Ploughing money into City in the early years was always part of the plan for Garry Cook’s “project”. The end result should be a leading football club on the global stage, and the cost should not be greater than that of buying an already established club.

Sheikh Mansour was rumoured to have looked at Arsenal and the shares bought by Alisher Usmanov this week values the Gunners at a whopping £900m. Buying Liverpool would be a little cheaper. A Real Madrid is said to be worth around £1 billion, but can’t be sold unless the club’s members vote for a change to the constition – which is highly unlikely.

The project which Garry Cook sold to Sheikh Mansour was to buy City, who were readily available, for a relatively cheap price, then invest in players and infrastructure in a similar way to Chelsea under the early years of Abramovich.

As a result, City are constantly compared to Chelsea, though the ultimate aim of Sheikh Mansour is likely to be closer to the model of Arsenal.

On the back of sustained on-field success Arsenal saw a 38,000 capacity Highbury become oversubscribed and have been able to move to the 60,000 capacity Emirates which they now fill. The huge match day revenues combine with Champions League money, Premier League money, and associated global commercial activities to make the club self-financing. This is also maintained by the emphasis on bringing through young players.

Abramovich is trying a similar policy with young players through the work of Frank Arnesen. It’s yet to bear fruit as the players haven’t been good enough, and he also has the problem of not being able to increase the capacity of Stamford Bridge.

Given time and the continued investment from Sheikh Mansour, City’s project could be a winner. The Independent claimed that Sheikh Mansour had earmarked up to £771m for our project, though goodness knows where they got that figure from.

City are in the process of buying a successful team in the short term, and are then looking to switch the emphasis to bringing through young players without need for the huge transfer spending. The fabulous track record of our Academy was a key attraction at City and it’s significance could return once the current spending spree is over.

On-field success will see Champions League income, increased commercial revenues from a global brand and increased match-day attendances. A new or expanded stadium could come into play once we have a waiting list for season tickets. This has been the case at Old Trafford and Highbury. City can’t charge London prices for tickets, so an increase in crowds would be necessary for the club to be self-financing in the long term.

Michel Platini and his new proposals for “financial fair play” are now looking like the biggest threat to City. These proposals have yet to be finalised and made public, but the talk is of clubs only being allowed to spend a percentage of their income from football related turnover. The Guardian gives details here. The 2013-14 season has been earmarked as the date for the new rules to come into play, though their has previously been talk of an additional three years before any clubs would face punishment by being excluded from the Champions League.

In the accounts just published City had turnover of £87m and operating expenses of over £120m. Turnover is set to increase, but will need to do so at incredible rate if we’re to break even in time for 2013.

For City to get their turnover up to the likes of Arsenal and Chelsea, never mind United and Real Madrid in three years would be a big ask. Maybe with the additional three years it would be possible with continued success. The pressure to get into the Champions League sooner rather than later is clearly on.

Quite possibly this was a factor in the dismissal of Mark Hughes. City may well have been on course for 6th place this season, but with a Champions League spot up for grabs and Platini’s proposals on the horizon, we need to go flat out for success now. Mancini says he can deliver it, and that’s what Sheikh Mansour wanted to hear.

As has been documented elsewhere, Platini’s ideas are full of flaws as they look to favour clubs with the highest turnovers. Rather than survival of the fittest, it looks more like a consolidation of the fattest.

As a consequence there could be a mad scramble get in the Champions League by 2013-14. The irony is that with no constraints in the meantime, a club like City would do well to spend what they can, while they can. Making big long-term signings prior to 2013 would be a priority for clubs without huge turnovers.

If we pip Liverpool to a Champions League spot this season, then a monster bid to get Torres makes even more sense.

Firstly, it’s clear that with Liverpool struggling there is a belief that a Champions League place is up for grabs and City should be going all out to grab it. Forget that line from Khaldoon at the end of last season about 6th place being good enough this time round. At the time it felt like a PR statement to keep the media happy and the pressure off Hughes in public. And now we see that’s all it was.

Following a successful Summer transfer window, and an open Premier League this season, their can be no doubt that this season’s target is a top four place.

As I’ve written previously, the professionalism of Hughes in the way he conducted himself and on matters off the pitch won the initial backing of the board and he brought in experienced quality players. We may have paid over the odds, and they aren’t Kaka style galacticos, but it is still a very good squad with strength in depth.

Unfortunately, when the team goes out on the pitch, it has consistently failed to be the sum of it’s individual parts. The defence in particular never looks convincing, and Hughes’ coaching team haven’t been able to resolve the problems.

