Daft questions (football edition)

Following on from this:

 

http://www.football365.com/faves/7723089/What-s-Wrong-With-City-Buying-Success-

 

Do people have more of a problem with Citeh's spending rather than Man Utd because they feel Man Utd "generated" their own affluence?

Yes.

Feel free to correct me (no, really.. do!) but wasn't Man Utd's major cash influx from share floats (ie. investors) in the early 90s?

 

So the difference is one investor (Sheikh Mansour) compared to many investors (the share floats)?

I'm not going to pretend I know a great deal of that but wasn't it a case of a massive club making the most of financial avenues available from their self made success?

 

Compared to a bored, rich billionaire who wants a new toy and instantly makes the lucky club one of the very few who can bid enough/offer enough wages to get practically any player they want?

 

I might be completely wrong but that is my perception of the two clubs.

Feel free to correct me (no, really.. do!) but wasn't Man Utd's major cash influx from share floats (ie. investors) in the early 90s?

 

So the difference is one investor (Sheikh Mansour) compared to many investors (the share floats)?

can't you tell the difference between a share float and someone saying "heres a billion or two" ?

Feel free to correct me (no, really.. do!) but wasn't Man Utd's major cash influx from share floats (ie. investors) in the early 90s?

 

So the difference is one investor (Sheikh Mansour) compared to many investors (the share floats)?

can't you tell the difference between a share float and someone saying "heres a billion or two" ?

 

Other than the difference I've noted in the post you've quoted... no.

 

The tone of your response indicates I asked in the right thread at least.

Feel free to correct me (no, really.. do!) but wasn't Man Utd's major cash influx from share floats (ie. investors) in the early 90s?

 

So the difference is one investor (Sheikh Mansour) compared to many investors (the share floats)?

can't you tell the difference between a share float and someone saying "heres a billion or two" ?

 

Other than the difference I've noted in the post you've quoted... no.

 

The tone of your response indicates I asked in the right thread at least.

ones an investment which needs results to provide a return, ie shareholdes. the other isn't. did you ever play FM. was it better to earn it or did you feel like you were cheating when you used some of the cheats to get an advantage.

Feel free to correct me (no, really.. do!) but wasn't Man Utd's major cash influx from share floats (ie. investors) in the early 90s?

 

So the difference is one investor (Sheikh Mansour) compared to many investors (the share floats)?

can't you tell the difference between a share float and someone saying "heres a billion or two" ?

 

Other than the difference I've noted in the post you've quoted... no.

 

The tone of your response indicates I asked in the right thread at least.

ones an investment which needs results to provide a return, ie shareholdes. the other isn't. did you ever play FM. was it better to earn it or did you feel like you were cheating when you used some of the cheats to get an advantage.

 

Thanks.

 

If Man City go on to become the biggest club in the world, with the biggest revenue stream - that covers the expenditure - will it be considered to be an equally as valid investment strategy as the one Man Utd took, just over a longer term? Without knowing about the modern state of football club finances whether that is even possible (though I very much doubt it), it'd be interesting to know if people's perceptions would change if that happened.

 

Probably not, as Sheikh Mansour could afford the loss (if it went tits up) and afford to wait until such a day came to pass, whereas (presumably) the original purchasers of Man Utd's floated shares didn't have those two luxuries.

Feel free to correct me (no, really.. do!) but wasn't Man Utd's major cash influx from share floats (ie. investors) in the early 90s?

 

So the difference is one investor (Sheikh Mansour) compared to many investors (the share floats)?

can't you tell the difference between a share float and someone saying "heres a billion or two" ?

 

Other than the difference I've noted in the post you've quoted... no.

 

The tone of your response indicates I asked in the right thread at least.

ones an investment which needs results to provide a return, ie shareholdes. the other isn't. did you ever play FM. was it better to earn it or did you feel like you were cheating when you used some of the cheats to get an advantage.

 

Thanks.

 

If Man City go on to become the biggest club in the world, with the biggest revenue stream - that covers the expenditure - will it be considered to be an equally as valid investment strategy as the one Man Utd took, just over a longer term? Without knowing about the modern state of football club finances whether that is even possible (though I very much doubt it), it'd be interesting to know if people's perceptions would change if that happened.

