Jump to content

Manchester United


BOF

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, villa4europe said:

Hard to know

As well as the artificially inflated stuff and the outright fake stuff man city also have legitimately increased their revenue with the likes of puma and okx

The only dodgy thing for utd is that once again it sounds like they're putting a money man at the top of the tree, he's got former job titles like head of marketing and head of sponsorship 

You look at the city group and say Brian Marwood is a football man in charge of the groups global football side, txiki is a football man in charge of man city's football side 

The revenue will no doubt go up, somehow they'll get no CL but the company that replaces teamviewer pay them more... There's no immediate confidence here that the football side of it which is an absolute **** shambles will get any better, that's no who this guy is at Man City 

They should have stuck with Ed Woodward then, at least he didn’t have the smell of the rivals all over his designer suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Genie said:

They should have stuck with Ed Woodward then, at least he didn’t have the smell of the rivals all over his designer suits.

There's almost a coincidence around Woodward that they stuck with him for so long despite the club obviously being in decline then he finally got the bullet just before it was announced man citys revenue had overtaken theirs... 

That will be the challenge for this new guy too no doubt, no matter how much better man city are on the pitch utd are the bigger team and the revenue will reflect that 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

There's almost a coincidence around Woodward that they stuck with him for so long despite the club obviously being in decline then he finally got the bullet just before it was announced man citys revenue had overtaken theirs... 

That will be the challenge for this new guy too no doubt, no matter how much better man city are on the pitch utd are the bigger team and the revenue will reflect that 

Being outside of the Champions League will hurt United eventually. No matter how good the people are in the office they won’t be able to complete for the top deals if United aren’t playing with the big boys 9 out of 10 seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Genie said:

Being outside of the Champions League will hurt United eventually. No matter how good the people are in the office they won’t be able to complete for the top deals if United aren’t playing with the big boys 9 out of 10 seasons.

Expect they are still playing with the big boys and will probably qualify for the CL at least 50% of the time which probably keeps them ticking over for the commercial deals. 

CL:

2 out 3 times in the last 3 years. 

3 out of 5 times in the last 5 years. 

5 out of 8 times in the last 8 years. 

Edited by ender4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ender4 said:

Expect they are still playing with the big boys and will probably qualify for the CL at least 50% of the time which probably keeps them ticking over for the commercial deals. 

CL:

2 out 3 times in the last 3 years. 

3 out of 5 times in the last 5 years. 

5 out of 8 times in the last 8 years. 

Yet they are in a dark place and have no heroes to cheer. 🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ender4 said:

Expect they are still playing with the big boys and will probably qualify for the CL at least 50% of the time which probably keeps them ticking over for the commercial deals. 

CL:

2 out 3 times in the last 3 years. 

3 out of 5 times in the last 5 years. 

5 out of 8 times in the last 8 years. 

IIRC correctly a few years back it was revealed that a lot of United’s sponsorship deals ratcheted down on consecutive years out of the CL. If they can get in every other year they might get away with it.

The problem is at this moment they seem further away than they have been.

City (unless sanctioned), Arsenal and Liverpool seem to be dead certs for spots. Then you have Villa, Spurs, West Ham, Newcastle sniffing around the last one if they can put an epic run together. Then Chelsea and United.

They aren’t considered an automatic “player” anymore, and it’ll be reflected in what sponsors will pay, even if they have the best in the business negotiating for them (I’ve no idea if the guy they hired is any good).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Villaphan04 said:

I don't like this move. Seems extremely sensible and they haven't done something like that in a while. 

Sensible?

They’ve hired someone linked with the biggest con in English football history, FROM THEIR RIVAL.

It’s impressively stupid.

Have you seen his old tweet hoping for a United loss?

It’ll back fire. They are a rich mans small heath.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or... They've hired a man from the management team of the most successful team in football... 

Personally I'm not convinced they've hired the right man but taking a guy from city's team does make sense, the cheating aside city are a team that are organised at the top and know exactly what they're doing, I'd say they're the most impressive management infrastructure outside of Bayern Munich 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea how we random plebs on a message board are supposed to know whether or not some C-suite type at Man City is a good appointment for Man Utd, and I'd suggest that voicing any opinion at all on it with any degree of confidence is just making noise. 