The problem with the tactics and coaching has been best exemplified by Richard Dunne – a solid defender under Stuart Pearce, Sven, Martin O’Neill and Giovanni Trappatoni; he looked a liability under Hughes. Micah Richards has likewise gone backwards under the Welshman. Bridge and Lescott followed a nightmare performance against Burnley by appearing as England’s best two defenders against Brazil when under the guidance of Fabio Capello.

Looking back, under Sven, we went to Old Trafford, kept it tight and took the sting out of the game, before scoring twice and closing the game out. There has never been that level of discipline and control under Hughes.

In contrast, we have now conceded three goals in each of the last three fixtures. After a year and a half, a good coach shouldn’t still be waiting for the defence to gel. That has completely undermined Hughes’ position, regardless of all the good work off the pitch.

The loyalty of Hughes to his coaching team has meant no fresh talent has been brought in to this area.

Having decided that we’re going to bid for a top four place this season, the decision for Sheikh Mansour, was whether that would be best served by persevering with Mark Hughes or bringing in someone else.

The run of draws and defeat at Spurs, along with insufficient signs of improvement in the defence has made that decision go against the Welshman. The way we’re playing, there isn’t sufficient evidence that Hughes could claim a top four spot.

Therefore should we just right off this season, or take a gamble and appoint someone else mid-season?

Unfortunately for Hughes, the example of Guus Hiddink at Chelsea is still fresh in everyone’s minds.

Last season, Scolari was struggling with a squad of talented individuals. Drogba was a shadow of his former self, and a top four place was in doubt. Abramovich acted decisively, bringing in a proven coach and hey presto, second place in the league and the FA Cup. Drogba was a man reborn.

City’s board have decided to take a similar gamble. For Drogba, read Robinho and Adebayor. The refusal to sanction Robinho’s move to Barcelona indicates that Sheikh Mansour believes the Brazilian can be salvaged and help inspire us to that top four place.

Guus Hiddink may well have been the preferred coach, but time is of the essence. Games are coming thick and fast. City can’t afford to slide down the league, and there is a transfer window to negotiate.

In contrast, Hiddink is at an age where he is in no hurry to take on a major challenge like City. Extracating him from the Russia job would also be a process that couldn’t be rushed against the Russian Federation’s wishes. These factors are likely to have ruled him out.

If Inter had failed to qualify for the next stage of the Champions League, then Mourinho may have been available. They made it, and he was never going to run away from the challenge of taking on Chelsea in the knockout stages.

Mancini on the other hand has arguably the best CV of any available manager and is keen to work in the Premier League. People are questioning his lack of Premier League experience and the fact Inter benefited from other clubs being punished in the Serie A financial scandal. However Ancelotti, Wenger, Benitez, Hiddink and Mourinho didn’t have previous Premier League experience, and Mancini still managed to finish above Ancelotti and Kaka three times to get his Serie A titles.

Appointing him this weekend may be brutal for Hughes, but it gives the Italian a full week to work with the squad before the game with Stoke. That’s as long a period as he could have at this time of the season. It also gives him a few weeks to assess the squad and bring in new players during the January transfer window.

Wholesale changes are unlikely. Initially, Mancini is here primarily for his coaching skills and ability to get results. There may be a couple of additions, but the turnover of previous transfer windows is highly unlikely. That won’t stop the speculation in the press mind.

His lack of experience in England and inability to speak the language (though apparently he has been having lessons) make the appointment a big gamble. But once it was decided that Hughes wasn’t likely to take us to fourth place, what is there to lose?

Finishing in a Europa League place is neither here or there to City’s owners. If Mancini crashes and burns, then Mourinho or someone of that ilk may be available in the Summer. There is talk of a clause in the Italian’s contract that he could be paid off in the Summer, though that may just be speculation.

One thing’s for sure, the target of fourth place has now been set. We have a coach with an impressive record of trophies who is hungry to do well. It promises to be an exciting ride once again. Here we go with Mancini’s blue and white army!

• Do you think City have done the right thing? I’d be interested to hear thoughts on Roberto Mancini.

Where has Mark Hughes and the best part of a couple of hundred million in transfers got us? Currently we have 20 points after 11 matches. At the same stage two seasons ago under Sven we had 22 points. Ouch!

Mark Hughes has assembled a squad of richly talented individuals. The concern is that we’re now well into his second season and there’s still little sign of the team as a whole being the sum of it’s parts.

