I think that's what Aussies call Sydney... Or it's a typoWhere's Sudnet?
United won't be the first team to have done this outside of City. Atlético de Madrid is one other notable example. Their first foreign club was Atlético de Kolkata, which has since separated from them. Currently, Atlético own two teams: one in Mexico (Atlético San Luis) and one in Canada (Atlético Ottawa, formerly Ottawa Fury FC).Surely this is a joke, right?
You would expect this from one of the evil trifecta who have ruined football, not one of the noble knight traditional big clubs...
Money.What would be the benefits of owning another club? And do clubs buy other clubs...The owners of city buy other clubs but City themselves don’t right!?
I mean the actual act of relocating a club from its original location. Surely this should be the third rail.United won't be the first team to have done this outside of City. Atlético de Madrid is one other notable example. Their first foreign club was Atlético de Kolkata, which has since separated from them. Currently, Atlético own two teams: one in Mexico (Atlético San Luis) and one in Canada (Atlético Ottawa, formerly Ottawa Fury FC).
United probably see some value in this after seeing how it's worked out for both City and Atlético de Madrid. I wouldn't be surprised if other privately-owned clubs start to get involved in this in the future.
Give or take 50 kmI know nothing of Australian geography. How far a relocation would that be?
To answer your second question first, Manchester City don't own any other club. Their parent company, City Football Group, does. However, Atlético de Madrid owns their two clubs in Mexico and Canada.What would be the benefits of owning another club? And do clubs buy other clubs...The owners of city buy other clubs but City themselves don’t right!?
Whilst they've had franchises around for a long time, this whole idea of football franchises started from Ferran Soriano, a businessman from Barcelona. He had this idea back when he worked under Joan Laporta at Barcelona, but Laporta wasn't too supportive of it. At City, however, he's been able to realise his vision of a global club brand. Since then, Atlético de Madrid followed suit.Naff. How I wish the Americans had never caught wind of 'Soccer. Their franchise obsessed influence can only bring bad things.
I see what you mean, now. Yeah, that's incredibly scummy, and I'd hate for United's image to be tarnished because of this, but the Glazers probably won't care one bit.I mean the actual act of relocating a club from its original location. Surely this should be the third rail.
It will help is lure the best Asian talent, which is a market that we need to exploit. It would prove to be a lucrative one to exploit if we end up signing the next big thing from Japan, South Korea or China etc.Why do we need a club in Australia? What good will it do exactly?
Absolutely agree.A step in the right direction. We've needed to do this for a while. Hopefully Europe & South & North America are next places.
On top of what Adnan said (primary reason), it also gives us the following benefits:Why do we need a club in Australia? What good will it do exactly?
Fernando Pons, a sports business partner at Deloitte in Spain, sees this as a prime example of what consultants have dubbed “glocalisation” – a concept that implies taking a global product, but adapting to local markets. “A Girona or New York City fan will almost certainly also become a City fan,” he said. It also means that the advertising for Nissan, SAP and Wix that is seen at the Etihad stadium in Manchester will be replicated in Melbourne or New York – and that players from the US or Australia will be able to travel off-season to the world’s most advanced training centre, built on 34 hectares of land beside the Etihad and equipped with sophisticated extras such as hyperbaric and hypoxic chambers that can simulate high altitude or boost blood oxygen levels.
A step in the right direction. We've needed to do this for a while. Hopefully Europe & South & North America are next places.
What about the supporters of the club in question? Clubs aren't there to be bought and sold by Man Utd and the Glazer mafia just because it further enhances the franchise. This is gross.Absolutely agree.
This should've happened earlier, but it's good to hear we're looking into it. The location is also good due to the potential of picking up top young talent from Australia/Asia.
Another point: we have one of the best academies in the world but 99% of the players won't make it here. Having a secondary club at a lower level allows the club to not have to release all the players but some of them can be moved on to the secondary club.On top of what Adnan said (primary reason), it also gives us the following benefits:
As stated in this Guardian article:
- Greater reach for sponsors, therefore opening up bigger deals for United
- Greater access to the Australian market
- Make it more likely for future generations of fans to support United
- High-quality facilities in what should be a familiar environment for United
That's a question for the Australian authorities.What about the supporters of the club in question? Clubs aren't there to be bought and sold by Man Utd and the Glazer mafia just because it further enhances the franchise. This is gross.