Jump to content
Melbourne Football

City Football Group (CFG) [Owner of Melbourne City]

Torn Asunder

By Torn Asunder,
in Melbourne City

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GreenSeater
GreenSeater

How to support Melbourne City, a calendar guide: OCTOBER: "Wow we've started the season really well. The way we played in the first game was really impressive, and we won the derby! This really f

GreenSeater
GreenSeater

The best way I find to accept all the changes at the club is to just support Melbourne City and that's it. I don't care about CFG. I couldn't give a toss tbh (sorry Manchester people). I don't support

KSK_47
KSK_47

Haha. I can imagine a bunch of suits all sitting around in a boardroom while someone at the front is showing a pie chart saying ""fold the club" comments were down a whopping 57.2% while "10 year cont

Posted Images

n i k o

n i k o

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

It annoys the hell out of me that an entity as big as CFG can't get its PR spelling correct.

"Melbourne representitives arrive for Young Leaders Summit"

http://www.melbournecityfc.com.au/article/young-leaders-summit/1u6gtb5rxgbwc1uelwd70ceohp

 

That's Manchurian for representatives. They are on English time of course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thrillhouse

Thrillhouse

Posted
Posted

Haven't seen anything about this but why aren't we making the most of the partnership with Melbourne storm? I haven't seen one promo with/for them to come see us or the other way around. Surely it's an easy way to bring in some potential fans even just by offering a discounted ticket.

We have any storm members here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jw1739

jw1739

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Thrillhouse said:

Haven't seen anything about this but why aren't we making the most of the partnership with Melbourne storm? I haven't seen one promo with/for them to come see us or the other way around. Surely it's an easy way to bring in some potential fans even just by offering a discounted ticket.

We have any storm members here?

What partnership? The original share in our club held by Storm interests was bought out by Manchester City some time ago, and we are now 100% owned by Manchester City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dylan

Dylan

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, morphine said:

No idea bro. I'm sure of it. Always could be wrong, but I'm certain, without having a link, that they own 20%ish.

That article that JW gave you is  clear that they bought them out....

Edited by Dylan
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jw1739

jw1739

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, morphine said:

No idea bro. I'm sure of it. Always could be wrong, but I'm certain, without having a link, that they own 20%ish.

I'm sorry. I was as polite as I could be about it, but I'm afraid that you are wrong. We are owned 100% by Manchester City.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
haz

haz

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, johnno cpfc said:

Not sure if this is the right place but what do you all think of the 3rd marque being touted by FFA i believe.

 

Just them providing a way Sydney FC can sign Cahill

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kinnibari

Kinnibari

Posted
Posted (edited)
55 minutes ago, johnno cpfc said:

Not sure if this is the right place but what do you all think of the 3rd marque being touted by FFA i believe.

 

What's this? Is it the youth marquee?

Edit: never mind found the info: http://www.news.com.au/sport/football/a-league/aleague-prepared-to-rewrite-marquee-rules-in-bid-to-lure-stars-like-tim-cahill/news-story/0a007ba9365745385d4cb7b6f43f7553

Edited by Kinnibari
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jw1739

jw1739

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Kinnibari said:

What's this? Is it the youth marquee?

Edit: never mind found the info: http://www.news.com.au/sport/football/a-league/aleague-prepared-to-rewrite-marquee-rules-in-bid-to-lure-stars-like-tim-cahill/news-story/0a007ba9365745385d4cb7b6f43f7553

It's really the equivalent of changing the number of matches for a guest player from 14 to 27, plus a "top-up" from FFA. Not really that much of a change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shahanga

Shahanga

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, johnno cpfc said:

Not sure if this is the right place but what do you all think of the 3rd marque being touted by FFA i believe.

How many marquees can you have before the salary cap loses its point?

3 hours ago, morphine said:

False.

20% odd owned by Storm.

So they did but Manchester city had an option to buy them out, which they exercised, so now we are a 100% owned by Manxhester City (well CFG is the financial vehicle).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kinnibari

Kinnibari

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, johnno cpfc said:

Not sure if this is the right place but what do you all think of the 3rd marque being touted by FFA i believe.

