• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

“Sugardaddies “ and the Mega-Money investors coming into the game

glorygloryeze

glorygloryeze

Jack Jull
I’ve been meaning to start a thread like this for a while and talk about the big moneymen who seem to be lining up to ‘invest’ in PL abd other big league football clubs.

I’m really interested in discussing the financial/marketing nittly-gritty as to why they are doing this, as it is not always so clear cut. In fact, at the risk of being libellous, it seems often borderline crooked. I trust many on the board work in certain financial/marketing fields and can shed more light on why certain things happen.
I will highlight some of the various types of investors that clubs have had in recent years:
• Roman Abramovich to Chelsea. I assume it was for acclaim and to feel ‘loved’ by hoards and get media attention. He also wanted to buy us so clearly wanted a club that wasn’t at the top of the table but would push towards the top, thus making him a ‘hero’. Was there another reason for such a large investment? Perhaps paying less tax??
• Thaksin Sinawatra to Emirates Marketing Project. People forget him since the Sheiks. But wasn’t he due to be charged by the state of Thailand, and wasn’t he charged shortly after his sale? Why would he invest so much if the charges were only round the corner? Was he trying to surround himself with ‘worshippers’ who perhaps would cry ‘nooooo..don’t jail our charman, we love him’ ???
• The Petrodollar Sheiks at City and other parts of Europe. What is their long-term game here?? Is it purely fame they seeks across the world? Is there a hrd-nosed business element behind their investments?? I’d be interested to hear what DubaiSpurs or other who know the region well have to say on this
• The Glazers and Hicks and Gillete. Obvious what’s going on there, but are they only different from the rest because of them having less good PR etc?
• Randy Lerner. Did he not realsise CL money wasn’t a given with Villa in the short-term? Perhaps he was seduced by Martin O’Neill eloquence and gave him millions to squander only to now feel burnt. Is the difficulties now really that much of a shock for him and he wants out?
• Remember the Magnussson gut who ‘loved west Ham’?? What happened there was sooooo predictable imo, though the Icelandic bank crash affected much more than football clubs as we know.
• Kroenke and the Arsenal board. As far as I’m concerned they are all asset-stripping the Scum (not that I care mind!)
• Carson Yeung. Now on a money-laundering charge. Co-incidence??
• The various ‘owners’ of Portsmouth…
• The Venkys: ‘Fools gold’, say no more
• The new Kuwaiti owners at Forest. Heard/read a rumour that they possibly need to funnel funds outside the country and need a ‘vehicle’…sorry if this is a slander but that’s what I’ve seen somewhere. Again, why Forest??

What is really going on with all the money being invested (or at least promised to be invested)? I thought at one point it was simply to do with the megabucks being handed out by the media contracts and having ready access to lovely cream instantly, but it’s got to be more than that.

Discuss…
 
These are just my opinions, but..

Most American owners are looking to make money almost immediately or at least in the near future, but have very little knowledge about football or how sports in general work outside the US.

The Russians seem to be more fame seekers or wanting a toy.

The sheikhs are more uncertain. Some of them have immense fortunes, but not all. The City owner is said to be doing it as a long term investment. Once City are firmly established and have gained loads of glory hunting fans he'll want some return. There also the potential of selling on the club somewhere down the line.

The Venkys are just a front for some other much shadier characters if rumours are to be believed. What I find baffling is how a lot of invesetors are going after Championship clubs. Yes they are easier and cheaper to purchase, but it's just not possible for all of them to succeed.
 
IMO the only way to get football back on track is to make it impossible for individuals to own clubs and do with them as they please. The clubs belong to their fans.
 
In Shinawatra and Sheikh Mansour, we have experienced the polar opposites of the owner scale.

Emirates Marketing Project was nothing but propaganda for Shinawatra. He was on the run from his own government so was looking for support in foreign areas, and where better than in the richest league in the most popular sport? And due to the fact so few know the truth about him, his propaganda scheme worked to an extent.

