Manchester United Banter Archive July 06 2012

06 Jul 2012 19:10:08
What's happened to the great SEAGULL? Kd

He followed the metaphorical trawler into the sea.

TK-Red

06 Jul 2012 18:19:12
Hey guys what's the best stand and tier at old Trafford for atmosphere? Just bought my season ticket for tier 2 stretford end wondering what's the atmosphere like


MUFC1990

Stretford End.

G.A.G.U.S

K stand!

Tier 2 Stretford end is the loudest for atmosphere, you will love it up there.

People in the k stand (or the east stand as its actually called) think it is them but it is definitely tier 2 Stretford end at most games.

GDS

Yeah man can't wait for fulham at home

MUFC1990

06 Jul 2012 17:57:42
With Park reportedly done deal to QPR... Fergie must have a replacement already on his way.

Who does everyone think it will be?

fearny

I've been told we still have a strong interest in Gaitan, and are expected.to at least bid for him. That is why the press think we are after Witsel as they know we are talking to Benfica and as per usual added 2+2 and come up with 5. Lol. Anderson could be used in the deal as he wants more football, but the suprising thing is it could be a loan. Which I find hard to believe, but my source believes that is the sticking point atm, Benfica want a perminant deal for Anderson and United want a loan.

Shappy

06 Jul 2012 17:30:24
Moura £35m?
Rodriguez £25m?
Mouthinho £22m?
Van Persie £25m?
Baines £15m?

I've thought for a while the Modric deal is dead so am pleased we are being linked with Moutinho now but boys and girls me thinks its 2 from the above given our previous prudence in the transfer market and the fact that we have 2 new players already.

Moura would be great as would Rodriguez. Surely not both though and whichever comes in its Nani out, no ?

Moutinho could be the Central Midfielder we have been craving for for so long and would clearly be the priority amongst that list if we could only pick one.

As for Baines, I'd love him at the club personally inspite of the fact he's 27. He's better than Evra now and 4years younger.

I suspect the only purchases we will see will be Baines and Moutinho but who knows!!

Advice from the many wise sages on here welcomed!

Halesini

Agree completely Halesini! They'd be too top quality signings and by all accounts Moutinho is very proven in the Portugese league. I would, however, like to see another striker. Simply because Berbatov is filling a space in that team that could be filled by a much more talented player. Now while Nick Powell played as an attacking midfielder for Crewe, I reckon he could be developed into a striker as he's still so young and is clearly hungry for goals going on his stats from Crewe. Maybe this is SAF's long term plan and that's why he hasn't been more forceful in offloading Berbatov.

Andy {Ed001's Note - he played as a second striker mostly for Crewe towards the end of the season.}

Halseni

I've been rooting for us to get Modric for a very long time but tbh if we brought in Moutinho and Baines on top of Kagawa and Powell I would be very happy with our summer. It remains to be seen whether we have serious interest in Moutinho (we really need a CM) but the Baines rumours don't seem to be dying down

Gav

06 Jul 2012 16:42:21
Just been reading andy greens take on the IPO and he makes a couple of good points
Firstly the

"prospectus makes it clear that there is no intention to pay dividends in the forseeable future. Interest payments will not simply be replaced with dividend payments."

So what are the glazers going to do with the extra cash and why do we need it if we are not struggling to compete in the transfer market

Also andy take on why the glazers are looking to an IPO
"Why is this all happening now? We can only speculate, but it seems to me that the Glazers are preparing for a Manchester United without Sir Alex Ferguson. As we know, the club has achieved great success on the pitch on a pretty low transfer spending since 2005. Would another “big name” manager come on board with this limited budget, especially as City, Chelsea, Real Madrid and Barcelona continue to flex their financial muscles?"
Jred

Jred

I don't comment on the financial side of our club as all this flotation stuff I find bit complicated to be honest. I'm not happy that the Glazer's have saddled us with debt but it looks like things are trying to be resolved, a situation that we shouldn't be in but we are so no point keep moaning about it!

But, like you I thought this small cash input was bizarre?! £64 million is not a huge amount when you consider the debt but some people on here have made very structured arguments for it being positive and some very structured arguments for why it's negative.

