bringing it in, it will disrupt our business plan somehow but doubtless we will outwit them.

As far as the article is concerned, It was the Mancini part I was particularly disgusted by.
Tbf, if we paid Mancini twice, it was a bit cheeky but given the attempts to stop us, legit subterfuge in response in my book.
 
When new PL rules come in, it will lay bare the lies and misunderstandings about our finances. So:
--City have no related sponsorships.
--Our Abu Dhabi connected sponsorships are, in any case, at fair market value.
-- The 30% rule for "associated" sponsorships will make no diff to us as the current total is around 15%.
I wonder how the lying press are going to account for this.
 
When new PL rules come in, it will lay bare the lies and misunderstandings about our finances. So:
--City have hundreds of related sponsorships.
--Our Abu Dhabi connected sponsorships are, in any case, not at fair market value.
-- The 30% rule for "associated" sponsorships will make a significant difference to us as the current total is around 15%.
I wonder how the lying press are going to account for this.
Updated to reflect the position of all media outlets.
 
When new PL rules come in, it will lay bare the lies and misunderstandings about our finances. So:
--City have no related sponsorships.
--Our Abu Dhabi connected sponsorships are, in any case, at fair market value.
-- The 30% rule for "associated" sponsorships will make no diff to us as the current total is around 15%.
I wonder how the lying press are going to account for this.
They’ll quote the years we would have failed the current (to be) regulations.
oddly we will be the only club subject to this historical in depth analysis. maybe Chelsea As well.

the main ‘istree clubs will be found to have the usual selective history applied and not get a mention.

media biased reporting - it’s an easy lark isn’t it.
 
They’ll quote the years we would have failed the current (to be) regulations.
oddly we will be the only club subject to this historical in depth analysis. maybe Chelsea As well.

the main ‘istree clubs will be found to have the usual selective history applied and not get a mention.

media biased reporting - it’s an easy lark isn’t it.
Which years would they be? I doubt if associated sponsorships were ever in excess of about 20%/25% of our income.
 
For balance - and both the author and the conduit have taken some often well deserved stick on here - but Glenn Hoddle has written an interesting piece on the BBC today comparing the rise of the likes of Phil, Kev and Jack to how playmakers like himself were often treated with suspicion back in the day. He is shilling his new book but an interesting read nonetheless, especially when talking about Grealish


Rise of the playmaker - Glenn Hoddle on why the future is Phil Foden for England
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/59247450
Hoddle always had a very high opinion of himself as a player. The way he went on you'd think he was the English Maradona or Pele. Despite the BBC bigging him up he went missing in virtually every big game he played in. That's why he was regarded as a luxury player
 
Where City use CFG or others to pay coaches, for example, I believe we reimburse those costs and so it makes no diff to our ffp position. Am I wrong?
Article doesnt even get basic facts right. Mancini "signed 2 contracts the day he arrived at the Etihad in 2011" , although he joined us in 2009. Outrage about offshore accounts, wonder what their view is on organisations registered in say the Cayman Isles for example
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

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.