comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 1 minute ago
Lot of heads in the sand here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, it's just denial.
Feel sorry for them, especially Gibson.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 1 second ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 seconds ago
As pathetic as using Human Rights issues to criticise a club?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who criticised the club, everything has been about your owners.
If you can't distinguish between the two, you have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’ve spent most of this thread blurring the lines of that talking about sport washing though, despite it clearly being the worst implementation of it imaginable if it was the case and contrary to any rational thought.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously the sports washing is perpetrated by those within UAE ruling circles, and have used Man City to do just that.
So if you can't distinguish between Man City and the owners of man city you really do have a problem, and in that, the sports washing has worked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hence my comment about it being the worst implementation of it I’ve ever heard of. For some bizarre reason, the definition of it seems to have shifted in the last eighteen months to only apply to fans of that particular club, which isn’t what it is. It’s even further than that in this particular case as it has led to a much wider adverse reaction, something that was spoken about before Mansour even bought the club and why he was very clear it was his own private investment.
That won’t negate it and that’s fair enough, I’ve always greater exposure can only be a good thing. It doesn’t mean people can make up nonsensical motivations though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Private investment when he is bankrolled by Abu Dhabi?
You know he is the deputy prime minister and brother to the ruler of the place.
Fack sake.. heads in the sand from City fans.
Not read all the replies but it is absolutely amazing that they have spent £1.2bn and now it's worth £2bn.
If that's all above board why isn't everyone doing it?
Of course I do, I'd hazard a guess that I know a fair amount more than you do if you're wanting to talk about him as a politician or as a member of the royal family.
I can distinguish the two though and also talk about him in his capacity of our owner
I'm not sure what's head in the sand about anything I've said? You seem now just to be making up what I'm saying to come to that conclusion yourself.
You're clearly not understanding my point about the ownership either - it isn't about the original source of the money in the context you're talking about, it's who is fronting it. If it was for the motivations you're saying then look at Abu Dhabis other investments. It makes no sense at all, which is why I say (again) they referenced it before the takeover. It really is that stupid.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
Not read all the replies but it is absolutely amazing that they have spent £1.2bn and now it's worth £2bn.
If that's all above board why isn't everyone doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They haven't got 1.2 billion they can afford to write off in the process. Its also not possible now due to ffp. There's a few owners now that would if they could though (Milan being a prime example, Everton and Leicester both on a lesser scale)
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 4 minutes ago
http://www.josimar.no/artikler/the-men-behind-manchester-city-the-dark-side/5040/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That article is a prime example of what i was referring to. It's increased exposure, not reduced it.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Increased exposure because they can’t control the media like they do back in the UAE.
Also nothing will convince me that the wealth Mansour is from his own graft.
That is total balls.
Also they know a ffp investigation is likely to find them in the wrong hence that interview from Khaldoon and the preemptive lodging of dispute with the CAS just for UEFA opening an investigation, never mind coming to a decision.
Yeah I remember reading that at the time. It’s not about our ownership as such, at least any of the incendiary bits in it, that’s mainly directed at others in the UAE. He references the detachment due to the reputation too. I disagree with his perception of some of it, but agree with a lot in the article.
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 5 minutes ago
https://medium.com/@NcGeehan/the-men-behind-man-city-a-documentary-not-coming-soon-to-a-cinema-near-you-14bc8e393e06
⬆️ That’s the more interesting article on Man City’s ownership. Think the one I posted above is a rip off or follow up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah pretty damning reading that.
Heads in the sand is the order of the day from some city fans though
“It’s his own money”
“So? Other countries are the same”
“They’ve got more focus on them”
“UEFA hate us”
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 4 minutes ago
Increased exposure because they can’t control the media like they do back in the UAE.
Also nothing will convince me that the wealth Mansour is from his own graft.
That is total balls.