Here's something I considered, probably way of the mark no doubt but could be food for thought?! Could it be this cash injection is for us to invest in the transfer market for some top players, therefore making us more attractive to potential buyers?!

Maybe they believe having 4 - 5 superstars in the team would give us even MORE market value?!

Just thoughts though, I do think something big is brewing with us, maybe positive, maybe negative, maybe to do with transfers? Who know's?!

Let's just hope for the best I suppose!

Ports

Ports

The $100m or £64m is the minimum amount that will be sought, a toe tipping exercise so see if the Glazer's can achieve the level of value they are after. If it goes well it is widely thought they will float 30-35% of United for a sum upward of £500m. The principal aim of flotation is to clear the debt not get money in for transfers. Although there is the possibility that clearing the debt and the interest payments theoreon will allow a larger proportion of our profit to be spent on transfers in the future. We can only hope

Gav

Spot on post gav. Put simply the figure of $100 million is the minimum amount for a ipo. Apparently no amount has been set and it will give the glazers the opportunity to see how much the club is worth. Who knows how many shares will be sold but if the money is used to either remove or reduce the debt it can only be beneficial for the glazers and probably the club. Bookedredmole

Gav/ports
what i mean by the extra cash is, if we pay the debt off and the glazers dont take dividends we would have an extra 50 mill ish a year in cash.
so if the glazers aren't going to take a dividend each year what are they going to do with the extra cash
jred

Jred - who knows!? transfers, stadium expansion, buying land, leave it in the bank for a rainy day (or until they do start taking dividends!)...we would just be speculating

Gav

06 Jul 2012 16:59:28
Whats the situation on Belhanda? Is he looking to go to a bigger club this summer or stay or what? Would think hed be worth a shot to improve our midfield, i like the looks of him. What do youll think, Syd, Ed?

Daniel

06 Jul 2012 17:00:40
You have to laugh at I am Kloot (surely it is I am a Clot). The Glazers are the devils own for the debt they have mounted up, now we are seeing a move to reduce that debt possibly with the further intention to eliminate it - and that is wrong too! He, being clairvoyant, KNOWS this is to line the Glazer’s pockets with dividends (not what is indicated in the prospectus, but Clot knows better). All this from a person who insists no supporter from outside Manchester is worthy of the club. So his financial model is great - all non Mancunians to abandon the club - its going to really help the coffers with TV and promotion income and reduce the club to the role of (and I mean no disrespect to Crewe) but that type of model - local people supporting a team that manages to develop a very good player every now and then!

Now if we apply the bigot’s views to players and managers, we should be well on the way to ruination. Welbeck I assume is OK, (and Scholes if he graciously extends coverage to Salford) but one assumes these “glory hunter” other players must go. Sorry SAF, thanks for your help, but you have to go, lets face it you are not even English, oh and we better get rid of the Busby, Law, Charlton, Best tributes too.!!! Great model....get off your soap box and look at how business works, and understand that this is an international business too.

We are where we are, the Glazers have run up the debt, but what they do to reduce it is good news. Full stop.

Very good post no doubt we wont hear from i am kloot for a day or two once this post goes away so he doesnt have to reply

Calvin

I suppose there trying to get rid of the debt to help the club ? just think debt free what shall we do with all that extra money we used to pay in interest shall we give it to the manager to spend on class players or shall we be as greedy as before .a leopard never changes its spots so dont hold your breath that the manager is going to get a big windfall .everyone is entitled to there opinion and mine is that theses leeches have milked us of the crown jewels,and dont people say oh look how they have grown utd,s income,we didnt need to grow it before they mortgaged the club but they need it now to repay what they borrowed.if you want to back slap them and say how good there doing thats fine your entitled to an opinion but dont expect people who live in the area and spent a large part of there lives following them home and abroad to congratulate then on a great job they have done with utd or is it franchise.
johndenton

Johndenton

You seem to have no clue, just wittering on. As many have said no-one can second guess what will hapen to the extra profit we make once we are debt free. So why do you continue to pretend you know what will be the outcome? The flotation cannot be a bad thing. we ARE in debt, so would you rather we carry on paying off that debt from our revenue alone or would you like to see that funded by the flotation?