Generally positive, it means clubs can risk signing a big name for publicity and still be ok on a footballing front. Still hard to say until we see it in practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HeartOfCity

HeartOfCity

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Kinnibari said:

Generally positive, it means clubs can risk signing a big name for publicity and still be ok on a footballing front. Still hard to say until we see it in practice.

Sorry to disagree but in an 11 man team no one can really be a passenger no matter how highly they are thought of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kinnibari

Kinnibari

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, HeartOfCity said:

Sorry to disagree but in an 11 man team no one can really be a passenger no matter how highly they are thought of. 

I totally see why you read my comment that way, but actually what I mean is that it takes the risk away from signing a marquee who may not deliver, because you can drop them from the team and the only penalty is financial.

Eg, current model: you sign two marquees, one is a big name who turns out to be terrible (or gets injured, or selected for international duty). You drop them from the team. You now have only one marquee. This is a disadvantage. The risk of this happening discourages clubs from signing big name but risky marquees.

New model: you sign two marquees. As a bonus, on top of that you sign a ~big name~ third marquee, that you are only able to sign because they're a big name (eg you're not choosing between a risky big name and cheaper safer bet - it's big name or nothing). Your marquee is not great, so you drop them. You still have two other marquees, just like you would have had if you decided not to sign the big name player. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
GreenSeater

GreenSeater

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, JC22 said:

Explain pls

In the video, the Manchester City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak scored a hattrick in a charity match. It has been revealed in the papers that we are signing a big name marquee. My post was a joke saying that the big name marquee is Khaldoon Al Mubarak. Khaldoon Al Mubarak is the chairman of Manchester City. Therefore he won't actually be the big name marquee. That is the joke that I am making.

Edited by GreenSeater
  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Embee

Embee

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
6 minutes ago, GreenSeater said:

In the video, the Manchester City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak scored a hattrick in a charity match. It has been revealed in the papers that we are signing a big name marquee. My post was a joke saying that the big name marquee is Khaldoon Al Mubarak. Khaldoon Al Mubarak is the chairman of Manchester City. Therefore he won't actually be the big name marquee. That is the joke that I am making.

Chuckled at the joke, laughed at the explanation

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jw1739

jw1739

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Embee said:

Chuckled at the joke, laughed at the explanation

Carrying a little bit of extra weight around the waist, but all three goals show he knows what he's talking about. Would like to see him on the pitch for charity at AAMI sometime!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
n i k o

n i k o

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Carrying a little bit of extra weight around the waist, but all three goals show he knows what he's talking about. Would like to see him on the pitch for charity at AAMI sometime!

The header was especially impressive. To show that ambition and determination in a charity match to score is probably a tiny insight into the man off the pitch.

Edited by n i k o
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Embee

Embee

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Carrying a little bit of extra weight around the waist, but all three goals show he knows what he's talking about. Would like to see him on the pitch for charity at AAMI sometime!

Showed a better understanding of when to time his runs off the last man than Mifsud...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kinnibari

Kinnibari

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Kinnibari said:

I totally see why you read my comment that way, but actually what I mean is that it takes the risk away from signing a marquee who may not deliver, because you can drop them from the team and the only penalty is financial.

Eg, current model: you sign two marquees, one is a big name who turns out to be terrible (or gets injured, or selected for international duty). You drop them from the team. You now have only one marquee. This is a disadvantage. The risk of this happening discourages clubs from signing big name but risky marquees.

New model: you sign two marquees. As a bonus, on top of that you sign a ~big name~ third marquee, that you are only able to sign because they're a big name (eg you're not choosing between a risky big name and cheaper safer bet - it's big name or nothing). Your marquee is not great, so you drop them. You still have two other marquees, just like you would have had if you decided not to sign the big name player. 

Hilariously it now seems it's more about us just wanting more players than we have space for. Fans of other clubs will presumably be upset but tbh I think we've suffered enough so bring on the good news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kiro Kompiro

Kiro Kompiro

Posted
Posted (edited)

no third marquee?

.http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/football/tim-cahill-unlikely-to-be-in-aleague-next-season-after-bid-fails/news-story/e50dcf17c6e179557ea853082285db39Football Federation Australia appears to have failed in an audacious bid to convince the other clubs to allow Melbourne City to sign the Socceroos legend as a third marquee player.

It can be revealed that a meeting of club chairmen on Wednesday gave a resounding “no” after they were asked to allow City to go outside of the rules and field three marquees instead of two for next season so they could accommodate Cahill.