Also they know a ffp investigation is likely to find them in the wrong hence that interview from Khaldoon and the preemptive lodging of dispute with the CAS just for UEFA opening an investigation, never mind coming to a decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your first point, yes maybe, that just further undermines the idea of sportswashing though doesn’t it, so are you agreeing with me on that now...?
Second point I don’t think anyone has said have they? I’ll reiterate again I said the ownership of the company, I haven’t said anything about where the base money came/comes from.
Third point, not quite. They’ve raised the complaint now about the process. When the sanction is announced, then they will take that to court and that will be the main one (if the first one doesn’t succeed).
Your first point, yes maybe, that just further undermines the idea of sportswashing though doesn’t it, so are you agreeing with me on that now...?
——————
No, sportswashing is still the aim. Whether it is successful or not is not the argument, it’s that the aim was to promote the UAE and their reputation abroad and “buy” loyalty.
Gibson is a good example of one that will defend them to the hilt, fanatically.
7 days of red comments incoming...
Which isn’t what sportswashing is, as I explained earlier. Now if we drop down a level and decide that it’s business reputation rather than state reputation, then that is something I could agree with, although this thread alone is proof people can’t normally detach the two.
It all boils down to that fundamental question though in terms of the initial motivation and whether it’s something else as well (such as he wants to make a bit of money and have fun in the process. It wouldn’t be the first time, just research Mansour and horse racing).
You’re clear on your assumption and nothing will sway you from that, which to me is the less likely of the initial two I say above. Personally, I’m not a fan of any assumptions and only really judge on the aspects that I’m sure of, which for us is in their capacity as owner and chairman of us. If the motivation is the same as your assumption and is state reputation, then I’d be arguing the same as you though . That would also require me to believe they’re monumentally stupid, even more so than your average fan on an English football forum, so I really do have my doubts on that though.
If it was business reputation, then I can see an argument why they would want to do it and I also think there’s validity in a lot that they’ve done. I’d argue that would be naivety more than stupidity, which is slightly
more believable.
You’d rather my comments that actually treat the club and owners as two separate bodies rather than someone unable to discern between them.
They are not beyond reproach, they have huge amounts of wealth that is from national reserves which as a totalitarian monarchy they have complete control over.
In such a regime paranoia is a fundamental aspect which leads to things like crack down on dissidents and a largely anaemic press. There is also the real fight for legitimacy around the world which is where sportswashing comes into play. A massive PR programme to ensure lineage of the Nahayan dynasty continues.
The footage of one of the family members torturing a business associate with impunity.. with impunity, shows exactly the lengths they’ll go to in order to preserve the status quo.
The Arab spring has scared the absolute shiiiiite out of these guys and they have had to commence the fight for legitimacy on many fronts.
Imagine what would happen in the UAE if the populous demanded a greater say on what happens to the country’s resources.
You’ve got people banged up for 10 years for posting something on twitter.
These are the owners of city, think they’re in it to make some of manchester happy? Mansour himself has only attended a few games in near a decade.
Khaldoon knows his neck is on the block (not sure whether that’s literally) to ensure nothing untoward happens in this grand scheme.
comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 27 minutes ago
...check your calculator.
Invested £1.3bn
Asset now worth £2.1bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invested 1.3bn and received back in profits so far, 20m..
So in 10 years he has got back 20m.. at that rate and checking my calculator he should be paid back in 640 years.
Man City is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it, and yes if someone did misguidedly take the plunge and pay £2.3bn for Man City, they would be your new owners..
And they would be able to get their £2.3bn paid back in 1150 years
They’re all in it to make money as long as they find the elixir of life
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wum or simply a fecking idiot?
I strongly suspect you’re the latter
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No need to suspect Paul, this guy makes Maf look like a PhD Physicist.
Don't diss Liverpool's answer to George Soros.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 minute ago
Don't diss Liverpool's answer to George Soros.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow, if it isn’t the master debater from the Tourette’s society.
