Manchester City reports revenue of £570M for 20/21. A season without fans.

TsuWave

Full Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2013
Messages
8,639


for comparison, Chelsea that won the Champions League:

The group turnover figure increased to £434.9m from £407.4m the previous year driven by the Club’s Champions League success and due to amounts being carried forward from the extension of the 2019/20 season in to the 2020/21 financial year.

The Covid-19 pandemic had a severe impact on the Club’s ability to generate revenues in the year. Had it not been for the impact of the pandemic on matchday, broadcasting and commercial income, this year would have probably seen the Club break the £500m turnover level for the first time. The impact on revenues contributed to the Group recording a loss of £153.4m for the year ended 30 June 2021.

https://www.chelseafc.com/en/news/2021/12/30/chelsea-fc-financial-results
How can anybody take football seriously :lol:
 

diarm

Full Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
14,402
To be fair, a season with no fans makes little to no material difference to City finances. If anything, they probably saved money on not having to pay people to pretend for 90 minutes a week.
 

Tyrion

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2014
Messages
3,176
Location
Ireland
i'm missing the intent of this post?
They're cheating FFP by sponsoring themselves with enough money to make a profit no matter what. It reminds me of a video game were I spent fortunes but knew a cheat that gave me a million pounds so it didn't matter.
 

Dumbstar

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2002
Messages
17,765
Location
Viva Karius!
Supports
Liverpool
They're cheating FFP by sponsoring themselves with enough money to make a profit no matter what. It reminds me of a video game were I spent fortunes but knew a cheat that gave me a million pounds so it didn't matter.
Aha, so you're saying the league title you won in that video game didn't mean much? Even to you?
 

MuFc_1992

Full Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2014
Messages
1,131
To be honest they can do whatever they want unless FA or UEFA introduce some sort of strict spending and wage cap that isn't dependent on Revenue like FFP but that would mean stingy owners like Glazers pocketing all the money from Football. Football is going to get very boring with Newcastle and City fighting for the title in 5 years time so, I'm all for any regulation that evens the odds even if it means United not being able to leverage our huge legit revenue.
 

bringbackbebe

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 9, 2021
Messages
71
Hate to say it, but City and Chelsea have made the EPL better. Liverpool have benefited quite a bit from the takeover as well but they have been very prudent in spending. We're one of the few clubs going in the other direction taking guidance from Blackburn with Venky's the chicken farmers and Mike Ashley's Newcastle. I'm not for financial fair play since it's a loose concept that can be by-passed anyway. Free market should reign & we should instead focus on our own strengths and try to work our way up.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
3,841
Location
DKNY
As long as oil production and petrol prices remain stable or increase , there is no reason for their revenue to go down. No one outside of City/PSG fanboys believes their figures have anything to do with the club itself.
 

UncleBob

Full Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2014
Messages
5,445
Hate to say it, but City and Chelsea have made the EPL better. Liverpool have benefited quite a bit from the takeover as well but they have been very prudent in spending. We're one of the few clubs going in the other direction taking guidance from Blackburn with Venky's the chicken farmers and Mike Ashley's Newcastle. I'm not for financial fair play since it's a loose concept that can be by-passed anyway. Free market should reign & we should instead focus on our own strengths and try to work our way up.
Not sure how you managed to fit so much incorrect information into such a small post. Well done.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
17,340
Location
Somewhere out there
Hate to say it, but City and Chelsea have made the EPL better.
Chelsea I'll give you, because they are still only drawing from one man's resources. But City? Like feck they have. The state funded club are about to go and walk the league again, making it league 4 wins from the last 5 seasons. And that at a time when Liverpool have been as good as they ever have been, and Chelsea have one of the best managers in Europe.

It's total state domination, and the only thing that'll stop that is sadly fecking Newcastle, but so many fans like yourself can't see the wood for the trees.
 

ForeverRed1

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
1,739
Location
England UK!
Chelsea I'll give you, because they are still only drawing from one man's resources. But City? Like feck they have. The state funded club are about to go and walk the league again, making it league 4 wins from the last 5 seasons. And that at a time when Liverpool have been as good as they ever have been, and Chelsea have one of the best managers in Europe.

