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.
United Thread 2015/16
- Thread starter Mikejl
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Sure I read somewhere that the guy who signed the deal off at the Chevrolet end was sacked the next day,or have I mixed it up with summat else?The Chevrolet sponsorship was a transparently bent deal.
SilverFox2
Well-Known Member
The advantage we have is the "prestige" element of Sheikh Mansour owning Manchester City. The Glasers have one motive, to make as much money from Manchester United as possible, the Sheikh on the other hand intends on using the reflective glory of Manchester City success to draw attention to, and investment to, Abu Dhabi as a whole. A successful Manchester City means a higher profile, which in turn means Abu Dhabi is seen in a good light, and attracts investment in the area. The Sheikh won't bankroll us for eternity, but he doesn't need to, we've already made huge leaps forward on the commercial front and, with increased prize money, and TV deals, City's profitability seems as secure as it can be for a professional football team. I don't foresee a scenario whereby ADUG start taking dividends from City and farm club generated profits into the pockets of people in the Middle East, or into other commercial ventures.
I think we would all like to think that way especially with the success of Etihad Airways and the housing / University deals ADUG are currently doing on the back of the City investment but not being privvy to their plans I see we are structured with CFG being the Holding Company. Other than tax reasons I cannot see a reason for this ?
The ADUG team are bound to be on incentives to make profits so they will definitely be sharing in the same profits one way or another but obviously not as shareholders.
Somewhere along the line of Companies CFG covers there is going to be profits that will allow CFG to use them against losses in another direction so the planning for long stay is in place and as you say with a profitable City to look forward to and the Collar Site as yet untouched the future looks rosy.
Mikejl
Well-Known Member
Dodgy as fuckSure I read somewhere that the guy who signed the deal off at the Chevrolet end was sacked the next day,or have I mixed it up with summat else?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/general-motors-exec-who-agreed-1218826
Sigh
Well-Known Member
Bogs in the Kippax are overflowing again. Swales out.He actually said that if City show the same rate of growth in revenue as we did from 2013 to 2014 then we would overtake them. Personally I don't think we will and that we'll see revenue between £360m & £370m. Still not bad.
He was literally sacked outright for that deal. As in that's the reason they gave the press.
http://fortune.com/2012/08/13/what-really-happened-to-gms-cmo/
The rest of the world quickly learned what Ewanick apparently suspected: the once-rising star had flamed out. On July 29, GM GM announced Ewanick’s resignation through a terse statement and GM spokesman Greg Martin told the press, Ewanick “failed to meet the expectations the company has of an employee.” The failure centered on the $559 million, seven-year sponsorship deal GM inked with Manchester United, Europe’s largest soccer team.
Insiders say Ewanick misrepresented the deal to upper management, telling CEO and chairman Daniel Akerson that the largest automaker in the U.S. was spending about a third less on the deal than what was originally agreed upon with Manchester United. (Upon the revelation, the deal was reworked.) When confronted about the situation, Ewanick repeatedly denied the misrepresentation, insiders say. GM declined further comment. Ewanick couldn’t be reached for comment.
The bolded bit is never ever mentioned by the rag press either
But while the deal misrepresentation, which was brought to light by a whistleblower within Ewanick’s division, sparked the ouster, sources say that Ewanick’s denial of it sealed his fate with Akerson. “That may have been the final straw,” an insider says.
mrtwiceaseason
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 7,670
Pb your pretty good on these things haven't seen the total debt figure mentioned is it still coming down ? Or is it still 400 million ishIt's £15m between the six of them.
He was literally sacked outright for that deal. As in that's the reason they gave the press.
http://fortune.com/2012/08/13/what-really-happened-to-gms-cmo/
The bolded bit is never ever mentioned by the rag press either
According to this,the deal was based on their "659 million fan base",but when looked at in greater detail,that said "fan base" turned out to be 277million.......if this is true of course.
http://www.businessinsider.com/hey-...s-it-doesnt-have-659-million-fans-2012-8?IR=T
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
Still around £400m I believe. The Glazers are up to their necks in debt as their main business is leveraged to the hilt and the future for down-market malls isn't looking good. Even the £225m cash they originally put into the deal to buy the rags was almost certainly borrowed by remortgaging some of those malls just before the crash. Plus they took on more personal debt to pay off the ruinous PIK notes they used to finance the rest of the deal. It's quite possible they could sell the rags for $2bn and still not have enough to cover all their various debts.Pb your pretty good on these things haven't seen the total debt figure mentioned is it still coming down ? Or is it still 400 million ish
Last edited:
The posts about the rags finances are all well and good, but does anyone really give a fuck about it? In terms of banter ammo with the dirty fucking reptiles I just rely on their irreversible slide towards mediocrity with the odd 6-1 thrown in. Come to think of it, why have these insignificant small time c**** even got their own thread?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.