Khaldoon Interview In The Guardian

[10.Goater_Legend]

Abu Dhabi takeover of Manchester City 'no danger to football', insists chairman

• In pictures: How Manchester City's takeover unfolded
• 'In business you are there to compete', says Khaldoon


Manchester City's chairman, Khaldoon al-Mubarak, has strongly defended the reconstruction of the club and said only outside investment on such a scale could ever break the monopoly on success enjoyed by Europe's richest sides.

The Uefa president, Michel Platini, has singled out the expenditure at City since the takeover by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al-Nahyan, a senior member of the Abu Dhabi royal family, a year ago. City have spent more than £200m on 11 players since, which Uefa has condemned as an inflationary danger for clubs across European football.

Khaldoon, speaking exclusively to the Guardian at his home in Abu Dhabi for a wide-ranging interview discussing the City acquisition in depth, rejected the assertion that the enormous wealth being spent by the club's new owners represents a danger to football.

"I could accept the argument if we were artificially building up the club through debt," Khaldoon said. "That produces a destructive end result; we have seen that happen. But in our case, the club will be in the healthiest position because there is no debt. We have funded it through equity [permanent investment], including the signing of the players.

"I believe what we are doing is a fair way to inject competition into football, without debt."

Announcing "financial fair-play measures" before the Champions League draw in Monaco last month, Platini unveiled proposals to prevent clubs living beyond their natural means, whether due to borrowing, or investment from "sugar daddies". To compete in European competitions from the 2012-13 season, Uefa, supported by the European Club Association, proposes that clubs must be spending only what they earn from their television income, ticket receipts and commercial activities.

Karl-Heinz Rummenigge, chairman of Bayern Munich and the ECA, said this was part of a "battle for more rationality and discipline in football finances", saying Uefa's initiative would "start curing football".

Khaldoon said he had not yet seen the proposals in detail, but believed that curbing the freedom of owners to buy and invest in "mid-tier" clubs would deliver a monopoly on European success to the already richest clubs.

"The argument that this is unhealthy suggests that the big clubs, which make the most money, must remain the big clubs, that the status quo must remain," Khaldoon responded. "Is Mr Platini saying that only Real Madrid and Barcelona have the right to be competitive in La Liga?

Uefa's general secretary, David Taylor, today released figures showing a quarter of Europe's top division clubs made large losses last year, with the proportion higher in the Premier League. He blamed the "constant inflationary effect" of "huge spending on players". Platini, when announcing the "fair-play measures", explicitly mentioned City as a club spending beyond their true commercial strength, because of the huge sums of money made available by Mansour.

"Manchester City can spend £300m if they want to," the Uefa president said, "but if they are not breaking even in three years, they cannot play in European competition."

Khaldoon countered that in the absence of regulations, or a franchise system as in US sports designed to ensure financial and sporting equality between clubs, Mansour is bringing healthy competition into a game dominated by financial might. He pointed out, too, that English football clubs as currently constituted are businesses, available to be taken over.

"I appreciate the argument about having so much money," Khaldoon acknowledged. "The way I answer it is: Yes, this is a club, but it is a business too, and in business, you are there to compete. And we are striving to build the club the right way, with respect for its heritage, and the fans."

Speaking more broadly about the City deal in Manchester and Abu Dhabi, Khaldoon discussed Sheikh Mansour's original motivation for acquiring the club, explaining that Mansour is an enthusiastic football fan, and also believes it is a sound investment, because City will ultimately be worth more, when established as a top European club, than he will have spent.

The new owners are significantly expanding City's commercial operation – they are thought to be questioning whether the 48,500-capacity City of Manchester Stadium will be big enough – and after this initial period of major investment, their intention is that City will become financially self-sufficient.

