New City owner confirms C. Ronaldo interest

Mr.Nice Guy

I was just thinking I hope the new Football Manager game continues the craziness. Would be brilliant to go to the chairman and request extra money for transfers and to be given £200m. :cool:

gixerfixer

C.Ronaldo would go if the money was enough.So would most footballers. If anyone is under any illusion that football is about anything more than money nowadays then they need a reality check. The days of player loyalty are well over.

Wreck

Mr. X wrote: »

134 million for Ronnie you can have him, as some have said joke is on City, if they bought ron for that price, we could kit out a whole side with that money.

Yeah, and City with unlimited finances will just take the cream of that team too. The new owners have already said that they will pay whatever it takes to achieve their goals and that its not an investment, they are not looking for any financial returns.

Karmafaerie

jesus_thats_gre wrote: »

If they have a real desire to make City the biggest club in the world, why would they go and give United £150 million..

Because it's pocket change to them!

MrPillowTalk

gixerfixer wrote: »

C.Ronaldo would go if the money was enough.So would most footballers. If anyone is under any illusion that football is about anything more than money nowadays then they need a reality check. The days of player loyalty are well over.

I can never understand this attitude, would you stay working for an employer if another company offered you a massive increase in salary? Why do we expect footballers to be any different.

There are situations where the money is secondary eg when a player puts the value of a certain lifestyle (settled kids etc) or of a certain relationship (with club, players, fans etc) as more important than the extra revenue of an offer from an alternative club. However that in itself is just an EV calculation it doesnt make them more loyal tbh it just means they have an emphasis on goals that are not necessarilly monetary. Scholes and Gerrard are usually thought of as extremely loyal to their club, they both could have moved at points in their carreers for more money but didnt, however they are both still very very well renumerated and at a certain level of wealth where the value of an extra £x per week is less than the cost of moving. When you earn 80k per week the real effect of earning another 50k on top is not that immense, however I guarantee if Utd or Pool turned around tomo and said "sorry lads tough year we need to cut your wages to 15k per week" then all of a sudden Gerrards move to Chelsea would be back on and Scholes would be out the door for a final big contract before hanging up the boots as well.

And to stay slightly on topic, if City want Ronaldo for 134mill then Utd will sell him and bring in 2 other world class players and still have 60mill to knock off the clubs long term debt, tyvm.

ROCKMAN

Yes ..Utd , Arsenal and Liverpool are just going to roll over and die now that a billionaire has arrived and started to playing fantasy football .............

Oh wait that sounds familiar......




As for 130+million for Ronaldo ,Throw in SWP and ye could have a deal

eagle eye

I think this is a brilliant move by the City owners, I'd be thinking that this is just trying to unsettle their rivals before the season even really gets into full swing. Next it will be Torres, Gerard and then Lampard and Terry and of course with Arsenal it would have to be Adebayor.

These comments have to be taken seriously now that they have the financial clout to actually do it, so it will definitely cause some consternation.

Mr Alan

according to SSN they have released a list of players they want incl Ronaldo,Fabregas,Torres,Henry......hahahahaha

Quazzie

eagle eye wrote: »

I think this is a brilliant move by the City owners, I'd be thinking that this is just trying to unsettle their rivals before the season even really gets into full swing. Next it will be Torres, Gerard and then Lampard and Terry and of course with Arsenal it would have to be Adebayor.

These comments have to be taken seriously now that they have the financial clout to actually do it, so it will definitely cause some consternation.

How much do we have to give ya to take Adebayour?

Mr.Nice Guy

Wreck wrote: »

Yeah, and City with unlimited finances will just take the cream of that team too. The new owners have already said that they will pay whatever it takes to achieve their goals and that its not an investment, they are not looking for any financial returns.

That's a good one! Do you see Chelsea acquiring United's players with Roman's money? No. City aren't going to be taking United's players unless they fork out very silly money.

If Man City follow Chelsea's attitude then we can all expect the following over the next 12-18 months...

1) Hughes will be sacked for failing to live up to the lofty targets of the owners.