Time will tell, perhaps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I have no idea how we random plebs on a message board are supposed to know whether or not some C-suite type at Man City is a good appointment for Man Utd, and I'd suggest that voicing any opinion at all on it with any degree of confidence is just making noise. 

Time will tell, perhaps. 

Heres what we do know:

1) Hiring staff, management or players from your rivals is rarely a good idea. 

2) Hiring someone strongly associated with a regime of industrial scale cheating is probably not a brilliant idea. 

3)  The new CEO publicly tweeted in the past that he was hoping United were to lose a specific game. 

4) With United seemingly a bit of a mess and fans highly critical of the running of the club 1), 2) and 3) are looking like accidents waiting to happen

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Genie said:

Heres what we do know:

1) Hiring staff, management or players from your rivals is rarely a good idea. 

2) Hiring someone strongly associated with a regime of industrial scale cheating is probably not a brilliant idea. 

3)  The new CEO publicly tweeted in the past that he was hoping United were to lose a specific game. 

4) With United seemingly a bit of a mess and fans highly critical of the running of the club 1), 2) and 3) are looking like accidents waiting to happen

 

I don't know that about 1, and even if it is a general rule (which I'm not just accepting at face value as an assertion) there will be tons of exceptions, eg we had our best ever season for the women's team after hiring the manager from Blues. 2 is more plausible as an argument. 3 is surely rubbish; anyone who cares about a 12-year-old tweet needs their head looking at.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

3 is surely rubbish; anyone who cares about a 12-year-old tweet needs their head looking at.  

I know a few manure fans and their heads definitely need looking at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I don't know that about 1, and even if it is a general rule (which I'm not just accepting at face value as an assertion) there will be tons of exceptions, eg we had our best ever season for the women's team after hiring the manager from Blues. 2 is more plausible as an argument. 3 is surely rubbish; anyone who cares about a 12-year-old tweet needs their head looking at.  

Id agree with that

Him being ex city doesn't or shouldn't make much of a difference, city are an excellently ran club, the cheating it's impossible to tell if this guy has any involvement, I'd assume he's good at his job as city punch way above their weight with their legitimate sponsor deals 

My point would be that it's a diagonal move, his job title at utd is not his job title at city, he's been promoted from the commercial department, I'd liken it to Tom Fox and us

But all that said utd might be at a point now where they can't get worse... 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I don't know that about 1, and even if it is a general rule (which I'm not just accepting at face value as an assertion) there will be tons of exceptions, eg we had our best ever season for the women's team after hiring the manager from Blues. 2 is more plausible as an argument. 3 is surely rubbish; anyone who cares about a 12-year-old tweet needs their head looking at.  

1) There are definitely exceptions but it tends to be avoided for obvious reasons

2) It just makes no sense to hire anyone from that regime at this point in time.

3) What it is, is a stick go beat him/the Glazer/SJR with.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

the cheating it's impossible to tell if this guy has any involvement

 

7 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

his job title at utd is not his job title at city, he's been promoted

It’s a bit mental though isn’t it?

Someone from a club under investigation for massive cheating gets hired and promoted by that clubs rival.

He probably can’t believe his luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Genie said:

Sensible?

They’ve hired someone linked with the biggest con in English football history, FROM THEIR RIVAL.

It’s impressively stupid.

Have you seen his old tweet hoping for a United loss?

It’ll back fire. They are a rich mans small heath.

From what I've heard, he's turned down other PL clubs in the past as well as NFL teams. Read that he is seen as highly regarded in sport as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a chance Man United’s new CEO gets personally sanctioned for his part in City’s rule breaking?

Quote

Berrada, who joined City from Barcelona in 2011, served as the chief financial officer for eight years. He played a pivotal role in the club's significant commercial growth over the last 13 years and was an instrumental figure in helping City achieve record revenues in the previous year, which was also fuelled by Pep Guardiola's side winning the treble.

goal.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Genie said:

Is there a chance Man United’s new CEO gets personally sanctioned for his part in City’s rule breaking?

goal.com

I’d say a very good chance, almost nailed on. CFO knows all the dealings, its his or hers job. If my old CFO didn’t, I would’ve sacked him

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Follyfoot said:

I’d say a very good chance, almost nailed on. CFO knows all the dealings, its his or hers job. If my old CFO didn’t, I would’ve sacked him

This is what I thought, such a risky appointment from United.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â