It's total state domination, and the only thing that'll stop that is sadly fecking Newcastle, but so many fans like yourself can't see the wood for the trees.
Yep and without them and their lottery winning oil billions we would of won the league a couple times in the last ten years.
 

Rob

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2009
Messages
2,786
Supports
Liverpool
It's total state domination, and the only thing that'll stop that is sadly fecking Newcastle, but so many fans like yourself can't see the wood for the trees.
Indeed. I said as much in another thread. In a few years time, it’ll be City and Newcastle fighting for the title year after year, with the rest of us hoping for a spot in the CL.
 

Castia

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
13,855
Hate to say it, but City and Chelsea have made the EPL better. Liverpool have benefited quite a bit from the takeover as well but they have been very prudent in spending. We're one of the few clubs going in the other direction taking guidance from Blackburn with Venky's the chicken farmers and Mike Ashley's Newcastle. I'm not for financial fair play since it's a loose concept that can be by-passed anyway. Free market should reign & we should instead focus on our own strengths and try to work our way up.
Bollocks

They play good football because of Pep I’ll give em that but everything surrounding the club is a joke. They should have been done for fixing the books when the initial 3 year? CL ban was in place

That club with a 3 year CL ban and transfer ban would have lost a lot including Pep.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
17,340
Location
Somewhere out there
Yep and without them and their lottery winning oil billions we would of won the league a couple times in the last ten years.
Without them Arsenal wouldn't have been utterly savaged at a time when they simply couldn't compete due to the ground move. The plan for Wenger and Arsenal was to stay there or thereabouts until the move was completed and they'd have been stronger financially, instead City started using them as a feeder club and their fate has been sealed since, their players saw they that way too, as nothing more than a stepping stone.

Remove state owned City from this league and the post Fergie days would have been brilliant, with Arsenal, Liverpool & Chelsea; and yes, Liverpool would have (I hate to say it), deservedly won a few more titles for sure. It's hard to know how Arsenal could have been if they had been "allowed" to remain a top team.

People sadly see the Fergie domination and think Chelsea and especially City have done a good thing by putting a stop to it, but as we've all seen, Fergie was the reason for the domination, not United. Other clubs would have shone post-Fergie.
 

11101

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
16,976
Hate to say it, but City and Chelsea have made the EPL better. Liverpool have benefited quite a bit from the takeover as well but they have been very prudent in spending. We're one of the few clubs going in the other direction taking guidance from Blackburn with Venky's the chicken farmers and Mike Ashley's Newcastle. I'm not for financial fair play since it's a loose concept that can be by-passed anyway. Free market should reign & we should instead focus on our own strengths and try to work our way up.
Yeah, they've done wonders for the game. It's brilliant that I now have to pay 70 quid for Sky Sports, 100 quid for a shirt and 50 quid for a match ticket in the nosebleed seats. Before, I used to worry myself to sleep about where to keep all my spare cash. Thank you City!
 

Dumbstar

Full Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2002
Messages
17,765
Location
Viva Karius!
Supports
Liverpool
Not sure how you managed to fit so much incorrect information into such a small post. Well done.
So we're discussing corrupt clubs (Chelsea, City and Newcastle) but he gleefully adds Liverpool into the conversation. Yeah I think you need to read more. :p

Oops responded to the wrong person. I agree with your post Bob. :p
 

bringbackbebe

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 9, 2021
Messages
71
It's total state domination, and the only thing that'll stop that is sadly fecking Newcastle, but so many fans like yourself can't see the wood for the trees.
Just have a look at the net spend done by City vs United in the last 5 years. Sources vary but we are generally on par with them. It doesn't have to do with money alone but the mindset of the administration and overall development of the club. You could argue they play good football because of Pep. Well, why didn't we get Pep and decided to go for Moyes and others? We could easily out do them in every way, but we just don't have the drive to do it.
 

