comment by Anfield of Dreams (Suarez is innocent, Britain is corrupt) (U6971) posted 3 minutes ago

Man U are in the top 5 richest clubs in the world.. lets not point the finger at City who have had a lot of spending to catch up on compared to the rest over the last 20 years. City are entitled to spend money because they havent had anywhere near the money the likes of Chelsea and Man U have had...so this article is pants im afraid.

I say good luck to you City. Go spend 2 billion if it means knocking those arrogant ckunts from there temporary "perch".

---------------------------------
Jesus wept.

United and City are utterly incidental to the point of the article, which was written by a Spurs fan

dependabledennis........................

Good points mate!

Lets take the article in the paper for what it was shall we.
Firstly it didnt take into acount income generated, sales of players or actually diferentiate between playing staff, backroom staff and infrastructure of the surrounding area which the club have invested heavily in. This is unlike Spurs who turned round and said that they should move to the olympic stadium because they owe nothing to the local businesses and local amenities...so where's the vaunted "local" spirit in the club there then?
Secondly the article was writen by a well known Arsenal supporter journo who while collecting the "facts" fails firstly to mention that he has an agenda in supporting Arsenal and Wenger and secondly has used it as an excuse to big up Wengers financial doping claims while not adressing the thing most real Arsenal fans want to know which is why arn't Arsenal and Wenger investing the money made in actually winning thing rather than smuly sitting back says well were in the CL again.

no Arab your the one whos THICK...

I'm not the one who puts other clubs in front of mine just so they can stop a rival club winning trophies. You don't care about Liverpool but City because they're stopping United winning titles. That tells me you're pretty obsessed and a pleb.

comment by Sir Thomas Of Towton - Wick Voted Best Board (U11544) posted 4 minutes ago

Cos it's mostly Man U fans crying about City.

--------------------------
That's the point

It isn't

You are just seeing the United fans' comments

I don't think it's impossible to compete with,the likes of City, Chelsea and Real can't buy every single top player,eventually players won't want to go to these clubs unless they can get a regular place in the team, the money on offer is one thing but players want to play games and want to feel part of a winning team.

We have competed with and for the most part been better than Chelsea since Roman took over and although City do deserve to be champions (in my opinion) we let them back into it against Wigan and Everton.

I had the same mentality when Chelsea were buying everyone, you can't keep spending record transfer fees and bringing in 6-7 players every single transfer window, the spending will have to level out at some stage despite this, the media will bang on about how City will spend 100 million in the next tansfer window, but they won't, there's no need to, and most importantly they can't keep doing it, the owners will want to make money out of the club, not lose it.

I'm quite happy about the fact my Seasoncard costs half of what I'd be asked to pay at Loftus Road.
--------------------
not for long Boris,make the most of it

8 bit, you said

This idea that FFP will make it harder for other clubs is balls.


How is that balls?

The richest revenue generating clubs will be able to spend the most money.

The top three revenue generating clubs in England are

Manchester United (by soe way
Arsenal

and Chelsea who earned 1m less than Arsenal in the last report.

The rest follow some up to 40/50m behind.

Those three clubs will benefit more from FFP than the others as they will be able to outspend the year on year.

UnitedRedMacca.....................Correct!

I deleted Anfield of Dreams comment because I specifically requested comments to be constructive!

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by UnitedRedMacca- I taught Rooney and Berbatov the overhead kick (U2024)


posted 42 seconds ago

comment by Anfield of Dreams (Suarez is innocent, Britain is corrupt) (U6971) posted 3 minutes ago

Man U are in the top 5 richest clubs in the world.. lets not point the finger at City who have had a lot of spending to catch up on compared to the rest over the last 20 years. City are entitled to spend money because they havent had anywhere near the money the likes of Chelsea and Man U have had...so this article is pants im afraid.

I say good luck to you City. Go spend 2 billion if it means knocking those arrogant ckunts from there temporary "perch".

---------------------------------
Jesus wept.

United and City are utterly incidental to the point of the article, which was written by a Spurs fan
===========================

NO... United should be brought into it as they have broken transfer records over many seasons so the finger should not be pointed solely at City. Chelsea are guilty too. City have just done it in 2 seasons

"Figures released this week show that Manchester City have spent £930.4million to get to the top of the Premier League!"

This is a very misleading article, both the one written by the OP (although I understand some of the points you are making) and The Telegraph. Firstly, that figure includes a substantial amount of money that has been put into the rejuvenation of the local area (significantly more than the Telegraph quotes, I might add). It also reads as if that money has been spent with no income happening and includes money spent on infrastructure, which cannot be counted towards FFP.

There is no arguing that we have spent big to get ourselves to the top of the league. However, one of the main reasons behind the spending policy over the last few years has been the implementation of FFP - the club has had to spend big to get in there before the door is shut. Our owners have said time and time again that they did not want such an aggressive investment, but had to, otherwise an opportunity to sit at the top table was far less likely to happen once FFP came in (if you don't think the gap will widen between the haves and have nots, then you are wrong).

