The Transfers Thread

[chef]

de laurentiis isn't going to sway from the buyout clause. there will be no as cheap as possible. it's either be the full fee or a player + the fee based on his evaluation. it's how he is. cavani hasn't said he wants to leave, the buyout is there, napoli don't need the money, he doesn't move until adl is completely satisfied.

Sounds like we're inching closer, latest reports are our second offer of €55mil has been rejected. Cavani hasn't stated publicly he wants to leave, but he's apparently agreed to terms with Chelsea.

 

[moomba]

Sounds like we're inching closer, latest reports are our second offer of €55mil has been rejected. Cavani hasn't stated publicly he wants to leave, but he's apparently agreed to terms with Chelsea.

Sod off Chelsea

 

[chef]

Sod off Chelsea

Wouldn't you rather Gomez?

 

[Shoei]

No, it's a race to win silverware by having the best squad of players each club could possibly have within their means.

It's an interesting concept that doesn't seem to matter that much to the legion of football supporters who grew up with posters of accountants on their walls.

By someone else's means.

 

[moomba]

By someone else's means.

No, by the means available to the club. Which includes a number of factors other than operating income just as it has done for every club in the history of football.

If we couldn't afford to pay a transfer fee we would get a ban from FIFA.

 

[Shoei]

No, by the means available to the club. Which includes a number of factors other than operating income just as it has done for every club in the history of football.

If we couldn't afford to pay a transfer fee we would get a ban from FIFA.

We'll wait and see what magical book keeping occurs between now and the start of the season.

 

[moomba]

We'll wait and see what magical book keeping occurs between now and the start of the season.

Magical book keeping? No need for magic, just a matter of having a plan to grow revenue and control costs. Like any business.

 

[Magma]

Magical book keeping? No need for magic, just a matter of having a plan to grow revenue and control costs. Like any business.

stop it, no one likes logic.

 

[Kaan]

Wasted talent. Was very effective for us for a few years coming off the bench. But I think his interests lie in being famous and music rather than his football.

He was treated badly by Rafa for some reason.

Never started more than 2-3 games in a row I think, that's just harsh.

 

[Tulip]

Tancredi tweets so much.

 

[jod23]

He was treated badly by Rafa for some reason.

Never started more than 2-3 games in a row I think, that's just harsh.

I always found that he was far more effective coming on as a sub anyways.

 

[NTRabbit]

Magical book keeping? No need for magic, just a matter of having a plan to grow revenue and control costs. Like any business.

Sell the naming rights to the new practice ground to Etihad for 600 million pounds?

 

[Magma]

other clubs are free to do the same things. it's not just down to a select few clubs

 

[moomba]

Sell the naming rights to the new practice ground to Etihad for 600 million pounds?

Forgetting for a second that no-one has ever suggested that the Etihad deal is £600m, that seems to be a figment of your imagination.

And forgetting for a second that the Etihad deal is not for our training ground, it is for the main stadium, shirt and 80 acres of East Manchester.

And forgetting for a second that as far as market value goes the deal at the rumoured rates is already looking undervalued (Arsenals shirt and stadium deal is supposed to be in excess of £30m a year)

If Etihad are prepared to give us the rumoured £40m a year then I'm struggling to think how this involves magical book keeping. Certainly by any accounting and legal definition it is about as straightforward as it gets.

 

[chef]

Reports out of Germany that KDB won't be loaned out again. Fantastic news.

 

[NYJetsfor2029]

If Etihad are prepared to give us the rumoured £40m a year then I'm struggling to think how this involves magical book keeping. Certainly by any accounting and legal definition it is about as straightforward as it gets.

It's magic in that it's artificial.

Arsenal's brand is worth two and a half times that of City's (according to Forbes). In a real business model sponsorship would reflect this.

 

[Tulip]

If Etihad are prepared to give us the rumoured £40m a year then I'm struggling to think how this involves magical book keeping. Certainly by any accounting and legal definition it is about as straightforward as it gets.

It's like your mum giving you $20 because your dad said he wouldn't give you anymore money.

Keep spinning.

 

[Magma]

It's magic in that it's artificial.

Arsenal's brand is worth two and a half times that of City's (according to Forbes). In a real business model sponsorship would reflect this.

arsenal are free to negotiate a deal worth two and half times more than ours. if they can't, that's their problem.

 

[moomba]

It's magic in that it's artificial.

Arsenal's brand is worth two and a half times that of City's (according to Forbes). In a real business model sponsorship would reflect this.

It's not artificial. The money is paid to the club, it goes in our bank account. It helps make us sustainable and grow as a club.

You're also comparing apples to oranges. If our Etihad deal was the shirt and stadium then you could look at Arsenal's Emirates deal and work out whether it is a good one or not. Or if Arsenal's Emirates deal was for a shirt, stadium and 80 acres of surrounding urban land then you could compare it to City's Etihad deal. But the two deals are for different things so I don't know how anyone can determine benchmarks.

I'm interested to see where you have the data on City's brand value. The Forbes 40 isn't brand value (and we're over half the value of Arsenal on it anyway (and above the likes of Liverpool).

I haven't been able to find any Forbes data that details City's brand value.

Look at things like BrandFinance and our brand value is 8th in the world (compared to Arsenals 6th).

 

[moomba]

It's like your mum giving you $20 because your dad said he wouldn't give you anymore money.

Keep spinning.

Once again, by every legal and accounting definition that Etihad deal is a straight forward one. Seems to be only football supporters that want to invent new laws to make things something they are not.

The good thing though, is that the whole bollocks that people were just concerned about clubs getting themselves into financial trouble has been exposed for what it is.

City make a loss - bad for football
City negotiate a deal to bring £40m a year into the club - bad for football

Hypocritical, and from a supporter of a club that I doubt was leading the protests when Alan Sugar made Amstrad a sponsor of Spurs.

 

[Magma]

deloitte has our revenue 5 million euro behind arsenal for the 2011-12 season.

http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Azerbaijan/Local Assets/Documents/footballmoneyleague2013.pdf

 

[Tulip]

Is that like when Amstrad sponsored Spurs coincidentally at the same time Alan Sugar was Spurs chairman and owner?

Or was it OK then?

Very similar, yeah. The point being made here is the figures that City (and Chelsea) are spending. Did we spend anything like this under Sugar?

Nope.

 

[Cruyff14]

Until Man City break any laws within the game nobody can really have a sook.

 

[moomba]

Very similar, yeah. The point being made here is the figures that City (and Chelsea) are spending. Did we spend anything like this under Sugar?

Nope.

Ah, you're ok with us getting a good sponsorship deal so long as we don't use any of the money to buy things.

BTW we had the 10th highest nett spend in the league last season.

 

[moomba]

Until Man City break any laws within the game nobody can really have a sook.

If you invent new rules and standards as you go along you can pretty much have a sook about anything.