Sviken

Full Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2021
Messages
1,396
As long as oil production and petrol prices remain stable or increase , there is no reason for their revenue to go down. No one outside of City/PSG fanboys believes their figures have anything to do with the club itself.
There's plenty of idiots deluding themselves that City somehow has higher revneue than United just because they've been successful this past decade.
 

giorno

Full Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Messages
20,653
Supports
Real Madrid
City won 2 league titles in the 7 years before they hired Guardiola, and both were very tight wins too. PL is rich enough to keep competing so long as City don't hire literally the best manager in the world. And Baldy won't be there forever, nor will he remain the best forever

Oh, and they still haven't won the CL
 

Evans999

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
318
Location
Wales
They're able to manipulate their sponsorship revenue. All they're sponsors are brothers, friends, Business partners of Mansour. They can receive any amount of money they want and it'll end up being paid back through different companies and assets on the sly.

Once Newcastle are through they're no new sponsor ban that city instigated, Saudi Airlines will announce a 500m complete sponsorship package.
 

Schmiznurf

Caf Representative in Mafia Championship
Joined
Sep 18, 2016
Messages
10,673
Location
The Lazy Craig Show
Thank god they have sponsors that are also owned by the companies that their owner owners own, otherwise they'd never get a 100 million quid sponsorship from a company that didn't exist until a few weeks ago and is somehow rich as hell without ever selling anything.
 

Dr. StrangeHate

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Messages
3,716
Hate to say it, but City and Chelsea have made the EPL better. Liverpool have benefited quite a bit from the takeover as well but they have been very prudent in spending. We're one of the few clubs going in the other direction taking guidance from Blackburn with Venky's the chicken farmers and Mike Ashley's Newcastle. I'm not for financial fair play since it's a loose concept that can be by-passed anyway. Free market should reign & we should instead focus on our own strengths and try to work our way up.
Username checks out.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
17,340
Location
Somewhere out there
Just have a look at the net spend done by City vs United in the last 5 years.
Why? If you spend more money, and they have, to build on an already far superior squad with KDB, Aguero, Kompany, Silva, then you're obviously gonna be in a miles better position.

If you can afford to make Pep Guardiola leave Bayern Munich to join a shitty little club like City and pamper him with everything he wants, then once again, you aren't playing on a level playing field, at all.

And who gives a feck about net spend from a club clearly bullshitting every single part of their financial activities.
 

Champ

Full Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
4,991
Am i right in thinking City's deal woith Etihad fihishes soon? WHich means another State backed entity will sponsor them at a vastly inflated rate?

Put it into context, Arsenal got £90m over 15 years for Emirates sponsoring the stadium etc, City got £400m over 10 years.

And people claim it's made football better?

Just look at their sponsorship list - at least half of them are state backed companies, all of which see's a heavily inflated amount of money ploughed in, recently they signed a deal with the owners own Hotel brand, Christ knows how much they ploughed in for that - probably enough to see them make a profit this financial year!!
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
17,340
Location
Somewhere out there
City won 2 league titles in the 7 years before they hired Guardiola, and both were very tight wins too. PL is rich enough to keep competing so long as City don't hire literally the best manager in the world. And Baldy won't be there forever, nor will he remain the best forever

Oh, and they still haven't won the CL
Nar, City had to build up to this domination, there's the big difference. You cannot simply go off the years they were struggling to get enough of the very best players on board. They have spent more than United since Pep arrived despite already having Aguero, KDB, Company, Silva, Stirling in their side.
 

adexkola

Arsenal supporter
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
42,501
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
Strict wage and transfer caps, squad limits across the league that creates a level playing field regardless of the source of income...

Or stop with the bitching about "state owned" and "sports washing" because who gives a feck honestly?

Or wait until I seize power
 

Smores

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
22,926
Feck City for many reasons but who cares?

We earn our sponsorship by a scumbag like Woody selling our brand to any nonsense. They earn it by putting their morals aside.

Neither have much to do with footballing merit, sponsorship in general nullifies that. Until there's proper spending caps or sponsorship is excluded from FFP i find these sporting merit arguments fanciful.
 

Wolf1992

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 27, 2021
Messages
907
Supports
No team in particular.
Without them Arsenal wouldn't have been utterly savaged at a time when they simply couldn't compete due to the ground move. The plan for Wenger and Arsenal was to stay there or thereabouts until the move was completed and they'd have been stronger financially, instead City started using them as a feeder club and their fate has been sealed since, their players saw they that way too, as nothing more than a stepping stone.