The business plan at City has always been to eventually be self sufficient - Uefa know this and have publicly said they are happy with our plan. Although our financial reports have not looked great over the last couple of years, a lot of money on those reports was put in there simply to get them out of the way before the FFP rules are fully enforced. If you look at the reports properly, then revenue is increasing considerably and this will only go up with CL involvement (which, even going out in the group stage, is massively lucrative).

In terms of whether we have just won a lottery, then to a certain extent, we have. However, it was a lottery in which we managed to significantly shorten our odds. For years, there have been wealthy investors sniffing around the PL (in fact, there have been wealthy investors around since football began), but a lot of clubs, despite courting this investment, did not make themselves marketable enough. Take Everton for example, no one would buy them knowing they would have to completely renovate Goodison or buy a new stadium. This is why Bernstein deserves a lot of credit for our move to Eastlands (a process that London could learn a lot from with the Olympic stadium). Not only that, we still had a large fanbase, an excellent youth setup and an always improving infrastructure. In short, we were the most buyable club at the time.

For me personally, and I realise that I will be biased due to being a City fan, but I cannot understand how any industry can believe it is a good thing to restrict outside investment. It has happened since day one in football, (including to both "ethichally run" clubs, Arsenal and Spurs).

Taking football to one side, particularly considering the financial constraints that the economy is in at the moment, it cannot be argued any other way that this outside investment is creating jobs, rejuvenating an area in desperate need of it that would not have been able to get the money else where, and generated a stupid amount of money for the treasury in terms of tax.

Sorry for the length of that, it is just depressing to read the same arguments being brought out by people that are either not thinking about the bigger picture or have a clear lack of understanding of the history of football finance - no club in the PL can get on a moral high horse with City, you have all had investment in the past, some even more so than we have and the game as a whole only improved because of it.

Arab - City didn't break Utd records when it comes to transfer money on a single player.

I know they did, there's an argument about that money being self generated. City broke their record on Robinho, Chelsea on Torres and so on. We're not the only guilty ones of doing it

comment by geniusgreaves, Lasagne delivery for Arsenal, Newcastle & Fulham, must be consumed by 12 noon on May 13th!! (U1302)


posted 43 seconds ago

UnitedRedMacca.....................Correct!

I deleted Anfield of Dreams comment because I specifically requested comments to be constructive!
======================
How was it not constructive OP ??? United are relevant to this...they are mostly the ones shouting about Citys wealth and yet they are guilty of overspending themselves!!!????

It forces clubs to live with their means and should lead to much more youth development in the longer term.

Which is why City are spending £180m on a new youth academy and training complex.

comment by bruceandpally (U8201)
posted 25 seconds ago

I don't think it's impossible to compete with,the likes of City, Chelsea and Real can't buy every single top player,eventually players won't want to go to these clubs unless they can get a regular place in the team, the money on offer is one thing but players want to play games and want to feel part of a winning team.

We have competed with and for the most part been better than Chelsea since Roman took over and although City do deserve to be champions (in my opinion) we let them back into it against Wigan and Everton.

I had the same mentality when Chelsea were buying everyone, you can't keep spending record transfer fees and bringing in 6-7 players every single transfer window, the spending will have to level out at some stage despite this, the media will bang on about how City will spend 100 million in the next tansfer window, but they won't, there's no need to, and most importantly they can't keep doing it, the owners will want to make money out of the club, not lose it.

--------------------------------------------------------------

yet they are guilty of overspending themselves!!!????

United's cash is generated by the club, the poit of the OP is to discuss clubs that are running on losses and spending beyond their means.

comment by JFDI (U1657)

without City and Chelsea, then Everton, Villa and Tottenham would have made the CL a few times in the last few years. Sugar daddy owners cause crazy inflation in transfer fees and wages. FFP will close the gap

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

LeePen

This was not taken from a report, it came from figures quoted on Radio 4 this morning.

However you have taken the opportunity to have a go at Arsenal when the point of the article is not to single out any single club.

City have only broken the transfer record once though.

8 bit, I have shown you why I believe FF will not close the gap, now you tell me how it will, because I can't see it helping any of the clubs you mention getting close to Chelsea beacause they don't earn anywhere near enough..

no Arab your the one whos THICK... United are on of the top 5 richest clubs in the world. Why should they be afforded that luxury whil others teams like Villa, Everton etc cant compete. You cant pick and choose to point the finger when United are guilty of over spending themselves and breaking many transfer records
-----------------------------------
Possibly the stupidest comment I have ever read on here

I take it Oldham Athletic have every right to accuse Liverpool FC of overspending massively to win the FA Cup game against them?

Chaddy FC have every right to feel bitter because the can't compete with the Rochdale's of this world because of their spending power?

Utterly ridiculous

United's spend on player costs is a fraction of our revenue that falls within FFP rules

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

8 bit, I have shown you why I believe FF will not close the gap, now you tell me how it will, because I can't see it helping any of the clubs you mention getting close to Chelsea beacause they don't earn anywhere near enough..

------

ok well simple question... take a club like Wigan. is the finalcial gap bigger between Wigan and Arsenal/Chelsea/United... or Wigan and City/Chelsea? simple