I recently (ok, in September) did another series of 10 tweets on an FFP-related topic. This time it was on the common argument from fans of certain clubs that their superior wealth is “earned” and ours wasn’t. Which is rude.
As a small subset of Twitter users don’t get automatic notifications every time I tweet, it’s just possible that there are avid fans(?) of my work(?) that were busy interacting with other humans and may have missed this. And I’d hate for that to happen to any of you.
For context, this was shortly after their mad trolley dash of a summer transfer window…
1/10 Utd’s big buys changed the script. Gone are haughty (& false) claims that the “United way” shuns the vulgarity of big money transfers.
2/10 They now try to discredit City’s success by saying they spent “their own money not someone else’s”. Theirs is earned, City’s is given.
3/10 Firstly, moral distinctions between investment types are naïve. Corporate sponsorship = giving clubs money so they can win. Simple.
4/10 The huge increases in Utd deals with Adidas and Chevrolet show brands will pay a premium to put trophies on shelves. It’s investment.
5/10 The correlation between Utd’s on-field decline and massive sponsorship increases illustrate this perfectly.
6/10 Anyone, owner or company, putting big sums of money into the game is trying to help a club succeed as it yields benefit for them.
7/10 Those that agree with this “earned money” argument are saying football should be “biggest brand today should win everything forever”.
8/10 Brand advantage is entrenched. Utd can’t fail & others can’t progress without investment. Complete antithesis to healthy competition.
9/10. New generation of fans see Utd dominance as natural order & have 0 interest in competition. We should be distributing not polarising.
Stay tuned for more topical, up-to-the-minute news….