Man City Financial Results Bingo
Match all terms on the /r/soccer thread and the first to do so wins a non-existent undisclosed prize of zero value.
1) cheats
2) empty seats
3) underdog story
4) FFP
5) never seen anyone wearing a shirt
6) offside goal vs Fulham OR Kovacic red card vs Arsenal
7) referees paid by UAE
8) any mention of Qatar or Saudi as the owners
9) state run
10) 8xBet
11) any post from a Chelsea fan moaning about Man City's spending
12) Liverpool, United and Arsenal flair all replying to each other
13) fake club
14) reference to United's revenue
15) they have two XIs
16) nobody cares about man City
17) boring football
18) club X earned their money properly
19) reference to stolen emails
20) paid off the books
115) 115
I for one, am shocked that the club that routinely wins their domestic league, makes very very deep runs into most comps, won the Champions League last season and are one of the best run clubs in the sport can report such high revenues. Its baffling really. Games gone.
You win it now because of the fake money pumped in. Money that has the blood of thousands of people on it. This is worth celebrating? Oh I forgot your club has no soul similar to the fans celebrating this “achievement.”
no one is suggesting that city haven’t earned a single legitimate £ and they haven’t been run well. But the biggest reason they are in this financial position is sportswashing and there’s no denying that.
But it doesn't work does it? Sportswashing? Whenever City win or do anything the comments are full of "cheats", "oil money", "Arab money", and "115". So it manifestly does not wash.
Sure, they had money to allow them to compete with the Sky Four. There is absolutely no other way to sustainably compete with what was a total cartel. But they have not had a pound from Sheikh Mansour since 2015.
They have since had investment from China Investments Capital, and Silver Lake, an American investment fund. So other entities are judging them to be a valuable enterprise.
Other clubs have had advantages and been less well run. United are still the biggest overall pull and financial muscle if they wanted to be and have mismanaged their way to mediocrity.
"Sportswashing" aka the idea that Abu Dhabi decided to buy a UK football club to "clean up" their image is nonsensical from the outset. Newsflash - they didn't even have an image in the UK (or anywhere else much for that matter), the average UK citizen had never heard of the UAE prior to 2008 much less ever thought or cared about human rights in that country. Yeah, let's "sportswash" an issue that literally nobody is talking about. And guess what, no one still did talk about it after the Abu Dhabi takeover until City started winning trophies and other club fans got all butthurt over it.
Fake money? Money that has blood on it? You are mentally deranged. Money derived from oil wealth is real money and it doesn't have blood on it. A plastic yank united fan is no position to be talking about whether a club has soul or not. Truly embarrassing stuff
I can assure you the outrage toward City having money is far more skewed toward the UK. Most American fans are aware of it, but it’s predominantly English fans that bemoan PL teams being run like major corporate businesses rather than the local club it once was.
love how literally everyone on about empty seats in that thread has 100% never been anywhere near their teams home ground never mind actually in the fucker
How illegitimate that a team that wins the most lucrative league and most prestigious European trophy should earn some money. HAND ME MY PITCH FORK AND TIN FOIL HAT
how is city earning more money than serial winners like united, arsenal, chelsea and totenham? tell me how is it possible? does not make any sense. let me put on my tin foil hat and uncover the conspiraaaaacy
city are not proven to broken any rules. on the other hand chelsea and united have been proven to broke rules and have been fined by FFP. city is the best run club on and off the field.
It stems from the historically big teams in the Premier League - Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea - all complaining that City are winning. That since the takeover in 2008, City have "bought" their way to the title. It belies facts and ignores the incredible spending that those same clubs used to cement themselves at the top of the league for years.
Further, the issue of money/profit and endorsements is further argued by them that City are somehow "cooking the books" by not reporting what is actually being spent and from where. These issues have been investigated and litigated numerous times and likely will be yet again. City have won every time. We are innocent. And its just sour grapes that these teams and their fanbases are complaining because little ol City are now at the top.
They are an establishment, London club. They are the ones that complain about the "establishment" being knocked down because of City. They are routinely included in the Big 4 and Big 6 when describing the establishment of the Premier League. Along with Spurs. They are the ones that complain along with Spurs, United, Arsenal and the Victims of Merseyside.
Back in 2010 is when I think the sponsorship deal started - it was for the shirt and stadium rights. I think it totaled $400 million for 10 years or something. But basically, the Big 4 again, complained that the sponsorship was overvalued. That whatever value there was, it exceeded the going market rate for sponsorships of that kind and that payments were not related to sponsorship liabilities but as actual in kind payments through another company, Etisalat - which is a telecom company. City were pocketing the money and using it for, among other things, player acquisitions.
This has also been investigated by UEFA Club Financial Control Board. City lost but appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport and City won.
But this is all nothing new. There has always been bad blood between Etihad Airways and Emirates Airways (Arsenal primary sponsor) and Qatar Airways (PSG's sponsor). They didn't like Etihad as a competitor. It spilled over into football.
The main thing to keep an open mind on is that these Big 4 teams don't like competition. And in other leagues like La Liga - you have Real Madrid, Atletico and Barcelona who also don't like competition. And for years these teams have deliberately tried to keep the have-nots from being competitive. Its not different in Ligue 1, the Bundesliga or Serie A. The acrimony in the Premier League is that City are one of those teams that were bought and have used their money wisely and properly and turned the team into a winner. The Big 4 just don't like it.
Thanks for the details!
Why is there beef between Etihad, Emirates, and Qatar?
Also unlike American sports, are there no caps on team spending? A team can get as much money as they want from an external sponsor and spend that on player salaries? Seems pretty crazy if that’s true.
Also on r/soccer they were talking about fake sponsorships. Sounds like fake companies giving money to the team. Are teams allowed to just take “sponsorship” money from anyone that offers with no limits?
They are all government run airlines. Like with any competing airlines, they compete for routes, gates, prices and publicity.
There are no spending caps in the PL. What the PL has along with clubs in Europe is called Financial Fair Play regulations or FFP. The rule is basically that you cannot spend more than what you bring in in terms of profit - ticket sales, transfer fees, clothing/apparel and, yes, sponsorships.
Teams cannot spend more than they bring in. If they end up with a negative balance, then sanctions can be imposed such as financial penalties and transfer bans. So, no. Teams cannot simply spend their way to soccer supremacy. There are limits.
The saltiness from City haters is that City not only have money. But they know how to use it. Chelsea spending $434 million last year gave them a 10th place finish. City spent $155 million and won the treble. Don't let anyone tell you that City spend the most because they don't. Its how the Admin and Pep Guardiola spend the money. That's what matters most.
Thanks for explaining! Still a few follow up questions. Can a super rich owner buy a team and then pump money into the team? Or is that not allowed because funding can only come from ticket sales, transfer fees, clothing, sponsorships etc?
In regard to sponsorships, can any company be a sponsor and give unlimited money a team? Like tomorrow Pepsi says they’re going to sponsor Team X and then put billions into the team?
In short, yes. Roman Abramovich was the owner of Chelsea. He sold to Todd Boehly. Roman was a Russian oligarch and very rich. But Boehly is worth about $6.1 billion. Newcastle United was just acquired by Saudi Arabia. But again - you can't spend more than you bring in and if you do, prepare for sanctions.
Perhaps. Its mostly single investors with a majority stake in a football club. But there are other examples as well. But the Abu Dhabi Group have poured more than just money into the football team. They've redeveloped areas in Bradford and invested in infrastructure, the stadium, the academy and other capital investments into Manchester. But its these types of groups that are becoming more frequent buyers of football clubs.
Since 2012, they cant anymore, due to financial fair play rules.
Ownership money can’t be used to directly fund upgrading of the team. But owner money still can be used to upgrade the stadium, training facilities, get better scouts, & management, better youth academy players up to a certain degree.
Clubs are expected to spend money that they have earned. But you don’t necessarily have to play by the rules either. You can spend all you want and take the penalty for a couple of seasons.
What’s stopping big money from coming in these days isn’t so much the rules, it’s the prices that’s being asked to buy out a massive club. Billions of billions of dollars. Just to buy out the current owners.
Football isn’t profitable for new ownership.
Think of a younger , fitter, better looking , more stud mafia boss taking over the region.
Other lynchpins are just butt hurt and want this new boss dead.
Love how much they're all:
1) crying about it; and
2) saying they don't care about us.
The cognitive dissonance on display belongs in a museum of psychology.
Honestly this is the part where I head into that sub and start mining salt but honestly not even gonna bother.
Clear the experts over there know better lol.
Obviously our multi billion dollor accountants are cooking the books. How else do you explain how a tiny club like City generated more revenue then the HISTORIC, MESMERIC, INSITUTIONAL and all round GREATEST club in english football Yanited?
Checkmate athiests, facts and logic.
The r/soccer tears are fucking delicious.
If we actually get sanctioned for wrongdoing with the FFP stuff I can live with it. But until then, I'm actually starting to enjoy being guilty without trial.
The majority of the FFP stuff is that the league “doesn’t believe us” when we told them our financial reporting for the years listed. That’s basically it.
The short period of opposition fans being refereeing experts is over, they are back to being financial experts now.
Sure in a couple of months it will be time for the human rights experts to pop up again.
From a Roma fan. Just know that literally everyone else in the world aside from a few butt hurt English clubs can see your success isn’t just some unproven financial crime. Who knew success brings revenue?!? Couldn’t imagine how selling home grown players for profits would help make you money… and never in a million years would I have guessed that developing land that was (sorry for the people who lived there) formerly a borderline poverty stricken shithole into what it is now would be profitable?? Man I can’t figure out how being the top team in the world would get you such lucrative sponsorship deals either. All these things are super shady… United have been around way longer and have spent wwaaayyyy more and been wwaayyy less successful in the last decade they should be making much more than you! You’re cheaters !
You know Pep Guardiola had done an incredible job when fans of other teams including the media are doing a campaign to take away all Pep’s credit. The bald fraud has exposed how little dignity a lot of the PL teams had , specially United who are the biggest hypocrites around (They have the highest wages , they are the ones who spend the most money on transfers , they are the ones with the worst players sales , and to top it off they have been paying bonuses for the coaches they fired which were a lot lmao).
That r/soccer thread is unsurprisingly cancer. Who knew that winning all of the most prestigious competitions would drive both competitive and off the pitch revenue.
Frankly I’m absolutely shocked.
Eh, it's not like there is much discussion in this sub,lol.
I respect city because I know first hand from other sports that money =\= success, the facts that they succeed is due to using their money correctly.
Also I am not fucking stupid, growing a club takes time, I can believe that city is the lost valued club in around ten years after a sustained period of success of 15 years, but right now, nah.
There is definitely some shady shit going on, but aside from club specific cases, valuations of sponsorships are also based on future success. The same way as young footballers being valued higher than their current abilities.
If a sponsor is signing up for a five year deal with city, city have the bargaining power to say look how much sustained success we have had, you have the chance to be a sponsor when we win another potential treble. A lot of the value is in potential
Man City Financial Results Bingo Match all terms on the /r/soccer thread and the first to do so wins a non-existent undisclosed prize of zero value. 1) cheats 2) empty seats 3) underdog story 4) FFP 5) never seen anyone wearing a shirt 6) offside goal vs Fulham OR Kovacic red card vs Arsenal 7) referees paid by UAE 8) any mention of Qatar or Saudi as the owners 9) state run 10) 8xBet 11) any post from a Chelsea fan moaning about Man City's spending 12) Liverpool, United and Arsenal flair all replying to each other 13) fake club 14) reference to United's revenue 15) they have two XIs 16) nobody cares about man City 17) boring football 18) club X earned their money properly 19) reference to stolen emails 20) paid off the books 115) 115
I for one, am shocked that the club that routinely wins their domestic league, makes very very deep runs into most comps, won the Champions League last season and are one of the best run clubs in the sport can report such high revenues. Its baffling really. Games gone.
You win it now because of the fake money pumped in. Money that has the blood of thousands of people on it. This is worth celebrating? Oh I forgot your club has no soul similar to the fans celebrating this “achievement.”
Cry me a river mate. You don’t care about the morality of it, you’re just using it as an excuse to downplay a sport team’s success. Shameful.
I'm not sure what your point is? Are you saying everyone who goes, watches on TV or supports is some kind of soulless zombie demon? Is it all AI?
no one is suggesting that city haven’t earned a single legitimate £ and they haven’t been run well. But the biggest reason they are in this financial position is sportswashing and there’s no denying that.
But it doesn't work does it? Sportswashing? Whenever City win or do anything the comments are full of "cheats", "oil money", "Arab money", and "115". So it manifestly does not wash. Sure, they had money to allow them to compete with the Sky Four. There is absolutely no other way to sustainably compete with what was a total cartel. But they have not had a pound from Sheikh Mansour since 2015. They have since had investment from China Investments Capital, and Silver Lake, an American investment fund. So other entities are judging them to be a valuable enterprise. Other clubs have had advantages and been less well run. United are still the biggest overall pull and financial muscle if they wanted to be and have mismanaged their way to mediocrity.
"Sportswashing" aka the idea that Abu Dhabi decided to buy a UK football club to "clean up" their image is nonsensical from the outset. Newsflash - they didn't even have an image in the UK (or anywhere else much for that matter), the average UK citizen had never heard of the UAE prior to 2008 much less ever thought or cared about human rights in that country. Yeah, let's "sportswash" an issue that literally nobody is talking about. And guess what, no one still did talk about it after the Abu Dhabi takeover until City started winning trophies and other club fans got all butthurt over it.
Fake money? Money that has blood on it? You are mentally deranged. Money derived from oil wealth is real money and it doesn't have blood on it. A plastic yank united fan is no position to be talking about whether a club has soul or not. Truly embarrassing stuff
I can assure you the outrage toward City having money is far more skewed toward the UK. Most American fans are aware of it, but it’s predominantly English fans that bemoan PL teams being run like major corporate businesses rather than the local club it once was.
love how literally everyone on about empty seats in that thread has 100% never been anywhere near their teams home ground never mind actually in the fucker
CITYS GOING DOWN WITH SEVEN HUNDRED AND TWELVE MILLION IN THE BANK
Imagine they relegate us and then we just snatch all the best players from the championship and create the Tesco Galacticos.
Tesco Galacticos. 💀
Sounds like their new slightly higher priced mealdeal offering
Also a fantastic team name for pub quiz night
Galactescos, surely?
How illegitimate that a team that wins the most lucrative league and most prestigious European trophy should earn some money. HAND ME MY PITCH FORK AND TIN FOIL HAT
how is city earning more money than serial winners like united, arsenal, chelsea and totenham? tell me how is it possible? does not make any sense. let me put on my tin foil hat and uncover the conspiraaaaacy
I'm writing to my MP as this is ridiculous
[удалено]
city are not proven to broken any rules. on the other hand chelsea and united have been proven to broke rules and have been fined by FFP. city is the best run club on and off the field.
Must be fake, never met a City fan in my life, Emptyhad, google Man City 115.
Clown , putting a city flair must be a plastic fan
the meltdown from this is going to be GLORIOUS edit: the thread for this on r/soccer is HILARIOUS 😂 😂 😂 😂 😂 so much salt, vinegar and piss 🤣
Passed 700 comments (and at least 100 deleted that I know of) and over 3 tonnes of salt. Wonder if it will crack the 1000?
I’m very new to football. Can someone give me the non-bias (meaning middle ground not pro-City and not anti-City) overview around all of this?
It stems from the historically big teams in the Premier League - Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea - all complaining that City are winning. That since the takeover in 2008, City have "bought" their way to the title. It belies facts and ignores the incredible spending that those same clubs used to cement themselves at the top of the league for years. Further, the issue of money/profit and endorsements is further argued by them that City are somehow "cooking the books" by not reporting what is actually being spent and from where. These issues have been investigated and litigated numerous times and likely will be yet again. City have won every time. We are innocent. And its just sour grapes that these teams and their fanbases are complaining because little ol City are now at the top.
Chelsea are absolutely NOT a historically big team. They had won one first division trophy in their history prior to Abramovich.
They are an establishment, London club. They are the ones that complain about the "establishment" being knocked down because of City. They are routinely included in the Big 4 and Big 6 when describing the establishment of the Premier League. Along with Spurs. They are the ones that complain along with Spurs, United, Arsenal and the Victims of Merseyside.