The Australian broke the story earlier this week that the cashed-up Victorian club had been in talks for the past three months with the man regarded as the greatest Socceroo of all time with a view to signing him in a bid to lift their profile.

There has also been interest for Cahill from other clubs, including Sydney FC, but it is understood the clubs are unwilling to meet the financial demands, reportedly around the $3 million-plus a season mark, even allowing for the fact FFA has a fighting fund to help assist.

City, owned by the City Football Group, owners of the Manchester City and New York City clubs, can easily accommodate Cahill’s wages but they are hamstrung in signing him because they already have two marquees on their books.

With Socceroo Aaron Mooy expected to move to Europe, thus freeing a marquee spot, they recently upgraded the contract of Uruguayan striker Bruno Fornaroli after his sensational A-League debut season when he broke all scoring records for the national competition.

In terms of a second marquee, The Australian understands City will unveil a big-name signing they have had under wraps for several months and one that came before Cahill was an ­option.

With City’s quota filled, FFA, desperate to have Cahill’s star value in the A-League, suggested to the clubs at Wednesday’s meeting that they allow the Victorians to have an extra marquee for 12 months.

According to one source, “there was plenty of robust debate” before they all turned down the idea.

“There was certainly a lot of toing and froing but, in the end, everyone was in agreement that it would be a grossly unfair ­advantage for City,” the source said.

The move to have Cahill ­finally play in the A-League comes after chief executive David Gallop resolved a number of issues with the Socceroo while he was in Australia for the two-game series against Greece.

The pair met in Sydney last week and again after the second match in Melbourne on Tuesday and it resulted in Gallop issuing a statement, with Cahill’s knowledge, on Wednesday in which he apologised for some comments he made about the player in February.

It is clear that FFA is now making a concerted effort to have the 36-year-old in the ­national competition.

Cahill’s presence would be a massive boost not just in terms of bringing more people through the gate, but marketing and ­promotion-wise.

More importantly, he is seen as a massive factor for FFA as they attempt to strike a new broadcast deal.

The current four-year $160m deal expires at the end of next season (2016-17) and they are hoping to double it to $80m a season.

Of course, much of this depends on Cahill and what he has planned.

His contract with Hangzhou Greentown expires at the end of next month.

It has been reported there are several clubs in China keen to sign him, including Shanghai SIPG.

There is also the option of returning to the MLS, where he had a highly successful stint with the New York Red Bulls.

Edited by Kiro Kompiro
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
Falastur

Falastur

Posted
Posted (edited)

Sounds like there may be a new kid on the block:

http://www.goal.com/en-za/news/4667/sa-psl/2016/06/19/24808432/rumour-black-aces-to-partner-manchester-city

Your mileage may vary, but for those who are think of CFG in terms of which order clubs fall on the pecking order, there may be a new wooden spoon. (That said, I'm not a fan of trying to "rank" CFG teams).

There's also been a fair amount of talk of a Chinese team to coincide with Manchester City's trip to China, and there was talk of a Korean side too but that one seems to have gone cold.

Edited by Falastur
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tesla

Tesla

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 10/06/2016 at 9:16 AM, n i k o said:

The header was especially impressive. To show that ambition and determination in a charity match to score is probably a tiny insight into the man off the pitch.

Yeah his ambition and determination got him where he is :up:

 

4 hours ago, Falastur said:

Sounds like there may be a new kid on the block:

http://www.goal.com/en-za/news/4667/sa-psl/2016/06/19/24808432/rumour-black-aces-to-partner-manchester-city

Your mileage may vary, but for those who are think of CFG in terms of which order clubs fall on the pecking order, there may be a new wooden spoon. (That said, I'm not a fan of trying to "rank" CFG teams).

There's also been a fair amount of talk of a Chinese team to coincide with Manchester City's trip to China, and there was talk of a Korean side too but that one seems to have gone cold.

I said we'd have to wait until Mogadishu City came to be before we'd be off the bottom of the pecking order, close enough.

Actually it would be a good league to poach players for the A-league, I'm sure some of the top players in the South African league would be decent  visa players in the A-league. 

FWIW, I consider the SA league to be about the quality of season 1 of the A-league. 

Edited by Tesla
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...