Money has been spent not only on players but on facilities and new staff, at a club whose infrastructure Khaldoon found inadequate previously. He also reflected on how the City "project" has become entwined with Abu Dhabi's wider ambitions, to diversify the emirate's economy beyond oil, and present an appealing image to the world, rooted in enduring values.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009 ... i-takeover

[The Man In Blue]

"The argument that this is unhealthy suggests that the big clubs, which make the most money, must remain the big clubs, that the status quo must remain," Khaldoon responded. "Is Mr Platini saying that only Real Madrid and Barcelona have the right to be competitive in La Liga?

spot on.

that is exactly what twatini is saying, the cunt.

[john68]

Platini is also saying that it is ok for the English rich clubs to fund their success on debt.

We do seem to be being pushed onto the outside on this issue. I am sure that the club know the details of any proposals in full and have plans in place to negate this problem.

[ronk]

Platini is also saying that it is ok for the English rich clubs to fund their success on debt.

We do seem to be being pushed onto the outside on this issue. I am sure that the club know the details of any proposals in full and have plans in place to negate this problem.

Actually, Khaldoon admitted in the interview that we don't know the exact details.

This is mostly charm offensive stuff though. It really should be borne in mind that these rules could help us in some ways.

We'll have the option of ducking out of the CL for a year, spending big, winning the league and coming into the following season profitable. Other clubs are going to have their spending power severely limited by this. I think Chelsea might have a bigger task to get profitable than us, Liverpool's owners want this because it will force everyone to spend less but they'll struggle for reinforcements.

[carl_feedthegoat]

IS IT RIGHT THEN THAT WHEN/IF THIS COMES INTO FORCE WE WILL BE THE ONLY CLUB WITH NO DEBT WHATSOEVER AND WILL JUST HAVE TO PAY WAGES FROM OUR REVENUES?

WE DONT HAVE ANY OTHER DEBTS TO TAKE CARE OF THEN DO WE ?

IS THAT JUST ABOUT RIGHT THEN ?

[mcfc1632]

Platini is also saying that it is ok for the English rich clubs to fund their success on debt.

We do seem to be being pushed onto the outside on this issue. I am sure that the club know the details of any proposals in full and have plans in place to negate this problem.

Actually, Khaldoon admitted in the interview that we don't know the exact details.

This is mostly charm offensive stuff though. It really should be borne in mind that these rules could help us in some ways.

We'll have the option of ducking out of the CL for a year, spending big, winning the league and coming into the following season profitable. Other clubs are going to have their spending power severely limited by this. I think Chelsea might have a bigger task to get profitable than us, Liverpool's owners want this because it will force everyone to spend less but they'll struggle for reinforcements.

Do not think that the 'ducking' out idea would work - this is about the cost of wages and transfer as set against our revenue - the wage bill we will have will exceed the revenue we generate and winning the PL will not address that

[kinkylola]

I think we have a loan from the sheik ... he's kinda consolidated all our debt, and we never have to pay it back to him sorta thing. So it's on the books, but in reality it is a non issue. I don't know how this fits with the french twats plan though.

I'd like to add that I think Khaldoon is the classiest man in the prem by a large distance.

[Slim]

I think we have a loan from the sheik ... he's kinda consolidated all our debt, and we never have to pay it back to him sorta thing. So it's on the books, but in reality it is a non issue. I don't know how this fits with the french twats plan though.

I'd like to add that I think Khaldoon is the classiest man in the prem by a large distance.

"I could accept the argument if we were artificially building up the club through debt," Khaldoon said. "That produces a destructive end result; we have seen that happen. But in our case, the club will be in the healthiest position because there is no debt. We have funded it through equity [permanent investment], including the signing of the players.

"I believe what we are doing is a fair way to inject competition into football, without debt."

It said it in the OP, christ on a stick does anyone bother to read these days?

[carl_feedthegoat]

Platini is also saying that it is ok for the English rich clubs to fund their success on debt.

We do seem to be being pushed onto the outside on this issue. I am sure that the club know the details of any proposals in full and have plans in place to negate this problem.

Actually, Khaldoon admitted in the interview that we don't know the exact details.

This is mostly charm offensive stuff though. It really should be borne in mind that these rules could help us in some ways.