Remove state owned City from this league and the post Fergie days would have been brilliant, with Arsenal, Liverpool & Chelsea; and yes, Liverpool would have (I hate to say it), deservedly won a few more titles for sure. It's hard to know how Arsenal could have been if they had been "allowed" to remain a top team.

People sadly see the Fergie domination and think Chelsea and especially City have done a good thing by putting a stop to it, but as we've all seen, Fergie was the reason for the domination, not United. Other clubs would have shone post-Fergie.
Domination is domination, wether due to money or great coaching, City have both.

Is undeniable that current PL is better than ever, if you eliminate Abramovich's Chelsea and Abu Dhabi's City, PL wouldn't be the best league in world, as it would be only 2 teams competing for the title(Liverpool and United most likely) like in the rest of Europe.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
17,340
Location
Somewhere out there
Domination is domination, wether due to money or great coaching, City have both.

Is undeniable that current PL is better than ever, if you eliminate Abramovich's Chelsea and Abu Dhabi's City, PL wouldn't be the best league in world, as it would be only 2 teams competing for the title(Liverpool and United most likely) like in the rest of Europe.
I wouldn't eliminate a non state funded club though, rich benefactors have always existed and their funds are actually finite.

And I've already explained how City have absolutely annihilated Arsenal. So no, without City we'd likely be looking at Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal and United, and teams like Spurs would have much more opportunity also.
 

Withnail

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
15,697
Location
The Arena of the Unwell
Just have a look at the net spend done by City vs United in the last 5 years. Sources vary but we are generally on par with them. It doesn't have to do with money alone but the mindset of the administration and overall development of the club. You could argue they play good football because of Pep. Well, why didn't we get Pep and decided to go for Moyes and others? We could easily out do them in every way, but we just don't have the drive to do it.
Net spend isn't the only consideration and certainly not the only cost to a football club. They've plowed shitloads of money into literally every aspect of the club while we've had a leaky roof at OT.

I do agree with what others are saying. It's the money and Pep. Once Pep leaves, hopefully they get a few duds in.
 

Iker Quesadillas

Full Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
805
Supports
Real Madrid
If you spend more money to build on an already far superior squad
If you can afford to make Pep Guardiola leave Bayern Munich to join a shitty little club like City
Maybe Pep Guardiola moved to City because they had a "far superior squad."

Guardiola signing for Bayern was a big deal. It was even presented as 'snubbing' the PL. He signed a three-year contract and managed them for three seasons, it's not like he was lured out of there.
 

marktan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
4,643
Strict wage and transfer caps, squad limits across the league that creates a level playing field regardless of the source of income...

Or stop with the bitching about "state owned" and "sports washing" because who gives a feck honestly?

Or wait until I seize power
You must be the biggest City loving United fan on this forum. Every thread you're defending them on something or the other.
 

adexkola

Arsenal supporter
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Messages
42,501
Location
The CL is a glorified FA Cup set to music
Supports
orderly disembarking on planes
You must be the biggest City loving United fan on this forum. Every thread you're defending them on something or the other.
I don't love them, I hate the hypocrisy on this topic. Rivalry aside, the amount of lamenting done by fans of traditional big clubs about the nouveau rich clubs is nauseating. As if the game was all well and good before 2004.

So yeah I see these threads as a call not for the game to be made very fair and balanced and competitive, but for clubs with historical advantages to retain their privilege. And feck all that, as far as I'm concerned.

I'd have the same stance if Bolton or Accrington Stanley won the lottery instead of City (or Chelsea or Newcastle or PSG)
 

giorno

Full Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2016
Messages
20,653
Supports
Real Madrid
Nar, City had to build up to this domination, there's the big difference. You cannot simply go off the years they were struggling to get enough of the very best players on board. They have spent more than United since Pep arrived despite already having Aguero, KDB, Company, Silva, Stirling in their side.
Yes, and they will keep being a big force in english and world football even long after the lunatic leaves, but i don't see how they can completely take over and dominate english football for years and years. At most they might manage Fergie's level of domination