With the quality squad we now possess, the team is resembling the Chelsea of Avram Grant more than that of Guus Hiddink, in the way it fails to shine and doesn’t quite achieve it’s goals.

It would be great if Hughes could turn things round and finally come up with a solid defence, but the amount of time it’s taking make that look increasingly doubtful. The midfield and attack is closer to where they need to be, though even there we look a long way behind Chelsea or Arsenal.

There appears to be a need for a top quality coach to take advantage of the slip by Liverpool and lead us into the top four. Hughes is very loyal to his trusted coaching team, and it’s doubtful he’s prepared to make changes.

We’ve bought quality players and they compare with those at the ‘top four’ sides. Can the same be said of the manager?

Having utilised his professionalism in the transfer market to assemble a strong squad of talented individuals has Mark Hughes served his purpose in taking us as far as he can? Would we now be better served by a better coach?

If change is needed, when is the likely time?

A number of things ought to determine the time to make a change. Obviously results are the main factor – if the team go on a bad losing run then any manager is likely to get fired.

For as long as City are in contention for fourth place, Hughes should be fine. If the team finish the season below sixth, he will be on his way. If the team finish fifth or sixth, then the situation is unclear. If future performances are like those witnessed recently then that shouldn’t be good enough.

Sheikh Mansour and Khaldoon al Mubarak appear far less trigger-happy over the firing of a manager than the likes of Peter Swales or Thaksin, so it would be a surprise if Hughes was to go during the season. However, it would be a shame if an opportunity to claim a top four spot at the expense of a struggling Liverpool was missed.

One final indication that Hughes has still to prove himself is that his contract is due to expire at the end of the season and there have yet to be any discussions over a new one.

Quality of potential replacements

Club owners are often castigated for enquiring after other managers when they already have one. After years of witnessing Peter Swales’ stewardship I was left feeling the opposite. The owner should always check out possible replacements and ensure a better manager is ready to come in before disposing of the present incumbent.

If Hughes goes mid season, the obvious candidate is Guus Hiddink. The way he galvanised Chelsea last season was hugely impressive, and he won the FA Cup to go alongside a top four finish. What City fan wouldn’t settle for that this season?

Of course the task with City is harder, even if the expectations wouldn’t initially be quite so high. Chelsea had a proven squad that needed to return to former ways, whereas this City team still needs blending for the first time.

Hiddink may be an excellent quick-fix coach, but his ability to work the transfer market is a bigger unknown.

He has spoke of his desire to return to the Premier League, and there was widespread talk that if Ancelotti crashed and burned, then Hiddink could go back to Chelsea following the current World Cup play-off fixtures. The man himself may prefer a return to Stamford Bridge but we could offer a big cheque and terrific prospects.

If results don’t improve, the spectre of Hiddink could start to loom over Mark Hughes.

An  interview with Jose Mourinho appeared in The Times this weekend saying he would like to join a Premier League club to build something special. He may have quickly backtracked on those comments before his current chairman saw them, but I’m sure his name will continue to be linked with City. Mourinho himself could have eyes on Ferguson’s retirement, but City may be able to persuade him of our qualities.

In terms of results, Mourinho is excellent. In terms of attractive football, his teams appear under instruction not to do anything that could divert attention away from the manager. The major concern could be his outspoken comments and courting of controversy. Given that one of Sheikh Mansour’s stated aims for City is to promote the good name of Abu Dhabi, then Mourinho’s ability to offend could make him to much of a risk.

If Rafa Benitez were to lose his job at Anfield, then he would inevitably be linked with any vacancy at Eastlands. His stock may be low at the moment, but his CV is still mightily impressive. Concerns about his transfer deals and the beautiful game may abound, but at least he can send out an organised, disciplined side when he’s up against it.

Given the desire for success at City, it’s doubtful whether Sheikh Mansour would look to a manager who doesn’t already have trophies on his CV. Mark Hughes was a promising young manager. If he fails, then the replacement is likely to be a proven one.

Next up in the Premier League is the battle of the under-performers when we travel to Anfield. Normally a draw would be a good result, but given how we’ve slipped down the table, a victory is required to stop the rot. Maybe the losers of that match should get on the phone to Guus Hiddink if they want to be playing in the Champions League next year.

(If you haven’t seen them already please check out ‘Part One: The good side of Mark Hughes‘, and ‘Part Two: Concerns about Mark Hughes‘)

• What do you think?

Footnote: For those who don’t recall the managerial merry-go-round of Peter Swales, here’s a cracking example of the interview process.