List of Clubs with a Sheik or Suger Daddy - Lower divisions nor great reputation

Hello all,

I have been searching on the forum and Internet for clubs that has a Sheik or Suger Daddy as Chairman in lower divisions, or clubs that doesn't have great reputation.

If you know any other club, please let me know! Thanks for your help.

Here is my list so far:

England:

Leicester

Queens Park Rangers F.C.

Southampton FC

Birmingham City

Ipswich

Charlton

Huddersfield

Peterborough

Gateshead

Crawley

Spain:

Malaga

Netherlands:

Vitesse

Germany:

RB Leipzig

Hoffenheim

Austria:

Red Bull Salzburg

France:

Evian TG FC

Portsmouth? You are joking mate, aren't you?

Portsmouth? You are joking mate, aren't you?

If he's using the original 10.0 database wont Portsmouth have a rich owner as it was before all the trouble started :confused:

This is tacken from wikipedia (i know its not a great source as uni lectures bark every day to us but it gets the point across)

"In 2010, Balram Chainrai loaned former owner Ali al-Faraj £17 million, secured through collateral on Fratton Park grounds and the club itself. When the owner failed to meet a scheduled loan repayment, Chainrai took over control of the club. While the press calls him the "owner" of the club, Chainrai has until recently rejected this label and still maintains that he is only protecting his security. He intends to sell the club as soon as possible."

This is tacken from wikipedia (i know its not a great source as uni lectures bark every day to us but it gets the point across)

"In 2010, Balram Chainrai loaned former owner Ali al-Faraj £17 million, secured through collateral on Fratton Park grounds and the club itself. When the owner failed to meet a scheduled loan repayment, Chainrai took over control of the club. While the press calls him the "owner" of the club, Chainrai has until recently rejected this label and still maintains that he is only protecting his security. He intends to sell the club as soon as possible."

Didnt all this happen after the game was released though? So on the original 10.0 database the owner would have been al-Faraj who was supposed to be rich IIRC.

You can find this out very simply by using the editor that comes with FM and doing a filtered search.

Go into the FM folder > tools > editor > file > load database > select database > clubs > filter > customise > add condition > sugar daddy > select type of sugar daddy and click ok

Simple!

yeah this was in feb of this year. I would assume al-faraj is the chairman on the game though and yes he is suppose to be rich. What I got there from good old wiki was in response to Bosson.

As the previous comment states though, there is an easy way to find out

You can find this out very simply by using the editor that comes with FM and doing a filtered search.

Go into the FM folder > tools > editor > file > load database > select database > clubs > filter > customise > add condition > sugar daddy > select type of sugar daddy and click ok

Simple!

perfect reply!

Any of those teams have their goalies in predominantly black (or blue) kits and even less in green or yellow kits?

sorry...what?

If he's using the original 10.0 database wont Portsmouth have a rich owner as it was before all the trouble started :confused:

No we didnt

According to the editor their are only 2 clubs in the game that start off with a foreground sugar daddy, Notts County and Man City.

Any of those teams have their goalies in predominantly black (or blue) kits and even less in green or yellow kits?

Heh? I'm confused.

Dont forget Hoffenheim

According to the editor their are only 2 clubs in the game that start off with a foreground sugar daddy, Notts County and Man City.

If they have an updated database or they are researching into what team to start with in FM11, then Notts County will not have a sugar daddy (or at least should not).

Some of the Turkish teams might have, they seem to be splashing the cash over there.

leicester????????????????

im a fan and i cant remember us ever having a sugar daddy. and dont say mandaric as he has made more from sales than he has spent on transfers.

we are now owned by a thai consortium and they are promising to splash the cash and get us back to the premier. but lets wait and see, broken promises have been seen before

Germany: RB Leipzig

Austria: Red Bull Salzburg

Thanks for all your replys, have updated the post.

Leicester(now do but not on the game) Charlton and the majority of the rest dont have sugar daddys or sheiks.

Heh? I'm confused.

I believe he wants to know if any of those teams have black or blue goalkeeping jerseys. Because of course that is the primary concern when you are deciding which team to manage

Notts County seem to be buying a hell of a lot of players in my save......

