Manchester United

[Froggy]

2 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

We can compare what you've spent under the glazers compared to what we spend under Ashley if you like?

 

You're comparing the clubs, not the owners. 

[Terrymac1966]

3 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

We can compare what you've spent under the glazers compared to what we spend under Ashley if you like?

Exactly a ridiculous comparison to even suggest

 

Truth is Man U do and will continue to spunk money on players whos characters are all wrong.

Then they get a new manager every couple of years as the last one becomes a scapegoat.

 

Now if you want to make a comparison about badly run clubs including the Ashley era and Manure right now I can see a little bit to agree on but NEVER finances

[Froggy]

10 minutes ago, Terrymac1966 said:

Exactly a ridiculous comparison to even suggest

 

Truth is Man U do and will continue to spunk money on players whos characters are all wrong.

Then they get a new manager every couple of years as the last one becomes a scapegoat.

 

Now if you want to make a comparison about badly run clubs including the Ashley era and Manure right now I can see a little bit to agree on but NEVER finances

 

We're over £1b in debt due to their buyout. We've spent £1b in interest payments due to their buyout. They've still taken £200m out of the club in dividend payments. 

 

You're confusing the financial might of our club with the owners pockets. We can spend a lot every season because of global appeal and revenue allows it, but The Glazers have never put a single penny of their own money into the club, and instead have bled it dry. Mike Ashley never did that. Even when he loaned the club money, it was interest free. 

 

The Ashley era and The Glazer era can't be compared finance wise, you're right. Ashley was bad, but The Glazers are infinitely worse.

[BennyBlanco]

29 minutes ago, Froggy said:

The Glazers are like Ashley.

 

Ratcliffe is making necessary cuts because of what the Glazers have done.

 

Not sure cutting the ex players relatively small support fund was a necessary cut mate in all honesty. That seemed ridiculously punitive and miserly. Didn’t Neville even have him for that in that interview?

[54]

2 minutes ago, Froggy said:

The Ashley era and The Glazer era can't be compared finance wise, you're right. Ashley was bad, but The Glazers are infinitely worse.

 

 

[Boey_Jarton]

The Glazers and Ashley are both terrible football owners but in different ways.

 

Ashley treated Newcastle as a subsidiary of Sports Direct and through mismanagement, hiring cronies and a lack of investment, he allowed the club to turn into a lower half PL team that regularly fights relegation and one has commercial revenues that are a fraction of previously comparable rivals. 

 

The Glazers took ownership of Man united through a leveraged buyout, putting the club into debt that is effectively secured on their future revenues. As an ownership group they have benefitted significantly (into the billions) from a combination of dividend payments, share sales and management contracts. They have overseen chronic financial mismanagement of the club that is only partly mitigated by their impressive commercial revenues, which are a function of man united's legacy rather than anything the Glazers have proactively done. Of course Man U have won trophies under the Glazer's tenure but their starting point was taking over one of the biggest clubs in the world 20 years ago. 

 

[r0cafella]

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

We're over £1b in debt due to their buyout. We've spent £1b in interest payments due to their buyout. They've still taken £200m out of the club in dividend payments. 

 

You're confusing the financial might of our club with the owners pockets. We can spend a lot every season because of global appeal and revenue allows it, but The Glazers have never put a single penny of their own money into the club, and instead have bled it dry. Mike Ashley never did that. Even when he loaned the club money, it was interest free. 

 

The Ashley era and The Glazer era can't be compared finance wise, you're right. Ashley was bad, but The Glazers are infinitely worse.

Agree and understood. But how much was your revenue when they bought the club and how much is it now ? 

 

What is your net transfer spending during that period?

 

I'm not suggesting the glazer are good owners but please don't compare to Ashley as the only metric which your team wins or loses depending on how you look at it is the debt. 

 

As for mike Ashley he gutted the club and left behind nothing but an empty shell. 

