Citizen Green
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 7,230
Reckon in the total time Sheikh Mansour has been here he has spent £1.02 Billion on the entire club, including it's purchase is September in 2008 for £210m.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
SSN and The Times
- Thread starter Citizen Green
- Start date
portisheadblue
Well-Known Member
see below
<a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186503</a>
<a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186503</a>
Check the figures for how much Abramovich spent in his first few seasons and adjust for inflation. Check out the wages United, Arsenal or Liverpool pay out and have done for ten years.
Check out how much Barcelona, Real Madrid or Inter have spent on wages and transfer fees in recent times.
We are playing a game of catch up and silly sums have to be spent. The silver lining is that this summer we have brought in really top drawer players which wasn't the case before so our spending sprees should not be as extravagant in the future. Yes, 1 billion has been spent but its all relative baby and part of that was buying the bloody club and inheriting its debt.
Check out how much Barcelona, Real Madrid or Inter have spent on wages and transfer fees in recent times.
We are playing a game of catch up and silly sums have to be spent. The silver lining is that this summer we have brought in really top drawer players which wasn't the case before so our spending sprees should not be as extravagant in the future. Yes, 1 billion has been spent but its all relative baby and part of that was buying the bloody club and inheriting its debt.
Citizen Green
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 7,230
Ahh, sorry mods merge if needed.portisheadblue said:see below
<a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.bluemoon-mcfc.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186503" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">viewtopic.php?f=1&t=186503</a>
It sounds alot because it is. But if you look at other clubs looking for investment in comparison its quite interesting. Lets look at Liverpool from an investment point of view. The yanks want £650 million to buy the club. Going on £400 million of debt.
£350 - £400 million MINIMUM to build the new stadium in stanley park - which they needed badly 3 years ago.
Thats 1.5 billion before you spend a penny on players and its clear they are going to need a major squad rebuild if they want to challenge for the title and to get back into the champions league again. You could spend £2 billion on Liverpool to get them where Utd and Arsenal are now in terms of infreastructure and you could argue squad and youth setup.
Even then you would still have a stadium hemmed in on every side - no scope for extra development and revenue potential Vs hundred of acres for pennies or free from th council within 10 minutes of the country second city + a mandate to do whatever our owners want. Vs Militant bordering communist Liverpool city council worst run in the country that are obstructive to virtually everything proposed in that city.
Plus Liverpool has exceptionaly poor demograhics as a city as a whole when you consider Liverpool vs Manchester. Liverpools population has been in decline for 40 years 600,000 people in a city built for over a million. Vs Manchester which has one of the fastest growing populations conurbation wise outside the south east.
Liverpool is also one of the poorest regions in the country per capita, yet they are deprived parts of Manchester some of the poorest in the country but large areas of Greater Manchester the south in particular and close surrounding areas are very affluent in comparison to Merseyside.
Our owners are not idiots, after the rags, Arsenal, Chelsea (due to land values) city were by far the best investment opportunity LONG TERM still available. Which is why we got this takeover and Liverpool didnt.
£350 - £400 million MINIMUM to build the new stadium in stanley park - which they needed badly 3 years ago.
Thats 1.5 billion before you spend a penny on players and its clear they are going to need a major squad rebuild if they want to challenge for the title and to get back into the champions league again. You could spend £2 billion on Liverpool to get them where Utd and Arsenal are now in terms of infreastructure and you could argue squad and youth setup.
Even then you would still have a stadium hemmed in on every side - no scope for extra development and revenue potential Vs hundred of acres for pennies or free from th council within 10 minutes of the country second city + a mandate to do whatever our owners want. Vs Militant bordering communist Liverpool city council worst run in the country that are obstructive to virtually everything proposed in that city.
Plus Liverpool has exceptionaly poor demograhics as a city as a whole when you consider Liverpool vs Manchester. Liverpools population has been in decline for 40 years 600,000 people in a city built for over a million. Vs Manchester which has one of the fastest growing populations conurbation wise outside the south east.
Liverpool is also one of the poorest regions in the country per capita, yet they are deprived parts of Manchester some of the poorest in the country but large areas of Greater Manchester the south in particular and close surrounding areas are very affluent in comparison to Merseyside.
Our owners are not idiots, after the rags, Arsenal, Chelsea (due to land values) city were by far the best investment opportunity LONG TERM still available. Which is why we got this takeover and Liverpool didnt.
Blue Train
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2009
- Messages
- 402
That sum hasn't been spent by the Sheikh at all. Only half of it has.
The other half is the figure they made up for wages he's committed to paying over the length of all the players contracts (again, a figure they made up, unless they are party to every payer's contract at City).
And this is all assuming that City make no money from its numerous sponsors, merchandising, match day sales, season tickets and whatever we rake in from the billion pound makeover of East Manchester we're planning.
The story is, therefore, total made up bullshite.
The other half is the figure they made up for wages he's committed to paying over the length of all the players contracts (again, a figure they made up, unless they are party to every payer's contract at City).
And this is all assuming that City make no money from its numerous sponsors, merchandising, match day sales, season tickets and whatever we rake in from the billion pound makeover of East Manchester we're planning.
The story is, therefore, total made up bullshite.