2) A big name manager will be brought in and promised massive money.

3) The likes of Ireland, Johnson, Dunne, Hart etc. will all make way.

4) More established players will be brought on board for huge pay packets and City will then challenge for a top four place next season.

gixerfixer

Mr Alan wrote: »

according to SSN they have released a list of players they want incl Ronaldo,Fabregas,Torres,Henry......hahahahaha

Well it's not going to that funny if our lovable owners stay and accept a 70+ offer from City for Torres next January.:(

Wreck

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

That's a good one! Do you see Chelsea acquiring United's players with Roman's money? No. City aren't going to be taking United's players unless they fork out very silly money.

Abramovich and Chelsea are at least attempting to make a profit from their little adventure. While it is somewhat of a hobby for Abramovich, he is actually treating it as a business venture. From all reports so far, the new City owners don't give a fcuk about the money, they just want to have the best players playing attacking football and winning trophies. So silly money it will be, but they don't care.

ShaneU

This guy makes Abramovich look like small change If he signs Torres or Ronaldo I'll be astonished.

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

The unnecessary rolleyes gave a different impression.

He's in top 5 most definitely so yeah I'll have him. Kaka and Messi as well please.

Oh, and Torres and Fabregas.

Goes searching for any posts in the past where Xavi moaned about Chelsea being rentboys!

MrPillowTalk

gixerfixer wrote: »

Well it's not going to that funny if our lovable owners stay and accept a 70+ offer from City for Torres next January.:(

Why wouldnt you sell for 70mill? God knows you need a few players.

Mr Alan

Mr Alan wrote: »

according to SSN they have released a list of players they want incl Ronaldo,Fabregas,Torres,Henry......hahahahaha

I have to agree. The clubs know the precedent this will set and I dont see anyone selling any of thos eplayers for big money....except maybe Barca, Id sell Henry for 20+ mill!

eagle eye

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

That's a good one! Do you see Chelsea acquiring United's players with Roman's money? No. City aren't going to be taking United's players unless they fork out very silly money.

If Man City follow Chelsea's attitude then we can all expect the following over the next 12-18 months...

1) Hughes will be sacked for failing to live up to the lofty targets of the owners.

2) A big name manager will be brought in and promised massive money.

3) The likes of Ireland, Johnson, Dunne, Hart etc. will all make way.

4) More established players will be brought on board for huge pay packets and City will then challenge for a top four place next season.

I certainly expect them to challenge this season. I think they are ahead of Villa, Spurs and Everton as regards panels. I expect the teams mentioned to be top ten, with Villa I'd expect them to finish either 6th or 7th, but with the squad and manager they have and the new funds I certainly think City will be challenging for a top four spot. Can you imagine if they are in the picture at Christmas, and the funds available to strengthen the squad in January.

When Abramovich first bought Cheslea he made similar noises to be fair. Theyre trying to appease Citys fans. They're demonstrating their arrogance.

I will say right now that City will catagorically not win the Champions Leagueby 2011 like their new owners predict.

jesus_thats_gre

Karmafaerie wrote: »

Because it's pocket change to them!

There is only so much you can spend before it starts becoming pointless. Realisitically speaking too, there is only so much you can spend on a squad of 25 players.

Giving United 150million when they have the squad that they have, will make it extremely difficult to gain the dominance that they want.

At that point, it boils down to who has the better manager.. Don't think that there are too many out there that are better than Ferguson.

Mr.Nice Guy

Wreck wrote: »

Abramovich and Chelsea are at least attempting to make a profit from their little adventure. While it is somewhat of a hobby for Abramovich, he is actually treating it as a business venture. From all reports so far, the new City owners don't give a fcuk about the money, they just want to have the best players playing attacking football and winning trophies. So silly money it will be, but they don't care.

What makes you think United players would go? It's not like the United players are getting paid a pittance. Fair enough they could earn more money but would you leave a club that is stable, has won the Premiership and Champions League and is set to be in the mix in major competitions once more...to go and join a club that seems like it will have a very unstable future in the short-term and which will have to prove itself capable of competing with the big teams?