[Froggy]

Just now, BennyBlanco said:

Not sure cutting the ex players relatively small support fund was a necessary cut mate in all honesty. That seemed ridiculously punitive and miserly. Didn’t Neville even have him for that in that interview?

 

Where do you draw the line for necessary cuts though? As I mentioned above, we're £1b in debt. The debt stands at 1.7x our annual revenue.

 

Maybe a poor comparison, but the average UK wage is £37,500. Imagine someone earning that being £60,000+ in debt. You would be licking the back of cling film to try and save money.

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, r0cafella said:

As for mike Ashley he gutted the club and left behind nothing but an empty shell.

 

What do you think is happening with us though? We're being dragged through the media as we're cutting free lunches for staff because there's less than an empty shell. The stadium hasn't been touched and is rotting. 

 

We've been bought some time by Ratcliffe, who has already invested a decent amount of his own money, but we are hanging on by the skin of our teeth because we're lucky to have one of the best players in the world who is dragging us to cup wins. Without Ratcliffe's cash injection we were fucked, and I think the Glazers knew it which is why they opened some of the club up for purchase in the first place.

[BennyBlanco]

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Where do you draw the line for necessary cuts though? As I mentioned above, we're £1b in debt. The debt stands at 1.7x our annual revenue.

 

Maybe a poor comparison, but the average UK wage is £37,500. Imagine someone earning that being £60,000+ in debt. You would be licking the back of cling film to try and save money.

If you were truly skint you wouldn’t be in the market in summer. But you will be won’t you?. Because you’re not as strapped for cash as Ratcliffe will have you believe. 
 

Cancelling a 50k emergency fund for old players whilst happily paying over the odds on wages and transfer fees ain’t a necessary cut mate. It’s forgetting the community side of a football club. 

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, BennyBlanco said:

If you were truly skint you wouldn’t be in the market in summer. But you will be won’t you?. Because you’re not as strapped for cash as Ratcliffe will have you believe. 
 

Cancelling a 50k emergency fund for old players whilst happily paying over the odds on wages and transfer fees ain’t a necessary cut mate. It’s forgetting the community side of a football club. 

 

We have to be. How can we not be in the market? There's still a brand there that needs to be protected. Our accounts are public as well. Ratcliffe doesn't need to lie. We can see how bad it is.

 

I know how bad it looks that the community side is going to shit. I truly believe that it's not a permanent solution, but tight measures need put in place right now or we're in big trouble.

[bobbydazzla]

 

3 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

What do you think is happening with us though? We're being dragged through the media as we're cutting free lunches for staff because there's less than an empty shell. The stadium hasn't been touched and is rotting. 

 

We've been bought some time by Ratcliffe, who has already invested a decent amount of his own money, but we are hanging on by the skin of our teeth because we're lucky to have one of the best players in the world who is dragging us to cup wins. Without Ratcliffe's cash injection we were fucked, and I think the Glazers knew it which is why they opened some of the club up for purchase in the first place.

 

 

You can play us a tune on your tiny violin when you're giving away all of your advertising space at Old Trafford to Ineos for free

 

And your players are cooling down in paddling pools and wheely bins

 

 

[Froggy]

Just now, bobbydazzla said:

You can play us a tune on your tiny violin when you're giving away all of your advertising space at Old Trafford to Ineos for free

 

Be patient. It's coming. Old Trafford's naming rights will be sold, you can guarantee that.

[bobbydazzla]

5 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Be patient. It's coming. Old Trafford's naming rights will be sold, you can guarantee that.

 

At least you'll get paid

 

We got fuck all bunce when the fat cunt renamed our stadium and painted a logo on the Gallowgate roof that was so big you could see it from outer space

 

 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[Kid Icarus]

22 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

We're over £1b in debt due to their buyout. We've spent £1b in interest payments due to their buyout. They've still taken £200m out of the club in dividend payments. 

 

You're confusing the financial might of our club with the owners pockets. We can spend a lot every season because of global appeal and revenue allows it, but The Glazers have never put a single penny of their own money into the club, and instead have bled it dry. Mike Ashley never did that. Even when he loaned the club money, it was interest free. 

