Pep only here 3 years?

Shaelumstash said:
I've never understood this stance against the Mirror. They basically requested we post links in the forum as opposed to copy and pasting the articles directly, what's the problem?

Before the internet, if they'd requested you didn't photocopy thousands of copies of their back page, blacked out the adverts, and handed them out on the street, I don't think it would be seen as an unreasonable request.

In the internet age, newspapers generate their revenue by the amount of clicks they get on their site. The more clicks, the higher the premium advertisers will pay. Newspapers are hardly flourishing, they're actually on their arse. Revenue they get from clicks goes towards paying the journalists and photographers who get the stories that we can talk about on here.

If we never clicked on a newspaper site again, they would get no revenue. They would then be forced to close, and eventually we would have no free press. That's not a society I want to live in.

The Mirror, or any other newspaper asking you to click a link as opposed to copy and pasting their content is basically them asking for you not to steal their product. I don't think that is unreasonable. It doesn't cost you anything to click the link, all it does it cost the advertisers more. I really don't understand what the problem is.

Everybody seems to want a free press, wants journalists to exist, but no one wants to pay for it anymore. That is the modern world, people aren't buying newspapers anymore, we want our news for free. That's fine, but then who pays the journalists wages?

Consuming news for free is seemingly what everyone wants. But the reality is, there are costs involved with reporting the news, and someone has to pay for it. The Mirror wanting us to paste links means the advertisers are paying for it, and we are getting it for free. I really don't think that is unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Not to fussed about links. I just think they're a bunch of twats.
 
But surely we're gonna sack him before then anyway? Because it turns out he's a really rubbish manager who always takes the easy option, and he'll get found out in the Premier League.
 
K-Bo said:
Interesting to see this article pop up.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/manchester-city-already-looking-pep-7515034

Thought this would be the case when he only signed a 3 year deal. Considering we've been trying to get pep for over a decade this would be a little disappointing to only get him for 3 years. I get he wouldn't want to end his career here but at the same time not sure 3 years would be enough to do all the things expected of him from where we are right now, IE win the champions league, form some semblance of genuine domestic dominance and integrate the academy into the first team. I think 5 would have been the ideal amount.
Click to expand...
When exactly did he sign this 3 year deal with us? And where does the 'over a decade' come from?
 
Shaelumstash said:
I've never understood this stance against the Mirror. They basically requested we post links in the forum as opposed to copy and pasting the articles directly, what's the problem?

Before the internet, if they'd requested you didn't photocopy thousands of copies of their back page, blacked out the adverts, and handed them out on the street, I don't think it would be seen as an unreasonable request.

In the internet age, newspapers generate their revenue by the amount of clicks they get on their site. The more clicks, the higher the premium advertisers will pay. Newspapers are hardly flourishing, they're actually on their arse. Revenue they get from clicks goes towards paying the journalists and photographers who get the stories that we can talk about on here.

If we never clicked on a newspaper site again, they would get no revenue. They would then be forced to close, and eventually we would have no free press. That's not a society I want to live in.

The Mirror, or any other newspaper asking you to click a link as opposed to copy and pasting their content is basically them asking for you not to steal their product. I don't think that is unreasonable. It doesn't cost you anything to click the link, all it does it cost the advertisers more. I really don't understand what the problem is.

Everybody seems to want a free press, wants journalists to exist, but no one wants to pay for it anymore. That is the modern world, people aren't buying newspapers anymore, we want our news for free. That's fine, but then who pays the journalists wages?

Consuming news for free is seemingly what everyone wants. But the reality is, there are costs involved with reporting the news, and someone has to pay for it. The Mirror wanting us to paste links means the advertisers are paying for it, and we are getting it for free. I really don't think that is unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Fuck the mirror and all that tabloid shite that passes as news, I hope they all go bust.

Without them, there will still be access to free information online. Most of what makes it onto the pages/ sites of these companies is just filler anyway, they just generate useless stories to pad out the handful of stories that actually hold relevance to any of our lives. Either that or they plant stories to support a larger agenda.

I write reviews every now and then for a music website and the guy who runs it had a go at me for not paying for the music I listen to. He said that, if we all downloaded music for free, record companies will go bankrupt and bands will stop being able to make music.

My stance is that that is bullshit, people with a passion for music will still create, even if the paychecks aren't coming their way. On top of that, we won't have the airwaves polluted with Miley Cystitis and all that shite because they're only in it for the money anyway. If anything, the overall standard of music made available to the public should improve because of this (although exposure to new music would be more limited).

Anyway, point is that I believe the same applies to the film industry and journalism; there are more than enough people willing to do it for free. There will be obvious downsides but there are also plenty of upsides.

Btw, I do pay for music (depending on the label) but only if I know I like the album. I don't earn enough to risk £10 on a potentially shit CD. Usually I'll just buy band merchandise at the gigs.
 
Tugay One Cup said:
Fuck the mirror and all that tabloid shite that passes as news, I hope they all go bust.

Without them, there will still be access to free information online. Most of what makes it onto the pages/ sites of these companies is just filler anyway, they just generate useless stories to pad out the handful of stories that actually hold relevance to any of our lives. Either that or they plant stories to support a larger agenda.

I write reviews every now and then for a music website and the guy who runs it had a go at me for not paying for the music I listen to. He said that, if we all downloaded music for free, record companies will go bankrupt and bands will stop being able to make music.

My stance is that that is bullshit, people with a passion for music will still create, even if the paychecks aren't coming their way. On top of that, we won't have the airwaves polluted with Miley Cystitis and all that shite because they're only in it for the money anyway. If anything, the overall standard of music made available to the public should improve because of this (although exposure to new music would be more limited).

Anyway, point is that I believe the same applies to the film industry and journalism; there are more than enough people willing to do it for free. There will be obvious downsides but there are also plenty of upsides.