Singha Beer became the only beer available in the stadium. At half-time of one home game, I can't remember which, a message came on the big screen saying "LONG LIVE THE KING OF THAILAND." The club organised an "End of season Thai party" or something similar, where Thai bands were flown over and played in the city centre, and free Thai food was given away. As soon as UK Gov caught wind of his plans, he was carted back off to Thailand.

Thaksin Shinawatra had no long-term plans for Emirates Marketing Project. He wanted to create a place of asylum, and successfully did so. He had no concerns for the club's welfare at all. He took over when we were days from ruin, and kept our metaphorical heart beating long enough to plant his parasitic roots into England.

By the end of his tenure our chairman before him (John Wardle) was spending *his own money* to pay for staff wages. If it wasn't for the Sheikh taking over, we would be gone. We were in a proper state because of this rat, and it sickens me how so many still celebrate his influence. He was in the crowd for the recent Manchester Derby, and one of my mates had a picture taken with him which got on all the websites. To say I wasn't happy would be a huge understatement. fudge knows how he passed the "Fit and proper person test", he was chased around Thailand on human rights charges!


Now, to the ever-so-popular Sheikh Mansour. I'm not such an expert on him, I can only give you a vague insight to what I believe is happening. As you said, perhaps DubaiSpurs could give a good insight here.

The main idea is to spend big at first, establish us as a big power then allow us to become self-sufficient. Seeing as there is no other way a team could break the 2008 top four cartel, it's necessary. However, that is not the current debate. We were chosen as the club to invest in because of our potential. Very close to the city centre. Main rivals the biggest club in the world, so already a bit of exposure there. Modern 48,000 seater stadium, which the club pays a tiny lump sum on for rent each year and with the possibility to expand if possible. Finally, the big one: a very run-down surrounding area, desperate for renovation.

People already know who Abu Dhabi United Group are now, and Sheikh Mansour is a well-known name across the country. Now imagine if the surrounding area is associated with this man and this group too? As long as our growth on the pitch continues, then through a number of logical reasons which I won't go into depth about, tourism in Abu Dhabi will increase. Shares in ADUG will rocket, and everyone involved will be quids in. Considering that eventually the Sheikh won't need to invest anymore, it's clear to see why the gamble was taken. We were chosen because the smallest possibility of failure was with us. Everton were famously very close to being taken over, but (as the legend goes) the infamous Garry Cook rung around a bit and organised for the Sheikh's representatives to be have a tour around Eastlands and the surrounding area. Whether that's true or not, you can make your own minds up. Personally, I think it is. It falls right in line with his unorthodox methods. The clincher was the stadium. If Everton didn't have to build a new stadium, it would be them who you all hate and who we envy so much.

In terms of what is planned for the area, not too much has been revealed yet. However, the one project which has been announced is for the new training complex that has been proposed in the immediate area around the Etihad. There are dozens of articles online which I can't find due to only being on a mobile, but many new community pitches and new walkways will hopefully be built on what is now wasteland and derelict buildings. It has been likened to the Barcelona camp, I think it's called La Masa, though I'm not too sure. The money spent on the surrounding areas will FAR outweigh how much is spent on the pitch. Though to be fair, we have won the Groundsman of the Year award quite a lot in recent seasons.
 
Sheikh Mansour isn't an Abramovich. Let's get that out of the way first. Abramovich bought Chelsea for two reasons; an extension of his ego and, as SWP129 insightfully pointed out, to improve his reputation in the UK and around the world, to make it easier for him to garner support against those pesky corruption and fraud charges he seems to be hit by every few years.

Mansour seems to be playing a much deeper game. It's a game he plays with the ruler of another city in the UAE; Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai.

