And if sugar daddy's hadn't come along, what would that percentage increase over the same period be?

The answer: exactly the same.
.......................................

Clearly not, if you don't think that two separate sugar daddies coming into the premier league and between them spending almost a billion pounds net on just transfers hasn't affected inflation at all then you do not understand inflation.

I don't think anybody is trying to claim there would be no inflation in football without the sugar daddy clubs but if you look at their time in football and try to claim they didn't help push inflation much faster than it would have without them you are clearly talking rubbish.

"I don't think anybody is trying to claim there would be no inflation in football without the sugar daddy clubs but if you look at their time in football and try to claim they didn't help push inflation much faster than it would have without them you are clearly talking rubbish."

Ok, so you think that ticket prices, the average transfer fee and average wage rose quicker after Abramovich joined Chelsea? Sorry, but that is wrong. The rises before then in the nineties were proportionately far bigger. If you compare it to the last four years since we were took over, then it is by even more.

Ok, so you think that ticket prices, the average transfer fee and average wage rose quicker after Abramovich joined Chelsea? Sorry, but that is wrong. The rises before then in the nineties were proportionately far bigger. If you compare it to the last four years since we were took over, then it is by even more.
...................................



So because inflation has slowed the sugar daddy clubs have not caused inflation?

Is that really what you are saying?

Please tell me your thinking is deeper than inflation in football as a whole has grown at a slower rate than previously so that must mean that even though only 2 clubs have spent nearly a billion pounds between them (NET!) that they have had no affect on inflation despite the fact their net spend makes up a decent percentage of the net spend across Europe in this period.

I can explain this to you but it is painfully simple and I will be disappointed you could not figure it out yourself.

No,I thought you were comparing to the rate of inflation before they were around rather than a what if, I misread what you put. I think you probably knew that I had done that anyway, but if it's going to turn into a condescending debate, then I'll leave you to it.

In fairness I did genuinely think that was the point you were pushing... I reserve the right to get a little exasperated should people make silly points.

I also reserve the right too apologise if my exasperation was caused by a misunderstanding

Good man

...and City are in that 1% if you like it or not

are they balls

Incredibly biased piece.

It starts:

"United couldn’t beat City on the pitch or in the title race last season, so it seems they have hatched a dastardly plot to undermine them off the field."

Sounds bitter to me! They have conveniently skipped Man Utd 3-2 win obver City this season and the fact that Man Utd are leading the PL!

The rags just love the bitter word
It's funny as that's how they come across

We did beat them on the pitch last season, not in the PL but we did.

"United couldn’t beat City on the pitch or in the title race last season, so it seems they have hatched a dastardly plot to undermine them off the field."


Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)

Dress it up how you like - that is a pretty pathetic piece of journalism.

comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
posted 5 minutes ago
The rags just love the bitter word
It's funny as that's how they come across
====

No Paul, that's you. You guys win a title and you talk about Utd, you sign a player, you talk about Utd. You hate Utd so much that you sold your soul to just be able to compete with Utd.

You called Utd evil for developing a business, now you are all talking about a business plan.

Hypocritical bitter blues

My 2p's worth....

First of all, the article is one of the worst pieces of 'journalism' I have ever read.

However, my opinion on this type of thing is that as a UTD fan, I and all of us, have been very fortunate to see so e of the worlds best players and compete for the best trophies on a regular basis.

The problem that almost every other club has is that now, it is almost impossible to break into the top 4, let alone compete for the CL or prem.

What happened with City, from their view, needed to happen for this to ever be something more than a pipe dream. They were always going to need a large and immediate injection to compete. Doing it 'the right way' would either take years upon years and possibly see them left further and further behind or just never happen at all.

I don't see their owners as some sugar daddy who will get bored or run out of steam. Like it or not, they obviously have a long term plan and objectives which several years down the line, has a good chance of coming to fruition.

In this respect, I have respect for their owners. Does it make things harder for us? Of course but that's life and we need to step up and take that challenge.

I just can't see how any club in English football will ever have a hope of even competing, let alone winning, unless it is done in this way. It is easy for us to sit back and judge it as wrong because we are in a very good position but as long as the owner has the right intentions and backing to pull it off, I don't have an issue with it.

