Put it this way, our record signing was 6m on Robbie Fowler that season ... Which is another story for another day.
I think the point is that any money United have spent has been generated by their own income which came from previous success. It is like a guy who built a big successful business from scratch , building on it year on year and ploughing the profits back into the business to grow it, and compare that to someone whose dad just bought it for him because he was rich.
If you like parodies does that then mean that great films deserve no credit because they have been independently financed by a producer.
I don't see the analogy there at all. Are you talking about a film made by a multi millionaire because they just can, or an independent film made on a shoestring by a talented producer ? which do you think sounds most like City ?
Producers finance films in the early stages, if the film is good enough it will go on to make a lot of money and be successful.
The producer doesn't necessarily interfer with how the film is made, that's the role of the director and the actors, but they ensure that the film stays on track with the initial goal.
Without the producer kick starting the whole process with a financial injection the film wouldn't happen, and the world would be deprived of something beautiful.
Sign in if you want to comment
some laughable facts
Page 3 of 3
posted on 27/12/11
Put it this way, our record signing was 6m on Robbie Fowler that season ... Which is another story for another day.
posted on 27/12/11
I think the point is that any money United have spent has been generated by their own income which came from previous success. It is like a guy who built a big successful business from scratch , building on it year on year and ploughing the profits back into the business to grow it, and compare that to someone whose dad just bought it for him because he was rich.
posted on 27/12/11
If you like parodies does that then mean that great films deserve no credit because they have been independently financed by a producer.
posted on 27/12/11
I don't see the analogy there at all. Are you talking about a film made by a multi millionaire because they just can, or an independent film made on a shoestring by a talented producer ? which do you think sounds most like City ?
posted on 27/12/11
Producers finance films in the early stages, if the film is good enough it will go on to make a lot of money and be successful.
The producer doesn't necessarily interfer with how the film is made, that's the role of the director and the actors, but they ensure that the film stays on track with the initial goal.
Without the producer kick starting the whole process with a financial injection the film wouldn't happen, and the world would be deprived of something beautiful.
Page 3 of 3