The mancityfans.net football forum

http://www.thenational.ae/sport/footbal ... ubs-income?

Manchester City will set their soon-to-be-appointed chief executive a target of more than doubling the club's income to £400 million (Dh2.3 billion) a year.

The target, one that exceeds by nearly £70m Manchester United's record revenue for an English club, underlines the ambitions of the club's Abu Dhabi ownership to establish City as one of the global game's principal powers.

City reported a turnover of £153.2m for the 2010/11 season, a sum that placed 12th in Deloitte's annual ranking of football club incomes. That figure, although a 22 per cent increase on the preceding year, left City behind United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool and Tottenham on the list of Premier League earners. It also came in tandem with a loss of £194.9m.

A significant portion of that deficit was the product of "front-loading" expenditure on a squad capable of competing for the Premier and Champions league titles. But the club's hierarchy is aware that income, particularly from commercial sources, must be multiplied to convert City into the kind of self-sustaining business required by Uefa Financial Fair Play regulations.

A stadium naming-rights deal with Etihad Airways will add around £35m a year for the next decade.

The club's top executives ultimately want to surpass United's annual revenue, which reached £331.4m in the year ending June 2011.

The identity of Garry Cook's replacement as chief executive has been kept a tightly guarded secret, the process handled by the executive-recruitment company Odgers Berndtson and the most senior members of City's hierarchy.

The new chief executive is likely to be found from outside the world of football. Also, City have stressed that they will bring in only one new executive into their management structure.

Ferran Soriano, formerly the vice president of Barcelona, was briefing friends that he had been offered the job, while Soriano's sports director at Barcelona, Txiki Begiristain, was also privately confident of joining him at City.

Soriano's candidacy has been complicated by the voluntary bankruptcy of Spanair; the Catalan had been the airline's chairman since leaving Barcelona.

Discussion within the club has suggested that the responsibilities of the football administrator Brian Marwood could be under threat, with the incoming chief executive to be handed control of player transfers and contracts

What a pile of rubish.

Was hoping for something informative on Cook's replacement. What I got is a speculative pile of shite from someone who clearly knows about as much as me.

Soriano was briefing friends?

Bollox.

http://menmedia.co.uk/manchesterevening ... ial-stakes?

Regurgitated bollox! Actually it may not be a story from a close source (although from AE) but both the financial targets and the future of Marwood seem highly likely outcomes to me.

City's new chief executive will be told he is expected to knock United off their football and financial perch. The Blues’ next head man – expected to be former Barcelona supremo Ferran Soriano – has been briefed that the owners want City to more than double the club’s income in the next 10 years. And that means taking the Reds’ place as regular Premier League winners and Champions League contenders, as well as leapfrogging them at the top of the English clubs’ rich list. City had a turnover of £153million for last season, but this season are expected to move above Spurs and Liverpool and into the European top 10, with only United, Chelsea and Arsenal ahead of them in England. In head-hunting the man to replace Garry Cook – who left after the email scandal involving the mother of then City player Nedum Onuoha – the Blues owner Sheikh Mansour homed in on men with a track record of making big increases in revenue. Reports from Down Under suggest their first choice was Australia rugby union boss John O’Neill, who has a great track record in rugby and football. But Soriano’s financial and football nous helped to take Barcelona from 13th in the European rich list to second behind Real Madrid, as well as winning La Liga and the Champions League after a barren spell. United last season had income of £331m, and those are the kind of figures which City are targeting. After spending around £325m on the squad, the Blues are now intent on reining in the expenditure on players, to comply with Uefa’s new financial fair play rules. Their bid will get a kick-start from the new stadium, campus and shirt deal with Etihad which is worth around £32.5m a year, and their involvement in the Champions League, which boosts revenue by up to £35m. But to truly hit the jackpot, City need to equal United’s commercial successes, which means sustained success on the field

The future of Marwood doesn't worry me. Not sure why, but I was never a fan...maybe just a gut feeling after hearing him occasionally speak.
That target is not such a massive one as it may seem at first glance, given that he has 10 years to achieve it.
The latest announced figure ( a few weeks ago) was £153. Given the added £35M pa from the Etihad Campus deal (total £190M) and the expected income from the CL being another £35M (total 225M). He has 10 years to increase our income by about £10M pa.

Considering that we are only in the early stages of our commercial evolution and with our resources are an attractive proposition, we have every reason to expect we should be able to reach that total with ease.

A point made by Gary Cooke was that marketting City on a World stage, is relatively easier now than it was some years ago, due to the efforts of the rags and other major clubs who did the hard yards in the World markets. Having them create a demand, we could cash in on those efforts....Thanks rags...your greed has been a great help.

Fact is....despite the fact that the PL is a hugely popular global "product" it is still not even remotely punching its weight in terms of revenues when referenced to its potential "market value". I think Deloitte published a study or at least publically commented recently that revenues of around GBP 2 billion for the whole league is relatively small beans for a "business" with such a high profile and global reach/appeal. Sure the US posters can give you some comparatives re US sports as to the numbers


In that context....doubling revenues should be eminently do-able and seems a pretty sensible target

ant london wrote:Fact is....despite the fact that the PL is a hugely popular global "product" it is still not even remotely punching its weight in terms of revenues when referenced to its potential "market value". I think Deloitte published a study or at least publically commented recently that revenues of around GBP 2 billion for the whole league is relatively small beans for a "business" with such a high profile and global reach/appeal. Sure the US posters can give you some comparatives re US sports as to the numbers


In that context....doubling revenues should be eminently do-able and seems a pretty sensible target

I agree. The rags haven't got the best out of their bullshittability worldwide imo, & if we perform well on the pitch (& continue to entertain) I think we will overtake their income in time, & then eventually their fan base, as we will have better & more inventive people in our employ.