Notts County seem to be buying a hell of a lot of players in my save......

Peter Trembling bought the club from a Middle Eastern consortium on 12 December 2009.

Not sure if this man is like a suger daddy or rich, whatever.

This year they bought one player for €700.000 irl.

No he's poor. He bought it for a quid. Anyway some other guy has bought it since then.

Peter Trembling bought the club from a Middle Eastern consortium on 12 December 2009.

Not sure if this man is like a suger daddy or rich, whatever.

This year they bought one player for €700.000 irl.

No hes not. The whole thing was a farce.

No he's poor. He bought it for a quid. Anyway some other guy has bought it since then.

Ray Trew, the former Lincoln and Boston chairman I think.

Notts County seem to be buying a hell of a lot of players in my save......

Are you still on patch 1

Ok, no Notts County then.

Ok, no Notts County then.

Peterborough, Charlton, Gateshead no. Pretty much all those teams you have said are no. Except Southampton(but are they still being funded by the money from that guy) and Leicester but that still hasnt been proven. It could be another Notts County.

Peterborough, Charlton, Gateshead no. Pretty much all those teams you have said are no. Except Southampton(but are they still being funded by the money from that guy) and Leicester but that still hasnt been proven. It could be another Notts County.

I found Peterborough & Gateshead via the Editor -> Suger Daddy in 10.3

I found Peterborough & Gateshead via the Editor -> Suger Daddy in 10.3

Irl they dont though. I think his name is Darragh Mac something. He may fund the club but so does Nigel Doughty of Nottingham Forest. Doughty spends lots of money on transfers (not this season) and the youth academy but hes not a sugar daddy. They arent sugar daddy's irl.

On the game they're probably just background or underwriters, so really the clubs don't get a lot of money.

Irl they dont though. I think his name is Darragh Mac something. He may fund the club but so does Nigel Doughty of Nottingham Forest. Doughty spends lots of money on transfers (not this season) and the youth academy but hes not a sugar daddy. They arent sugar daddy's irl.

There are three different types of sugar daddy in the game. They all act very differently.

Foreground

Background

Underwriter

Only Man City and Southampton have a foreground sugar daddy in England for 10.3, Huddersfield/Peterborough are background and Chelsea/Gateshead have underwriters.

Irl they dont though. I think his name is Darragh Mac something. He may fund the club but so does Nigel Doughty of Nottingham Forest. Doughty spends lots of money on transfers (not this season) and the youth academy but hes not a sugar daddy. They arent sugar daddy's irl.

Ok, will remove Peterborough & Gateshead then as well and all Underwriter suger daddy clubs then.

There are three different types of sugar daddy in the game. They all act very differently.

Foreground

Background

Underwriter

Only Man City and Southampton have a foreground sugar daddy in England for 10.3, Huddersfield/Peterborough are background and Chelsea/Gateshead have underwriters.

Yh I know that but what im trying to say is they dont get a lot of money. Doughty may as well be a background or underwriter.

Ok, will remove Peterborough & Gateshead then as well.

No leave them as they are probably background like afced7 said.

i wont say leicester until i see them spend some proper money. yes we bought waghorn for around 3m but its too early to say how much our new board will want to invest into the club.

bill gates could buy a football club, doesnt mean he would put any extra money into it though does it?

No leave them as they are probably background like afced7 said.

Added Peterborough again

Added Peterborough again

And put Gateshead back. All I was trying to say is that they dont spend alot of money so the chairman arent going to be foreground. Just like afced7 said.

I would also put Crawley's chairman as a foreground as they ahve spent a lot of money in the transfer window.

And put Gateshead back. All I was trying to say is that they dont spend alot of money so the chairman arent going to be foreground. Just like afced7 said.

I would also put Crawley's chairman as a foreground as they ahve spent a lot of money in the transfer window.

Added Gateshead & Crawley

So i guess no more clubs than?

no no no to Crawley, they have spent a lot of money the previous transfer window but are still in lots of debt, had a ten point reduction not long ago, i wouldn't consider their chairman to be a sugar daddy by any means!