We'll have the option of ducking out of the CL for a year, spending big, winning the league and coming into the following season profitable. Other clubs are going to have their spending power severely limited by this. I think Chelsea might have a bigger task to get profitable than us, Liverpool's owners want this because it will force everyone to spend less but they'll struggle for reinforcements.

ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE WAGE BILL EXCEEDS ALL MONIES GAINED FROM SKY....ATTENDANCE..SHIRT SALES.....LEAGUE POSITION..SPONSERSHIPS AND MAYBE CL QUALIFICATION?


Do not think that the 'ducking' out idea would work - this is about the cost of wages and transfer as set against our revenue - the wage bill we will have will exceed the revenue we generate and winning the PL will not address that

[zuricity]

If I'm not mistaken, City is once again a privately held club - Corporation.

Revenues do not need to be openly published for the world to scrutinise.

Here's an explanation i googled. However I am not up-to date but if any one knows any more. Please inform us.

Unlike publicly held companies, privately held companies are not required to make public their profits and other financial results. Of course, they are also not able to raise capital by selling shares of stock to the general public. Successful and relatively young privately held companies often attempt to facilitate their growth by becoming publicly held companies and making an IPO. It must be remembered, however, that not all privately held corporations are small; there are some very large corporations that remain privately held, such as Levi Strauss & Co. and Hallmark Cards, Inc.

Source http://www.enotes.com/biz-encyclopedia/privately-held-company

So how is Platini going to get the information ? HE simply cannot breach Company laws to get it. It can only be a voluntary action on behalf of the owners.

[Slim]

So how is Platini going to get the information ? HE simply cannot breach Company laws to get it. It can only be a voluntary action on behalf of the owners.

But he can refuse to allow us into Europe if we don't.

[blue 68]

I know this posts smacks of bite our nose off to spite our face but i'd find it hilarious if we were to win the Prem a couple of years on the trot and weren't permitted entry to the chumps league. Wouldn't overly bother me knowing UEFA will be thinking we've excluded one of Europe's best.
In the long run of course we'd struggle to get the quality recruits without chumps league but I just feel like stinking two fingers up to Platipus.

[zuricity]

So how is Platini going to get the information ? HE simply cannot breach Company laws to get it. It can only be a voluntary action on behalf of the owners.

But he can refuse to allow us into Europe if we don't.

Don't be silly he can do nothing of the sort. Secondly, if he doesn't watch himself, I believe he could be out of a job. He's made enough enemies opening up that mouth of his. Just like his mentor old Seppli, these two are not only disliked in England.

Btw, if you want me to hurl abuse at Sepp - like the crazy psychologist in 'Local Hero' let me know, I can easily run past his office on my way home and give him a good talking too.

[Beefymcfc]

If I'm not mistaken, City is once again a privately held club - Corporation.

Revenues do not need to be openly published for the world to scrutinise.

Here's an explanation i googled. However I am not up-to date but if any one knows any more. Please inform us.

Unlike publicly held companies, privately held companies are not required to make public their profits and other financial results. Of course, they are also not able to raise capital by selling shares of stock to the general public. Successful and relatively young privately held companies often attempt to facilitate their growth by becoming publicly held companies and making an IPO. It must be remembered, however, that not all privately held corporations are small; there are some very large corporations that remain privately held, such as Levi Strauss & Co. and Hallmark Cards, Inc.

Source http://www.enotes.com/biz-encyclopedia/privately-held-company

So how is Platini going to get the information ? HE simply cannot breach Company laws to get it. It can only be a voluntary action on behalf of the owners.

Quite simple, if we do not show them the books they don't allow us into Europe!

On another note, I like the way that Khaldoon goes from not really knowing about the new rules but then mentions the business aspect. He states that these regulations will lead to the already major clubs staying in that position with no chance of the smaller clubs having a chance. Then he goes on, slight of hand I suppose (like a Poker Player), and mentions that as it stands, all clubs are a business. So reading between the lines, is he inferring that this is then a 'Monopoly', and does anyone know what happens when businesses have the 'Monopoly' in the market place?

