Citeh Rename Stadium

[Kostas 1,468]

They are not jealous. This deal is one of the most immoral things in football business history.

Not because they renamed the stadium, football is business and money, but when you talk about business this deal is immoral.

Can those two even be used in the same sentence?

I'm pretty sure I rep'ed a post of yours during the last few weeks where you wrote about market and freedom.

[Guest justin_3d]

Can those two even be used in the same sentence?

I'm pretty sure I rep'ed a post of yours during the last few weeks where you wrote about market and freedom.

He did.

He was all about market freedom. And that UEFA is doing it wrong.

I think Henrique is just jealous like Arsanal and Liverpool cause City got an uber deal and we did not.

[Kostas 1,468]

He did.

He was all about market freedom. And that UEFA is doing it wrong.

I think Henrique is just jealous like Arsanal and Liverpool cause City got an uber deal and we did not.

That sounds unlike him. The principle of that post was absolutely spot-on.

[Henrique 9,133]

He did.

He was all about market freedom. And that UEFA is doing it wrong.

I think Henrique is just jealous like Arsanal and Liverpool cause City got an uber deal and we did not.

Free market doesnt mean you should allow this kind of stupid deal under a regulation.

If there is a fair play rule, then you cant allow this kind of deal, or the rule wont make any sense.

Thats why this is stupid and immoral. Not because of the money, but because its to avoid getting the axe under a rule.

Im not discussing if the rule is necessarily. For me football is business and you should allow clubs to spend as much as they want, as long as it doesnt mean destroying the sport. Buying Torres for 50m wont destroy football.

But now there is a rule, so UEFA must take some actions, if not City would be allowed to spend big every year and other clubs wont, not because City is doing a good job, but because the stupid sheiks are making this kind of artificial deal to "fool" the rule.

If there was not any rule, so city could make 1 billion deal and I would not care, but this deal is only to cheat the rule and cheat other clubs that are trying to get into the regulations.

[Guest justin_3d]

Free market doesnt mean you should allow this kind of stupid deal under a regulation.

If there is a fair play rule, then you cant allow this kind of deal, or the rule wont make any sense.

Thats why this is stupid and immoral. Not because of the money, but because its to avoid getting the axe under a rule.

Im not discussing if the rule is necessarily. For me football is business and you should allow clubs to spend as much as they want, as long as it doesnt mean destroying the sport. Buying Torres for 50m wont destroy football.

But now there is a rule, so UEFA must take some actions, if not City would be allowed to spend big every year and other clubs wont, not because city is doing a good job, but because the stupid sheiks are making this kind of artificial dee to "fool" the rule.

If there was not any rule, so city could make 1 billion deal and I would not care, but this deal is only to cheat the rule and cheat other clubs that are trying to get into the regulations.

But I keep saying Arsanal did the same and nobody said anything.

[Henrique 9,133]

But I keep saying Arsanal did the same and nobody said anything.

No. Many clubs sell the right names.

Its not wrong. What is wrong is the artificial deals to cheat a rule. This is what Im saying. Arsanal deal with Emirates has nothing to do with the City cheating.

[Guest justin_3d]

No. Many clubs sell the right names.

Its not wrong. What is wrong is the artificial deals to cheat a rule. This is what Im saying. Arsanal deal with Emirates has nothing to do with the City cheating.

Yeah but the idea came from there, and Chelsea been wanting to do it.

So because City does it it's cheating???

More jealousy there.

[Henrique 9,133]

Yeah but the idea came from there, and Chelsea been wanting to do it.

So because City does it it's cheating???

More jealousy there.

Jesus, you wont give up. lol

You dont know what you are talking about.

[Guest justin_3d]

Jesus, you wont give up. lol

You dont know what you are talking about.

No because it just seems jealousy from people that City got an uber deal and they did not.

[Domino- 116]

As I rose and fell in my eyes

[LDN Blue 7,903]

Ian Ayre questions Manchester City naming rights deal

Quoted by the Independent on the club's pre-season tour of Asia, he said: "Is Etihad, Manchester City and Sheikh Mansour a related party? If they are, then it's up to UEFA to rule on them.

"When I spoke at Soccerex earlier this year, I was on a panel about financial fair play. The guys from UEFA who are managing it said there would be a robust and proper process about related-party transactions.''

Of the stadium name change, he added: "It hasn't happened anywhere in Europe where a football club has renamed its existing stadium and it's had real value.

"It was called the City of Manchester Stadium or Eastlands for the last nine years and now it's going to be called something else - and someone has attached a huge amount of value to that.

"I find that odd because there is no benchmark in football that says you can rename your stadium and generate that amount of value. Mike Ashley tried it at Newcastle [sportsdirect.com@St James' Park]. But nobody calls it that and it doesn't have that kind of value.''

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/934961/liverpool%27s-ian-ayre-questions-man-city-stadium-naming-rights-deal?cc=5739

[Guest justin_3d]

City reveal expansion plans

http://uk.eurosport....sion-plans.html

Really good stuff from City.

This is what UEFA likes.

Smart from City.

Ian Ayre questions Manchester City naming rights deal

http://soccernet.esp...ts-deal?cc=5739

Sour grapes!

[True_Blue 469]

Tradition has no money value,it is selling out your history i would be crushed if we ever changed our stadium name.

[Guest justin_3d]

Tradition has no money value,it is selling out your history i would be crushed if we ever changed our stadium name.

And that is why if team cant do that because of tradition, then just hate on somebody that can.

Sour grapes as i said.

[middleoftheshed 388]

Tradition has no money value,it is selling out your history i would be crushed if we ever changed our stadium name.

I agree but its not really the case here. They have only played there since 2003 so theres not much history there anyway, would be a different story if it was Maine Road.

[True_Blue 469]

And that is why if team cant do that because of tradition, then just hate on somebody that can.

Sour grapes as i said.

I don't hate them because of it,as a matter of fact i don't give a shit what the call it.They can call it the Mickey Mouse World is you ask me.But i am against changing our stadium name.

[Guest justin_3d]

I don't hate them because of it,as a matter of fact i don't give a shit what the call it.They can call it the Mickey Mouse World is you ask me.But i am against changing our stadium name.

Yeah, but i was referring to the teams complaining about it.

It's harder for them to get such deal, and because of that they are crying over it.

I would sure like it if Chelsea got a deal like that, but Stamford Bridge has so many memories, that it's not good to change it.

The only way I would see it, is if Chelsea builds a new stadium and then have somebody pay for that naming rights.

[True_Blue 469]

Yeah, but i was referring to the teams complaining about it.

It's harder for them to get such deal, and because of that they are crying over it.

I would sure like it if Chelsea got a deal like that, but Stamford Bridge has so many memories, that it's not good to change it.

The only way I would see it, is if Chelsea builds a new stadium and then have somebody pay for that naming rights.

We can build a new stadium and still remain with the same name,somehow having the name Samsung or something similar just ruins the feeling.

Arsenal's ''Emirates'' makes e sick.