Manchester United Banter Archive August 01 2012

 

Use our rumours form to send us manchester united transfer rumours.


01 Aug 2012 22:23:31
One thing that doesn't add up. The Glazers are selling 10% of the club, and they hope to get £200m. Of this they want to keep half, (£100m) for themselves, therefore proving they are liers and cheats, and they plan to put £75m towards buying back bonds. What about the other £25m, that could be for a new signing, and I would hope for Van Persie or a centre mid, maybe Sahin. Also, since the Glazers own the club, they are selling part, so they are allowed to keep all the money. Just glad they put some towards the debt, although they are bleeding this great club. Gilly

Believable2 Unbelievable1

Totally agree with wot u have sed and i honestly think the glazers will give fergie more money and fully expect to see a big name signing come to us very soon

Calvin

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 22:03:56
I Think all this transfer talk is just a smoke screen to keep the fans happy,kagawa will be our only big signing this year because I honestly think we ain't got a pot to piss in the glazers have killed this great club,hope I'm wrong but I can't see it
Ant D. Rhondda

Believable5 Unbelievable5

01 Aug 2012 21:51:29
I know where probably not that excited about the GB side, but they are a very good side. efficent and know what they have to do in their position. Cleverly looks like he can solt in the United side nicely, if he stays fit.
Recently we have been debating about evras position and talkig about a stop gap. I think we all agree, Fabio and Blackett will be the natural succesors, but until they are ready what about Neil Taylor. I know he isn't the most attractive or the most appealing, however he is efficent, versatile and reliable. he can offer competition on both sides of defence and shouldn't be too dear. He could be a terrific bargain.
Hopefully we already have and agrrement for moura, not to fussed about RVP, dont really want him. the main player that i want if we cant get modric would be Sahin. If we can get a loan with an option to buy that would be a great move, that will surely add class to the midfield.

aaallj5

Believable1 Unbelievable1

MOTD fever at his best.

Nowhere near good enough for us I am afraid!

GDS

Agree1 Disagree0

It is a case of MOTD fever but i do think he is a decent player. I think though he isn't quite good enough for our first team imo, but he could be a very good squad player like O'Shea. But he is still young and has time on his side to show that i know nothing and he becomes a great player. lol

Shappy

Agree2 Disagree0

I disagree GDS, I've seen Swansea a lot this season and 3 players have stood out to me, Allen, Taylor and Vorm. I think Taylor and Allen would both be very good additions, and have said so for a while.

Percy

Agree0 Disagree2

Percy,

Fair enough, I generally dismiss most people who watch a game on the BBC and pick a player who played well, it happens every time.

I think he is a decent player, but not sure why we need someone a similar age to Fabio who in my opinion isn't as good as him.

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 21:49:54
Just because he didn't address each point implicitly doesn't mean he didn't address them.

To be honest, jred - the 'five' points you mentioned are all pretty much the same one. You believe the Glazers and the debt which they have lumbered the club with has limited us in the transfer market.

At the end of the day it will have to remain an 'agree to disagree' situation as only a handful of people really know the financial implications imposed on SAF by the Glazers (Gill, the Glazers and SAF himself).

Just for fun though I'll address all of your points with a question of my own.

When the Glazers took over in 2005 turnover was at £169.1m (http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/manchester-united-the-biggest-club-in-the-world-6146271.html). I can't be bothered to find a list of year by year turnovers - but assuming the club's turnover has grown at an equal rate every year since the Glazers took over (around £25m/year) to the point we're at now (£320m turnover) our accumulative increase in turnover stands at somewhere in the region of £525m up to the end of 2011 [(195-170) + (220-170) + (245-170) + (270-170) + (295-170) + (320-170)].

Of course the growth rate could be different (as I'm going on educated guess work) and it could certainly be argued that the club would have grown had it remained a plc (although many big companies struggled to combat the effects of the recession leading to huge losses / decrease in turnover - which barely seemed to touch Manchester United).

