Revs Team Up With Sporting
- Thread starter MikeDatTiger
- Start date
So you're saying that Mansour bought 3 additional clubs, and plans on paying enough to make each of them a winning team with a strong fan base, just to get some publicity for Man. City? Because that is definitely the cheapest and most effective way he could think of to market an EPL club that may win the league this year regardless of all these other dealings. Oh, and this somehow also has something to do with FFP, but not player development, though you haven't really gone back to that point since being questioned about it.
I'm sorry but I'm having a real hard time seeing coherently just what it is that you are arguing here, and I definitely can't figure out the logic behind it. And for the record I also have some doubts about CFG's intentions, but your marketing argument is incredibly narrow and doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
Again, no.
He's buying more teams so he can create more revenue. Right now, MCFC is the crown jewel.
He's looking at a way to expand his revenue base so he can spend more within the rules of FFP.
20 years ago, he could have purchased the team and paid wages out of his own pocket. Now you need new revenue sources.
He's buying more teams so he can create more revenue. Right now, MCFC is the crown jewel.
He's looking at a way to expand his revenue base so he can spend more within the rules of FFP.
20 years ago, he could have purchased the team and paid wages out of his own pocket. Now you need new revenue sources.
Is CFG allowed to count revenue from the other clubs as part of Man City's relevant income for FFP?
I was under the impression that that FFP focused on income of the club itself and not the ownership group.
Speaking as someone who has been very concerned and skeptical about CFG and NYY's intentions, I think your line of thinking in this thread has been very flawed.
Correct. BUT it does get to count the income it would make say, from a friendly at Yankee Stadium against NYCFC. It does get to count the income it would make from selling MCFC "stuff" at NYCFC games. Why do you think they televise replays on YES Network under MCTV?
Yes but you're missing the point. The money clubs like Manchester City make from international friendlies is not from the TV revenue. The TV revenue for a single game is pretty much peanuts considering the size of their annual income. The money comes from the initial invitations - MCFC can get offered as much as $5m to play in a competition like the World Football Challenge, or $1-2m for a single match. They would probably struggle to make $1-200,000 from TV rights, and in fact I suspect that part of the exorbitant fee for playing the game includes that the home team keeps the TV revenue as well as gates since they are paying over the odds for the match anyway.
Thing is, on top of this, the fact that MCFC and NYCFC are under the same ownership muddles the issue with paying fees for friendly appearances anyway. MCFC have already got into trouble with UEFA once for transferring money from one club to the other, and they announced when they accepted UEFA's fine this summer that as part of the agreement that they had to agree not to transfer money between the clubs for questionable reasons in future. They could probably argue that some appearance fee is valid for a future friendly between the two clubs, but if UEFA even sniffs the fee being at a "we don't think you should have earned that much" value, UEFA will simply scribble it out of the accounting ledger and make it count against their FFPR assessment. There really isn't much potential to make money off NYCFC, except indirectly as others mention through such things as encouraging fans of one club to start following the other, and by transferring promising youth players between the clubs who might help the club to major honours in future years.
But it's about exposure. Exposure turns into $$$
That's what I'm getting at. I would make a terrible lawyer. All I am saying is that the purchases of franchises in affluent nations with growing soccer markets is to try and turn new fans onto the CFG brand.
That's what I'm getting at. I would make a terrible lawyer. All I am saying is that the purchases of franchises in affluent nations with growing soccer markets is to try and turn new fans onto the CFG brand.
I would agree with that. The point I'm trying to make is that NYCFC does not just exist in order to exploit FFPR loopholes.
I'm sure that's part of it, but if all they wanted was exposure there are a lot of cheaper, easier ways they could go about getting it. To say that they bought and are building up three clubs just for exposure is missing a huge part of the equation.
Similar threads
