He and his rat faced friend still seem unable to grasp the basic economic principle that a team that won the treble in a season (in the richest league in the world) and added the supercup and club world Cup would maximise their sponsorship income (winners bonuses), maximise their TV income (more games on the box than anybody else so more dosh) and max their trophy winners income all in the same year.
Who does he think should have earned more than City that year? Scousepool for winning the Carabou Cup because they have more fans in Malaysia? Do fuck off Jamie you thick scouse ****. They live in the fantasy land that thinks clubs earn big money from shirt sales. They don't.
This.
Is a sponsor only advertising to the club's own fans? No.
Do sponsors want their clubs to be in the Europa League (or worse!)? No, less people watch them.
Do sponsors want their clubs knocked out in the early stages of the CL? No, because it reduces publicity.
Do sponsors want viewers to see their club lifting trophies and being linked with success? Yes, more viewers for the biggest games and success attracts.
Which team has been practically guaranteed CL qualification, and reaching the latter stages of the tournament, for about the last 8 years. Us.
Which other teams don't and therefore don't give their sponsors the same level of exposure. Every other f#cker, but especially united, Chelsea, Spurs etc.
We should be getting bigger sponsorship deals than any other club now, simple.
Last edited: