Manchester City’s millions are once again in the headlines. Etihad Airways’ £400million sponsorship deal over 10 years at the club has left many seething and questioning its legitimacy ahead of Uefa’s financial fair play (FFP) rules being installed. The deal is the largest of its kind in sport and only goes to push the boundaries of financial parity further apart if you compare it to Arsenal’s 2004 deal with Emirates worth £90million over 15 years.
But are the critics, including Arsene Wenger and Liverpool‘s managing director Ian Ayre just slightly envious of the money surrounding City? On the surface the more money a football club can have to spend on players and wages is good for that club and not its competitors, who wouldn’t be jealous of City’s ability to buy the world’s best players and off the back of that challenge for honours. But it is below the surface, into the heart of the business side of the club, where I think jealousy is replaced by concern that City are unfairly maneuvering themselves away from ever being on a level playing field with the rest of the Premier League and making sure that financial fair play rules don’t come back to bite them.
Renaming a stadium after a sponsorship deal is not a new practice. Bolton’s Reebok Stadium and the club’s association with the brand stretches back 18 years whilst Arsenal more recently named their new stadium after a sponsorship deal. City’s deal is just on a very enhanced scale. Maybe Arsenal now regret agreeing to £90million only seven years ago?
But rather than criticise, could any other clubs follow City’s lead? Across the world wealthy businessmen have looked to football clubs as a investable business, the latest being Spanish side Malaga being bought a member of the Qatari royal family at the end of last season. The money being poured into the club has already been spent on eight new summer arrivals, including ex-Manchester United and Real Madrid star Ruud van Nistelrooy.
Despite numerous wealthy businessmen being at the helms of many Premier League clubs, few can still match the wealth of Manchester City’s owners. Having many clubs in the Premier League with the money of Manchester City would create a sort of super-charged level playing field where top clubs relates solely to the money you have, rather than success.
But could clubs like Tottenham and Liverpool follow the precedent set by City, just on a smaller scale? Both clubs are reported to be considering a new stadium and a similar financial package (unlikely to match the millions of City’s) would enhance their chances of competing both on the pitch and also in terms of ground and area development. How Liverpool and Spurs’ fans would react to losing White Hart Lane or Anfield for a branded stadium name remains to be seen.
The Etihad deal at City involves an extension of their shirt sponsorship, renaming their ground the Etihad Stadium and development of an Etihad Campus (the area around the current ground that will be developed to include facilities including new training grounds). There will be no getting away from the connection between City and their sponsors.
But do people like Wenger have a point when questioning such a deal and its credibility in the financial fair play rules? Firstly Wenger is allowed to be concerned as he looks to battle City on the pitch in the upcoming season but the Arsenal manager’s lack of involvement in the financial side of both clubs means that he should have possibly not voiced such worries.
The deal between Manchester City and Etihad is no doubt going to come under intense scrutiny by Uefa and rightly so. But if investigations reveal that City have been transparent and correct in their dealings, City’s competitors will have little to complain about as talking too much about finances rather than football may start to sound like jealousy.
Written by Jenny Kerwood for FootballFancast.com. If you want to read more of my bite size, 160 character views and thoughts follow me on Twitter @jennyk5
ThisisFutbol.com are seeking new writers to join the team! If you’re passionate about football, drop us a line at “thisisfutbol.com@snack-media.com” to learn more.
To have a peak at the top SEVEN available FREE TRANSFERS this summer, click here.
Or to have a look at 10 ways a football lover can spend this summer, click here!
Good luck to city if they can prove this is within UEFA’S fair play rules. But the questions is would Ethiad who is owned by the half brother of Manchester city’s owner given that much in a sponsorship deal if there were no family connection, the answer to that is more than likely no. So because brother is City’s owner we make a 400 million sponsorship deal. Where does the money come from really and all the accounts and everything will be legitimate so there is no way of knowing if the money comes from Ethiad or from City’s rich owner via Ethiad?
You missed the most important point. The family who control the Abu Dahbi investment group that owns City also owns Etihad Airlines.
The sponsorship deal is not an arms length business agreement that makes business sense from both sides. It’s just an indirect way to pump money into the club.
It clearly violates the fair play rules, but don’t expect FIFA or any other footballing authority to do anything about it. Rest assured all parties have been appropriately paid off.
Rubbish.
Dax, the sponsorship clearly DOES NOT violate the fair play rules, as Fifa have been consulted all throughout the process, and have chosen to say absolutely nothing, and take absolutely no action against City.
If however, you have evidence of bungs and law-breaking on behalf of any of the parties, please feel free to share this information with us in your next post, and pass it on to the Police or relevant authorities – indeed, sell your story to a national newspaper to expose the dodgy dealings and make yourself a wage at the same time.
Just because you do not understand this business deal and the rules, does not mean you can go around spouting lies and rumours.
Why would Fifa allow the first big sponsorship deal to flout it’s flagship financial fair play rules immediately, in fact the rules specifically designed to stop Manchester City breaking into the European Elite?
Make your mind up, either Fifa are bent and on Man City’s side – which you suggested, or they’re not, in which case the deal is commercially viable and within the rules.
Sepp Blatter and Michel Platini have said and done the sum total of fuck all about City’s dealings, despite being dead set against City since the Sheikh’s takeover, so if these two arch enemies of City and English football have no case to even slander City, then you can be assured the deals are watertight.
Ironically, now that City are on the Champions League bandwagon, it will be virtually impossible to shift them thanks to the FFP rules, City are now part of the old order, just in time before the door clanged shut on the likes of Liverpool, Spurs, Villa and Everton, doomed to scrap amongst themselves for Thursday night Europa League action.
Sorry dax.didn’t realise you knew the intricate details of the sponsorship deal and where every penny will be spent.you sound like wenger.don’t hear chelsea or united complaining too much.maybe the only ones complaining are Liverpool and and arsenal because they know we might push them further away from competing for the title.how ironic how the first comment regarding jealously towards city is another jealous rant.don’t comment about other teams when you knownothing about how they’re ran and concentrate on your own team.the deal was done with transparency with uefa throughout the process.if uefa didnt like it they would have said and if they don’t then they don’t add that figure in the ffp report.that’s it as simple as that.at least our club will leave a legacy and do some good for the local community irrespective of who they support unlike uefa and fifa who simply claim they’re making a difference but don’t give anything back and costs like the last world cup.
It makes me laugh – Find 1 person who isn’t a City fan that believes this deal is a genuine, above board business deal, where both parties are satisfied they have got some value from it. There simply isn’t anyone out there who feels this looks like anything other than an attempt to bypass the FFP regulations. Why? Because it defies common sense to pay so much more than any other sponsor is willing to for the same deal. Therefore, by definition, the price being paid is excessive, that is to say not reflective of true current market conditions. In other words it’s a form of corruption. Now I personally don’t care much one way or the other and FWIW, I thank Man City’s owners for bringing some fantastic players to England to keep us all better entertained. There’s no denying the facts and Man City are now a top side with some world class players. That in and of itself must be good for the PL, good for the city of Manchester and not a bad thing for football or our country in general. BUT the fact that they will almost certainly get away with such blatant corruption of the laws of the game must not be seen as UEFA going soft or Manchester City being a shining beacon of decency in the world of football. On the contrary, I think we should all sympathise with UEFA (yes, it sounds absurd I know, bunch of clowns that Platini and his mob are). I’m serious! What are they supposed to do? If the deal has been done and the money has changed hands and all of it using the correct and proper processes and chanels, who are UEFA to consider it unlawful? They are not the FSA or an economic crime division at Scotland Yard. They are a football organisation. They cannot and will not interfere in a perfectly “legitimate” business deal just because the investor does not on the surface seem to have negotiated particularly great value for money or because the reason for the deal is to circumvent their own rules. Legally they can’t.
Talk about ignorance… FFP rules clearly state that any sponsorship deal has to be within the Market rate to avoid this kind of problem. £400 mill is not Market rate, it’s 4 times anthing any other sports team gets, including the highly lucrative American sports.
They are fully aware of this at city, which is why they have since denied that it is anywhere near that amount. So it’s simple really; if they get that figure they will be breaking FFP rules.
So what Jack? This deal related to a longer period of time, more varied vehicles of sponsorship, local community work, innovative new ideas for company exposure etc etc etc. If no deal of the same structure has ever been presented to them, it makes it very difficult for UEFA to take a strong stance or make an accurate judgement over what represents market value. I agree with what you’e saying 100%. I just dont think UEFA can back up their words with punitive action, which is what ruling clubs out of their competitions would reprasent. The fact is their FFP rules appear very unenforcable when there are such stinking rich parties involved. What’s to stop some lone benefactor appearing from nowhere and investing a huge sum of money in the club for a small share of the company, based on potential future earnings, for example? Or shirt sales suddenly soaring in India and China when some philanthrapist decides to give away 1,000,000 shirts to poor kids in cities? If City have gone ahead with this deal, they must be confident they can pull it off. While I agree that it’s a clear and obvious case of corruption, even to the layman (like me), UEFA may struggle to run the rule over how companies operate when their mandate is football and not financial/economic law or morality. This was my point. UEFA will not be able to make these rules work where the likes of Sheih Mansour are concerned. It’s all very well being venoumous, but if you’re toothless, then all that’s left is to spit it and I don’t think UEFA can spit far enough to do any damage.
Let’s talk about ignorance shall we?
No-one outside of MCFC, Etihad and Fifa knows the true amount of money being sponsored.
You lot don’t, that’s for sure.
So how is this deal “obviously” corrupt, or not fair market value?
How do you know it is not Etihad who have got the best of the deal due to being owned by the same Royal family, rather than City?
The Sheikh intends City to be the biggest and best team on the planet, within that ten year period it seems, so how can you put a price on a dynamic, world beating football powerhouse?
Football is the most lucrative sport on earth, comparisons with American sports are becoming inaccurate. It could be we look back in ten years time and consider Etihad were smart for getting on board nice and early.
Other City sponsors and business partners include:
Umbro
Etisalat
Aabar
Thomas Cook
Jaguar
EA Sports (signed up yesterday)
Amstel
and others
So you can see there are plenty of businesses putting cash City’s way, and there will be more no doubt – are they all bent and commercially incompetent as well?
If you wish to remain in denial even when presented with the full facts of the Sheikh’s business plan to elevate City to the level of ManU, Barca and Madrid, that’s going to be your problem in the years to come.
I implore you, don’t let the bitterness and jealousy eat away at your insides.
“It makes me laugh – Find 1 person who isn’t a City fan that believes this deal is a genuine, above board business deal, where both parties are satisfied they have got some value from it.”
Michel Platini.
He has to either back it or fight it and, as stinky said above, Platini may have little lehal standing to fight his corner.
Yup.
FWIW buddy, I’m not bitter. I enjoy watching yoour mob play a lot more than I used to and I have already said I think we should all be grateful for all the top players Cook and Co’ bring over that we all get to watch each week. It’s great entertainment. In addition I think it’s fantastic you might finally rival your local arch-enemy and Manchested will have 2 big teams. I’m in full support of all this. But come on, after paying OTT wages to some fairly good players and a few excellent ones and spending on massive transfer fees, this type of disproportionate sponsorship deal OR some other masked form of monster cash injection was always on the cards or you lot were goinf to be out of Europe. You know it and so do the rest of us. If there’s someone in denial here, it isn’t the rest of the world, is it! Like I say, I couldn’t care less and ultimately I think this along with other deals at Chelsea andd other super-rich clubs will go a long way to making an even bigger enemy of UEFA for the English Premier League. I don’t think they will have any choice but to stand behind such deals or expose themselves for being the impotent old men they clearly are. I don’t think the world is against City anymore than it is against other clubs. You see similar comments from Spuds, Geordies, ManUSA fans. Par for the course mate. The fact that you’re so defensive betrays your true beliefs and tells us all we need to know.
I’m defensive because there are so many people commenting negatively on one of the sponsorship deals, a minor part of the overall business plan, from a position of ignorance.
What are my true beliefs?
I truly believe Sheikh Mansour has decided to make my team, Manchester City, one of the greatest teams in the world, if not the greatest, within a ten year period, chiefly because he has said so, and has put his money where his mouth is.
He also has the credentials to pull this huge undertaking off, surrounded by the finest business brains money can buy.
I see nothing so far to prevent him in his ambitions, indeed, the Champions League closed shop has been busted wide open just in time for City to make a mockery of Fifa’s attempt to exclude City in particular.
There has been no comment at all from big mouth Blatter, nor a whimper from the enemy of City and England Platini, so you can be confident City are playing by the rules, and will continue to do so.
I believe the “project” will be successful, because i am incredibly well researched in it’s details,as I’m a City fan, it’s fans of other clubs who can’t comprehend the scale of acheivement so far, preferring to squeal foul play and corruption, chucking around moralities and philosophies which are outdated or childishly naive.
I have thought my posts through, I wish others would do the same.
Fair enough sir. I do still think if you looked things with an open mind and without your sky blue hat on, you might still be able to see how it does look more than a bit fishy on the face of things. I have heard a lot of football pros and pundits, who are far from Man City haters, say they think the situation looks suspect and they may even be saying so with the greatest respect for the club, it doesn’t mean anything other than what it is. As a total outsider I have to say it stinks of using the regulations to your advantage and capitalizing on that unfathomable, expendable wealth now at the disposal of the club. Would I not do the same if I could for my beloved Spurs? Of course I would! I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a little jealous of the terms your club is able to offer top players to sign! We simply can’t compete in that market, but I’m not bitter about it. Quite the contrary, I’m pleased to see those players in our league. It’s a priviledge for all of us imo. And I look forward to some great games between our 2 sides this season and thereafter. However, it has to be pretty hard to imagine that with all the lavish spending, a club like City could even dream of breaking even or getting close enough for UEFA’s liking. Clearly they are doing so and I don’t think City fans should take offense that eye-brows are being raised as a result. It’s nothing more than common sense to question how this could occur. It does look like blatant corruption and although we are supposed to be proven guilty before being considered guilty, sometimes there are a whole lot of cookie crumbs leading from the jar in our direction and we are forced to justify ourselves, fairly or not. I have no doubt at all that the whole football world will be waiting with baited breath to learn more about how City have pulled this off exactly, if for no other reason than to follow suit in raising exorbidant sums!!!! Whether or not is would be a feesible concept for anyone except the Abu Dabi oligarch, is another question. If in a few years from now no other club has managed to find similar levels of funding, I guess there must have to be a time when overly defensive City fans may have to eat a little humble pie… 😉
Thank you for replying to my posts in a polite and courteous manner Stinky, it’s not often that happens nowadays online 🙂
If you look at the sums being invested into MCFC and it’s infrastructure, several billion pounds over the next decade or so, then you will understand the returns from this unprecedented business growth (in a football club), will easily allow City to post large profits, after a couple of seasons of posting permissable losses.
This is a perfectly normal, acceptable business plan, but unique to football and probably any sport, which is why most sports commentators cannot believe it’s veracity.
However, if you have a background in large corporate development, then it makes perfect sense – and of course, the Abu Dhabi investment group do it all the time, they are experts.