I don't think anyone is happy with the debt the Glazer's lumbered us with but it has happened now so we must look towards the best possible outcome

Gav

06 Jul 2012 14:43:18
The funny thing about Pogba is that he really thinks he can force his way into the Juventus starting 11. With Vidal, Pirlo, Marchisio, Asamoah, Isla, Melo and Giaccherini already on their books, how on earth can that happen?

Moen#7

Giaccherini is a winger. And isn't Isla a defender?

M.D.

The lad is clearly confident in his ability, obviously the Boss doesn't seem to think so. SAF is the leader, we follow but we still have the right to be curious as to what's happening within the club.

If pogba fights his way into the first team at Juve and becomes a world class player I hope SAF looks back and say to himself, I should've trusted the boi.

diego

I think Raiola has planted him there because he made a lot of money on the transfer of an unproven player so he's up a few quid regardless, and he's in a position to start whoring him around the continent if the boy comes good, something which I don't think would be allowed at Utd. Either way he's making a killing, perhaps to the detriment of the lads career but that's agents for you really. Would like to see Raiola banned from representing Utd players at any level though after this officially or unofficially I don't care but he's plainly a scummy operator.

Wilbur

Who ? ;)

Forget him my friend.
He's not our concern anymore.

Halesini

I don't know much about Raiola tbh, however a player has his future in his hand. No agent should make a decision on behave of a player.

Its Pogba's career, if he wanted to stay and fight for his spot he could. But my point earlier was that the confidence shown to the lad, was it enough? Yes he played games but was it a ploy to have him sign or did SAF genuinely wanted to play him? The lad might just be thinking, I can do bad all by myself?

diego

Agreed. Assuming he forces his way into the Juve team in the next couple of years (and lets face it Pirlo and Vidal wont be there in 2-3 years time) then if he does well then its gets the likes of Bayern, Barca, Madrid and even City & Chelsea interested and its quids in for the agent.

06 Jul 2012 12:26:00
At the end of the day the Glazers are trying to clear the debt simples and that is only a good thing regardless of what will happen to the money etc when we are in the clear is null and void they WILL take dividends of 30million just like i would if i owned the club but i have never seen the Glazers as the reluctant spenders ive always thought Fergie was a tight spender but a clever one at that and the value of the club went from 800million pounds to now around 1.6 i believe so they are some great businessman as much as i hate them and i am not standing up for them i am just stating the facts

That I agree, I feel if they hadnt have got the debt they would be great owners.

1redarmy

1red,

If they didn't have the debt they wouldn't be the owners, they bought the club with the debt, it is crazy how it is even allowed!

GDS

Agree with you OP

Agree with GDS too - how can it be allowed!

Gav

06 Jul 2012 10:27:05
jred,

Not at all, because it brings down what the club needs to pay. I don't like that the glazers have put so much debt into the club, no united fan can like that, but it's happened and done no amount f moaning can stop it.

The future is now starting to look brighter though surely if they want rid of the debt, can't be in a worse position can we?

GDS {Ed002's Note - Look at it from the other standpoint - the value of the club has trebled in recent years.}

GDS
im more than happy that they are going to float and pay of the debt i cant really see a negative in it.
my post before was in response to the ronaldo money going in to the glazers pocket, we sold our best player and it would seem the proceeds were used to pay of debt , the Glazers debt so in a way you could say it did go in there pockets , thats all pal
jred

Ed002, can you answer my next question with a one word answer please. We are likely to be valuing the club at £2bn for this IPO, do you think Glazers would go ahead with this IPO if it was valued at just £1.2bn?

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - I can't Syd because your figures are incorrect. There is no £2B valuation being sought.}

Ed,

So are you suggesting that is a good thing? I am trying to not be too positive in my posts because there are so many Anti Glazers on here I just get shouted down!

