Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by razman, 7 Mar 2019.
Why are we not that again now?
According to his blog he said he wouldn’t work with them until they sorted out some of their internal security issues
Wow! That's certainly some clarification, many thanks.
And it's nice to know I'm not losing my marbles. Yet...
I thought the emails mentioned HH would arrange the funds for Etihad to meet their obligations. Which is where the out of context claim comes in from the official club statement, as HH is probably referring to the Crown Prince and not our owner. I've seen ADUG mentioned only in the press without an actual quote from the email given, I'd assumed this was a case of Chinese whispers, HH becomes Sheikh Mansour, then ADUG.
Does anyone have the actual quote with ADUG referenced, if there is one? I'm sure I asked this a month or so back and it was decided that there was no quote from the emails given.
After watching the tactics UEFA via its auditors, have been using on PSG. Whereby they are seemingly trying to lower their fair market value estimations every year rather than increase them. Which could be to suit the other clubs in Europe around them rather than what they are actually worth to a sponsor at present. I think if Etihad are not a related party, we should keep it recognised as such despite this case investigated, as I suspect we'll get the PSG treatment turned up to 11.
On that note, the most recent article I've read comparing the PL club sponsorship deals, has us at £45m a season. I do think this is low for the clubs current status but the people doing articles on it seem to think this is what we're getting. I had the assumption that our deal is flexible, where we can take £25m one season and £65m in another to help us balance the books. This might be why that year caught Etihad cold so to speak, along with their losses that year and they had no chance of meeting it without some help.
Sometimes I think we'd be better off letting the Etihad contract run down and get a big Chinese sponsor in that nobody can question. I suppose that's more about proving how full of shit the people complaining are, it's not about where the money comes from and never has been. It's the fact that City have money now and they don't like it.
I quite like the idea of a change of sponsor on the shirt... could someone mock up the fruit salad kit with “FUCK UEFA” in big Chinese characters?
Manchester City have been fantastic for Abu Dhabi & they have often said are the highest profile of all the sponsorships & partnerships they do. Why would they give that up when they’ve been the visionaries behind it all just because shit house journalists & corrupt officials question the legitimacy of it all.
They could easily get more from someone else but they deserve the reduced sponsorship for making it happen.
In fairness this sponsorship was and is part of the flagship plan to extend our owners and for that mattter AD's business investment interests.
Surely up to AD to decide if its ailing airline can be helped long term with its business plan which includes high cost advertising with City.
Makes far more sense than Chevrolet, who don't sell cars in Europe anymore, sponsoring United.
There you go!