CHAPTER 439: NEW EMBLEM, LEAKED!

Richard hoped to replace the role of CVC Investment Company and partner with Bernie Ecclestone to buy shares of SLEC. Of course, even if he decided to proceed with the deal, he had no intention of becoming an enemy of the three major banks circling SLEC.

He believed that Bernie had already been in contact with CVC Investment Company, and he knew it wasn’t only them. The fact that Bernie also wanted to involve him showed that the old man’s shrewdness as a businessman was already at work.

In the real timeline, other bidders had also offered competitive prices. In the end, only CVC succeeded.

Why?

One case that would later shake the UK occurred in 2013, when Bernie Ecclestone was prosecuted by a German court on charges that he had bribed banker Gribkowski, who handled F1 equity transactions, with $44 million between 2004 and 2005. The bribe had allegedly helped CVC buy SLEC shares at a low price, causing the three banks to suffer huge losses.

This was where Bernie Ecclestone’s brilliance truly showed. By choosing Gribkowski, the banker who had long been in charge of the sale of SLEC shares for the banks, Bernie acted with calculated precision. He ensured that CVC Investment Company would be the only buyer willing to let him retain control over the F1 management company.

In the end, the court ruled that the bribery charges were unproven. Yet Bernie still paid $100 million to settle the case — a small price for preserving both his reputation and his grip on Formula One. Critics claimed the court had been "bought off," but Bernie dismissed the accusations with a scoff: "This idiotic matter is finally over."

Bernie Ecclestone had always been willing to use any means necessary to maintain control of F1’s operations.

Well, this actually worked in Richard’s favor. By working with Bernie, he could potentially buy SLEC shares at a lower price — just as CVC had — while letting Bernie handle the messy details.

So, why not?

Richard had no intention of managing the day-to-day commercial operations of F1 himself; he only needed to maintain influence over the sport. After all, F1’s development was inseparable from Bernie Ecclestone.

The smooth functioning of the sport required the cooperation of the twelve F1 teams and the support of the FIA, and Bernie remained the best mediator among them. For the foreseeable future, no one in the racing world was better suited than Bernie to guide F1. Not to mention, given Bernie’s age, it was clear he couldn’t remain at the helm forever.

The ideal scenario would be to leave the sport in capable hands while still benefiting from his leadership.

After successfully persuading Richard to consider the deal, Vince McMahon immediately invited him to a private room to discuss matters further — this time directly with Bernie.

"I have many options. How do you intend to convince me?" Bernie asked, cutting straight to the point in their private meeting.

It was ironic — here was Bernie, the one who needed the investment, yet he questioned Richard as if he were the one asking permission to sell his shares. But Richard remained composed. He knew this shrewd, aging titan was merely testing him.

"Mr. Ecclestone," Richard began, locking eyes with him, "I don’t just own a media group in the UK — I also hold shares in Sky Sports, one of the top television broadcasting companies in the country. Partnering with me would significantly enhance the promotion of F1."

He leaned forward slightly, his tone calm but confident. "You claim you have many options, yet I am the only one who can guarantee that you will remain in control of the commercial operations. What do you say?"

It was clear that Bernie had not yet reached a deal with CVC, which is why Richard could speak with such confidence.

"And how exactly can you assure me of that?" Bernie asked.

"Once the acquisition is complete, you will remain president of the company," Richard explained. "I promise that I will not interfere with operations in any way that harms your interests. Everything can be formalized in the agreement."

Bernie paused, expressionless.

"What also concerns me is whether you can mobilize such funds immediately. I know you’ve done leveraged buyouts at high prices — it would leave significant debts. SLEC is worth a billion pounds, after all..."

What a slick bastard. In other words, he was probably testing Richard’s liquidity, making sure he could pay the full amount immediately without leaving himself buried in debt.

"Rest assured, Mr. Ecclestone," Richard replied calmly, a spark of defiance in his eyes. "My visit here today has a clear purpose. Regarding the acquisition price, as the future head of F1, you also need to demonstrate your value."

For a moment, he decided to strike back, turning the tables with measured confidence, letting Bernie feel the weight of his words.

After discussing the matter in greater detail, Richard realized just how much CVC had invested in the acquisition to make the deal.

They had prepared over £700 million to secure 100% of SLEC, and even after factoring in additional expenses, the total did not exceed £800 million. Bernie’s 25% stake alone had earned him a tidy £200 million. With the final acquisition lined up, Richard finally understood why Bernie had been testing his liquidity — he wanted to see whether he could truly mobilize such massive funds on his own.

(For context, the Liberty Media Group had paid a full $8 billion to acquire SLEC in 2017 — a massive difference.)

At the end of the day~

"Then, happy cooperation," Richard finally said, shaking hands with a smiling Bernie.

While Richard was deep in discussion with Bernie Ecclestone and Vince McMahon about the future of F1, football fans in Manchester were buzzing over something entirely different.

Manchester City supporters had just received an early — and unexpected — present when the club’s new badge was accidentally leaked by a government office.