I'd choose the former anyway. I think people are getting a bit carried away with yesterday's news.

eagle eye wrote:

I certainly expect them to challenge this season. I think they are ahead of Villa, Spurs and Everton as regards panels. I expect the teams mentioned to be top ten, with Villa I'd expect them to finish either 6th or 7th, but with the squad and manager they have and the new funds I certainly think City will be challenging for a top four spot. Can you imagine if they are in the picture at Christmas, and the funds available to strengthen the squad in January.

Yeah I was just reading some quotes from their new owner and he seems intent on them doing well this season...

"What happened is great for the club and for Abu Dhabi," capital of the United Arab Emirates, he told Al-Khaleej newspaper.

"Our goal is simple: it is to make Manchester City the biggest club in the English League ... and for a start it must finish the season in fourth place," he said.

I just can't see that happening and I think Hughes' job is in real jeopardy if this is their honest goal. I don't think he or anyone can deliver that this season.

I think these clowns will be the final straw in forcing UEFA/FIFA to introduce a salary/transfer cap tbh. And with the way its all going I'd have to say I'd be in favour of it.

gixerfixer

MrPillowTalk wrote: »

Why wouldnt you sell for 70mill? God knows you need a few players.

Because our sugerdaddy's are coming round the corner anyday now. We will be after Ronaldo,Messi and Kaka ourselves:cool:.

gixerfixer

Deleted User wrote: »

I have to agree. The clubs know the precedent this will set and I dont see anyone selling any of thos eplayers for big money....except maybe Barca, Id sell Henry for 20+ mill!

Football is a business now,every club has a price.

Xavi6

Xavi6 wrote: »

Emmmm we can afford to do that as well. I posted a story on it earlier.

Are they gonna rename it "Middle Eastlands"?

Mr Alan

If DIC bought Liverpool and behaved in the arrogant manner these lads have done in the last 24 hrs, i'd be mortified.

By all means back the manager, but no need to tell the world about it. No need to publically naming targets so brazenly.

With all their bragging, they've probably already potentially cost themselves hundreds of millions in future transfer fees as the world knows they'll pay watever is needed.

If this spells the future of football, its probably the beginning of the end for me.

gixerfixer

I have to laugh at Man U fans coming out with comments like "why would a player want to leave a club that is stable"....yeah like 680m quid in debt and about to lose the best manager the league has ever seen in a couple of years. :pac:

slingerz

gixerfixer wrote: »

Because our sugerdaddy's are coming round the corner anyday now. We will be after Ronaldo,Messi and Kaka ourselves:cool:.

It is known that the arabs in control of Man City compete directly with DIC over every little thing to make themselves look the better of the too. Possibly the best news Liverpool fans could here is that DIC have taken over Liverpool and the two cowboys are gone galloping off into the sunset

Mr Alan

Mr Alan wrote: »

If DIC bought Liverpool and behaved in the arrogant manner these lads have done in the last 24 hrs, i'd be mortified.

By all means back the manager, but no need to tell the world about it. No need to publically naming targets so brazenly.

With all their bragging, they've probably already potentially cost themselves hundreds of millions in future transfer fees as the world knows they'll pay watever is needed.

If this spells the future of football, its probably the beginning of the end for me.

Wow an entire post from start to finish where I agree with every word.


I know you may say that Fergie does this but he doesnt. He can be underhanded in how he handles transfers, as can most managers but to be fair you would never hear Fergie, Rafa, Wenger etc come out so brazenly and say "we're gonna sign Kaka, Messi and Eto'o because they obviously would want to play for the biggest club in the world"

However this is pretty mcuh what Calderon did all summer....


I agree, if it keeps going like this I'll be choosing a team in the eL.....

gixerfixer

slingerz wrote: »

It is known that the arabs in control of Man City compete directly with DIC over every little thing to make themselves look the better of the too. Possibly the best news Liverpool fans could here is that DIC have taken over Liverpool and the two cowboys are gone galloping off into the sunset

To be honest id rather if the share liverpool group took over myself but it aint gonna happen. Think D.I.C. will come in and scrap over every big name player with City and Chelsea. not really what football is about is it.

