london blue 2 wrote:
Beefymcfc wrote:I've made a vow not to click on negative City articles and only give decent (doesn't have to be positive) articles the click-bait they deserve.
So, without reading it, fuck the cunt and hang him!
what does it say?
it says we are A++++!
'It’s interesting, for several reasons, that La Liga have also picked out Manchester City on this occasion, and contrast to PSG, I’d argue that the complaint against City is an unwarranted swipe of frustration by La Liga. City have been a club that have managed to spend big and still make operating profits for the last few years consistently, and for those of you that don’t believe me, here’s the direct link to their 2016 Annual Report, so you can see for yourself. However, City are an easy target and one that the ignorant and ill-informed individuals within the media, and fans of other clubs, revert to stereotyping City as being an oil-rich-arab-owned-financially-doped football club or millionaires, but that’s actually not the case. The club is a functioning business model which, unlike the majority of European banks in recent years, has seen unprecedented growth and has become financially sustainable. The club managed to generate approximately £85m in player sales this summer and freed up space on its wage bill (to the point where it was planning to add Alexis Sanchez on deadline day).
But if La Liga’s complaint is that City have a sponsorship package which acts as financial doping, then they’re very wrong their too! Barcelona recently signed a record-breaking shirt sponsorship deal with Japanese company “Rakuten” worth £188m over four seasons. By comparison, Manchester United‘s deal with Chevrolet is only a measly £53m a year. But not to worry, their deal lasts seven years, and to back it up, they’ve also got a £75m (SeventyFive) a year deal with Adidas. Real Madrid’s current deal with Emirates is £20m a year, but that expires in 2018, and will be replaced by a highly lucrative one. However, despite all these mega-money deals, Manchester City are currently six years into a 10 year deal with Etihad which brings them, a comparatively pathetic, £7.5m (Seven-point-Five) a year in sponsorship fees. The difference in the sponsorship deals is actually laughable. And remember that extra money United get from Adidas? Well, City do get some money from Nike as part of their kit deal too, but it’s just a shy £18m. If La Liga consider City’s sposnorship deals to be disproportionate then they’re going to need to provide some strong evidence.
The most interesting point, in regards to La Liga complaining about Manchester City, is that this summer, La Liga have given their seal of approval for the City Football Group (the family of businesses for which Manchester City is the flagship and brand leader), to purchase a 88% share of one of La Liga’s own teams, Girona, with Pere Guardiola (Pep’s brother).'