Would you want your team to be Man City style rich?

No. Ahly is already one of the top teams in Africa and in good financial strength. The ability to buy anyone we want isn't going to make much of a difference. The same could be said about Barcelona.

yes, fuck all yall.

Only to build us a nice stadium within the city limits. The money would be useless otherwise to build a squad.

i know a few man utd fans here who would love it

not me personally

ViVaRooney wrote:i know a few man utd fans here who would love it

not me personally

Then we could get Aguero and Lahm instead of shit players like Ashley Young.




But seriously, if I had a choice between our situation now and City's financially, I'd definitely go for theirs, not too bothered about being super rich but if we were I wouldn't want us to spend it like City.

IIBentII39 wrote:Would you really want to be known as the team who bought success though?

Meh, every winner buys success so end of the day unless you're content with not having success then you might as well be filthy rich.

In one condition, we could afford to keep it going for a very long time. i.e. 100 years.

Lux wrote:

IIBentII39 wrote:Would you really want to be known as the team who bought success though?

Meh, every winner buys success so end of the day unless you're content with not having success then you might as well be filthy rich.

I know this doesn't really count. But Celtic spent about £20million between last and this season, and they haven't won the title for 3 years, compared to our £2million in 2 years.

I believe in things such as good team spirit etc is more important, because undoubtedly Celtic have some better players. But we continue to be ahead of them.

I'd take it. But would want us to keep our current business model in place (wage restrictions and such) and not go on a bender buying a shit load of players like City have done.

I'd like it more for the fact if we needed to buy a striker, we could go out and get one, rather then be in the situation we are now were we need to shift a few players 1st.

Plus we could get our new stadium with it

Obviously yes.

In one way yes because we could get the big stars like Hazard, Gotze etc but in another way no because I don't like it when teams buy success.

ViVaRooney wrote:i know a few man utd fans here who would love it

not me personally

Like who? It wouldn't make any difference, even when we were the richest club in the world, we never spent like it.

Sammys_Tekkers wrote:It would be nice, but I'd miss a few things.

-Seeing players break through regularly and hoping for others to, eg Ferguson, Sammy, Vuckic etc.

Do you mean players like Charles Hart (and yes, his name is Charles, not "Joe") and Micah Richards?

Oh shit it is

Why he change his name?

Didn't they get Hart from Shrewsbury?

Point wrote:Oh shit it is

Why he change his name?

Because he's a prick.

Cam wrote:Didn't they get Hart from Shrewsbury?

Yes, as a teenager though. I'd say it still counts.

Yes, I'd love it...as someone has mentioned the only succesful clubs these days seem to have a ridicoulously large financial backing.

I would like a rich owner,him making good signings,but not man city style.They have crossed the line.

Potato-7 wrote:I would like a rich owner,him making good signings,but not man city style.They have crossed the line.

Yeah, I bet you would be devastated if someone came in and made your club one if the best in Europe.

ResurrectionRooney wrote:

Potato-7 wrote:I would like a rich owner,him making good signings,but not man city style.They have crossed the line.

Yeah, I bet you would be devastated if someone came in and made your club one if the best in Europe.

I wouldnt be devestated.I would be very happy.I just dont think it would be fair for the others if an arab started spending hundrends of millions in signings,while other clubs in greece can barely spend 2 million and greece is steadily going bunkrupt.

Jelavic9|RFC wrote:In one condition, we could afford to keep it going for a very long time. i.e. 100 years.

You are going to keep your owner's money even after he dies?

What scum.

Anyone who says no are kidding themselves. Major investment in the youth academy, major investment in stadium, better conditions for fans, a much stronger brand, more entertaining football and some of the best players on the planet playing for your club. And you would turn all of that down because "we don't want to buy success".

Please.

Potato-7 wrote:

ResurrectionRooney wrote:Yeah, I bet you would be devastated if someone came in and made your club one if the best in Europe.

I wouldnt be devestated.I would be very happy.I just dont think it would be fair for the others if an arab started spending hundrends of millions in signings,while other clubs in greece can barely spend 2 million and greece is steadily going bunkrupt.

Major sports brand = increased revenue stream and tax payments in Greece = better economical conditions. No matter how you turn it around having a financially strong business in your country is only good for your country, never bad.

Yes because we are the complete opposite to them at the moment...we have no money at all

Scuba Steve wrote:Only to build us a nice stadium within the city limits. The money would be useless otherwise to build a squad.

Fucking Salary Cap. What is it this year, $3.6M?

Downtown stadium, marketing, a couple world class players and then we sit on the cash. Its what our owners do anyway.

Laurencio wrote:Anyone who says no are kidding themselves. Major investment in the youth academy, major investment in stadium, better conditions for fans, a much stronger brand, more entertaining football and some of the best players on the planet playing for your club. And you would turn all of that down because "we don't want to buy success".

Please.

What if your club is already a top club in their respective country/continent? The excessive spending and possibility of huge debts is not worth a slight gain.

Yes, if the man who controlled it was Daniel Levy. The man is a genius with money, with our wage structure it stops us from going overboard and saves money. Plus, at least for the summer just gone, we made more money than we spent. If we had the amount City have then I would like someone I had trust in to use it. Kind of like Crawley, with the board there they are wise when it comes to finances and sponsorship deals etc.

ahlycotc wrote:

Laurencio wrote:Anyone who says no are kidding themselves. Major investment in the youth academy, major investment in stadium, better conditions for fans, a much stronger brand, more entertaining football and some of the best players on the planet playing for your club. And you would turn all of that down because "we don't want to buy success".

Please.

What if your club is already a top club in their respective country/continent? The excessive spending and possibility of huge debts is not worth a slight gain.

Excessive spending and huge debts is obviously things you would want to avoid at any club. However, if you look at the actions taken by Sheik Mansour it is obvious that he has no intention of letting the club down with debts.

Excessive spending is maybe a problem, although in all honesty I don't think they have realy overpaid for anyone, except for maybe having a wage level bordering on insanity. Most of the time their actions have only helped the club, they invested heavily in the youth system, have invested a great deal in player material, massively improved their marketing, and although spending a little "over the top" they have mostly invested money which will only help the club long term.

I honestly wouldn't mind owners like that, sure as hell beats what we have now