 

The Ashley era and The Glazer era can't be compared finance wise, you're right. Ashley was bad, but The Glazers are infinitely worse.

And you have a go at us for not knowing what the Glazers are like.

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

And you have a go at us for not knowing what the Glazers are like.

 

I was going purely off Swiss Ramble reports. If they're wrong then fair enough. 

[Kid Icarus]

4 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

I was going purely off Swiss Ramble reports. If they're wrong then fair enough. 

 

You could only ever argue that he 'put money in' when we went down, but you'd also need to class the money he put in as the same money he kept away from the club in the first place.

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Kid Icarus

[BennyBlanco]

10 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

We have to be. How can we not be in the market? There's still a brand there that needs to be protected. Our accounts are public as well. Ratcliffe doesn't need to lie. We can see how bad it is.

 

I know how bad it looks that the community side is going to shit. I truly believe that it's not a permanent solution, but tight measures need put in place right now or we're in big trouble.

I would put it to you mildly that the brands image is suffering just as much from the penny pinching. Amorim having to pay for his own staff is not only him sticking two fingers up to the owners but it’s an absolutely look to any prospective new players and coaches.

[Froggy]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

You could only ever argue that he 'put money in' when we went down, but you'd also need to class the money he put in as the same money he kept away from the club in the first place.

 

I was never trying to suggest he invested and know he was tight-fisted. I'm meaning the act of actually removing money from the clubs cash reserves. I don't think any other club owners in England took dividends from their clubs.

[Froggy]

3 minutes ago, BennyBlanco said:

I would put it to you mildly that the brands image is suffering just as much from the penny pinching. Amorim having to pay for his own staff is not only him sticking two fingers up to the owners but it’s an absolutely look to any prospective new players and coaches.

 

I don't think they care about that. Those stories probably won't even make it out of England won't damage the global fan appeal.

 

Those tours of Asia and America will become much less profitable if the club is in the Championship though. The revenues need to be maintained or the whole lot will fold and fast, and that can only really happen with continued success.

[gbandit]

It’s not all about money, owners can damage their clubs in all sorts of ways. Ashley ripped the heart out of this club and cheapened everything about it. The damage he did to our standing reputationally is probably the worst thing of all and the way he destroyed so many fans’ relationship with the club. I think the Glazers are doing enormous damage to Man U but let’s not get into some stupid debate about who’s worse than who and whose dad is bigger than your dad

[bobbydazzla]

The fat cunt wasn't just tight fisted, he actively pursued a strategy that prevented NUFC from being able to compete

 

We were nothing more than a free billboard for his rancid shops, what happened on the pitch was of virtually no consequence to him

 

 

 

Edited 6 hours ago by bobbydazzla

[Chris_R]

39 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Where do you draw the line for necessary cuts though? As I mentioned above, we're £1b in debt. The debt stands at 1.7x our annual revenue.

 

Maybe a poor comparison, but the average UK wage is £37,500. Imagine someone earning that being £60,000+ in debt. You would be licking the back of cling film to try and save money.

 

Did you buy your house for cash, or was it, like me, borrowed at way more than 1.7x my salary, over a vast period, with the majority of everything I pay being interest?

[Ginola14]

maybe if MU tried to finish a few places higher up in the league they wouldn't have to make so many 'necessary' cuts 

 

each league place is worth something like 3m? 

 

yet looks like they've completely given up now and happy to finish 17th

[Chris_R]

7 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

 what happened on the pitch was of virtually no consequence to him

 

 

This isn't true. He paid close attention to what happened on the pitch.

 

Our stated aim, as said by the club in fans' forums and actually written down in the minutes, was to exit the cup competitions quickly because winning a cup might cause us to get relegated.

 

Meanwhile doing 'well' in the league (aka comfortably avoiding relegation) meant no investment was needed, or better still he could sell some players. 

 

He was very concerned with what happened on the pitch, just it was entirely to our detriment.