Based on this - Is there any chance that the changes in the club's infrastructure enforced by the Glazers upon their purchase of the club have in fact brought in more money to the club than has been spent on the debt?

T0MB0Z

yer that could be true but that would work on the assumption that if the glazers had not taken over and we had stayed a PLC ,the PLC would not have increased the revenue at all over the last 7 years.
I think its unlikely but as you seem to have missed the whole point of the original post which was about looking at the issue from BOTH side i am quite happy to coincide that you could be right.

one last thing united turn over in in 1999 was £103 mill by 2005 it was as you say £170 thats an increase in turn over of nearly 70 % in six years.
in the 6 years after the glazers revenue was up to £331 which is round about 90% increase .

both figures are very impressive but do they show good marketing by both the plc and the glazers or the continued growth in football and brand united over a number of years
jred

Believable0 Unbelievable3

As I said - some growth would have occurred had we remained a plc. Some of that can be attributed to the massive increase in the amount given to clubs for television rights - but based on similar sized clubs which remained public companies after we were purchased by the Glazers - I'd suggest that the rate of growth we've experienced is far greater than we could have ever hoped to achieve (especially considering we've been going through a worldwide recession for most of the time they've been at the club). Throw in the fact that we're no longer paying out dividends to shareholders (which would have increased massively to reflect the clubs growth) and the money the club has spent servicing it's debt does not seem quite as bad as some people are making out.

Anyway. I appreciate what your original point was - but when it comes to the Glazer ownership I don't think you will find anyone who supports it. Unfortunately there are too many people on this site who use the Glazers to explain any issue with the club and refuse to believe that although the majority of their input to the club has been bad they have done some good.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that the debt is bad for the club - but there is very little evidence to suggest that it has had a direct impact on our transfer dealings.

I can see how people may see the significant decrease in player spending and attribute it to the Glazers - but given that SAF has always backed them and told the press that they in turn have always backed him when it comes to player transfers - I believe the issue truly sits with an overinflated market caused by Chelski/City/Madrid/PSG/etc and SAF's fear of making another expensive mistake or paying over the odds for foreign players.

In his time at the club SAF has only spent big (£20m+) on 4 players (Berbatov, Rooney, Rio and Veron). He's been manager for 26 years which works out at an average of 1 £20m+ signing every 6.5 years. The Glazers have been at the club for 7 years and we've signed 1 - which doesn't seem too far off to me. Out of the 4 players the 2 which weren't English were considered flops.

Furthermore a lot of his best players at United have been English (Rio, Rooney, Cole, Sheringham, Beckham, Neville, Neville, Butt, Scholes, Carrick, etc) and he clearly places a certain importance on maintaining an English element in the squad (Rio, Rooney, Smalling, Jones, Young, Wellbeck, Cleverley,Carrick, Scholes, etc).

To me this suggests that he's only willing to spend big on English players these days (very few of whom could actually command a £20m+ price tag) - and I guess this is backed up by the signings of Jones and Young last summer and us being linked with players like Lampard, Cole, Baines, etc in the past year.

I see your side of the argument and have myself considered it - but find that it suffers from a distinct lack of substance when it comes to fact. Provide some and I'll be more than happy to consider it!

T0MB0Z

Agree4 Disagree0

As I said - some growth would have occurred had we remained a plc. Some of that can be attributed to the massive increase in the amount given to clubs for television rights - but based on similar sized clubs which remained public companies after we were purchased by the Glazers - I'd suggest that the rate of growth we've experienced is far greater than we could have ever hoped to achieve.
Which clubs in particular are you talking about that have remained a plc and have ever generated the money we have and has shown a continual growth as we have,
Have u any evidence at all that we would not of continued to grow and expand the brand at the same rate under the glazers.

