City fan base up 523%, United minus 19%

[gillie]

If you think about these figures it's not that outlandish really.If we had 1 fan say in Katmandu and then someone else decided to become a fan that's an increase of 100%.

so we have 5 1/4 new fans, that's about right :-)

Yeah in my simplistic world that's spot on :)

[FA cup winners 2006]

Although the figures are bullshit, it should be noted where this story was first printed, sport AS in Spain. Mainly a Catalan paper, they have done a story on the campus a few days ago and now a story on our increase in fan base. It looks like we are feeding them these stories for whatever reason. Maybe it's just more positive PR or it could be to justify Messi's decision to join us in the summer!

[Ted Hughes]

Although the figures are bullshit, it should be noted where this story was first printed, sport AS in Spain. Mainly a Catalan paper, they have done a story on the campus a few days ago and now a story on our increase in fan base. It looks like we are feeding them these stories for whatever reason. Maybe it's just more positive PR or it could be to justify Messi's decision to join us in the summer!

We are definitely not feeding them the stories as, if we were, they wouldn't be using pictures from 100 years ago.

[bobby brows]

The sad problem is that the only people who take any notice of these stats are the ones that don't know any better.

I suspect the numbers will be taken from social media which is incredibly mis-leading (not even taking into account the sheer volume of spam accounts). I run the media for semi-pro team and I used to be obsessed with the number of twitter followers we had. When I took over it was 700 and until we reached the 1,000 mark I was monitoring it hourly. Now we have 1,800 twitter followers and 271 facebook likes and i'm not that bothered. Its nice but is that the strength of our support? No chance, We average 117 at home but that's not a real indicator of our support as that number factors in opposition officials, away supporters and club members. We've had crowds as low as 60 and as high as 278.

The numbers that matter are a PAID average attendance and match day revenue. Yeah, its great for the rags that they've got 600m twitter followers but if they can't gget 99.9% to spend any money then they aren't supporting the club. We've gone from selling no merchandise to a steady trickle, one afternoon we sold £30s worth, that was a big day and I'd rather have the £30 than a million supporters that are never going to support us in any way.

[Ted Hughes]

But if you were on tv, there might be up to 1800 people who would consider watching, & those are the people who see whatever your sponsors would put out.

[Beefymcfc]

You're right BB, this isn't anything conclusive and only shows the number of hits that have an interest in our club, whether they be good, bad or ugly.

However, what it does show is that interest in our club has grown exponentially while the interest in the Rags has waned, just a little bit.

We laugh at the way the Rags worked their 659 million followers but this is exactly where they got their figures from. And that's good for business.

[bobby brows]

But if you were on tv, there might be up to 1800 people who would consider watching, & those are the people who see whatever your sponsors would put out.

true, i was going to include that. However if we were on TV I would expect our number of followers to increase dramatically. Again, there is going to be a baseline of people who will watch every game no matter who is on, then variation based on what channel which would need to be deducted from the number of supporters we have. I suppose what would increase massively is our social media reach.

[Beefymcfc]

I could be wrong but has anybody noticed how little we've been on TV this season. The Rags seem to have been shown every single game whereas we, the PL Champions just seem to get the odd game now.

And what about UK exposure, how many games have been shown terrestrially, genuine question?

[london blue 2]

I could be wrong but has anybody noticed how little we've been on TV this season. The Rags seem to have been shown every single game whereas we, the PL Champions just seem to get the odd game now.

And what about UK exposure, how many games have been shown terrestrially, genuine question?

Does this surprise you mate?
2015


2013-15

[london blue 2]

Just for clarification

"The number of live games broadcast in the UK (on Sky Sports, ESPN and BT Sport) for each Premier League club since the start of the 2013 season. The 2015 season figures only go up to November 2014"

Feels like rags have had a shit load of coverage since Christmas but not sure if that's correct.

[mr_nool]

Mourinho's boring football is probably to blame for the lack of telly time for the rent boys.

[Herb]

Nice trend and long may it continue.

[WhyAlwaysMe?]

The Chelsea vs City match had record high viewers around the globe... It was one of the most watched Premier League matches ever, both on TV & the net. If that brings City even more lucrative sponorship deals, that will be greater insurance that the team can avoid any more ridiculous restrictions from FIFA, UEFA & the FA!

[john@staustell]

The Chelsea vs City match had record high viewers around the globe... It was one of the most watched Premier League matches ever, both on TV & the net. If that brings City even more lucrative sponorship deals, that will be greater insurance that the team can avoid any more ridiculous restrictions from FIFA, UEFA & the FA!

Biggest ever 'Soccer' audience in the good old US of A!

[Beefymcfc]

I could be wrong but has anybody noticed how little we've been on TV this season. The Rags seem to have been shown every single game whereas we, the PL Champions just seem to get the odd game now.

And what about UK exposure, how many games have been shown terrestrially, genuine question?

Does this surprise you mate?
2015


2013-15

Actually, not really mate. As Champions we seemed to be on most weeks at the start of the season which then tailed off coming up to Christmas while the Rags seemed to be shown every game over the festive period, and throughout January. It's like they saw how shit they were and only when they started winning did they jump back on the bandwagon.

[Fullartj]

Complete b8llox WTF did they get these statistics???

[Aggressive Walkling]

I bet a lot of this comes from the absurd numbers of City followers on Weibo (the Chinese main social network.)

I also imagine a lot of those followers were purchased by the club for PR purposes. Purchasing likes and followers on these silly networks seems to be very much a new thing in corporate marketing.

All that said, the trend in support for City worldwide is obviously very much in the ascendant. And the rag filth needed one off year of Wee Davie to certainly shed a big chunk of their supposed 657 million "fans" (or whatever silly number they claimed).

[Beefymcfc]

This census is absolutely correct and shows the Rag glory-hunting hoards leaving in their droves. I make that about 13 million of their support has already fucked off after just one season, and in a coincidence, seem to have come to us.

Manchester City, ruining Asia since 2015.

[Mikhail Chigorin]

This census is absolutely correct and shows the Rag glory-hunting hoards leaving in their droves. I make that about 13 million of their support has already fucked off after just one season, and in a coincidence, seem to have come to us.

Manchester City, ruining Asia since 2015.

Today Asia; tomorrow THE WORLD.