Nah.....Spurs would have a bigger international fanbase than City.
They have twice as many Twitter followers mate.
I know you will scoff, but its a decent metric in this day and age.
I mean why would people support Spurs over City?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Nah.....Spurs would have a bigger international fanbase than City.
They have twice as many Twitter followers mate.
I know you will scoff, but its a decent metric in this day and age.
I mean why would people support Spurs over City?
The answer lies in your own question,
City have been a force for about what, ten years?
My first memory of football is Spurs winning the Double nearly 60 years ago.
And they have remained one of the biggest and most glamourous clubs in England ever since......whilst City languished in the doldrums for 40 years between the Joe Mercer team and the Arabs arriving, falling as low as the third tier not so very long ago.
So during that forty years, who would have supported City over Spurs?
Now, it is undoubtedly true that City are in the process of amassing a global fanbase which will eclipse Spurs if things keep going the way they are but that will take time.
So right now I would say Spurs have more worldwide fans than City.
Seems a lot ....but then again Chelski is massive for a kit deal.Why?
Seems a lot ....but then again Chelski is massive for a kit deal.
How much do we get ?
They have twice as many Twitter followers mate.
I know you will scoff, but its a decent metric in this day and age.
I mean why would people support Spurs over City?
The answer lies in your own question,
City have been a force for about what, ten years?
My first memory of football is Spurs winning the Double nearly 60 years ago.
And they have remained one of the biggest and most glamourous clubs in England ever since......whilst City languished in the doldrums for 40 years between the Joe Mercer team and the Arabs arriving, falling as low as the third tier not so very long ago.
So during that forty years, who would have supported City over Spurs?
Now, it is undoubtedly true that City are in the process of amassing a global fanbase which will eclipse Spurs if things keep going the way they are but that will take time.
So right now I would say Spurs have more worldwide fans than City.
I disagree. City have been winning trophies for 10 years while spurs have done what ? Don’t underestimate the glory hunting nature of a football fan .I wouldn’t have thought so, if I am honest with you.
And even if City were bigger globally, I doubt it would be “much” bigger.
Nah.....Spurs would have a bigger international fanbase than City.
Herein lies the problem the other "Big" clubs market themselves to the hilt where we are second rate in that department.Nowt, it's part of the Fanatics deal.
Obviously that's been renewed but the original desk it was a fixed pittance.
Sorry Khal, on this one mate I think you're wrong. In my travels over the past 15 years, the City presence on the streets of the US and Africa is considerably bigger than that of Spurs.
City and their parent group have a very definite and well devised global marketing strategy related to their acquiring clubs in other countries and setting up soccer schools and local initiatives in key locations.
Spurs may well be the more 'romantic' of the two clubs on the back of the first double winning side and the Ardilles era, but City are considerably 'bigger' these days and will continue to grow their global brand on a scale few others will be able to match, certainly (sadly) not Everton till we have some real serious business people on the board of directors and not jobsworths.
City just signed a new kit deal £650 mil over 10 years.
Its with Puma.
Must be an investigation into that surely.