GDS {Ed002's Note - The club is worth significantly more than it was placing it in a strong financial position. CAsh flow might be a problem for the owners, but it is for many businesses.}

Ed002, do you know what we are likely to value the club at for when we float? It will certainly be for more than our true valuation of around £1.2b wouldn't it?

Sydney! {Ed002's Note - The figure being sought is $2B. Seeking a figure more than a "true valuation" would result in the float not working for the obvious reasons.}

GDS

I wouldn't let that stop you mate. There are a good portion of "anti glazers" on here that shoot people down because they are worried about people like RFT calling them a judas. I'm with you mate. Are the glazers wonderful owners? No. Would I prefer them out? Yes. Yet they have made the club much more profitable, discounting the debt, than we've ever been and, as ed002 said they have nearly trebled the value of the club. I'd much rather read the posts of someone who has formed their own opinion instead of those who think they are part of a new age revolution. If that makes me a glazer lover or a judas in the eyes of RFT and co then I guess I should count myself lucky that I don't give 2 hoots what they think.


TK-Red

Gds
It works both ways pal, if I post on here any anti glazer or question our financial position you can guarantee I get shouted down , normal by the same people , even if I suggest things may of been better as a plc.
Thatswhat makes the site , it would be a bit boring other wise,
Rft is at one end of the spectrum and seems to think the world may soon end , and others don't seem to be able to see or accept any problems with in the club.
I'm some were in the middle I don't think things are as bad as some make out but also not as good as some would like to believe
Jred

As a business the only clubs that are as profitable as United are Arsenal, Bayern and RM. But United are more profitable than both Bayern and Arsenal. As a business we are light-years ahead of everyone else. Cash flow is not a major issue, but if the Glazers want to combat the debt then now is the best time. With them saying they will not be taking dividends for the foreseeable future and not having to pay the investors dividends makes us the most profitable club in the world.

Sydney!

Its not a point of being a judas or whatever, its seeing what's right before your eyes. The flotation thing, for me, isn't a problem as I don't know much about it and less debt can only be a good thing.

But the number of posters who refuse to acknowledge the lack of transfer funds we've been given over the years, is a bit weird. I don't care about the £50m we spent last summer, by all accounts most of that came from our successes the season before.

If we make 2-3 more GOOD TO AWESOME signings this summer, I'll really have to rethink my views on whether we have funds available.

RED_SKY

06 Jul 2012 09:14:13
I keep love united 4 ever

06 Jul 2012 08:53:45
Tomboz and RFT,

I feel sorry for your partners (if you have them), you must be so miserable all the time.

You shout me down for saying anything positive, just cheer up, football is supposed to be fun, enjoy it!

GDS

Is this the T0MB0Z who was getting an earful from RFT for protecting the Glazers only two weeks ago?

Sydney!

Lol. I feel sorry for you if you can't recognise sarcasm.

T0MB0Z

T0MB0Z,

Apologies if you were not having a go at me with this post..

GDS or Glazer's Detective/Spy? Careful Kloot. I think they're on to you!

T0MB0Z

I just quickly read down and I thought you were having a go at me!

GDS

No worries. I appreciate it's hard to 'read' sarcasm.

I was mocking RFT's belief that the Glazers are sending 'agents' to stifle his views. I can't help but feel there'll be some mention of silver coins some time soon as well!

T0MB0Z

I know, my views 'astound' him despite the fact they are the views of most fans.

I keep asking him and others what they suggest would be the best thing now, but nobody can give me an answer. I hate what the Glazers did to the club with the debt, but other than go back in time we cannot change this.

The next best thing now would be to get rid of the debt and see where we go. Not bothered if it is the Glazers who do this or somebody else, but if the club is debt free I will be happy.

RFT will never be happy...

GDS

I've answered your question at least twice now GDS but when I do you ignore it, and make some pejorative remark about moaning.

This isn't an argument about what we can do, because we're all pretty powerless to do anything since the Glazers were allowed drag the club into debt in the first place. It's an argument about the attitude supporters should have toward the current running of the club. Any the major points I have made about the Glazers running the club on the cheap, never putting a penny into the club, and exploiting supporters willingness to support regardless of how much of our money they are pocketing, you have ignored. As long as we keep supporting, sponsors will keep sponsoring and the Glazers will reel in profits regardless of on field success.