A few years ago, Dubai was the only city most people knew about in the United Arab Emirates. Hell, few people knew about Dubai being an entity subservient to the UAE at all. A surprisingly large percentage of people I talked to over the years seemed to assume it operated as an independent city-state, or at best was marginally attached to the other six emirates. The capital of the UAE was, and remains Abu Dhabi, but few knew or cared about that. As long as Dubai was fabulously successful, Sheikh Mohammed, could continue attracting all the tourists and all the foreign investment, leaving Abu Dhabi behind. His plan was for Dubai to become a self-sustaining city independent of the oil revenues it relied on, capable of becoming a world leader in the financial sector utilising its booming property and tourism markets as revenue streams to fund its growth. To that end, he funded aggressive marketing schemes, built fabulously extravagant structures, and crafted the image of Dubai as a tax-free vacation paradise, all to lure people (and more importantly, their money) into the city. In the mean time ,Abu Dhabi was largely ignored by the expat populace and the world's media. They were by far the wealthiest city of the seven, but who cared? Dubai was where it was at, and Abu Dhabi fell further and further behind. Announcing ambitious building projects, promoting itself, all of it was pointless because Dubai was the sole driver of world interest in the country, and Abu Dhabi saw no way to change that.

All that changed in 2008, however. With the property crash and Dubai's subsequent descent into bankruptcy(and its subsequent bailout by Abu Dhabi), Sheikh Mansour and the ruling family saw an opportunity to plant the Abu Dhabi name where Dubai's once was. It was around that time that Abu Dhabi aggressively and rapidly expanded its influence. The Club World Cup hosting rights were bought around that time for both 2009 and 2010. Etihad, the airline based out of the city, saw a massive increase in its ad campaigns and budget in a bid to rival Emirates' market share. City infrastructure was massively upgraded (the main road leading into the city from Dubai was formerly little more than a strip of tarmac with endless sand on both sides; now it's got residential towers, power stations, stadiums et al going up around it like crazy), a new port is due to open, the airport is getting a massively expensive new terminal to rival the Emirates one in Dubai....and a lot more besides that. Ambitious new architectural projects were announced, and proposals for insanely extravagant things, like a 224-storey building (specifically announced in the proposal as being 'taller than the Burj Khalifa') were seriously considered.Quite a few of them were approved.

And most importantly of all,to this discussion at least, ADUG, a self-proclaimed private equity company, bought a relatively unheralded club competing in the world's most popular football league with the intention of placing it on the map. And doing so with 'Abu Dhabi' stitched firmly into the lining. ADUG claims to be a private equity group, so the share prices wouldn't really matter overly much to the likes of Mansour. Rumours persist, however, that ADUG is basically just an extension of Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund, and is being used for that end, i.e to plant Abu Dhabi's name firmly into people's minds as THE Gulf destination of choice. You see it already at the Etihad Stadium; 'visit Abu Dhabi!' flashes across the electronic hoardings at annoyingly frequent intervals, and no one can miss the influence of the city when following a City game, be it in person or on the telly/online.


The more successful City get, the more fans they'll get and the more coverage they'll receive. The more coverage they receive, the more coverage Abu Dhabi receives, and the more coverage Abu Dhabi receives, the less prominent Dubai gets in the scheme of things.

Sheikh Mohammed once wanted to buy a Premier League club using the Investment corporation of Dubai. He can't now, because Mansour's gotten there first.

One city falls, another city rises. In that regard, City's just a tool to be used and then eventually disposed of. But if Mansour's plans for global media coverage come to fruition, it'll have been some ride.

links(mainly just news items to show the speed of Abu Dhabi's expansion since 2008, really);

http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manage...er-league-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/a317746/2
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/abu-dhabi-s-khalifa-port-set-for-sept-1-launch-466677.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120708-702861.html
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/abu-dhabi-says-5-4bn-spent-on-labour-cities-463258.html
http://www.thenational.ae/business/aviation/etihad-clear-for-virgin-bid-take-off
http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1340801998.html
http://www.thenational.ae/business/property/abu-dhabi-says-no-to-worlds-tallest-building
http://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/plant-arrives-for-dh40bn-abu-dhabi-gas-project


As far as the rest of the sheiks go, it's for essentially the same reason, publicity. The Qatar Foundation sponsoring Barca is a great example; what better way for a tiny country with scorching temperatures and an oppressive government to get noticed than by slapping its name onto one of the world's biggest brands?

Or, for that matter, by hosting the World Cup?

Or by buying Lavezzi, Pastore, Ibrahimovic, Silva et al for a formerly prestigious French giant, with the knowledge that the meda will inevitably add 'funded by their Qatari owners' to any discussion involving said club?

