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….
