Yes but what you’re forgetting is that City is owned by City football group. They’ll continue having money pouring into them and I can guarantee if Etihad leaves, there will be plenty of sponsor sitting in the wings waiting to pounce. City, whether people like it or not, is a global brand now.
My point on Juve is that they were relegated to the second division. Getting thrown down a division is a bigger disaster for any team than missing out on Champions League football, yet they still managed to survive. This on top of the fact that they lost half of their top players and I’m sure would have had plenty of financial penalties from their sponsors.
Again, this changes nothing for City, apart from the fact that some of the world cup players may reconsider going, but they still have enough buying force to convince the greedier ones to come.
I don’t see City as as big a global brand as Real, Barca, Juve or Man United. Nowhere near it.
City’s owners are part of the royal family/government that owns Etihad, they are virtually one and the same. You have to think if one goes, so does the other. That money and investment won’t be easily replaced if it goes.
They will of course get another sponsor if Etihad drop out but no sponsor is going to pay them 45m when the actual market value was 8m. They may be a global brand but they are no where near the level of United, Liverpool, Real, Barca, Juve etc in terms of commercial reach.
That they got caught cheating and have no CL football makes them even less desirable from a commercial perspective for any independent third party.
France Football is going off fake sponsor dollar numbers.
You fail to realise why they bought and created the City Football Group, it’s a PR exercise to help hide the truly heinous things happening in their country due to their rule. If they are known as cheaters and cannot cheat again that reputation is ruined and they legit might sell, hence City not being part of the City Football Group and losing those revenue streams.
Juventus etc all have 20/30/40/50 years of history as global powers, City have what 9 years of being kind of revelant on a global stage, tell me what non Abu Dhabi companies are going to want to invest in a team called cheaters? (Juventus aren’t a good example as we all know Italy couldn’t give a shit if they cheat see Grosso World Cup or not as long as they win).
What players are going to take two years out of their career to wait for them to MAYBE get back into the Champions League and who is going to trust that they aren’t cheating to do it again. They’ll be back to signing Robinho/Jo/Bony type mercenaries and that isn’t going to get you Champions League now
FYI I’ve hired City’s accountants and lawyers, I’ve sold 10% of my personal rights for 500 million, I’m now worth 5 billion dollars, life is about to get awesome.
Or it’s worth x10 the £480m a US investment firm paid for 10%. You know, people who would have done some real due diligence on the deal, not some guy on an internet football forum.
So you’re saying UEFA didn’t also do due diligence on the fake sponsorships in 2014 when you were fined the first time? I haven’t heard one thing from City officials actually denying their emails about this situation are wrong just that UEFA weren’t fair, maybe because they know they are true.
Let’s see if that deal stays.
I just don’t get how City fans are so head in the sand about this and their owners. Also read up your club isn’t worth that money but you know don’t let actual facts, honestly from the behaviour and stubbornness of City fans I’ve seen over this I hope you lose all your trophies.
You can’t compare this to Juventus as they had a squad of players who loved the club and stayed to bring them back to glory.
How many of the city players gave a shit about city a few years ago?
My point on Juve is as much financial as it is player loss. In fact Juventus lost even more out of it as the punishment was more severe.
Relegated to Serie B meant the loss of Serie A money, a huge drop in sponsorship revenue and an even bigger drop in revenue due to the loss of Champions League, for two years… They also lost 33 players, amongst them Thuram, Ibrahimovic, Emerson, Viera, Mutu and Cannavaro, some of the greatest players of their generation. Yet they survived and smashed it the year they came back to first division.
City will maybe lose some of the players at the ends of their contracts but most are still signed on and if you think they’ll willingly let 90% of the squad leave, you’ve got to be kidding. I don’t think any of their contracts would have a “if we don’t go to Champions League, you can leave” clause. The biggest issue will be the signing of new players.
In terms of money influx, you have to be kidding if you don’t think all the top teams are exploiting loopholes. By all accounts, the City loophole wasn’t even discovered by Uefa, it was by a group of American Airlines that were complaining that Etihad was getting money pumped into them by the government. They’ll continue with their current revenue and they’ll more than survive…
A secondary complication is reigniting the US “open skies” issue that they had finally put to bed. The US carriers were pushing Congress hard to deny Etihad and Emirates access as they were being propped up by government subsidies. Evidence of AD washing money through Etihad won’t go un-noticed and AD may just decide that moving on from CFG is the easier option.
Edit: I’d missed the fact that the last paragraph above pretty much says the same thing.
Stack the popcorn, people. Some City players may want to leave for teams playing Champions League football but would almost certainly have to take a pay cut to do so (unless they can con PSG into signing them). If City don’t sell some of their star players, how will they ever be able to comply with FFP given a lack of Champions League money? And they will certainly not be in a position to demand top dollar for their top players.
I don’t know? If only they had a network of clubs worldwide whereby they could transfer fringe players for grossly inflated transfer fees only to bring them back in on loan.