The Gulf is a fiercely competitive region in terms of investment. Everyone realises that the oil won't last forever; indeed, it's highly unlikely it'll last into the second part of this century. Ergo, the states formerly based around the stuff have to find other ways to stay relevant; ergo, they market themselves as investment destinations, business hubs, travel hotspots; anything to stay competitive. The problem is, they're all doing it at once, so they have to outdo each other as well as try to impress a jaded (mainly western) audience, so they branch out into populism, to try to win the average folk over as well as shower their governments in gold. And one of the easiest ways of doing that, short of going out into the street and throwing money at passers-by, is by buying a football club and taking it to the top. Because people will look on that almost as favorably as if you handed them free money.
 
Last edited:
DubaiSpur said:
Sheikh Mansour isn't an Abramovich. Let's get that out of the way first. Abramovich bought Chelsea for two reasons; an extension of his ego and, as SWP129 insightfully pointed out, to improve his reputation in the UK and around the world, to make it easier for him to garner support against those pesky corruption and fraud charges he seems to be hit by every few years.

Mansour seems to be playing a much deeper game. It's a game he plays with the ruler of another city in the UAE; Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, the ruler of Dubai.

A few years ago, Dubai was the only city most people knew about in the United Arab Emirates. Hell, few people knew about Dubai being an entity subservient to the UAE at all. A surprisingly large percentage of people I talked to over the years seemed to assume it operated as an independent city-state, or at best was marginally attached to the other six emirates. The capital of the UAE was, and remains Abu Dhabi, but few knew or cared about that. As long as Dubai was fabulously successful, Sheikh Mohammed, could continue attracting all the tourists and all the foreign investment, leaving Abu Dhabi behind. His plan was for Dubai to become a self-sustaining city independent of the oil revenues it relied on, capable of becoming a world leader in the financial sector utilising its booming property and tourism markets as revenue streams to fund its growth. To that end, he funded aggressive marketing schemes, built fabulously extravagant structures, and crafted the image of Dubai as a tax-free vacation paradise, all to lure people (and more importantly, their money) into the city. In the mean time ,Abu Dhabi was largely ignored by the expat populace and the world's media. They were by far the wealthiest city of the seven, but who cared? Dubai was where it was at, and Abu Dhabi fell further and further behind. Announcing ambitious building projects, promoting itself, all of it was pointless because Dubai was the sole driver of world interest in the country, and Abu Dhabi saw no way to change that.

All that changed in 2008, however. With the property crash and Dubai's subsequent descent into bankruptcy(and its subsequent bailout by Abu Dhabi), Sheikh Mansour and the ruling family saw an opportunity to plant the Abu Dhabi name where Dubai's once was. It was around that time that Abu Dhabi aggressively and rapidly expanded its influence. The Club World Cup hosting rights were bought around that time for both 2009 and 2010. Etihad, the airline based out of the city, saw a massive increase in its ad campaigns and budget in a bid to rival Emirates' market share. City infrastructure was massively upgraded (the main road leading into the city from Dubai was formerly little more than a strip of tarmac with endless sand on both sides; now it's got residential towers, power stations, stadiums et al going up around it like crazy), a new port is due to open, the airport is getting a massively expensive new terminal to rival the Emirates one in Dubai....and a lot more besides that. Ambitious new architectural projects were announced, and proposals for insanely extravagant things, like a 224-storey building (specifically announced in the proposal as being 'taller than the Burj Khalifa') were seriously considered.Quite a few of them were approved.

And most importantly of all,to this discussion at least, ADUG, a self-proclaimed private equity company, bought a relatively unheralded club competing in the world's most popular football league with the intention of placing it on the map. And doing so with 'Abu Dhabi' stitched firmly into the lining. ADUG claims to be a private equity group, so the share prices wouldn't really matter overly much to the likes of Mansour. Rumours persist, however, that ADUG is basically just an extension of Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund, and is being used for that end, i.e to plant Abu Dhabi's name firmly into people's minds as THE Gulf destination of choice. You see it already at the Etihad Stadium; 'visit Abu Dhabi!' flashes across the electronic hoardings at annoyingly frequent intervals, and no one can miss the influence of the city when following a City game, be it in person or on the telly/online.