Your argument is that a debt free club is good news for Manchester United Football Club rather than simply for Manchester United Inc. You argue that because we can do nothing to change the situation we should shut up and hope that a debt free club indicates a willingness to invest more in the team, which relies on the belief that the Glazers will pump money back into the club. Where is this belief coming from? All they have done so far is siphon over £500 million from the club. All clearing the debt will prove is that the Glazers will own a controlling share in the most profitable football team in the world without spending a single penny. Then even if they sell what's there to stop another lovely businessman from attempting the exact same trick?

Danny Pughnited

My main concern is that becomes a cycle , one owner after another "buying" us with our money
jred

That's precisely the problem jred. If the Glazers do decide to sell, then the cost of buying the club is so great that only an enormously wealthy person or consortium could actually afford us, otherwise it would mean potentially an even bigger loan, and even bigger debt.

Danny Pughnited

Danny,

I am still confused, what you are saying is we are powerless and there is nothing we can do, but my attitude should be one of negativity and worry towards the club that I love?

I enjoy football, I want to watch football, I want United to do well, if they don't then I will still be there enjoying the football.

There is nothing stopping somebody else doing the exact same thing, nothing at all, and like jred said it could become a cycle, but once again, there is nothing you can do about it, so you can either be miserable, negative and complain, or cheer up, enjoy life a little, enjoy what should be a hobby (watching the greatest football team in the world) and don't get so upset that other people feel differently to you.

GDS (Judas)

GDS I understand that you might be confused because you've been changing your tune so much it must be difficult to remember what your current argument is. You started off by telling us what great things the Glazers were doing expanding the fan base, paying off the club's (their) debt and making us the biggest brand in sport, but now you seem to have dropped that shtick.

You keep repeating that you will keep supporting and enjoying United no matter how badly they do on the field. This is exactly the point I have been making: the Glazers know they can do things on the cheep, pilfer all they can from the club and we'll still turn up and cheer.

Just because the average supporter cannot do anything about the situation doesn't mean that the situation doesn't warrant protest. What you're advocating is that we bury our heads in the sand, shut up and enjoy the football. In other words you're saying lets just be apathetic to the future of our club and enjoy ourselves now. But it makes it difficult to do this when you're aware that every time you turn up to support your club, your helping contribute to an agenda that you know is detrimental to the future of the club.

I fully believe that the Glazer ownership of the club and ethos of running the club will have major negative longterm impacts. They are here to take as much as they can for as long as they can from the club. Nothing they have done since they took over points in any other direction, and they have left us in a position where any new owners could potentially repeat this successful strategy leaving us in even greater debt. Even if I can do nothing about this, I'm not going to stop drawing attention to what the Glazers are doing. Why would I? Why would any supporter ignore something that could financially cripple us for decades?

Danny Pughnited

Danny, if the Glazers sold us then they would sell us on the market. They would just float the rest of the club. But they clearly want to keep the club.

Sydney!

Danny, the Glazers could sell the club without settling the debt. But all this is 'what ifs'. The fact they are settling the debt can only be good news. Any club could be bought by a leverage buyout. Are their fans sat their worrying about it?

Sydney!

Danny,

I have repeated on many occasions I do not like what the Glazers have done to the club.

My argument at this time is all about the floatation and whether the club having no debt will be a positive in the long term, which I FEEL (my opinion remember) that it will be.

When I go watching my club I go and enjoy the football on offer, the Glazers are far far from my mind.

As Sydney keeps saying, the Glazers have said they will not be taking dividends, surely this shows there is something they have 'done since taking over that points in another direction'.

I will go watching United through thick and thin but a lot of fans won't, a lot of fans are United fans because of the success, they are 'glory hunters', any successful team has them and the Glazers need them for future success. To get glory hunters, you need glory, so to grow the fanbase or even keen it as it is the club has to be successful, surely the Glazers know this and will make sure the club is successful.

