New York City FC Thread (new away kit P245)

Re: New York City

cmdub said:
To the poster above I really doubt that NYCFC revenue could apply to ours and u've gotta realise that they aren't expected to even start playing until 2016, by then we'll have cleared ffp or be fucked miserably

Soccer in the US is growing is this is going to be a good investment for our owner. The MLS just needs to nix their salary cap or change it so the owners that have money can actually spend it and bring in quality players

Well if the team plays in blue, has the same badge and branding as ours (we could even change the "MCFC" on the badge to "City" making it easily expandable worldwide) I think that could be considered as a blatant use of our branding.

Even if NYCFC revenue could not be considered as revenue for MCFC, I'm sure we could certainly benefit from an increase in merchandise sales / brand recognition across the USA.
 
Re: New York City

Shaelumstash said:
Question for Prestwich Blue and anyone else well read on FFP.

I've seen people mentioning on this thread that the main advantage of this would be NYCFC buying / loaning players to us as an FFP dodge. I don't think that's viable at all, especially with the MLS salary cap.

I think the strategy behind this is a "City" brand building exercise. I remember reading one of the clauses in FFP was that any revenue that was generated in immediately proximity to the ground (the collar site) could be counted as revenue for FFP, and also any activity worldwide that used the clubs name or branding could be counted as revenue (many people used the example of Real Madrid property development in the UAE.)

Is it possible that NYCFC could be seen as a brand extension of MCFC? Therefore any revenue it generates, shirt sales, sponsorships, ticket sales etc, could be included in our FFP accounts as revenue?


I highly doubt it, for two reasons:

1 - I think UEFA would argue that NYCFC is a separate club and therefore we can't just merge it into our accounts. If they didn't do that, they'd find some other reason to argue it. Besides, the proposal isn't for city to own this club, it's for ADUG to own it, so they could ask what right we have to claim the revenues of a completely separate company.

2 - MLS is notoriously unprofitable. The average profit for an MLS club was about $5m (£3m) and unlike the PL there isn't a huge gulf between those who earn loads and those who earn little. This is largely down to America's ironically-socialist way of running sports. The league owns all the clubs, and owners just buy the right to run one, like you buy the right to run a branch of McDonald's. The league owns all the players - teams have to request the league negotiate a transfer for them, then the league gives the player to the club - and here's the big clincher: all merchandising money is split equally. Say one club sells 1,000 replica shirts and one sells a million. Both clubs get the same amount for those shirts, the league gives them it, you can't keep your own merch revenue. Added to the way that the worst teams get first pick of the new talent means that on and off the pitch, being successful only really helps your opposition.

In short, this is not about FFPR, and I wish people would stop looking for ways to cheat the system as I'm convinced that the only way to win at FFPR is to play by the letter of the law - and I'm convinced that the board agrees with me on this. This is purely about brand recognition and growing young talent.

That is, if the story is even true (I hope it is). City have denounced this story once, they might well do it again.
 
Re: New York City

The MLS is a very unique league, and it will be interesting to see how City (if they do actually get a team) integrate into the league. Mexican club Chivas de Guadalejara tried a similar expansion into the MLS, and was/is an utter failure. I live in Seattle, so was able to first-hand experience a very successful start-up. I think the Seattle Sounders earned the title of one of the most successful (expectation-wise) expansion teams in US sports history.

My advice to City would be this:
1) Invest heavily in marketing and building the brand. Seattle sent out alot of consumer surveys years before announcing a team, held a public vote on a possible 4 names of the team and a vote on the crest symbol. Seattle is also the only team with a 4-year vote of confidence by the public for the general manager. I think the visionary behind the marketing strategy has since moved on from the club, but if I was City, I would look the guy up.
2) Make sure the stadium is worth attending. Since we have no history in the game, Americans want to attend a game in a nice stadium with good overall atmosphere that makes you feel special that you're there. Sounders play in an NFL stadium that is only allowed 1/2 capacity (35,000), but it is a great venue designed with a view of the downtown skyline from almost every seat.
3) Make sure you understand the league before assembling a squad. Many clubs think you can bring in a successful european coach, and some european players, and think you will do well in the MLS. Those clubs do very poorly. The MLS is a physical, non-technical, league with alot of travel. The MLS has a salary cap that is supposed to protect the league from becoming too lop-sided (It's currently too low in my opinion). There are a couple "designated player" spots that don't count against the salary cap that are there to bring in high-profile name players to attract viewers. Due to the salary cap there isn't much depth in teams, so usually teams with the most balanced squads do the best. I would find an experienced and successful MLS coach, bring in a good core of MLS veterans, and get a winning first season under your belt.

