I'm not sure what sickens me more; the fact City have effectively self-paid themselves £500m in revenue, the fact this isn't investigated/they just get away with it or the fact the BBC print it with no sense of irony and no questions relating to my first two points. It's Sky-esque in its' ignorance. Here's a country paying the club it owns a bunch of "above board" yet grossly inflated sponsorship agreements, subsequently spending ****loads more on facilities, scouting, part- or full-share of other clubs (New York) and we're supposed to applaud? ****ing football makes me physically sick sometimes. I wouldn't even mind if there was a sense of humility about them, but there isn't. "This is part of a carefully planned strategy". Carefully planned open chequebook. Funny what's possible with limitless cash. We just have the English Real Madrid - that's not a compliment. What I mean is, if the country of Spain hadn't written off their debts on more than one occasion, there'd be no Real Madrid to "admire". Full article here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/45512733
Hence why football shouldnt be taken so seriously anymore. Not worth getting upset over. The days of having pride in your club and football in general are long gone. The addiction from my childhood, when football deserved its supporters loyalty, is what keeps me interested nowadays. Like a recovering alcoholic who manages to restrict himself to a couple of light ales at weekends. It makes me sad really, not angry.
I’m still in “getting upset” mode. One day I’ll grow up and apathy will finally take over. To be honest, I look forward to it. Correlating this to the dwindling stadium attendances, is football dying? Will it need to change?
It's a brilliant loophole exposed beautifully. Sponsorship revenue is, as with a transfer fee, limited by what someone is willing to pay. There is no law about the owner or subsidiaries exploiting their advertising spaces. I wish there was, because then we would be shot of Sports Direct forever. However, if Mike says that sponsorship is worth nothing, or Sheikh whoever says the sponsorship is worth £500mil, then that is what it is worth and there is no way to dispute it. I'm not aware of any limitations in this regard across other business industries when there are takeovers, so football would have to take an unusual stance. The only other option would be to set limits on commercial revenue streams, and that can't work for sporting megaliths like Man Utd, they'd probably threaten to **** off again.
This The glaring difference between the two ambitions of Manchester City and Ashley's Newcastle United. Not that the Toon need any more money, we just need Ashley to stop spending it elsewhere. Ashley could pump any amount of money into St James' Park and call it advertising revenue. Instead he buys House of Fraser and Man City scoop £500m. Lucky them!
