Interesting stuff. No doubt there is a lot to be concerned about. However, when I noticed the writer's sloppiness on things about which I know something, it made me question the whole endeavor.
For example, he says that CFG has lost GBP850 million on their purchase of Manchester City, including their GBP210 purchase price. First of all, the purchase price isn't an expense - they still own the Club. More importantly, the value of that Club was recently estimated at GBP1,630 million. So, while they might be cash out GBP850 million, their investment has risen in value by GBP780 million more that their cash outlays. They had a strategy to pour in cash in an effort to boost value and create a sizeable return, and so far it seems to be working brilliantly.
And this was an important part of the article. He quoted these figures to support the notion that they are buying soccer clubs not for profit, but to distract the public from human rights abuses . (As if people had been clamoring about these abuses before they sunk money into Man City.)
Which comes around to his description of the abuses themselves. There is really disturbing stuff in the article. No doubt there is much for anyone to be concerned with when dealing with a repressive oligarch. But is what he wrote accurate? Is it in proper context? Are there mitigating factors left out? Is he jumping to conclusions? Who knows? But the example cited above - to point out just one - has to leave doubts.