GDS

This will be the last thing I say on this because you seem intent on ignoring the points I make and restating the very points I have just addressed.

There is a difference between being successful and being competitive. We have been a very successful club for the last two decades. Arsenal were a successful club but now they are merely a competitive club. To maintain our position as a successful club we need big investment to replace the players who our success was built upon.

Every year since Ronaldo left we have failed to land our number one (most expensive) target. We have failed to rebuild our midfield and this year we hit a new low in failing to hold on to our best youth player. The Glazers are not backing us to be a successful club because that would take a major investment in terms of transfer fees and wages. They are backing us to be competitive enough that fans believe that we have a chance of winning. But with our team declining (or in transition, from one of Europe's best teams to one of England's best teams) we are going to fall further and further away from the best sides in Europe. The Glazers are trying to balance minimum investment with keeping us competitive enough to keep supporters interested. They care about success, as long as it's cost effective success that ensures their profits don't drop.

A final question. Why do believe that the Glazers will reinvest more of the club's profits back into the club if the debt is cleared? Why do you take them at their word? What evidence have they given you that they care about the club or its supporters? Why do you think that they aren't lying about their intentions? Up until last week they were saying that we could compete at the top end of the transfer market, but now they've admitted that they were lying there. You're placing your faith in a family that have never given the club anything but have taken hundreds of millions. Why?

Danny Pughnited

Why not?

GDS

06 Jul 2012 03:20:27
"You have to remember that those figures are for net spending so our figures will always be distorted by Ronaldo leaving. That means we have spent about 115 million.

Welsh Dragon"

This still confuses me. I don't understand why we have to ignore the figures here. Yes, we sold Ronaldo for 80m. And why are we ignoring this? He was worth this much money, if not more. We sold an asset that was worth eighty million pounds. How does this mean we should ignore the figure? I cannot get my head around this..

Joe

We shouldnt ignore the figure, unless of course your trying to make our net spend look better.
jred

You shouldn't ignore the figure, but if you look at the net spend from 2004-09 before Ronaldo was sold you will get a better idea of what the Glazers were willing to spend on players every season.

Personally I think the club and manager made a bit of a blunder. I think the club should have signed players like Benzema before we offloaded Ronaldo. I always believe players should be brought in first.

Sydney!

Syd
I think the glazers took control in 2005 for the 4 seasons from 2005 to 2009 i think our net spend was 16.25 mill
jred

Yeah that's about right mate. Our net spend under the Glazers in total has been £16m a season. It was around £21m a season for the five years leading up to the Glazer takeover.

Sydney!

I never said you should ignore it, my point was that it is a statistic and so you always have to take it with a pinch of salt as there is usually some underlying feature not immediately obvious, in this case the Ronaldo money.

Welsh Dragon

You wouldn't ignore it but you would possibly adjust it or just give less weight to the figures. Why? Because I believe SAF's transfer strategy is such that he wouldn't go out and splash £50m on one player just because we got £80m for Ronaldo. If we had just got say £60m for Ronaldo we would still have gone out and spent the same amount on Valencia and whoever else IMO. In otherwords the 'net spend' would have been £20m to the positive in that scenario

Having said all that, our net spend has been piss poor anyway because of the debt (even pre Ronaldo). I just think the figures since Ronaldo are a little skewed as SAF's transfer strategy wouldnt have been affected by that £80m coming in

As with all statistics - to look at 'net spend' in isolation doesn't tell the whole story. There are many other factor's to be taken into account

Gav

06 Jul 2012 00:59:28
Man utd best option this summer is a bid for Lucas moura , 30 - 35m would get him , spend that on him rather than modric . Young , hungry and very talented . This is what we are looking for . The ability to do a "ronaldo" and become the world next best . He is who we should be focusing on . Please David gill and fergie get him signed
MUSH PEE

05 Jul 2012 23:45:24
just a question eds-with talk of share issue to pay down debts i wonder could u please clarify the 420 mil debt is this on top of the 500 mil bond issue or not?thanks {Ed002's Note - The debt and the bonds are one of the same.}

05 Jul 2012 22:55:05
lucas moura class. but what a gready b*****d