The press have been full of stories claiming other clubs are asking for the Manchester City-Etihad deal investigated. True they may claim unfair on the basis that the Mansour family are on the board of Etihad but there is a lot more to it than simply that.
Take Barcelona they will this season have a shirt sponsor in the Qatar Foundation. They always have proudly stated they won't have a shirt sponsor...so why the change? The BBC report in that link points out that Barca were over £300 million in debt in '09-10. They even last summer had to get a loan to pay the players wages.
Real Madrid weren't much better a little under £300 million in debt . Then of course there is our arch rivals from Trafford. Despite making huge operating profits their parent companies debt climbs year on year.
Perhaps Italian football is in better shape? Ok perhaps not both Milans are in debt despite recent success domestically and in Europe.
Perhaps the best example is that Barca shirt deal for £25 million a year. If the Etihad deal is as now reported is £400 million over 10 years is that bad value for shirt sponsorship stadium sponsorship and "campus" sponsorship? The Bluemoon is rising and it's making the old guard panic.