 

Probably not, as Sheikh Mansour could afford the loss (if it went tits up) and afford to wait until such a day came to pass, whereas (presumably) the original purchasers of Man Utd's floated shares didn't have those two luxuries.

if man city were to go on to do that legitimatly then yes. even though they have had the biggest of helping hands. though as you say the risks arent the same.

Does anyone find managerial win % records interesting? For instance, according to Wiki, Sir Bobby's fantastic time in charge of us being a 46.66% and Souness' hell with 44.82%. Gullit's ill-fated spell in charge at 34.61% compared to Partyin' with Pardy a mere 8% higher win %. Obviously there's more to it than just % but it's just interesting that such a small % can cause such a stark contrast in managerial careers and how their time in charge is percieved.

 

Just me? Okay.

 

I don't think those managers' win % records have that much to do with how their tenures are perceived. It has more to do with their  personalities and the fans' expectations. There's clearly more than "2%" between fans memories of Sir Bobby's and Souness's times in charge and less than "10%" between Gullit and Souness. Should Pardew somehow leave this summer his period will be perceived better than Souness's since we've exceeded expectations, comfortably avoiding relegation his first 6 months and fighting for a CL place going into the final week of his second season.

I'm not sure win % record is a good way to evaluate a manager unless you're looking at a period when the manager has a settled 5+ season session in charge. It is interesting to note how many post-KK managers' careers have floundered after leaving us.

I think that about all managers win percentages. But as time goes on they all go down. It's hard to judge a manager just by win percentage if they were anywhere less than 18 months imo. I remember looking at MON's record first at sunderland and it was constantly high 60's for his first 10 games or so. Now look at it. Same with Dalglish and if Di Matteo gets the Chelsea job the same will happen to him.

Excuse me for not knowing the answer to these questions but hope someone can help anyway:

 

1. Does anyone know if the game is on UK television anywhere tomorrow?

2. How come Manchester City vs QPR is starting earlier than all the other matches?

 

 

Thatl be a mistake about man city

Sam Jacks will have the match I imagine? Whether that tickles your fancy is another matter

It's just the coverage of the Man City match which is starting at 2pm. I assume the Man United coverage is raw match only.

Cheers. Looked to me like Citeh match coverage starts at 2, but Manure starts at 3... Doesn't take much to confuse me admittedly.

 

wonder what they'd do if one game was postponed, waterlogged pitch etc ? call them all off ?

usually do that on final day, do the build up on one channel but show the 2nd match on another channel

I feel I am in the correct thread to ask this shit question, it's daft etc, what happens if say the Man United V Mackems game is called off tomorrow due to too many quaver packets on the pitch/waterlogged/other excuses.

 

Very unlikely, I know.

I feel I am in the correct thread to ask this s*** question, it's daft etc, what happens if say the Man United V Mackems game is called off tomorrow due to too many quaver packets on the pitch/waterlogged/other excuses.

 

Very unlikely, I know.

well i'm awaiting an answer to a similar TWO FUCKING POSTS ABOVE!!!!

just wondering what would happen if a game on the last day of the season if postponed for whatever reason, waterlogged pitch perhaps? anybody know?

I'd imagine they'd replay it during the middle of the week or whenever they could. Only similar case would have been the Liverpool Arsenal title decider in 89 when they played it after the FA cup final

I'd imagine they'd replay it during the middle of the week or whenever they could. Only similar case would have been the Liverpool Arsenal title decider in 89 when they played it after the FA cup final

they were playing each other though.

I feel I am in the correct thread to ask this s*** question, it's daft etc, what happens if say the Man United V Mackems game is called off tomorrow due to too many quaver packets on the pitch/waterlogged/other excuses.

 

Very unlikely, I know.

well i'm awaiting an answer to a similar TWO f***ing POSTS ABOVE!!!!

 

Wouldn't of thought anyone would ask this question, hence why I went straight to quick reply and clicked post

 

Let's just wait and see who responds, it looks like Steggy is also in the same boat, proving a popular question.