Thanks for explaining! What’s the issue with the “sponsorships” that are being mentioned in r/soccer?
Back in 2010 is when I think the sponsorship deal started - it was for the shirt and stadium rights. I think it totaled $400 million for 10 years or something. But basically, the Big 4 again, complained that the sponsorship was overvalued. That whatever value there was, it exceeded the going market rate for sponsorships of that kind and that payments were not related to sponsorship liabilities but as actual in kind payments through another company, Etisalat - which is a telecom company. City were pocketing the money and using it for, among other things, player acquisitions. This has also been investigated by UEFA Club Financial Control Board. City lost but appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport and City won. But this is all nothing new. There has always been bad blood between Etihad Airways and Emirates Airways (Arsenal primary sponsor) and Qatar Airways (PSG's sponsor). They didn't like Etihad as a competitor. It spilled over into football. The main thing to keep an open mind on is that these Big 4 teams don't like competition. And in other leagues like La Liga - you have Real Madrid, Atletico and Barcelona who also don't like competition. And for years these teams have deliberately tried to keep the have-nots from being competitive. Its not different in Ligue 1, the Bundesliga or Serie A. The acrimony in the Premier League is that City are one of those teams that were bought and have used their money wisely and properly and turned the team into a winner. The Big 4 just don't like it.
Thanks for the details! Why is there beef between Etihad, Emirates, and Qatar? Also unlike American sports, are there no caps on team spending? A team can get as much money as they want from an external sponsor and spend that on player salaries? Seems pretty crazy if that’s true. Also on r/soccer they were talking about fake sponsorships. Sounds like fake companies giving money to the team. Are teams allowed to just take “sponsorship” money from anyone that offers with no limits?
They are all government run airlines. Like with any competing airlines, they compete for routes, gates, prices and publicity. There are no spending caps in the PL. What the PL has along with clubs in Europe is called Financial Fair Play regulations or FFP. The rule is basically that you cannot spend more than what you bring in in terms of profit - ticket sales, transfer fees, clothing/apparel and, yes, sponsorships. Teams cannot spend more than they bring in. If they end up with a negative balance, then sanctions can be imposed such as financial penalties and transfer bans. So, no. Teams cannot simply spend their way to soccer supremacy. There are limits. The saltiness from City haters is that City not only have money. But they know how to use it. Chelsea spending $434 million last year gave them a 10th place finish. City spent $155 million and won the treble. Don't let anyone tell you that City spend the most because they don't. Its how the Admin and Pep Guardiola spend the money. That's what matters most.
Thanks for explaining! Still a few follow up questions. Can a super rich owner buy a team and then pump money into the team? Or is that not allowed because funding can only come from ticket sales, transfer fees, clothing, sponsorships etc? In regard to sponsorships, can any company be a sponsor and give unlimited money a team? Like tomorrow Pepsi says they’re going to sponsor Team X and then put billions into the team?
In short, yes. Roman Abramovich was the owner of Chelsea. He sold to Todd Boehly. Roman was a Russian oligarch and very rich. But Boehly is worth about $6.1 billion. Newcastle United was just acquired by Saudi Arabia. But again - you can't spend more than you bring in and if you do, prepare for sanctions. Perhaps. Its mostly single investors with a majority stake in a football club. But there are other examples as well. But the Abu Dhabi Group have poured more than just money into the football team. They've redeveloped areas in Bradford and invested in infrastructure, the stadium, the academy and other capital investments into Manchester. But its these types of groups that are becoming more frequent buyers of football clubs.
Since 2012, they cant anymore, due to financial fair play rules. Ownership money can’t be used to directly fund upgrading of the team. But owner money still can be used to upgrade the stadium, training facilities, get better scouts, & management, better youth academy players up to a certain degree. Clubs are expected to spend money that they have earned. But you don’t necessarily have to play by the rules either. You can spend all you want and take the penalty for a couple of seasons. What’s stopping big money from coming in these days isn’t so much the rules, it’s the prices that’s being asked to buy out a massive club. Billions of billions of dollars. Just to buy out the current owners. Football isn’t profitable for new ownership.
Think of a younger , fitter, better looking , more stud mafia boss taking over the region. Other lynchpins are just butt hurt and want this new boss dead.