Mr.Nice Guy

gixerfixer wrote: »

I have to laugh at Man U fans coming out with comments like "why would a player want to leave a club that is stable"....yeah like 680m quid in debt and about to lose the best manager the league has ever seen in a couple of years. :pac:

The debt didn't seem to affect stability yesterday with the Berbatov signing or in the summer when Real were flaoting their figures about.

I have to laugh at the ABU brigade trying to have a pop at SAF and United at every opportunity. I saw a tabloid journo on SSN earlier asking for the PL to investigate United. Sad really.

Mr Alan

DIC with a Share Liverpool minority holding and seat on the board is what will happen i think.

smemon

We want a team who can win the UEFA Champions League

Why not just buy Utd from the glazers? - it'd be cheaper than throwing stupid money around the place at city...

MrPillowTalk

gixerfixer wrote: »

I have to laugh at Man U fans coming out with comments like "why would a player want to leave a club that is stable"....yeah like 680m quid in debt and about to lose the best manager the league has ever seen in a couple of years. :pac:

The debt is very managable in relation to Utds turnover and profit.

Mikeyt086

These Man City owners are hilarious.

Ronaldo took some bloody strong convincing to stay in Manchester in the first place, do they really think he would choose City over Real if he was moving?

Mr Alan

MrPillowTalk wrote: »

The debt is very managable in relation to Utds turnover and profit.

I am pretty sure that currently its not and that Utd are barely covering interest payments as it is at the moment.

stovelid

Maybe he can slip the UEFA a billion quid or so to allow City to field 15 outfield players.

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

Ronaldo took some bloody strong convincing to stay in Manchester in the first place, do they really think he would choose City over Real if he was moving?

Yes

Mr Alan

Mr Alan wrote: »

I am pretty sure that currently its not and that Utd are barely covering interest payments as it is at the moment.

Source?

With the current world economic climate its not the best time to be in debt that much is true but I havent heard anything about STRUGGLING to pay the debts.

Mr Alan

thats wat i mean, they are not struggling to pay it at the minute, but they are not yet repaying it afaik, only making interest payments? this could be wrong.

even if they are making repayments, they are not making huge profits from the club whereby you could then say the debt is comfortable. so if they miss out of CL for a couple of years over the next few years (the emergence of new money and departure of Ferguson make this a real possibility imo), then the real trouble could start as the club would be left with massive debts and unable to pay em.

LostinBlanch

Mr Alan wrote: »

If DIC bought Liverpool and behaved in the arrogant manner these lads have done in the last 24 hrs, i'd be mortified.

By all means back the manager, but no need to tell the world about it. No need to publically naming targets so brazenly.

With all their bragging, they've probably already potentially cost themselves hundreds of millions in future transfer fees as the world knows they'll pay watever is needed.

If this spells the future of football, its probably the beginning of the end for me.

Fair play Alan, you're on the ball there.

I think it's just going to make Platini even more determined to spike English footballs guns. He's already been doing enough complaining about the PL.
This could be the straw that broke the camels back, and the salary cap etc could be on the way as Neil mooted.

RasTa

Yeah and if the debt gets to much I'm sure we would find it really hard to get a suitable buyer to take over and clear our debt.

I'm not a massive fan of the Glazeirs and I'm pissed ticket prices keep on going up but United going into Administration is something I never worry about.

Karmafaerie

I remember when Abramovic bought Chelsea.
The rumour was that he was going to buy either Liverpool or Chelsea, and then Chelsea came fourth and got the CL football, so he choose them.

I was actually happy cause I didn't want to see Liverpool "buying" success.
Same goes now.
I'm all for salary caps etc, cause I'm not overly happy with the idea of DIC coming in and spending 20 bazillion on the team.

It takes all the fun out of it.

LostinBlanch

RasTa wrote: »

United going into Administration is something I never worry about.

Never say never. At the moment it looks very unlikely and long may it stay that way. But . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . never say never.

