Media thread 2022/23

[remember arthur mann]

I don't know when that was taken, but he looks a lot older now. What happened?

Looks like he's got his new gnashers in there.

 

[Mid Wales blue]

You’ve gotta love all this blame for Henry selling up. If I’m not mistaken, he’s trying to sell while their stock is high so that he can maximise his profits while the the followers scream ‘Victim’ once again.

They need to take a hard look in the mirror. They’re pathetic.

This is 100% the reason!
Sell now for the highest price, blame the dirty Arabs and all is good.

 

[JASR]

Absolutely correct. My immediate reaction too. The point is they have a G14/ Dipper/Rag/ American mindset and so their starting point is wrong. If they did any research and got their heads round the reality of elite football, they would know they were talking bollux. Funny how all the wealthy backers mentioned are brown, just a coincidence of course.

Added a new complaint, linked to the previous complaint, about the absolute bollox (heh - better english than that in the complaint), and the clear biased/lazy/xenophobic editorial reasons that produced the 1st version and then the 2nd, and what they intend to do about the repeated use of 'state owned' in endless pieces

 

[NowInMilnrow]

In fact made a complaint myself to the pricks, obvious bias - filed under “cunts being cuntish”, will be opting out of the licence fee since getting iptv I think

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63555465 is the article, complain here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints I’d say as many as possible get on it, I messed up a bit as I moaned about “state owned” where it says “state backed” but the argument is the same as is the sentiment

Also probably worth pointing out their own editorial guidelines document which states:

1.2 Our editorial values​

Our audiences trust us and they expect us to adhere to the highest editorial standards.
.
.
.
We operate in the public interest – reporting stories of significance to our audiences and holding power to account. In our journalism in particular, we seek to establish the truth and use the highest reporting standards to provide coverage that is fair and accurate.


When they do not meet their own editorial values, then this should be pointed out explicitly in any complaint.

 

[schfc6]

Ha ha. Classic.

I don't know if you guys had any impact (well done if you did, and well done, in fact, even if you didn't) or the club had a word, but that is funny as fuck. The whole introduction to the piece now makes no sense whatsoever. Brilliant writing. Not.

Whatever happened to the BBC? It's becoming a joke.

I’d guess that the slight change in narrative is because there’s a good chance Liverpool with get a wealthy muslim backer. Then it will be good for the game..

 

[blue b4 the moon]

In fact made a complaint myself to the pricks, obvious bias - filed under “cunts being cuntish”, will be opting out of the licence fee since getting iptv I think

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63555465 is the article, complain here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/contact/complaints I’d say as many as possible get on it, I messed up a bit as I moaned about “state owned” where it says “state backed” but the argument is the same as is the sentiment

There've been numerous complaints made over the years by us fans and nowt changes, 99% of the time they lie when replying eg the Pete stuff.

Maybe someone needs to try a different tactic and have a go with Points of View on Sunday mornings.

 

[Moss Side's Finest]

There've been numerous complaints made over the years by us fans and nowt changes, 99% of the time they lie when replying eg the Pete stuff.

Maybe someone needs to try a different tactic and have a go with Points of View on Sunday mornings.

Or just protest with banners in the background on any high profile bbc live TV broadcasts you can. If you can be arsed. Or we just carry on dominating football and annoy them even more

 

[supercity88]

Or just protest with banners in the background on any high profile bbc live TV broadcasts you can. If you can be arsed. Or we just carry on dominating football and annoy them even more

That's it. Who gives a fuck. Facts are irrelevant in the majority of what we read online and in newspapers these days. A left wing person things the BBC is right wing. A right wing person thinks they're left wing. Social media will give you stories that suit your political profile based on what you click on and what you read/like etc. We're all just fucking ants. Regardless of whether we're state owned or owned by a company run by someone from Abu Dhabi the fact is we're fucking dominating and they can't stand it. You can try and educate, but they don't care. They'll still spit out the same old bile about how we've ruined football.

They perceive the US owners to be poor and the Arab owners to be minted. The US owners are fucking loaded. But they want to get instant returns. They want to drip feed money in and take big sums out, it's the US model. Then leave as soon as you've exhausted the opportunity. Our owners see a way to broaden the opportunity and they spend money to make money. Either enjoy the fact we've rattled them and they're chatting shit, or long for the days when we're lickle City that everyone has as their second team and no one mentions us except when they're talking about Oasis.

There will come a time when they start reporting on us fairly, and that will be when our fans outnumber the rags and dippers. At that point they'll cater to their new audience by bigging us up and reporting favourably. Until then just ignore it and enjoy the fact we're loaded!

 

[spiny]

Always intriguing to see City owners vilified with Abu Dhabi as an oil state monster. The truth is that the oil output of UAE is under one third of the USA. This from Forbes 2019. Later figures can be found that are similar.

The truth is the USA economy and companies depend on and benefit from cheap oil. The difference is that the UAE seeks to diversify from its dependancy and invest in growth whilst the USA seeks to exploit their advantage through economic colonisation and short term ROI.

 

[spiny]

For FSG and journos wailing how USA companies cannot compete financially with the wealth of Manchester City and other middle east owners. What nonesense?

Arsenal are owned by a scion of Walmart whose T/O is greater than the GDP of the UAE. This is no different from relating the ownership of Manchester City by Sheikh Mansour to Stan Kroenke. Report here from 2018.

How Large is Walmart? A Comparison of Walmart Sales to Nations’ GDP

Various pundits over the years have compared Walmart’s size to that of various nations. This paper ranks Walmart, comparing Walmart’s sales to the GDP of the wo

deliverypdf.ssrn.com

The likes of Apple, Microsoft, Google and more are a level up again in terms of revenue compared with the whole of the UAE GDP. For USA owners like FSG to cry poverty with all their wealth and links to finance is a bit far fetched.

In truth FSG's gamble to impose a guarranteed maximum ROI investment based on USA sports models, cartels and owner greed has failed in the face of fans wishes. Moneyball has failed along with their aspirations. Liverpool has enjoyed success under FSG having been brought back from the brink but it is hard to see a future for them which is why FSG are seeking to cash in.

City have set the standard with a new model. Newcastle are following. It is hard to see why anyone would want to take over at a premium a club like Liverpool who are so much despised along with their fans at anything other than a huge discount if at all. I only see a money pit.