The more successful City get, the more fans they'll get and the more coverage they'll receive. The more coverage they receive, the more coverage Abu Dhabi receives, and the more coverage Abu Dhabi receives, the less prominent Dubai gets in the scheme of things.

Sheikh Mohammed once wanted to buy a Premier League club using the Investment corporation of Dubai. He can't now, because Mansour's gotten there first.

One city falls, another city rises. In that regard, City's just a tool to be used and then eventually disposed of. But if Mansour's plans for global media coverage come to fruition, it'll have been some ride.

links(mainly just news items to show the speed of Abu Dhabi's expansion since 2008, really);

http://citywire.co.uk/wealth-manage...er-league-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/a317746/2
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/abu-dhabi-s-khalifa-port-set-for-sept-1-launch-466677.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120708-702861.html
http://www.arabianbusiness.com/abu-dhabi-says-5-4bn-spent-on-labour-cities-463258.html
http://www.thenational.ae/business/aviation/etihad-clear-for-virgin-bid-take-off
http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1340801998.html
http://www.thenational.ae/business/property/abu-dhabi-says-no-to-worlds-tallest-building
http://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/plant-arrives-for-dh40bn-abu-dhabi-gas-project


As far as the rest of the sheiks go, it's for essentially the same reason, publicity. The Qatar Foundation sponsoring Barca is a great example; what better way for a tiny country with scorching temperatures and an oppressive government to get noticed than by slapping its name onto one of the world's biggest brands?

Or, for that matter, by hosting the World Cup?

Or by buying Lavezzi, Pastore, Ibrahimovic, Silva et al for a formerly prestigious French giant, with the knowledge that the meda will inevitably add 'funded by their Qatari owners' to any discussion involving said club?

The Gulf is a fiercely competitive region in terms of investment. Everyone realises that the oil won't last forever; indeed, it's highly unlikely it'll last into the second part of this century. Ergo, the states formerly based around the stuff have to find other ways to stay relevant; ergo, they market themselves as investment destinations, business hubs, travel hotspots; anything to stay competitive. The problem is, they're all doing it at once, so they have to outdo each other as well as try to impress a jaded (mainly western) audience, so they branch out into populism, to try to win the average folk over as well as shower their governments in gold. And one of the easiest ways of doing that, short of going out into the street and throwing money at passers-by, is by buying a football club and taking it to the top. Because people will look on that almost as favorably as if you handed them free money.
Click to expand...

Excellent, excellent posts both DS and SWP29. It's good to read about the investment in City (mainly) without the term 'money-grabbing c***s' etc deployed within the text. I suppose that may be because I have no ill-feeling towards the club or their fans on the whole since they were bought out. My only 'bitterness' stems from the thinking that if they had not received investment, the evidence would suggest we would have been challening the Top 2/3 more aggressively in the last few seasons.

I have spoken to a few City fans regarding the Mansour Family plans for the club and the area. The consensus seems to be that they are not treating it as a plaything but are committed to expanding the team/club/brand/area as a tangible business investment and of course, a very profitable venture.

I personally feel that investments such as Abramovich's and PSG's will become a thing of the past, although it will take time for that bubble to burst. It's just not sustainable as you will see this type of ownership across the board for all clubs who want to compete. However, if City's investors are to carry out their plans in the way that they have said they will, I feel this sort of investment is sustainable as it is model that is ultimately based on aggressive early expansion in order to achieve long-term profitability. This is just my opinion though, I have no knowledge of the business element of running a company/corporation.

I can't really comment about the alleged backgrounds and dealings of the owners mentioned in the OP and other posts. At what point in the sport bar Sunday League/amateur level can we not start pointing fingers at the the evil of corruption? It's rife throughout now, the saddest element being its so blindingly obvious but because of the amount of money in the system, the perpertrators are either protected or given a slap on the wrist if caught.
 