Go on Gibson, give us some more of your mental spasms that make you vent “murderers” or “scousers” or have a rant about social ills in other countries in amongst a reasonable debate on the owners of city. All because you can not comprehend that the ownership of city and the club are two different things.
Learn the difference
Reasonable debate.
You crack me up.
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 27 minutes ago
...check your calculator.
Invested £1.3bn
Asset now worth £2.1bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invested 1.3bn and received back in profits so far, 20m..
So in 10 years he has got back 20m.. at that rate and checking my calculator he should be paid back in 640 years.
Man City is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it, and yes if someone did misguidedly take the plunge and pay £2.3bn for Man City, they would be your new owners..
And they would be able to get their £2.3bn paid back in 1150 years
They’re all in it to make money as long as they find the elixir of life
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wum or simply a fecking idiot?
I strongly suspect you’re the latter
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No need to suspect Paul, this guy makes Maf look like a PhD Physicist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich coming from you Bom.. you’ve not once said anything of substance or amusement from anything I’ve read.
Just holding onto the coat tails of others..
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 minute ago
Reasonable debate.
You crack me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a true master debater aren’t you? Go on, rant about something that comes into mind.
Are the ruling family of Abu Dhabi and all they stand for synonymous with the values of Manchester City?
Note : they are two different entities.
Why do you keep refering to an overseas Ruling Family on a football forum?
How about Prince William and his support for Villa, it's more pertinent.
Ok, I take it you don’t have an answer to that. Didn’t expect much more than that to be fair.
Bringing Prince William and his Villa Panini stickers into a debate when you can’t answer a pretty straightforward question.
You’re just a shiiiit Michael Howard (vs Paxman)
Sign in if you want to comment
Once upon a time
Page 9 of 12
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
posted on 10/6/19
comment by CrouchEndGooner (U13531)
posted 1 minute ago
Lot of heads in the sand here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, it's just denial.
Feel sorry for them, especially Gibson.
posted on 10/6/19
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 1 second ago
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 seconds ago
As pathetic as using Human Rights issues to criticise a club?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Who criticised the club, everything has been about your owners.
If you can't distinguish between the two, you have a problem.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’ve spent most of this thread blurring the lines of that talking about sport washing though, despite it clearly being the worst implementation of it imaginable if it was the case and contrary to any rational thought.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously the sports washing is perpetrated by those within UAE ruling circles, and have used Man City to do just that.
So if you can't distinguish between Man City and the owners of man city you really do have a problem, and in that, the sports washing has worked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hence my comment about it being the worst implementation of it I’ve ever heard of. For some bizarre reason, the definition of it seems to have shifted in the last eighteen months to only apply to fans of that particular club, which isn’t what it is. It’s even further than that in this particular case as it has led to a much wider adverse reaction, something that was spoken about before Mansour even bought the club and why he was very clear it was his own private investment.
That won’t negate it and that’s fair enough, I’ve always greater exposure can only be a good thing. It doesn’t mean people can make up nonsensical motivations though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Private investment when he is bankrolled by Abu Dhabi?
You know he is the deputy prime minister and brother to the ruler of the place.
Fack sake.. heads in the sand from City fans.
posted on 10/6/19
Not read all the replies but it is absolutely amazing that they have spent £1.2bn and now it's worth £2bn.
If that's all above board why isn't everyone doing it?
posted on 10/6/19
Of course I do, I'd hazard a guess that I know a fair amount more than you do if you're wanting to talk about him as a politician or as a member of the royal family.
I can distinguish the two though and also talk about him in his capacity of our owner
I'm not sure what's head in the sand about anything I've said? You seem now just to be making up what I'm saying to come to that conclusion yourself.
You're clearly not understanding my point about the ownership either - it isn't about the original source of the money in the context you're talking about, it's who is fronting it. If it was for the motivations you're saying then look at Abu Dhabis other investments. It makes no sense at all, which is why I say (again) they referenced it before the takeover. It really is that stupid.
posted on 10/6/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 4 minutes ago
Not read all the replies but it is absolutely amazing that they have spent £1.2bn and now it's worth £2bn.