Scanned Bmoon yesterday & some of the people on there with alleged club connections seem to have a pretty low opinion of Marwood's acheivements & general persona. The leaks coming out at the moment suggest that opinion may be shared by those at the top.

I was never a fan before he came to City, but was under the impression he'd done ok whilst here.

I'd be very surprised to see Marwood at the club once Cook's successor is appointed. I don't know enough to comment on his performance but he was Cook's man and it would be unusual for our new man to not want his own people around him.

ant london wrote:Fact is....despite the fact that the PL is a hugely popular global "product" it is still not even remotely punching its weight in terms of revenues when referenced to its potential "market value". I think Deloitte published a study or at least publically commented recently that revenues of around GBP 2 billion for the whole league is relatively small beans for a "business" with such a high profile and global reach/appeal. Sure the US posters can give you some comparatives re US sports as to the numbers


In that context....doubling revenues should be eminently do-able and seems a pretty sensible target

maybe if you followed my posts more closely you would have seen that i posted something like this just this past weekend, douchelick.

The NFL does probably 4x what the Prem does, and it probably has billions (i said b-b-b-billions) less eyeballs and interested fans.

Sky, the FA, and the Clubs need to sort it out. It's a fucking joke honestly.

cheers

DoomMerchant wrote:

ant london wrote:Fact is....despite the fact that the PL is a hugely popular global "product" it is still not even remotely punching its weight in terms of revenues when referenced to its potential "market value". I think Deloitte published a study or at least publically commented recently that revenues of around GBP 2 billion for the whole league is relatively small beans for a "business" with such a high profile and global reach/appeal. Sure the US posters can give you some comparatives re US sports as to the numbers


In that context....doubling revenues should be eminently do-able and seems a pretty sensible target

maybe if you followed my posts more closely you would have seen that i posted something like this just this past weekend, douchelick.

The NFL does probably 4x what the Prem does, and it probably has billions (i said b-b-b-billions) less eyeballs and interested fans.

Sky, the FA, and the Clubs need to sort it out. It's a fucking joke honestly.

cheers

Bollocks to the rest of them. Promote our brand & they can tag on later.

Ted Hughes wrote:

DoomMerchant wrote:

ant london wrote:Fact is....despite the fact that the PL is a hugely popular global "product" it is still not even remotely punching its weight in terms of revenues when referenced to its potential "market value". I think Deloitte published a study or at least publically commented recently that revenues of around GBP 2 billion for the whole league is relatively small beans for a "business" with such a high profile and global reach/appeal. Sure the US posters can give you some comparatives re US sports as to the numbers


In that context....doubling revenues should be eminently do-able and seems a pretty sensible target

maybe if you followed my posts more closely you would have seen that i posted something like this just this past weekend, douchelick.

The NFL does probably 4x what the Prem does, and it probably has billions (i said b-b-b-billions) less eyeballs and interested fans.

Sky, the FA, and the Clubs need to sort it out. It's a fucking joke honestly.

cheers

Bollocks to the rest of them. Promote our brand & they can tag on later.

i certainly would prefer that....esp. as an American. Like i said in another post...i don't need Spurs becoming "America's Team" or something silly like that.

cheers

Went to a fans meeting at City the other night to discuss catering, seems that the majority of this £400m is going to be from pies and beer!

someone needs to start getting more american sports commercial guys into the setup at city so we can be at the forefront of taking advantage of this ... one thing to take into account though, is that in every major american sport there are many many less professional teams to support. for british teams to achieve the same type of revenue they have to actively go and basically steal fan support from the local teams that almost surely already exist. Different prospect altogether

Maybe we should try and gwt someone from nike?

Wonderwall wrote:Maybe we should try and gwt someone from nike?

Ravaged with it.

nike isn't an american sports team ... they are an international merchandise company. Not the same thing by a looong ways. Why would people from Nike be experts at promoting and commercializing sports teams? They can do it pretty well with boots though.

kinkylola wrote:nike isn't an american sports team ... they are an international merchandise company. Not the same thing by a looong ways. Why would people from Nike be experts at promoting and commercializing sports teams? They can do it pretty well with boots though.

Somebody once told me that americans didnt get irony, but I dont always believe what I hear

Wonderwall wrote:

kinkylola wrote:nike isn't an american sports team ... they are an international merchandise company. Not the same thing by a looong ways. Why would people from Nike be experts at promoting and commercializing sports teams? They can do it pretty well with boots though.

Somebody once told me that americans didnt get irony, but I dont always believe what I hear

beautiful, simply beautiful.

Americans love raising ticket prices more than most! but they are also good marketing people

Arjan Van Schotte wrote:

Wonderwall wrote:

kinkylola wrote:nike isn't an american sports team ... they are an international merchandise company. Not the same thing by a looong ways. Why would people from Nike be experts at promoting and commercializing sports teams? They can do it pretty well with boots though.

Somebody once told me that americans didnt get irony, but I dont always believe what I hear

beautiful, simply beautiful.

it wasn't me goddamit. I can't defend the faith for a whole fuclin country!!! i do my best.

cheers