Egypt > Libya > Syria > who's next :-k

080526_p05_arab1.gif
 
Quite interested in the qatar stories. Ive been doing some work with them and learned a little about the country. Recent news points out the extent of qatari influence in london as an enormously rich kingdom, but not from oil. natural gas is their recently found honeypot and will peak in 2030 before running out. They have several branches of overseas investment and compete with each other for prestige landmarks, driving prices up between themselves in order to take top spot. The Amir owns/controls one huge arm, and the other is controlled by the Prime Minister, and this latter one owns harrods, stock exchange, shard, us embassy and the rest while the former owns an equally expensive set. The country is football obsessed but they know their fortune is finite and trying to develop the economy into a sustainable one is the big task. They love glamour and prestige and showing this off is everything, and while the country is strict and opressive in some aspects its tiny, you cant even become a citizen unless born there.
 
Howard Webb said:
Quite interested in the qatar stories. Ive been doing some work with them and learned a little about the country. Recent news points out the extent of qatari influence in london as an enormously rich kingdom, but not from oil. natural gas is their recently found honeypot and will peak in 2030 before running out. They have several branches of overseas investment and compete with each other for prestige landmarks, driving prices up between themselves in order to take top spot. The Amir owns/controls one huge arm, and the other is controlled by the Prime Minister, and this latter one owns harrods, stock exchange, shard, us embassy and the rest while the former owns an equally expensive set. The country is football obsessed but they know their fortune is finite and trying to develop the economy into a sustainable one is the big task. They love glamour and prestige and showing this off is everything, and while the country is strict and opressive in some aspects its tiny, you cant even become a citizen unless born there.
Click to expand...


This may stop them progressing in the future. I have a relative who was involved in a car accident out there. It was immediately deemed her fault because she wasn't a citizen.

Even though it was the other guy speeding that caused him to ram his car into the back of hers. Mentalist.


Edit: They took her passport away instantly too. She was fine in the end though, her 'sponsor' has a decent amount of pull.
 
Yeah thats the other thing. Sponsors and clout are defining elements of the culture. If you want something done, if you dont know the right man it wont happen and this extends right up the ladder. If you break the law your sponsor gets it in the neck. I heard a story last week about a job not even starting for 6 weeks because the top guy hadnt cleared it, the guys had to wait in the hotel for 6 weeks and check every day if they could start.
 
I have no doubt Abramovich loves football so owning a club as a plaything was part of his thinking. However, I also think he had a more hard-nosed reason in that becoming a high profile figure in Britain was always useful if he fell out of favour with the Kremlin.

For Shiekh Mansoor, its serious business. While his plans for Eastlands might still be profitable, the main motivation is to promote his Emirate. City is his "loss leader" to help the rest of his business interests.

I suspect money laundering is part of the equation for some owners. Large amounts of money get transferred across borders in deals with lots of middlemen, so illegal money can be put in somewhere in the chain when buying a player and then the money becomes legitimate when the player is sold. The links of some owners with the illegal arms trade (Portsmouth) and the triads (Birmingham City) doesn't lessen the suspicion.
 
Levy and Lewis are not that different from some of the American investors. I don't mean leaches like the Glazers or Hicks-Gillett, but people like Lerner and Kroenke. They all are in it as an investment and have made mistakes early in their tenures. The difference is that Levy and Lewis have had time to learn and make better decisions.

Lets just hope our new owner isn't a Somalian pirate.
 
They are a cancer within our game. And it's spreading.

I don't like how, with respect, a very average side like City can be elevated into such a position by oil money alone. It's not how it should be. Clubs should grow naturally using the resources available to them within their budget.

Football has evolved over the years but these sugar daddies have put our game in a false position.
 
Roy1983 said:
They are a cancer within our game. And it's spreading.

I don't like how, with respect, a very average side like City can be elevated into such a position by oil money alone. It's not how it should be. Clubs should grow naturally using the resources available to them within their budget.

Football has evolved over the years but these sugar daddies have put our game in a false position.
Click to expand...

The whole buying/selling of clubs should not be allowed. In Germany it's law that the fans own at least 51%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back