Media Thread - 2021/22

Status
Not open for further replies.
waspish said:
Yes I have and come to conclusion they don’t give a fcuk because they look at the long game as they have done since day one.
Click to expand...

By the time the penny drops for Neville and those teams that play in red and bang on about history it will be too late. It is too late now, what decade does Gary Chuckle think it is? The hierarchy at City may have been pumping money into the club between 2008-2011. Do you think an astute business man like Mansour would keep chucking his wealth into a football club for zero return? It’s why the club was bought by him for £265 million and is now worth over £3 billion.

Do you think Silverlake or the Chinese investors who purchased their stakes in the club would have paid what they did if it was over inflated?
 
grim up north said:
Have you ever thought that the hierarchy at the club don’t actually give a shit what the likes of Neville or no nowt journos write or say when we are as successful as they are, it’s probably water of a ducks back to them
Click to expand...
I think that is a fair analysis, but the hierarchy are wrong to assume that people other than them are equally blase.
We know it upsets fans, we know that fans get it in the neck from others based on this lie, we know the authorities, affected by the lies, target City, we know other clubs believe the lies in their boardrooms. No doubt it affects staff who want to be proud of the club, and it may affect sponsors and other potential partners who will not deal with a cheat. Reputation is a precious thing, City should not treat it so lightly.
 
KS55 said:
I think that is a fair analysis, but the hierarchy are wrong to assume that people other than them are equally blase.
We know it upsets fans, we know that fans get it in the neck from others based on this lie, we know the authorities, affected by the lies, target City, we know other clubs believe the lies in their boardrooms. No doubt it affects staff who want to be proud of the club, and it may affect sponsors and other potential partners who will not deal with a cheat. Reputation is a precious thing, City should not treat it so lightly.
Click to expand...
Totally get that, but what’s the best way to stick 2 fingers up to the lot of them keep winning trophies whilst making loads of wedge. It used to annoy and upset me but now it just makes me chuckle, used to get in the neck constantly from the geordies but guess what they have all gone pretty quiet now and I have no idea why
 
LongsightM13 said:
I would wager that in terms of increasing awareness of their brand through sponsorship, there are few if any companies in the world that will have done better than Etihad over the last decade
Click to expand...
Exactly and this is one of the things i argue about when it comes to value of sponsorship.
Not a lot of people had heard of Etihad back then, but now their name is know all over the world.
The apparent "over the top" sponsorship deal with us was totally worth the money for the publicity and exposure they have gotten.
 
bobbyowenquiff said:
I think it is different. Being state funded is not illegal but only a breach of sporting rules. "Exaggerating sponsorships" is illegal and criminal. If it was true then even the independent auditors who have audited the club for years will suffer reputational damage. It is one hell of an accusation to make with no evidence provided. He has to apologise and retract his comments.
Click to expand...
I agree and all this stuff about syphoning money through shell companies, would be totally fraudulent and as if it would get past an audit. They obviously have no idea how a large company works.
 
halfcenturyup said:
Isn't this a 1970s view of sponsorship?

Isn't it more to do with global brand awareness, these days? You think Standard Chartered want a load of scallies to open accounts with them? You think TeamViewer are expecting United fans in Asia to start installing their software?

No, they want exposure for their brand to all football fans all over the world and that means as much exposure as you can get. More matches on TV, further in competitions, winning trophies. You know the way to judge that? Not on the number of Twitter followers or "fans" or history, but on current broadcast income. More games, more success equals more broadcast income.

Look at the ratio of our commercial income to broadcast income compared to other clubs and you will see it is understated, not overstated. Liverpool are also understated. United, Real and Barcelona are bang in the median.

Bayern and PSG on the other hand ....
Click to expand...

A lot of football fans think having millions of Asian fans wearing counter fit United shirts is the reason why companies put their names on clubs T-shirts. It’s a lot more than that now, it’s like you said about the exposure. City have been the best English club over the past decade. The most watched league in the world and City have been at the top for years. This is why we attract the sponsorships. I wouldn’t worry about people on Twitter that can’t accept we’re not little City anymore. Don’t Etihad sponsor all the CFG clubs? Now that is exposure no other club in world football can offer.
 
feedmpenzaandhewillscore said:
By the time the penny drops for Neville and those teams that play in red and bang on about history it will be too late. It is too late now, what decade does Gary Chuckle think it is? The hierarchy at City may have been pumping money into the club between 2008-2011. Do you think an astute business man like Mansour would keep chucking his wealth into a football club for zero return? It’s why the club was bought by him for £265 million and is now worth over £3 billion.

Do you think Silverlake or the Chinese investors who purchased their stakes in the club would have paid what they did if it was over inflated?
Click to expand...
Mansour gave Silverlake and the Chinese money, it’s all a sham mate.
 
Legal Alien said:
Exactly and this is one of the things i argue about when it comes to value of sponsorship.
Not a lot of people had heard of Etihad back then, but now their name is know all over the world.
The apparent "over the top" sponsorship deal with us was totally worth the money for the publicity and exposure they have gotten.
Click to expand...
Frankly, I had never heard of Etihad before our takeover. I soon became aware of a new airline, competing with Emirates, whose Arab name translated as 'United'. Oh.....
 
Lol!

AE6-C8-E9-E-D50-F-4-B9-E-A926-7-DD45-EF63-D78.jpg
 
Interesting question:

Would anyone debate that our reputation has been damaged by the constant, unabated media onslaught since the Der Speigel leaks in 2018? And would it be any better if we had taken an aggressive, defensive stance with legal action?

I think it would be even worse, & when you look at it like that, City’s approach starts to make more sense imo.
 
Citizen Green said:
Interesting question:

Would anyone debate that our reputation has been damaged by the constant, unabated media onslaught since the Der Speigel leaks in 2018? And would it be any better if we had taken an aggressive, defensive stance with legal action?

I think it would be even worse, & when you look at it like that, City’s approach starts to make more sense imo.
Click to expand...
Legal action is not the only recourse. Active reputation management can be very effective. Suppose, for example, City put out a statement showing the errors in Neville's comment (he got the figures for sponsorship, which he failed to quote, all wrong) in a slightly withering tone. He would just look stupid or lying to suit his agenda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top