If that's all above board why isn't everyone doing it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They haven't got 1.2 billion they can afford to write off in the process. Its also not possible now due to ffp. There's a few owners now that would if they could though (Milan being a prime example, Everton and Leicester both on a lesser scale)
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 4 minutes ago
http://www.josimar.no/artikler/the-men-behind-manchester-city-the-dark-side/5040/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That article is a prime example of what i was referring to. It's increased exposure, not reduced it.
posted on 10/6/19
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/6/19
Increased exposure because they can’t control the media like they do back in the UAE.
Also nothing will convince me that the wealth Mansour is from his own graft.
That is total balls.
Also they know a ffp investigation is likely to find them in the wrong hence that interview from Khaldoon and the preemptive lodging of dispute with the CAS just for UEFA opening an investigation, never mind coming to a decision.
posted on 10/6/19
Yeah I remember reading that at the time. It’s not about our ownership as such, at least any of the incendiary bits in it, that’s mainly directed at others in the UAE. He references the detachment due to the reputation too. I disagree with his perception of some of it, but agree with a lot in the article.
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Ace (U18814)
posted 5 minutes ago
https://medium.com/@NcGeehan/the-men-behind-man-city-a-documentary-not-coming-soon-to-a-cinema-near-you-14bc8e393e06
⬆️ That’s the more interesting article on Man City’s ownership. Think the one I posted above is a rip off or follow up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah pretty damning reading that.
Heads in the sand is the order of the day from some city fans though
“It’s his own money”
“So? Other countries are the same”
“They’ve got more focus on them”
“UEFA hate us”
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 4 minutes ago
Increased exposure because they can’t control the media like they do back in the UAE.
Also nothing will convince me that the wealth Mansour is from his own graft.
That is total balls.
Also they know a ffp investigation is likely to find them in the wrong hence that interview from Khaldoon and the preemptive lodging of dispute with the CAS just for UEFA opening an investigation, never mind coming to a decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Your first point, yes maybe, that just further undermines the idea of sportswashing though doesn’t it, so are you agreeing with me on that now...?
Second point I don’t think anyone has said have they? I’ll reiterate again I said the ownership of the company, I haven’t said anything about where the base money came/comes from.
Third point, not quite. They’ve raised the complaint now about the process. When the sanction is announced, then they will take that to court and that will be the main one (if the first one doesn’t succeed).
posted on 10/6/19
Your first point, yes maybe, that just further undermines the idea of sportswashing though doesn’t it, so are you agreeing with me on that now...?
——————
No, sportswashing is still the aim. Whether it is successful or not is not the argument, it’s that the aim was to promote the UAE and their reputation abroad and “buy” loyalty.
Gibson is a good example of one that will defend them to the hilt, fanatically.
posted on 10/6/19
7 days of red comments incoming...
posted on 10/6/19
Which isn’t what sportswashing is, as I explained earlier. Now if we drop down a level and decide that it’s business reputation rather than state reputation, then that is something I could agree with, although this thread alone is proof people can’t normally detach the two.
It all boils down to that fundamental question though in terms of the initial motivation and whether it’s something else as well (such as he wants to make a bit of money and have fun in the process. It wouldn’t be the first time, just research Mansour and horse racing).
You’re clear on your assumption and nothing will sway you from that, which to me is the less likely of the initial two I say above. Personally, I’m not a fan of any assumptions and only really judge on the aspects that I’m sure of, which for us is in their capacity as owner and chairman of us. If the motivation is the same as your assumption and is state reputation, then I’d be arguing the same as you though . That would also require me to believe they’re monumentally stupid, even more so than your average fan on an English football forum, so I really do have my doubts on that though.
If it was business reputation, then I can see an argument why they would want to do it and I also think there’s validity in a lot that they’ve done. I’d argue that would be naivety more than stupidity, which is slightly
more believable.
posted on 10/6/19
You’d rather my comments that actually treat the club and owners as two separate bodies rather than someone unable to discern between them.
