so this agenda thing.

[SilverFox2]

Anyone else see this last monday on net spend over the last 2 seasons

On Sky Sports no doubt.

Agenda, though.

That's because the rag darlings are getting their nickers in a twist about the Glazers not investing in the team. The truth is in recent windows they have spent, they have just done it very badly.

It served the medias purpose to portray us as 'buying the title' now the rags are in meltdown and on the verge of mutiny about the lack of signings Sky are seeking to do the Glazers PR for them.

Just an opinion but the fans (and the media that reflects their feelings) are wanting any prestige signing at MUFC rather than strategic purchases that will rebuild the team in its weakest areas.

I am pleased in a way that this year City have been forced to watch their spend because balancing a budget soon sorts out the 'must haves' from the 'would likes' and forces a pruning of existing resources.
Not saying that without the imposed restrictions this would not have happened but I think 'Team Building' rather than 'Star Chasing' has been the feature of this particular Transfer window for us.

 

[George Hannah]

I am pleased in a way that this year City have been forced to watch their spend because balancing a budget soon sorts out the 'must haves' from the 'would likes' and forces a pruning of existing resources..

You agree with the Euro attack dogs then - we need their "help" with our financial governance to avoid embarrassment for the cartel. Foxy, it seems the pack on here have run you to earth!

 

[Pablo ZZZ Peroni]

I don't know how to post youtube links but George did post a nice a nice anti-United clip in the Sunday Supplement thread:



*Di Maria great signing but way too much money, paid over the odds, because United desperate and no Champions League

*United NOT an elite team

*Miracle if United win the league

*Mismanaged transfer window. Again.

*United " instable"

*VG not in the same class as Ancelotti

*Mata gone backwards since joining United

*Concerns letting go of an English striker. Wont sell to top 6 side which shows they see rivals as all other top 6 ie imply how much teyve fallen

*Lack of 1st choice international players in the team

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

Anyone else see this last monday on net spend over the last 2 seasons

On Sky Sports no doubt.

Agenda, though.

That's because the rag darlings are getting their nickers in a twist about the Glazers not investing in the team. The truth is in recent windows they have spent, they have just done it very badly.

It served the medias purpose to portray us as 'buying the title' now the rags are in meltdown and on the verge of mutiny about the lack of signings Sky are seeking to do the Glazers PR for them.

Let me get this straight.

When Sky say we've spent a lot of money it's to make us look like we've bought the title, but when Sky say United have spent a lot of money it's supposed to make them look better by showing they've got money?

Can't you see the problem?

 

[SilverFox2]

I am pleased in a way that this year City have been forced to watch their spend because balancing a budget soon sorts out the 'must haves' from the 'would likes' and forces a pruning of existing resources..

You agree with the Euro attack dogs then - we need their "help" with our financial governance to avoid embarrassment for the cartel. Foxy, it seems the pack on here have run you to earth!

Dare I say you have been a little selective with your post editing George.
My next sentence on that post specifically qualified the part that you highlight.

Incidentally, it has always been my view that our owners have never needed any assistance from anyone (including UEFA) on how to run a business.
In fact the full impact of FFP as it was designed never happened because UEFA were taken by surprise at the financial progress the Sheiks Business Plan had been progressed by his superb ADUG officers. They were rightfully aggrieved by the deceitful means that 'Cher Michel' used to appease his G14 masters.

I am sure MCFC will continue to be run via a splendidly successful Business Plan whereas the panic buying on one hand and the asset stripping on the other at MUFC will continue without too much adverse comment in the media.

I am looking forward to seeing the modified Graphic Table at the end of this window. I have already found the existing one invaluable (via a written crib in my wallet) in shutting up critics from MUFC because of our spend reputation.

 

[Eccles Blue]

There's a new thread that I think should finish this thread off for good and maybe a MOD will say it's a draw!!! (IMHO) :-)

<a class="postlink-local" href="http://forums.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=305015" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=305015</a>

In one sentence it explains why we don't get the coverage:

It is a sign of a healthy club when they don’t occupy the front pages of our national newspapers.

 

[Blueknows]

I am pleased in a way that this year City have been forced to watch their spend because balancing a budget soon sorts out the 'must haves' from the 'would likes' and forces a pruning of existing resources..

You agree with the Euro attack dogs then - we need their "help" with our financial governance to avoid embarrassment for the cartel. Foxy, it seems the pack on here have run you to earth!