Do all this and New York-City will have a good base to work from. The MLS is actually now becoming a good place to try out emerging South American talent, and bring up home-grown academy players. Whether any players become quality enough to join Manchester City down the road, we'll just have to wait and see. I wouldn't recommend using New York as a place to loan out young players, but it could be a good spot for aging players to impart their experience and professionalism.
 
Re: New York City

Beezer said:
The MLS is a very unique league, and it will be interesting to see how City (if they do actually get a team) integrate into the league. Mexican club Chivas de Guadalejara tried a similar expansion into the MLS, and was/is an utter failure. I live in Seattle, so was able to first-hand experience a very successful start-up. I think the Seattle Sounders earned the title of one of the most successful (expectation-wise) expansion teams in US sports history.

My advice to City would be this:
1) Invest heavily in marketing and building the brand. Seattle sent out alot of consumer surveys years before announcing a team, held a public vote on a possible 4 names of the team and a vote on the crest symbol. Seattle is also the only team with a 4-year vote of confidence by the public for the general manager. I think the visionary behind the marketing strategy has since moved on from the club, but if I was City, I would look the guy up.
2) Make sure the stadium is worth attending. Since we have no history in the game, Americans want to attend a game in a nice stadium with good overall atmosphere that makes you feel special that you're there. Sounders play in an NFL stadium that is only allowed 1/2 capacity (35,000), but it is a great venue designed with a view of the downtown skyline from almost every seat.
3) Make sure you understand the league before assembling a squad. Many clubs think you can bring in a successful european coach, and some european players, and think you will do well in the MLS. Those clubs do very poorly. The MLS is a physical, non-technical, league with alot of travel. The MLS has a salary cap that is supposed to protect the league from becoming too lop-sided (It's currently too low in my opinion). There are a couple "designated player" spots that don't count against the salary cap that are there to bring in high-profile name players to attract viewers. Due to the salary cap there isn't much depth in teams, so usually teams with the most balanced squads do the best. I would find an experienced and successful MLS coach, bring in a good core of MLS veterans, and get a winning first season under your belt.

Do all this and New York-City will have a good base to work from. The MLS is actually now becoming a good place to try out emerging South American talent, and bring up home-grown academy players. Whether any players become quality enough to join Manchester City down the road, we'll just have to wait and see. I wouldn't recommend using New York as a place to loan out young players, but it could be a good spot for aging players to impart their experience and professionalism.

would be another huge investment when you combine the $100 million expansion fee, the $340 million stadium fee and costs for training facilities and players. (One could expect that NYC FC would field the maximum amount of big-name Designated Players, which are currently limited to three per MLS team

Read More: <a class="postlink" href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer/news/20130429/manchester-city-sheikh-mansour-mls-new-york-fc/#ixzz2Rs4jQrQ0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/soccer ... z2Rs4jQrQ0</a>
 
Re: New York City

Impeccable One said:
Tomorrow's Daily Fail, "Sheik preparing for City exit" ......

Some article or other, I can't remember which one it was, has already postulated that Mansour is buying this club so that he can enjoy spending money like FFPR has stopped him from enjoying with City...
 
Re: New York City

Falastur said:
Impeccable One said:
Tomorrow's Daily Fail, "Sheik preparing for City exit" ......

Some article or other, I can't remember which one it was, has already postulated that Mansour is buying this club so that he can enjoy spending money like FFPR has stopped him from enjoying with City...

Like the media, I love a good grip at drinking accessories.
 
Re: New York City

Shaelumstash said:
cmdub said:
To the poster above I really doubt that NYCFC revenue could apply to ours and u've gotta realise that they aren't expected to even start playing until 2016, by then we'll have cleared ffp or be fucked miserably

Soccer in the US is growing is this is going to be a good investment for our owner. The MLS just needs to nix their salary cap or change it so the owners that have money can actually spend it and bring in quality players

Well if the team plays in blue, has the same badge and branding as ours (we could even change the "MCFC" on the badge to "City" making it easily expandable worldwide) I think that could be considered as a blatant use of our branding.

Even if NYCFC revenue could not be considered as revenue for MCFC, I'm sure we could certainly benefit from an increase in merchandise sales / brand recognition across the USA.
O we certainly would which is why I'd be curious to know when this all comes together how much of MCFC we'll see tie in with this MLS expansion. All about increasing brand recognition
 

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.