Or are you just making things up to support the glazers

You also say that Rooney berb rio and veron are our big 4 signings and that this works out as 1 big signing every 6 years.
But veron Rooney and ferd were all bought over a 4 year period
Berb being the only player in your big 4 bought in the 7 years under the glazers

This is clearly an attempt to fudge the figures
Are you just making things up to support the glazers

You say you see my side but you don't
The op was about looking at it from both sides but your above post is very 1 sided

Your are quite right far to many people blame the glazers for everything ,
But far to many seem to feel the need to defend them.

My own view is quite simple they are hear there's not a lot we can do , they have saddled us with debt but we can afford to pay it but by paying a ridiculous amount of 500mill in 7 years it has affected how effective we could of been in the transfer market .
Ferd was our biggest transfer 11 years ago yet in that time our revenues have increased 100%
In short we are doing ok but I think we would of done better with out them.

(hope that makes sense as I'm on the mobile and it's a nightmare)
Jred

Agree1 Disagree1

Given that we have the third biggest turnover of all clubs in the world it's hard to find a publicly owned club that 'have ever generated the money we have' - but Arsenal are the closest example.

In the 2005-2006 financial year Arsenal's turnover was £132m (compared with our £170m meaning that our turnover was around £28m/year higher). In the 2010-2011 financial year their turnover had grown to £255m (compared with our £331m meaning that our turnover was around £76m/year higher).

If we're going to talk percentage increase we only just beat them (94% increase vs 93% increase) - but the disparity growth between the turnover of the two clubs is somewhere in the region of 277% (£28m-£76m) which shows how much better we've done.

These figures also don't take into account the fact that they spent £390m between October 2004 and 2006 on a new stadium which has massively increased their turnover nor the fact that they've sold £217.8m worth of players in that time whilst we've only sold £183.2m - both of which will have affected turnover (ie, their £225m turnover last year would have been buoyed by £70m worth of player sales whilst we only added £14m to our turnover through player sales).

All in all I'd say my argument is on pretty solid ground - but as for whether it's possible to actually prove whether we would have continued to grow and expand the brand without the Glazers it's impossible to say without having the benefit of a parallel universe in which the Glazers never took over the club.

Perhaps they were all brought over a 4 year period - but are Rio and Rooney still not in the team? Should we have a team made up entirely of £30m+ players on massive wages? Prior to last summer was there really a position in the starting 11 that needed dramatic improvement? For that matter what big £30m+ player has been available over the past 6 years who we haven't tried to sign or hasn't been a flop?

I don't see your side? Must I implicitly acknowledged every single contributing factor in argument to appear 'balanced'. I'm not 'defending' the Glazers - but putting across a side that everybody else choses to ignore because it's more convenient for them to bash on the Glazers (like you ignored pretty much the entirety of the second half of my last post).

I agree with your view with the exception of thinking that the Glazers have severely limited our performance in the transfer market for the reasons I finished my previous post with.

BERBATOV was our biggest signing and as I replied to another post earlier - the only signings I can think of in the EPL which have cost more than him are Hazard, Carrol, Torres, Shevchenko, Robinho and Aguero.

Aguero has done well so far and we're yet to see how Hazard will get on (although it's worth pointing out we offered the same as Chelski to sign him) - - but remind me again how the others got on? For that matter remind me how well Berbatov fitted in to our style of play?

Would you rather we'd signed 6 £30m+ players in the time the Glazers have been at the club in the hope of one of them being good? Unlike City and Chelski - we can't afford to do that - debt or no debt. The transfer fees and wages would cripple us. SAF sees this - hence the 'no value in the market speech' we keep getting.