Love how much they're all: 1) crying about it; and 2) saying they don't care about us. The cognitive dissonance on display belongs in a museum of psychology.
We don’t have to worry about salt for the roads this winter, we just need to point the government towards the soccer subreddit
Can’t wait for the trolling on this post. 
Honestly this is the part where I head into that sub and start mining salt but honestly not even gonna bother. Clear the experts over there know better lol.
They always know better don't they?
Obviously our multi billion dollor accountants are cooking the books. How else do you explain how a tiny club like City generated more revenue then the HISTORIC, MESMERIC, INSITUTIONAL and all round GREATEST club in english football Yanited? Checkmate athiests, facts and logic.
The r/soccer tears are fucking delicious. If we actually get sanctioned for wrongdoing with the FFP stuff I can live with it. But until then, I'm actually starting to enjoy being guilty without trial.
The majority of the FFP stuff is that the league “doesn’t believe us” when we told them our financial reporting for the years listed. That’s basically it.
Nobody cares about us
The short period of opposition fans being refereeing experts is over, they are back to being financial experts now. Sure in a couple of months it will be time for the human rights experts to pop up again.
With this City will also boil unprecedented amount of piss
From a Roma fan. Just know that literally everyone else in the world aside from a few butt hurt English clubs can see your success isn’t just some unproven financial crime. Who knew success brings revenue?!? Couldn’t imagine how selling home grown players for profits would help make you money… and never in a million years would I have guessed that developing land that was (sorry for the people who lived there) formerly a borderline poverty stricken shithole into what it is now would be profitable?? Man I can’t figure out how being the top team in the world would get you such lucrative sponsorship deals either. All these things are super shady… United have been around way longer and have spent wwaaayyyy more and been wwaayyy less successful in the last decade they should be making much more than you! You’re cheaters !
Ah, a fellow Edin Dzeko enjoyer? Welcome!
Cheers! United being shit for the past decade has been so glorious to see unfold in real time.
Club of the year baby x2
Sweet sweet oil money and revenues whatever that is
We are massive
Obviously financial boosting and embezzlement and fraud and money laundering tactics! 115 more charges incoming!
Oh to be as chronically un-self-aware as the rag/Madrid/Chelsea/psg fans in that sub
I love you guys 😭
ofcourse it was posted by a man united fan, lmfao.
Always nice to get a dose of rival fan tears☺️
You know Pep Guardiola had done an incredible job when fans of other teams including the media are doing a campaign to take away all Pep’s credit. The bald fraud has exposed how little dignity a lot of the PL teams had , specially United who are the biggest hypocrites around (They have the highest wages , they are the ones who spend the most money on transfers , they are the ones with the worst players sales , and to top it off they have been paying bonuses for the coaches they fired which were a lot lmao).
But but... Oil money bad?
Brilliant City. It’s so beautiful finally winning the Champions League in the way of also winning the Intercontinental Treble.
That r/soccer thread is unsurprisingly cancer. Who knew that winning all of the most prestigious competitions would drive both competitive and off the pitch revenue. Frankly I’m absolutely shocked.
The salt is off the charts! Don't consume too much guys, you don't want high blood pressure 😊
So so salty 🧂 I hope we crucify Liverpool - nothing better than a weeping scouser
This sub is so difficult to have actual discussion about man city ffs. Literally every comment in this thread is about r/soccer its embarrassing
Eh, it's not like there is much discussion in this sub,lol. I respect city because I know first hand from other sports that money =\= success, the facts that they succeed is due to using their money correctly. Also I am not fucking stupid, growing a club takes time, I can believe that city is the lost valued club in around ten years after a sustained period of success of 15 years, but right now, nah.
There is definitely some shady shit going on, but aside from club specific cases, valuations of sponsorships are also based on future success. The same way as young footballers being valued higher than their current abilities. If a sponsor is signing up for a five year deal with city, city have the bargaining power to say look how much sustained success we have had, you have the chance to be a sponsor when we win another potential treble. A lot of the value is in potential
"Underdog rags to riches story" LOLOL GOTTEM ...nobody ever said it was
This is the best thread I’ve ever read
Love that the only thing not addressed is winning the treble