Not wanting to piss on your parade..... and it's all well and good banging that Manure spend £xx and Barca spend £yy on wages when you have to look at the bigger picture.... especially if you don't want to fall foul of Platini's new rules....
Manure and Barca can afford those wages as they turnover close to £300m..... If they spend £150m on wages that is a mere 50% of the turnover.... Where City need to work is growing the revenue streams as a turnover of £90m a year and a wage bill of over £110m a year will mean no entry into European competitions......
I see many of you banging on about Chelsea did this and Chelsea did that, well one of my oldest mates worked for Chelsea up until this season..... some facts about Chelsea and Abramovic....
They had already qualified for the CL before he arrived
They had 3 FA Cups, 1 Cup Winners Cup and a League Cup in the previous 7 years... so some level of success..... with all due respect to City your recent history is nowhere near that.
Chelsea spent a lot of money, but they also got a world class coach in Mourinho. The step from 3rd or 4th to 1st or 2nd is very small...... compared to the leap City are trying to make. Abramovic guaranteed the Chelsea debt (and still does to this day), all the money he has put in has been converted to shares so in effect the debt has gone, but even they are not operating within their means (spending more on transfers, wages etc than they bring in revenue, but they are much much closer than they were, but it has taken 8 years, when they said it would take 5)...
The point is, if your owners work the same way (even allowing a little for inflation), it is going to take at least 5 years if not longer due to the economic climate to get to that break even/operating within your means level to satisfy UEFA and Platini....
Meanwhile having looked at the regs for this UEFA will not allow things like £150m shirt sponsorship deals, £1m executive seats in the ground, £50m advertising hoardings as these would not represent fair and value.... compared to every other club....
Far be it from me to say what's right or wrong way to do things, but CL qualification is a must sooner rather than later.... which is not going to be easy, Spurs, Pool, Everton also in that mix (I think Arse, Manure, Chavs are still the best 3 in the PL)
All those wanting Spurs to lose last night should think again..... if we don't make the group stages there is a chance that the PL could lose a CL place... would it not be ironic if you finished 4th and missed out cos we cocked up in the play-off?? Be careful what you wish for......
Good luck Thursday..... let our game be a warning.... there are no easy away days in Europe.... unless you play a Scottish team (sorry to all the Scottish people on here but the standard north of the border is dire)....
Manure and Barca can afford those wages as they turnover close to £300m..... If they spend £150m on wages that is a mere 50% of the turnover.... Where City need to work is growing the revenue streams as a turnover of £90m a year and a wage bill of over £110m a year will mean no entry into European competitions......
I see many of you banging on about Chelsea did this and Chelsea did that, well one of my oldest mates worked for Chelsea up until this season..... some facts about Chelsea and Abramovic....
They had already qualified for the CL before he arrived
They had 3 FA Cups, 1 Cup Winners Cup and a League Cup in the previous 7 years... so some level of success..... with all due respect to City your recent history is nowhere near that.
Chelsea spent a lot of money, but they also got a world class coach in Mourinho. The step from 3rd or 4th to 1st or 2nd is very small...... compared to the leap City are trying to make. Abramovic guaranteed the Chelsea debt (and still does to this day), all the money he has put in has been converted to shares so in effect the debt has gone, but even they are not operating within their means (spending more on transfers, wages etc than they bring in revenue, but they are much much closer than they were, but it has taken 8 years, when they said it would take 5)...
The point is, if your owners work the same way (even allowing a little for inflation), it is going to take at least 5 years if not longer due to the economic climate to get to that break even/operating within your means level to satisfy UEFA and Platini....
Meanwhile having looked at the regs for this UEFA will not allow things like £150m shirt sponsorship deals, £1m executive seats in the ground, £50m advertising hoardings as these would not represent fair and value.... compared to every other club....
Far be it from me to say what's right or wrong way to do things, but CL qualification is a must sooner rather than later.... which is not going to be easy, Spurs, Pool, Everton also in that mix (I think Arse, Manure, Chavs are still the best 3 in the PL)
All those wanting Spurs to lose last night should think again..... if we don't make the group stages there is a chance that the PL could lose a CL place... would it not be ironic if you finished 4th and missed out cos we cocked up in the play-off?? Be careful what you wish for......
Good luck Thursday..... let our game be a warning.... there are no easy away days in Europe.... unless you play a Scottish team (sorry to all the Scottish people on here but the standard north of the border is dire)....
twinkletoes
Well-Known Member
Do they not realise that the club generates it's own revenue streams as well?
I think these would be used to pay the majority of any future wage costs.
I think these would be used to pay the majority of any future wage costs.
Seasideblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 1,365
Blue Train said:That sum hasn't been spent by the Sheikh at all. Only half of it has.
The other half is the figure they made up for wages he's committed to paying over the length of all the players contracts (again, a figure they made up, unless they are party to every payer's contract at City).
And this is all assuming that City make no money from its numerous sponsors, merchandising, match day sales, season tickets and whatever we rake in from the billion pound makeover of East Manchester we're planning.
The story is, therefore, total made up bullshite.
Yes but if the press did what you did there they would of had to put some effort in and prob would not have got to the magic 1 BILLION headline
Lazy journalism at its worst