If it goes wrong, then on their head be it but if it doesn't, fair play and bring it on I say!!

comment by RipleysCat (U1862)


posted 14 hours, 5 minutes ago

We've seen a 1000% increase in transfer fees in the PL era

-----------------

And if sugar daddy's hadn't come along, what would that percentage increase over the same period be?

The answer: exactly the same.

Don't believe me? Then posit your "argument" in another period, any period, one of your own choosing, evaluate the facts, and then get back to me.
____________________

No.

How about you read the rest of my comments instead. Then you might understand my point without fixating on one sentence as you clearly don't have a valid argument to address anything else that I said.

The feel free to come back to me with an ""argument"" of your own if you are capable.

Redrach

comment by Siempre Rojo aka tenemos diecinueve (U1560)


posted 15 hours, 32 minutes ago

Melton it really isn't about morality or stopping wage inflation, or protecting the small clubs it is all about maintaining the status quo. It is about keeping the big clubs big and successful. And it will work.
__________________

Sorry but that's a crock of sht. If that was the case then why are all the SMALL clubs in favour? Are they all just thick or something?



"comment by Boris "Inky" Gibson (U5901)
posted 15 hours, 7 minutes ago

My whole point throughout this thread is that with sugardaddies there is no upper limit.

So what?"
___________________

And there you have it in a nutshell - the Manchester City fan's view of the game.

"so what"

comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
posted 5 minutes ago
The rags just love the bitter word
It's funny as that's how they come across
====

No Paul, that's you. You guys win a title and you talk about Utd, you sign a player, you talk about Utd. You hate Utd so much that you sold your soul to just be able to compete with Utd.

You called Utd evil for developing a business, now you are all talking about a business plan.

Hypocritical bitter blues


Seeing as Utd are our main rivals I suspect sometimes they will be a topic of conversation as you would expect.
Is that bitterness?
The rest of your rant is puerile nonsense and as I said just comes across as being a bit bitter yourself.
Did Utd choking last year cause you many tears?
It's funny how Utd supporters like to call us bitter at any opportunity when we have nothing to be bitter about and like to say the scousers are easily offended never ashamed when again that is much more true of Utd supporters than Liverpool
Or have I been bitter again by offering an alternative view?

why not just have a wage cap at 70 mil

comment by Paulpowersleftfoot (U1037)
_______________

You might do well to remember that this whole thread was started by a City fan who chose to have a dig at United for supporting FFP whn the fact is that the majority are in support of FFP.

You' also do well to acknowledge that the OP linked an article written by a bitter blue, the sole purpose of whcih was to have a pop at United as though the whole point of FFP is solely to benefit United.

United being a "topic of conversation" is one thing but trying to make out that United are the only supoprters of FFP worldwide, and that the only reason we care is that we are jealous of City, and then coming onto the United board to print this drivel, smacks of petty bitterness among your fans.

I've never even been on the City Board. Not once in my life. I've seen you here plenty of times though...

"Or have I been bitter again by offering an alternative view?"
_______________

I missed this comment. No, you are being bitter by offering the cookie-cutter, stereotypical bitter blue view.

A "different" view would indeed be welcome from a City fan. Yet to see one though.

"whn the fact is that the majority are in support of FFP."

??

really?

I've offered one numerous times misty, the problem is that neither side seems willing to see the other point of view, instead these threads always go the same way, where hypocrisy runs rife throughout the whole of it.

No side is any worse than the other at it in my opinion though, and that won't ever change unless people recognise failings in their own club.

It's hard to tell who the most bitter fans in football are these days but at least Arsenal and United narrow the field down to 2.

melton, you have offered by far the most sensible comments from any City fan on this thread. By a considerable distance.

As I believe you noted earlier, if City fans wanted a sensible debate on the subject then do you think the original article was the best way to achieve that?

You don't slap a bloke in the face and then wonder why he knocks you on your arris for it....

And this isn't about "club failings", this debate is about what the rules of the game should be. Rules affect all clubs but the prevailing City view is that United are trying to create rules that only suit United.

Do you honestly expect United fans to agree with that sht? One of your lot earlier was even coming out with stuff like "why not just give United all the trophies in August" FFS.

Come on....are you honestly telling me that doesn't sound bitter?

No, it's realistic.