It's not though is it. You only have to look at the state of the economy in general that by throwing more money at a problem makes for disaterous results. It leads to hyperinflation and you can see evidence of this forming in the transfer market today. Look at the Moura deal to PSG he is reported to be on a 3million a year contract for a 19yo who is unproven is european football. The more sugar daddys the more problems created. Guaranteed.As I mentioned the only way to really bridge this club is to throw money at teams. Its not that Ambramovich demanded success fast. He realised its the easiest and surest way to bridge the gap.
Your forgetting the fact that the club built up this fan base over many decades and this is what we have to show for it, the only reason we are the only club left out of the original trio of Liverpool arsenal and united is that we as a club have not been completly crippled by money problems as Liverpool were or poor form. We have stability in the core management at united which have let us have the large fan base that you have a problem with. Point is we built it. Sugar daddy clubs have bought it. like the old saying money earned is a lot sweeter than money gained.How is it fair that the sort of Brand Appeal Manchester United enjoy and the commercial revenues they bring in will never be achieved by other clubs no matter how hard they try?
It's not though is it. You only have to look at the state of the economy in general that by throwing more money at a problem makes for disaterous results. It leads to hyperinflation and you can see evidence of this forming in the transfer market today. Look at the Moura deal to PSG he is reported to be on a 3million a year contract for a 19yo who is unproven is european football. The more sugar daddys the more problems created. Guaranteed.
Your forgetting the fact that the club built up this fan base over many decades and this is what we have to show for it, the only reason we are the only club left out of the original trio of Liverpool arsenal and united is that we as a club have not been completly crippled by money problems as Liverpool were or poor form. We have stability in the core management at united which have let us have the large fan base that you have a problem with. Point is we built it. Sugar daddy clubs have bought it. like the old saying money earned is a lot sweeter than money gained.
We have it because we are successful. Let's take Anzhi for example. They achieved nothing, they have ****** fanbase, but they can spend more then us.
I forgot nothing, you simply are strengthening my point that the league was competitive before the sugar daddies came along. You didn't have those revenues because of mismanagement at the top and lack of a visionary chairman or business model being put in place, of course winning league titles helps but you simply just pointed out City and Chelsea's failing's by saying that Liverpool and Arsenal had global fanbases and presence which they had to achieve through normal marketing roots. They're not benefits, what your club has is a benefit, what those two have is a culture and history and business plans that worked for them when the PL showed up in the 90's.
A team that you could point to quite well is Tottenham who have quietly plugged away at the business side of football and are now (That they managed to get a decent manager to manage their young stars) looking like CL probables every season, they have sat in Arsenal's shadow for years yet they still make good money and get good players and challenge, Sugar daddies are not always the answer to bridging that gap, sometimes you just need the combination of a good manager and chairman to do it!.
I completely disagree with what you have said. Your saying that having a visionary chairman and a effective business model will help any club reach the dominace Man Utd/Liverpool have in the commercial market eventually. Yes it does help but don't tell me that Arsenal/Man Utd have the sort of commercial dominance they do solely because they managed themselves well when the EPL was born.
In time, yes. To say a club can't rise to the top without a sugar daddy is just defeatist, it's just not a short term process. Any business in the free market can eventually make it to the top, provided they have the fundamentals, the same is true for football, IMO.
Not saying a club cannot rise to the top without a sugar daddy. However having one is the quickest and most effective way to do so... Other ways as you suggested which relies on fundamentals and a sound business strategy does take long and you need smart/effective people at the top along with some luck.
Do I sound bitter ? No. And I'm not. How are they going to close the gap ?So your always going to be bitter whenever another club wants to bridge the gap and finds that being backed by a sugar daddy is the quickest and most effective way to do so completely ignoring the fact that you are guilty of rising up the same way yourself?
I'd argue that Ferguson is the much bigger reason for our continued success. Yes, he's had the money, but no other man has achieved his level of success, money or not. Plenty of teams have had money achieved a little and failed or been inconsistent.
I completely disagree with what you have said. Your saying that having a visionary chairman and a effective business model will help any club reach the dominace Man Utd/Liverpool have in the commercial market eventually. Yes it does help but don't tell me that Arsenal/Man Utd have the sort of commercial dominance they do solely because they managed themselves well when the EPL was born.
Do I sound bitter ? No. And I'm not. How are they going to close the gap ?
One way is throwing money like some clubs do.
Other way is to patient. Bilbao style.
I'm not saying that we are not spending money. We are. But the club made that money. Not some oil guru. Do you understand that ? We are spending money we earned. Anzhi i.e can spend the same amount, maybe even more, but they didn't earn a penny. How the **** is that fair ? You're saying that fair because it's the only thing they can do to close the gap ? Wrong! Smart financial and transfer politic is way better, but slower.
Yea definitely nobody is denying that Ferguson has been a huge part of the reason for your continued dominace of the top. But nobody would deny that with having a lot of money, any club can achieve a reasonable amount of success. If you have a manager like Ferguson, you can even do better.
Point is that money is an integral part for any club who wishes to remain at the top for a extended period of time. Yes you can always have 'dream' seasons like Montpellier just had but I would bet my cajones that Montpellier will not be winning the League title next season
I believe a lot of people care about clubs who have been given money, in the same way someone who wins the lottery, people don't care about them - just a little bit jealous. Whereas someone who's a selfmade millionaire, you respect them for their achievement.
Point being?
That Chelsea are the ones who won the lottery.
And Manchester United are the self-made millionaire? Sigh Joel