It's good to see that our custodians are wealthy, but it's even better to know that they are Wise in the World of Business. I'm impressed!

[zuricity]

I'm not sure it's quite that easy beefy. However i agree with your point raised about the monopolistic situation.

More importantly we all know what happens in markets that are deemed monopolistic..... Governments ( not Football Associations) break them up. Even where duopoly occurs, break ups have taken place previously.

The can of worms is really opened up when you start looking at how CL, Europa league revenues get distributed.

I can quite well imagine that bored lawyers and legislators in Brussels would love to have a go at UEFA. Non EU countries tend to follow the guidelines of the EU very closely too.

[Beefymcfc]

I'm not sure it's quite that easy beefy. However i agree with your point raised about the monopolistic situation.

More importantly we all know what happens in markets that are deemed monopolistic..... Governments ( not Football Associations) break them up. Even where duopoly occurs, break ups have taken place previously.

The can of worms is really opened up when you start looking at how CL, Europa league revenues get distributed.

I can quite well imagine that bored lawyers and legislators in Brussels would love to have a go at UEFA. Non EU countries tend to follow the guidelines of the EU very closely too.

That's what I'm inferring 'Z', and I'm sure it actually is that easy.

[Socrates]

I'm afraid Bovril is right Zuric. They can withdraw our European licence if we don't open our books up to them. They could actually do that now under existing rules if we refused them financial information!

[Beefymcfc]

I'm afraid Bovril is right Zuric. They can withdraw our European licence if we don't open our books up to them. They could actually do that now under existing rules if we refused them financial information!

Now that is a drink and half. Love ya man!!!

[ronk]

Quite simple, if we do not show them the books they don't allow us into Europe!

On another note, I like the way that Khaldoon goes from not really knowing about the new rules but then mentions the business aspect. He states that these regulations will lead to the already major clubs staying in that position with no chance of the smaller clubs having a chance. Then he goes on, slight of hand I suppose (like a Poker Player), and mentions that as it stands, all clubs are a business. So reading between the lines, is he inferring that this is then a 'Monopoly', and does anyone know what happens when businesses have the 'Monopoly' in the market place?

It's good to see that our custodians are wealthy, but it's even better to know that they are Wise in the World of Business. I'm impressed!

Not monopoly: cartel, although the EU are tougher on them. Khaldoon wasn't talking about anything that drastic. He's going to get the little clubs to fight his corner. The rest of the clubs have a lot of power if and when they're forced to act.

This regulation will lower costs for owners, they all want that but everyone know they can't do it unilaterally. They have to compel everyone else to follow suit. But these regulations are designed to let the rich get richer and the poor get poorer until eventually there's a breakaway. But clubs rely on the prospect that they may someday break into the top4. There are a lot of wealthy owners in the prem, if UEFA change the rules to discourage new investors from buying clubs for big money then they've just made a group of very bitter enemies: owners who'd been looking for an exit strategy, especially at a profit. The price of clubs like West Ham, Spurs, Newcastle, Sunderland (us pre-takeover too) etc. will sink like a stone.

The other thing about salary caps is that they have the odd side effect of automatically lowering the wages of non-franchise players who want to play for one of those teams. There's only so much your agent can squeeze the chairman for so eventually you end up with players taking pay cuts to stay at a club that will give them a chance of winning. They couldn't give you more money if they wanted to.

But that same factor is a complete nightmare for anyone wanting to break into the top club. You automatically have a smaller pool of money and it doesn't go as far (worse than now).

[zuricity]

I'm afraid Bovril is right Zuric. They can withdraw our European licence if we don't open our books up to them. They could actually do that now under existing rules if we refused them financial information!

Now that is a drink and half. Love ya man!!!

Yeah you're right. Financial statements supplied by the accountancy houses that perpetuated the Enron myth for years.