The redesigned crest was supposed to be officially unveiled on Boxing Day at the end of the year, as part of a carefully planned marketing campaign. The club had even plastered mysterious posters all over Manchester, teasing fans with hints about the new design and building excitement for the big reveal.

But that grand moment was spoiled when the UK Intellectual Property Office prematurely published the trademarked design on its ’new’ website — three days ahead of schedule.

A monstrous golden eagle was introduced, along with three stars, a Latin motto, and the "FC" lettering — symbols that many fans had come to associate with the club’s modern identity. Before this, it was a simpler, circular crest with the ship and red rose featured prominently in the design.

This version included the red rose of Lancashire at its center and the date 1894, marking the year Manchester City officially adopted its name. It was a deliberate nod to tradition — a return to the club’s roots, with a cleaner aesthetic meant to evoke heritage over flash.

The leak instantly became one of the day’s biggest talking points across Manchester and much of the United Kingdom.

Fans were quick to voice their opinions. Many welcomed the new design, where City returned to their classic round crest — a nostalgic throwback to the club’s earlier identity.

But not everyone was pleased.

Some supporters were upset about the removal of long-standing symbols, arguing that "the badge is an important part of a club’s history — some things should be left untouched."

A small protest even formed outside Maine Road, with banners and chants calling for the club to preserve its heritage.

Another point of contention came from the three stars above the golden eagle.

"What the hell?" some fans asked. They debated their meaning — were the stars supposed to represent trophies, achievements, or something else entirely?

In truth, they had no specific significance; they were purely decorative. Yet their presence — and sudden removal — sparked confusion among loyal supporters. One man even took off his shirt in front of Maine Road in protest, showing his tattoo of the old badge.

"City are getting a new badge? What about all the people with tattoos?" he shouted, waving a Manchester City flag defiantly.

What was meant to be a proud moment of rebranding quickly turned into a passionate — and very public — debate about identity, legacy, and what it truly means to be part of Manchester City.

Thanks to the uproar, the club’s management had no choice but to step forward and explain the reasons behind the badge redesign.

According to City officials, the new emblem symbolized more than just aesthetics — it represented a new era for the club. Having secured their place among the elite of English football, competing for Premier League and Champions League glory, Manchester City sought a crest that reflected both prestige and authenticity.

While most locals in Manchester were probably dissatisfied with the explanation, miss Heysen, the club’s CEO, later appeared in public to clarify the decision. She explained that it was also deeply rooted in history.

"For over half a century," she said, "few have ever stopped to ask about the true meaning behind the ship and the red rose. These aren’t just decorations — they tell the story of Manchester itself."

The Official Manchester City Magazine later published an uncomfortable revelation about the origins of the club’s symbols and their connection to slavery.

Yes — the golden ship and the red rose of Lancashire.

By the time the Manchester Guardian was founded in 1821, the slave trade had already been abolished in Britain for 14 years. However, cotton merchants were still profiting from its legacy. Raw cotton, picked by enslaved people in the Americas, the Caribbean, and Brazil, was shipped to British ports, processed into textiles in the mills of Lancashire, and then sold across the world.

The ships represented more than just Manchester’s trading prowess — they also stood as silent symbols of exploitation.

These three-masted vessels sailed the seven seas, loading and unloading cargo. Until 1865, when slavery was abolished in the United States, much of that cargo was produced through slave labour — and at times, the cargo was enslaved people themselves.

The ship on Manchester’s badge, therefore, had nothing to do with football. It symbolized the trade that made Manchester wealthy — a trade built, in part, on the suffering of others. The legacy of slavery had become so subtly woven into the city’s identity that it was even celebrated in club emblems — often without anyone realizing it.

There it is — on the Manchester United crest, hovering above the famous red devil, and also on Manchester’s official coat of arms. Sure, the slave trade had been abolished 35 years earlier in the British Empire, but Manchester and its surrounding towns were still thriving thanks to trade linked to slavery.

The most popular story is that both the City and United badges celebrate the Manchester Ship Canal.

This is why Manchester City eventually decided to remove the ship motif from their badge — at least, that’s the most straightforward explanation for the change.

Interestingly, football clubs from port cities that were directly involved in the slave trade — such as Bristol, London, and Liverpool — tend to avoid featuring ships in their crests (although the Bristol Rovers flag notably includes a pirate).

This is also why modern Manchester City has largely managed to steer clear of such associations. The club never wanted to be directly linked to the slave trade — much like Liverpool, even though the city itself was deeply tied to it in the past.

By the time Manchester became the third-largest port in the country, thanks to the Ship Canal, slavery had long been abolished. Yet, when the city’s coat of arms was created, Manchester’s prosperity still rested heavily on the legacy of enslaved labour from the United States.

"This is why," Miss Heysen said, her tone calm but firm as she faced the crowd of reporters and fans. "The symbols we wear must represent who we are today — not the shadows of the past."

She paused for a moment, letting her words settle in the air. "For our city, and for the people who shape its future. That’s why we chose to change — not to erase our past, but to learn from it. Thank you for understanding."

As she stepped down from the podium, the crowd remained silent — thoughtful and subdued. Even those who had come ready to protest found themselves reflecting instead.