Dare I say you have been a little selective with your post editing George.
My next sentence on that post specifically qualified the part that you highlight.

Incidentally, it has always been my view that our owners have never needed any assistance from anyone (including UEFA) on how to run a business.
In fact the full impact of FFP as it was designed never happened because UEFA were taken by surprise at the financial progress the Sheiks Business Plan had been progressed by his superb ADUG officers. They were rightfully aggrieved by the deceitful means that 'Cher Michel' used to appease his G14 masters.

I am sure MUFC will continue to be run via a splendidly successful Business Plan whereas the panic buying on one hand and the asset stripping on the other at MUFC will continue without too much adverse comment in the media.

I am looking forward to seeing the modified Graphic Table at the end of this window. I have already found the existing one invaluable (via a written crib in my wallet) in shutting up critics of MUFC because of our spend reputation.

And this graph is not taking into account Rojos signing and if they do sign Di Maria for the reported 60 mill , blimey they will top the table

 

[Blue Mooner]

On Sky Sports no doubt.

Agenda, though.

That's because the rag darlings are getting their nickers in a twist about the Glazers not investing in the team. The truth is in recent windows they have spent, they have just done it very badly.

It served the medias purpose to portray us as 'buying the title' now the rags are in meltdown and on the verge of mutiny about the lack of signings Sky are seeking to do the Glazers PR for them.

Let me get this straight.

When Sky say we've spent a lot of money it's to make us look like we've bought the title, but when Sky say United have spent a lot of money it's supposed to make them look better by showing they've got money?

Can't you see the problem?

Absolutely right. It's the narrative that accompany the figures which is completely different and why whenever I meet anybody new through business and football support comes up and I reveal I support city it is always closely followed by 'the team that s bought the title'

I see no such criticism of the rags current spending or that it is any way unfair or that they are distorting the Market blah blah.

Never did I see any defence of our spending in the context of the rags having spent 30 million back in 2002, simply the narrative that we were buying the title

The irony is that your average football fan fell for this rhetoric hook line and sinker.

I guarantee that the spending the rags may do in this week and recent Windows will not be presented in the same way.

It also blows the myth that FFP had anything to do with fairness.

 

[aguero93:20]

I am pleased in a way that this year City have been forced to watch their spend because balancing a budget soon sorts out the 'must haves' from the 'would likes' and forces a pruning of existing resources..

You agree with the Euro attack dogs then - we need their "help" with our financial governance to avoid embarrassment for the cartel. Foxy, it seems the pack on here have run you to earth!

Dare I say you have been a little selective with your post editing George.
My next sentence on that post specifically qualified the part that you highlight.

Incidentally, it has always been my view that our owners have never needed any assistance from anyone (including UEFA) on how to run a business.
In fact the full impact of FFP as it was designed never happened because UEFA were taken by surprise at the financial progress the Sheiks Business Plan had been progressed by his superb ADUG officers. They were rightfully aggrieved by the deceitful means that 'Cher Michel' used to appease his G14 masters.

I am sure MUFC will continue to be run via a splendidly successful Business Plan whereas the panic buying on one hand and the asset stripping on the other at MUFC will continue without too much adverse comment in the media.

I am looking forward to seeing the modified Graphic Table at the end of this window. I have already found the existing one invaluable (via a written crib in my wallet) in shutting up critics of MUFC because of our spend reputation.

Que?

 

[Deleted member 58678]

You agree with the Euro attack dogs then - we need their "help" with our financial governance to avoid embarrassment for the cartel. Foxy, it seems the pack on here have run you to earth!

Dare I say you have been a little selective with your post editing George.
My next sentence on that post specifically qualified the part that you highlight.

Incidentally, it has always been my view that our owners have never needed any assistance from anyone (including UEFA) on how to run a business.
In fact the full impact of FFP as it was designed never happened because UEFA were taken by surprise at the financial progress the Sheiks Business Plan had been progressed by his superb ADUG officers. They were rightfully aggrieved by the deceitful means that 'Cher Michel' used to appease his G14 masters.

I am sure MUFC will continue to be run via a splendidly successful Business Plan whereas the panic buying on one hand and the asset stripping on the other at MUFC will continue without too much adverse comment in the media.

I am looking forward to seeing the modified Graphic Table at the end of this window. I have already found the existing one invaluable (via a written crib in my wallet) in shutting up critics of MUFC because of our spend reputation.

Que?

MUthaFuCkers