The Lemon Fool

flyer61 wrote:Off to watch City play in the CL tonight. Chairmans hospitality package....my kids (all reds) tell me this would cost 5 or 6 times more at United and would all be sold out well in advance.

Man U is indeed a very valuable brand as to the football team that is another matter!

True. City is the extreme example of a team outperforming their brand. The brand is that of a second tier club, the success on the field has been bought. While ManU is a great brand now, it will decay if they have a number of years of mid table finishes.

Spet0789 wrote:

flyer61 wrote:Off to watch City play in the CL tonight. Chairmans hospitality package....my kids (all reds) tell me this would cost 5 or 6 times more at United and would all be sold out well in advance.

Man U is indeed a very valuable brand as to the football team that is another matter!

True. City is the extreme example of a team outperforming their brand. The brand is that of a second tier club, the success on the field has been bought. While ManU is a great brand now, it will decay if they have a number of years of mid table finishes.

I think this is unfair on City. Despite all their money, the main reason they have outstripped United for the past several years is because their recruitment has been a million times better. Not only player recruitment, but they also have the best football manager in the world by a country mile. The people running the football side at City (Begiristan and Soriano) are second to none IMHO. Other teams such as Brentford and Brighton are now showing United what happens if you recruit properly rather than spending big money on overrated players.

And as far as selling the club, you need to be careful what you wish for. You only have to see how what was previously Team Sky Cycling has gone downhill since it was taken over by Ineos - they simply don't compete for the best riders any more. So, a buyout by Radcliffe is not the answer, no matter how awful the Glazers are. I feel some sense of sympathy for United fans, but at the same time there is this sense of entitlement (as espoused every week on Sky by Neville and Keane) which disgusts me!

simoan wrote:

Spet0789 wrote:
True. City is the extreme example of a team outperforming their brand. The brand is that of a second tier club, the success on the field has been bought. While ManU is a great brand now, it will decay if they have a number of years of mid table finishes.

I think this is unfair on City. Despite all their money, the main reason they have outstripped United for the past several years is because their recruitment has been a million times better. Not only player recruitment, but they also have the best football manager in the world by a country mile. The people running the football side at City (Begiristan and Soriano) are second to none IMHO. Other teams such as Brentford and Brighton are now showing United what happens if you recruit properly rather than spending big money on overrated players.

And as far as selling the club, you need to be careful what you wish for. You only have to see how what was previously Team Sky Cycling has gone downhill since it was taken over by Ineos - they simply don't compete for the best riders any more. So, a buyout by Radcliffe is not the answer, no matter how awful the Glazers are. I feel some sense of sympathy for United fans, but at the same time there is this sense of entitlement (as espoused every week on Sky by Neville and Keane) which disgusts me!

I agree that Guardiola is a great manager and City have bought well, but without the money-doping to prime the pump none of that would have been possible.

If the Qataris had bought say West Ham, they’d be able to attract the best managerial and playing talent.

Personally, I feel no sympathy for ManU fans whatsoever. If below the age of 50, they’re most likely glory chasers who have backed the wrong horse.

City were impressive. 1-11 all excellent footballers. Hospitality package was very good. First time I have been to their ground. Lots of works going on outside to improve the infrastructure. Manchester has a lot to thank Abu Dhabi for.

However, little real atmosphere, United in full cry is a completely different beast. However from a footballing point of view United have a difficult season in prospect even without mentioning the balance sheet....

I bought back in earlier today, though on a much smaller scale (roughly 7% of the number of shares that I originally bought just before starting this thread). It's a punt sized stake rather than the kitchen sink sized investment I made last November (I don't have anything like the level of confidence I had back then).

My reason for buying back in is somewhat paradoxical at first glance. It's because the team's performance this season has been poor, well below the expected level particularly given last season's third place finish. This is causing all sorts of grievances to come to the surface and when combined with the club's well publicised off the field troubles with several players (Greenwood, Antony and Sancho), this is giving me a bit of a "buy when there's blood on the streets" vibe.

If you look on American investment websites, you may have seen that some posters try to justify the share price by treating at it as a conventional operating company. It isn't (it's seriously overvalued on that basis). It's a trophy asset which can't make much of a profit because of the nature of its business and the competition (in particular the financially doped clubs like PSG, Newcastle and Citeh). The only way to justify those valuations is if we see a no relegation Premier League (with some form of salary cap), a European super league and clubs selling some of their broadcast/streaming rights individually.

There will be fierce resistance to all of these changes, not just from fans of most clubs but also politicians and media companies who have substantial broadcast contracts with the league (it was no surprise that Sky Sports was incredibly hostile towards the European Super League). I reckon that a no relegation Premier League is on the cards given that there continues to be a steady increase in the number of clubs that are owned by Americans. 14 out of 20 is what's needed to vote through such a change.

EDITED - only to correct spelling mistakes

SalvorHardin wrote: I reckon that a no relegation Premier League is on the cards given that there continues to be a steady increase in the number of clubs that are owned by Americans. 14 out of 20 is what's needed to vote through such a change.

I honestly can’t ever see this happening. It’s no better than what the ESL was proposing. UEFA and FIFA, as well as UK Government would never allow it. Good luck with the investment though. Americans don’t always get what they want!

All the best, Si

SalvorHardin wrote: 14 out of 20 is what's needed to vote through such a change.

Yes but implementing that proposed change is a whole different thing. You will get political kick back, and with an independent regulator scrutinising football sustainability only the passing of a white paper away, it strikes me as unlikely. The terms of reference of the regulator - and the definition of sustainability - won't be about how 20 teams survive indefinitely.

Salvor, what a good thread this has been. You have clearly explained your reasons for buying, holding, selling and buying again. Full credit to you. I wish my investment mind worked this way but it doesn’t or maybe I haven’t trusted it too.

I haven’t piggy backed because this isn’t the kind of investment I am looking for (or maybe again have the confidence to invest in) but I have enjoyed reading these posts and learning something along the way.

As a supporter of a side outside the premiership I am against a no relegation premiership. It works in America because in any given year the worst teams get the best picks in the draft. I am bored of a few teams winning every year in European soccer.

Pendrainllwyn

Just to close this out, I sold the few shares I bought back on Friday. A combination of being seriously ticked off with the spectacular corporate mismanagement, plus wanting to free up some cash to invest elsewhere. After one year of rampant speculation over a possible sale the company has still not made any official announcement.

Reinvestment was into Sphere Entertainment, the company which owns the Las Vegas Sphere which you may have seen on the news or social media.

I might do a write up sometime, though given that I am cutting back on my online time it's unlikely as other sites take priority. There is good coverage of Sphere Entertainment on Seeking Alpha.