Of course the “project” is a gamble, but so is all business, and so is life, the trick is to be as prepared as possible for all eventualities.
As an insider, but also as an educated observer too, I look at the personnel in place now, the progress made so far, and the likelihood of success, and I conclude that the project is eminently “do-able”.
Clearly most commentators haven’t grasped the true scale of ambition, planning and investment at MCFC, so it irks me when they cry foul play, whilst the governing body set up to thwart MCFC have full disclosure of the sponsorship deal and have kept deafeningly and significantly quiet.
Remember, Fifa FFP rules were designed specifically to stop Manchester City, and also Chelsea, from “ruining” football, if they could punish City, they certainly would, with a huge fanfair.
Sepp Blatter has just been re-elected as President of Uefa, and is as powerful now as ever – he could easily mouth off about City with impunity, but he significantly has not.
You state –
“it stinks of using the regulations to your advantage ”
Come on, everyone plays rules and regulations to their own advantage in life, from tax rules to your car passing the MOT, why all of a sudden are City cheats for operating lawfully?
Once the penny drops as to how good City’s owners are compared to all the other clubs in the established european elite, then I would predict every one will up their game to catch up, with varying degrees of success, much like when Man United pushed on their marketing in the nineties.
Oh, and I’ve eaten enough humble pie as a City fan in the last three decades to last a lifetime, so no thanks, looking forward to some smug cake, like my fellow Mancs in Red have been feasting on the last twenty years 🙂
This victimhood cobblers and accusations of “jealousy” that regularly comes from Manchester City fans and sympathisers these days is truly pathetic.
There is an issue about the effects of financial doping filtering down and causing harm to many clubs in the lower league, as well as the practice discrediting the concept of fair competition, but that’s not the main reason why many have a disgust for what Man City are doing. That reason is the NATURE of their money and their owner, rather than the mere fact of their riches itself. In other words it’s not so much the money, as the fact it’s DIRTY money.
Despite some of the self-serving, mealy-mouthed and ridiculous defences of Saint Mansour to be found on City forums by his hero-worshippers, it is a fact that he is a member of a ruling dictatorship and that the source of his wealth is the sovereign wealth of Abu Dhabi – i.e money that should be spent for the benefit of the citizens of Abu Dhabi and/or pooled into the wider public fisc of the UAE. Ridiculous arguments that the Manchester Cirty funding is his “own money” are as mendacious as suggesting that the investment return on public funding looted from Zaire was the personal wealth of President Mobuto. Which of Mansour’s royal ancestors ever surveyed, commisioned, or dug an oil well?
The fact that the al Zahyan dynasty is a regime accused by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch of Human Rights Abuses is another reason to abhor what is going on at Eastlands. The mendacious argument that Abu Dhabi is supposedly not as bad as some other Middle-Eastern regimes is a ridiculous justification. It says something when I see the Daily Mirror being castigated by a City Fan on Blue Moon as “the mouthpiece of Amnesty International”, as though Amnesty International is some kind of nasty political party like the BNP.
I have no jealousy, historic issue, or regional hatred of Manchester City or Manchester itself. As a supporter of a lower league club owned by its fans, I am never likely to be a rival to any Premiership club for anything. Far from hating Man City, I spent most of the thirty years I watched football prior to the takeover of the equally repellent Sinawatra, regarding City as one of the clubs I liked the most. I can’t stand them today purely for what they now stand for – i.e the rapicious, immoral greed of the PL and supporters who will sell their soul to the devil and hero-worship anyone who buys them success, regardless of who he might be or what he may have done. For much the same reasons I loathe Chelsea as well, in case anyone decides to trot out the tedious argument that Manchester City are being singled out in some way.
To paraphrase Harry Redknapp; some supporters would cheers the likes of Adolf Hitler to the rooftops and ignore any little pecadilloes he might have been involved in, so long as he bought them the Champions League.
You can shove your Premiership where the sun don’t shine.