T0MB0Z

Agree2 Disagree1

My op was quite simple really,
if you look at both sides of the argument is there a CHANCE that due to the cost of the debt we have struggled at the top end of the transfer market.
quite a simple question i think a yes no answer would of done.

but for some reason some people cant look at the argument from both sides they have to either prove there right or feel the need to defend the glazers.
everyone's different but personally i dont understand why anyone would feel the need to defend some Americans who have put united in debt to the tune of 1/2 billion and then wasted a further 1/2 billion on debt payments.

you make some good points but the truth is we dont know what the revenue increase would of been if the PLC had continued but united and football were expanding at a good rate and we were buying the top players year after year before the glazers took over.

how many of the seeds of our success under the glazers were laid by the plc.

like i have said in the above, some people cant answer a simple question ,
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

I don't feel a need to 'prove' my point - but like to provide evidence and facts which could support it. After all - it's opinion I'm talking.

If people didn't back up their points and others were expected to take them as possibilities I could make a ridiculous statement like - Isn't it possible that Ryan Giggs has been sleeping with Malcolm Glazers wife and as such Glazer is refusing to support SAF in the transfer market until Giggs has left the club. I've got ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to back this statement up with - but by your logic - shouldn't you consider it as in some small way it is possible?

Of course you'll say it's ridiculous as there's very little to support it (although if he'd sleep with his brothers wife what's to stop him doing it to a man who has laden his beloved club with debt!) - and that's what I'm saying to your point. It's possible - but with nothing solid to back it up I chose to believe otherwise.

Why am I 'supporting' the Glazers? I'm not. What I am doing is pointing out that the situation is not black and white. They're not either good or bad and have done some good things for the club. Yes they've put United in debt (well. technically it's their holding company which is in debt) and have spent a lot on interest payments - but as I pointed out the club has also seen an unprecedented increase in turnover and increased in value by 60% under their ownership.

As for 'the seeds of success' comment - we finished 3rd (our worst ever EPL finish) in 3 of the 4 seasons before the Glazers came in. Since then we've won 4 league titles (finishing 2nd in the 3 years we did not win) and been in 3 champions league finals (winning 1). From memory we'd only been in 1 ECL final in the other 19 years SAF had been at the helm?

This season we weren't good enough - but the root of that lay with serious injuries to Clevs, Ando and Vidic. At the start of the season we were running riot (despite De Gea taking some time to settle) and had we had Scholes from the start of the season I've no doubt we would have won the league with a few games to spare and done better in the champions league.

It's clear that we need to bring in a couple more players for the upcoming campaign to keep up with City and stay ahead of Chelski - but given that there's a month left before the window shuts I fully expect us to do so.

T0MB0Z

Agree2 Disagree0

Tomboz
i will refer you to my last post

"My op was quite simple really,
if you look at both sides of the argument is there a CHANCE that due to the cost of the debt we have struggled at the top end of the transfer market.
quite a simple question i think a yes no answer would of done.

but for some reason some people cant look at the argument from both sides they have to either prove there right or feel the need to defend the glazers."

i think your last post proved it perfectly lets leave it at that pal
jred

Agree0 Disagree2

What, leave it at that because you were owned?

Sydney!

Agree1 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 21:43:57
cleverley has looked really good in the Olympics, hopefully he can stay fit and get back in the united team.

Believable8 Unbelievable1

01 Aug 2012 21:34:39
Just hope sir alex could step up his interest in M'villa or better still go for Arsenal's alex song.They are both good players.

Believable4 Unbelievable7

Agree, like both of them. Song played many a good through ball for RVP last season.

Red Daz.

Agree1 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 21:20:32
I don't know why they've made Suarez play with a big C on his arm, I thought everyone already knew that he's a c**t.

