OzzieMandias Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 We'd be completely up shit street by now if the debts hadn't been dealt with. It's seriously deluded to think otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 I guess being relegated with a top six wage bill isn't 'up shit street'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 I guess being relegated with a top six wage bill isn't 'up shit street'. It could be even worse, Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Right-o. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bealios Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 We'd be completely up shit street by now if the debts hadn't been dealt with. It's seriously deluded to think otherwise. True, although "dealt with" doesn't necessarily mean cleared. There's a common misconception that debt is a bad thing - its not - gearing/borrowing is how businesses become successful. Certainly hasn't done Man Utd any harm. Trick is to get good terms so that the interest payments are comfortably met, and run the business properly so that you are not incurring further borrowing to meet the interest payments i.e. £40m overdraft facilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 We'd be completely up shit street by now if the debts hadn't been dealt with. It's seriously deluded to think otherwise. True, although "dealt with" doesn't necessarily mean cleared. There's a common misconception that debt is a bad thing - its not - gearing/borrowing is how businesses become successful. Certainly hasn't done Man Utd any harm. Trick is to get good terms so that the interest payments are comfortably met, and run the business properly so that you are not incurring further borrowing to meet the interest payments i.e. £40m overdraft facilities. Yes, which is why I said "dealt with" and not "cleared". It's precisely his inability to "deal with" the finances that is holding up Moat buying the club. There's a common misconception that further borrowing will be easy for any future owner to acquire. Oh, and Man U are in debt because of a leveraged buy-out. They did not finance their success by borrowing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bealios Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 If Moat gets the club it will be also acquired almost entirely with debt to be honest - certainly more than the £70m or so that we had before Ashley got involved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Shepherd proved progress can be made without endless amounts of disposable cash. Ashley proved endless amounts of disposable cash means nothing without knowing what you're doing. This isn't me saying Shepherd was great all the way his tenure before Ozzie starts crying, I hope Moat has more of a clue than both of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bealios Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 I think if you have a decent commercial revenue then you can live without a rich benefactor - there is no particular reason that Arsenal are a top 4 team and NUFC aren't, other than consistent good management over a long period of time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 Shepherd proved progress can be made without endless amounts of disposable cash. Ashley proved endless amounts of disposable cash means nothing without knowing what you're doing. This isn't me saying Shepherd was great all the way his tenure before Ozzie starts crying, I hope Moat has more of a clue than both of them. I would say that at the time of our successful spells under the old board the club probably had more disposable cash than many of our our rivals due to the revenues we could generate as a big club with a large catchment. The world has changed post Abramovitch and money just gets lumped into clubs these days. We now are in an era when players who are no more than decent Prem standard command fees of £10 million or more and wages of £50k and only the billionaire owned/heavily leveraged backed clubs can compete - different gravy to the climate when we were at the top of the table imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 well we we're told that ashley needed to pay the debt due to shepherd putting clauses in, if we're taken over whether that's true or not, is another thing using debt is fine, and having debt is fine, as long you always have a plan to pay it back Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted October 3, 2009 Share Posted October 3, 2009 People still tripping over themselves to defend him I see. What a surprise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now