Btw, I do pay for music (depending on the label) but only if I know I like the album. I don't earn enough to risk £10 on a potentially shit CD. Usually I'll just buy band merchandise at the gigs.
Click to expand...

If you hope all of the national press go bust, what do you think will fill the vacuum it leaves? There will be some very rich people / companies / government bodies with their own agenda who will be dictating the news cycle.

The system we have now of a free press is absolutely essential to democracy. As much as the tabloid press publish some utter click-baiting shite, at least there is competition. A free press means people will be held to account, the truth will out.

Take Murdoch who's the biggest media mogul in the country. If he controlled all of the press, the News of the World hacking scandal would never have come out. He could carry on doing as he pleased, invading people's lives, liberties, and even if he got caught, there would be no alternative press that would report on it.

I'm proud to live in a democratic country, and one of the corner stones of a democracy is a free press. They aren't perfect, but they play an incredibly important role in society. The idea that if all the national papers went bust that some plucky volunteers would research and publish all of the news for us on Twitter is just an absolute fallacy. How would those people survive and make a living, and how could we trust that they were telling the truth if they were not accountable to anyone?

Music is rather different. The cost of producing and marketing music has come down ten fold in the last 20 years. Music can be produced to recordable standard now in a bedroom with £2k worth of equipment. 25 years ago it might cost £2k a hour to work in a studio with comparable technology. Bands can now launch themselves on social media and get millions of plays / views for their songs for absolutely nothing. Again 25 years ago that exposure would cost hundreds of thousands of pounds in marketing, video production etc.

Many people get music for free now, so artists aren't getting the same income from record sales. But songwriters are still getting paid comparable amounts for publishing when their music is used on radio, TV etc, and live gigs have never been more popular, with more people attending music events now than ever before, and prices going up to reflect it. So with music, yes sales are down, but the cost of producing and marketing music has also fallen dramatically, and the live aspect is doing very well.

Journalism is a completely different industry. Newspaper sales are in terminal decline, people are becoming more savvy online using adblockers etc, so even advertising revenues aren't picking up the slack. Music and art plays an important role in society, but it's essentially entertainment. Whether record labels exist in ten years, or whether musicians become millionaires, is debatable, but new music will always be produced regardless.

If national newspapers cease to exist, the ramifications for democratic society are a lot more stark than if the record labels go bust.
 
squirtyflower said:
For a variety of reasons the Mirror is far from welcome amongst some posters
Click to expand...
What I meant to Karen was no reason for me not to then, now i had cleared up what she was talking about in regards to the legal aspect that had cropped up. Also, it's not going to ruin my day or be seen as some kind of defeat for City fans and a victory for the Mirror if the links are clicked.

The guy above clearly feels the opposite.
 
Pep's first contract is for 3 years. If he does well and wants to stay then I am sure another contract can be negotiated. The press have used the '3 year deal' as the only negative in what is the greatest appointment that any English club could make. Do you think we'd be talking about 'only' 3 years if Pep was going to the rags?
Our owners have already proved that they are the most forward thinking in world football. Stop looking for negatives and enjoy the next 3 years ... and beyond...
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
There's no doubt they are within their legal rights to request that we don't cut and paste whole articles but rather than ask politely, they threatened the site with legal action. That was just after a particularly shit article they'd published which caused outrage on here. Oddly enough, no other major forums seem to have been threatened in the same way and you can still see Mirror articles in full on them.

Plus Trinity Mirror are the biggest trolls regarding anything to do with our club, both through the Mirror itself and for other titles in their stable, like the Liverpool Echo. So fuck them.
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the threat of legal action was the only means of communication the Mirror had with you guys. Thanks for that, and it obviously explains some of the vitriol against them.

However, I've seen numerous posters over the last few months take issue with the actual request to post links as opposed to copying and pasting the articles. As I pointed out in my earlier post, I don't see any issue with that whatsoever. If anything, I can totally see the papers side, and whatever the publication is, I usually post a link as I think that is right and fair.

There was an appalling article by someone called McDonnell in The Mirror about empty seats in the lead up to the CoC semi at home. I slaughtered him for it on here, and didn't post a link, because I didn't want that kind of negative, ridiculous shite generating them revenue. So I am no champion of the Mirror.

But I do think Simon Mullock is one of the best connected journalists at City, and he does write some good, informative pieces about us.

If the legal department of the Mirror have been overly heavy handed, I don't think decent journalists like Mullock should have to bear the brunt, as I think he does a good job in the most part, and a lot of his information is of interest to Blues.

I wasn't aware that the Mirror allow other forums to paste their articles, that seems ridiculous. Perhaps someone in their legal department that has an axe to grind with us and not other clubs. Just like there are journalists. But it's not right to measure the whole publication by an overly-eager member of their legal team.

And regarding Trinity-Mirror, I'm not sure if you still look at the MEN, but it's becoming more and more like a City fanzine by the day. The articles are often overly positive, and stinging in their defence of City. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they are taking that tone as it gets more hits because City fans read overwhelmingly negative press about us everywhere else, and I'm sure that is a reaction to it. But the point remains, I don't think Trinity-Mirror have some kind of corporate wide strategy to slag City off.
 
We haven't had a city complete 4 years since Joe Mercer and times have changed since then.
 
Prestwich_Blue said:
If you read Pep Confidential, his wish is to coach youngsters and develop them. I could see him moving to the Academy or becoming something like Technical Director.
Click to expand...
I think he will do the 3 years, then extend for 2 more as he will have had a better relationship with the board and more freedom to operate than previously. That takes him to 50 , the age he wants to retire as a manager and then I think he will become Head of the CFA with a world wide brief to train the youngsters but also train the coaches.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top