They are not beyond reproach, they have huge amounts of wealth that is from national reserves which as a totalitarian monarchy they have complete control over.
In such a regime paranoia is a fundamental aspect which leads to things like crack down on dissidents and a largely anaemic press. There is also the real fight for legitimacy around the world which is where sportswashing comes into play. A massive PR programme to ensure lineage of the Nahayan dynasty continues.
The footage of one of the family members torturing a business associate with impunity.. with impunity, shows exactly the lengths they’ll go to in order to preserve the status quo.
The Arab spring has scared the absolute shiiiiite out of these guys and they have had to commence the fight for legitimacy on many fronts.
Imagine what would happen in the UAE if the populous demanded a greater say on what happens to the country’s resources.
You’ve got people banged up for 10 years for posting something on twitter.
These are the owners of city, think they’re in it to make some of manchester happy? Mansour himself has only attended a few games in near a decade.
Khaldoon knows his neck is on the block (not sure whether that’s literally) to ensure nothing untoward happens in this grand scheme.
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 27 minutes ago
...check your calculator.
Invested £1.3bn
Asset now worth £2.1bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invested 1.3bn and received back in profits so far, 20m..
So in 10 years he has got back 20m.. at that rate and checking my calculator he should be paid back in 640 years.
Man City is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it, and yes if someone did misguidedly take the plunge and pay £2.3bn for Man City, they would be your new owners..
And they would be able to get their £2.3bn paid back in 1150 years
They’re all in it to make money as long as they find the elixir of life
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wum or simply a fecking idiot?
I strongly suspect you’re the latter
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No need to suspect Paul, this guy makes Maf look like a PhD Physicist.
posted on 10/6/19
Don't diss Liverpool's answer to George Soros.
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 minute ago
Don't diss Liverpool's answer to George Soros.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow, if it isn’t the master debater from the Tourette’s society.
posted on 10/6/19
Go on Gibson, give us some more of your mental spasms that make you vent “murderers” or “scousers” or have a rant about social ills in other countries in amongst a reasonable debate on the owners of city. All because you can not comprehend that the ownership of city and the club are two different things.
Learn the difference
posted on 10/6/19
Reasonable debate.
You crack me up.
posted on 10/6/19
comment by bomdia (U13941)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
posted 5 hours, 23 minutes ago
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 27 minutes ago
...check your calculator.
Invested £1.3bn
Asset now worth £2.1bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Invested 1.3bn and received back in profits so far, 20m..
So in 10 years he has got back 20m.. at that rate and checking my calculator he should be paid back in 640 years.
Man City is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it, and yes if someone did misguidedly take the plunge and pay £2.3bn for Man City, they would be your new owners..
And they would be able to get their £2.3bn paid back in 1150 years
They’re all in it to make money as long as they find the elixir of life
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wum or simply a fecking idiot?
I strongly suspect you’re the latter
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No need to suspect Paul, this guy makes Maf look like a PhD Physicist.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rich coming from you Bom.. you’ve not once said anything of substance or amusement from anything I’ve read.
Just holding onto the coat tails of others..
posted on 10/6/19
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 1 minute ago
Reasonable debate.
You crack me up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, a true master debater aren’t you? Go on, rant about something that comes into mind.
Are the ruling family of Abu Dhabi and all they stand for synonymous with the values of Manchester City?
Note : they are two different entities.
posted on 10/6/19
Why do you keep refering to an overseas Ruling Family on a football forum?
How about Prince William and his support for Villa, it's more pertinent.
posted on 10/6/19
Ok, I take it you don’t have an answer to that. Didn’t expect much more than that to be fair.
Bringing Prince William and his Villa Panini stickers into a debate when you can’t answer a pretty straightforward question.
You’re just a shiiiit Michael Howard (vs Paxman)
Page 9 of 12
8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12