Karmafaerie

Karmafaerie wrote: »

I remember when Abramovic bought Chelsea.
The rumour was that he was going to buy either Liverpool or Chelsea, and then Chelsea came fourth and got the CL football, so he choose them.

I was actually happy cause I didn't want to see Liverpool "buying" success.
Same goes now.
I'm all for salary caps etc, cause I'm not overly happy with the idea of DIC coming in and spending 20 bazillion on the team.

It takes all the fun out of it.

I agree with this.

m@cc@

I'd only accept £30m plus Joe Hart for Ronaldo.

m@cc@

gixerfixer wrote: »

I have to laugh at Man U fans coming out with comments like "why would a player want to leave a club that is stable"....yeah like 680m quid in debt and about to lose the best manager the league has ever seen in a couple of years. :pac:

lol, most United fans would say if City want to pay £135m for Ronaldo, work away.

Karmafaerie

m@cc@ wrote: »

I'd only accept £30m plus Joe Hart for Ronaldo.

:eek:

m@cc@

Karmafaerie wrote: »

:eek:

No, that's MICKEY Harte. I'd accept £40 plus Mickey Harte.

Karmafaerie

m@cc@ wrote: »

No, that's MICKEY Harte. I'd accept £40 plus Mickey Harte.

Done!

I'll go club Mickey Hart and through him in a burlap sack!

eagle eye

Karmafaerie wrote: »

I remember when Abramovic bought Chelsea.
The rumour was that he was going to buy either Liverpool or Chelsea, and then Chelsea came fourth and got the CL football, so he choose them.

I was actually happy cause I didn't want to see Liverpool "buying" success.
Same goes now.
I'm all for salary caps etc, cause I'm not overly happy with the idea of DIC coming in and spending 20 bazillion on the team.

It takes all the fun out of it.

Any club that wants to get into the running has to buy players to catch up. But to say they are buying success is just ridiculous. Look at the amount of money Liverpool shelled out for Torres. Is that not buying success?
Similarly with United they paid huge money at the time for Ferdinand, similarly for Van Nistlerooy, Rooney and now Berbatov. Is that not buying success?
I don't understand this salary cap trash talk. It will never happen, the big clubs would not have it, look back at the days when money was not such a big factor and you had the Nottingham Forests and Ipswich Towns and Derby Countys up there challenging for the League because they had a couple of good youths come through and a top manager who brought in the right players.
You'll notice I have not mentioned Wenger yet but he too has been able to spend big sums of money on players but at least there are a lot of young players developing and playing first team football there.
But thats the way its gone now, all the big clubs are trying to buy the Leagues and cups, and all thats wrong with a couple of you is that some new clubs come along with money so you spout off this petty 'buying the league' rubbish.
Get real, thats what soccer is all about now, money, money, money. Otherwise you'd have the likes of Wigan up there challenging for League titles.

You also need a good manager to win anything by the way, you cannot just go out and buy the League.

heyjude

LostinBlanch wrote: »

I think it's just going to make Platini even more determined to spike English footballs guns. He's already been doing enough complaining about the PL.
This could be the straw that broke the camels back, and the salary cap etc could be on the way as Neil mooted.

The real big clubs across Europe would have little to lose from a salary cap, as the salary cap that has been suggested would be a percentage of a teams' turnover. There were two worlds' richest football clubs listings this year, one from Deloitte and one by Forbes and Man Utd were in first place on both lists,so Man Utd would still be able to pay huge wages, Real Madrid are in 2nd place(on both) and Chelsea (3rd in Deloitte and 8th in Forbes). It would though hamper Man City, who were ranked 15th by Deloitte and 23rd by Forbes.

A salary cap like that used in American Football in the NFL wouldn't work as every NFL team can afford to pay annual salaries totalling over $100m, as all TV revenue and merchandising income is split equally, so every team can afford to sign superstar players. The problem in soccer is that the difference between the biggest and smallest clubs is too great, both in terms of the size of their support and their income from sponsorship and merchandising.