Danny Pughnited

Believable12 Unbelievable3

They made Bellamy and Richards wear it too, just incase people didn't know they were c**ts too. lol

Shappy

Agree4 Disagree1

01 aug 2012 20:40:33
people stop pressing the panic button now in the transfers,these guys arent stupid,they are now trying to make up for their shares nonsense with high profile signings so as to impress the fans,fergie is reportedly to have been told to go fro the 4 players he wants and the glazers are ready to pay and bring them in as long as it will take the fans off their backs for some time.......,and so i understand fergie has lined up lucas moura as number 1 target,then robin van persie,then leighton baines and modric or go for dembele if they fail to bring in modric...........so be patient guys on signings

Believable2 Unbelievable4

01 Aug 2012 20:15:06
Jred, the sides are not 'my side' and the 'Glazers side', you are getting lost in this discussion. It's whether it's the Glazers telling the manager he isn't allowed the funds that he wants or whether there's a different reason to why we are not concluding our deals. I believe there are a few different reasons why we are not concluding our deals. The manager's stubbornness being one reason or players simply choosing another club over ours is another. After weighing up both sides of the argument I believe the cash is there and it's the manager's stubbornness that's the main issue.

Sydney!

sorry syd but i thought the point of the post was looking at it from BOTH sides (a point that you raised by the way) and a point i think you struggle with.

you may well be right but you may be wrong its a shame that you struggle to accept even the possibility of some one else's view being right.

especially when by your own omission you have no inside knowledge.

but that is just the norm really syd's right everyone else is wrong.
I really dont want to discuss it anymore because its imposable to banter with someone who can only see his own point of view
jred

Believable8 Unbelievable1

You might aswell be talking to the man on the moon, jred mate. Disney does not listen to reason, other peoples opinions and even the Eds (especially Ed002).

He's very consistent with the BS, no doubt about it.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree3 Disagree1

Jred, what are you harping on about? No one knows for certain who's right about this subject and who's wrong. I am just putting my opinion across, what's the problem with that? Like I have continuously said, I have listened to your opinion and I agree that it's very possible you could be correct, I just do not buy it. I just cannot imagine the manager being told no when asking for a couple extra million. However I can certainly see the manager telling a player or agent to go f**k himself as he refuses to give into him or his agent's demands.

Sydney!

Agree4 Disagree3

Exactly jred, I've said it before and I mean no disrespect Syd but you are that small minded you could look through a keyhole with both eyes when it comes to the Glazer issue and its painful to have any banter with you as its always the same one sided argument.

Flimbo

Agree3 Disagree1

Oh dear Syd coming up with the same old excses to why we don't get the players we want.
Have heard them all: salaries, agents is a popular one of his,sell on value,mancini makes better pasta, have heard them all from syd lol.

Red Daz.

Agree2 Disagree1

It's my opinion. I genuinely believe we have money to spend this summer just like we had last summer. I'm not saying the Glazers are good owners or that we have unlimited amounts of cash, because they are far from good owners and we do not have City's or Chelsea's budget, but I believe the manager has cash to spend this summer just like we had cash to spend last summer.

Sydney!

Agree4 Disagree4

How about we settle this like men? Rock, Paper, Scissors, Lizard, Spock anyone?

TK-Red

Agree4 Disagree1

I've never doubted we have money to spend I think it could of been more .
But thats a different issue the op was about looking at it from both sides

( rock)
Jred

Agree1 Disagree0

Syd I think your wrong on this.....
We made noises about bringing in certain players last season but it did'nt happen, we are again making them same noises, I will be very surprised to see more than a LB come in now....
HERBIE

Agree2 Disagree0

Herbie, I think last summer we had more than £50m to spend, but I think the manager got restless with midfielders and their greed and with Anderson & Cleverley playing very well in preseason I think he called off the midfielder hunt when Sneijder was being very difficult. The manager thought he had the midfield solution sorted until Nasri or his reps went back on their word. Then I think it became a bit of a scramble and at the time the only other midfielder of quality available was Sneijder and his demands were so high City and Chelsea told him to bugger off. I can understand the manager finding it difficult last summer, but there is no excuses this summer and we need to sign some players.

We know the Hazard deal was down to agent fees, the Moura deal is also to do with agent fees according to Ed002 and journalists such as Delaney & Cass. The issue we keep having is agent fees and we know our manager has a history of rowing with agents. He has made it very clear that he does not like agents in the past and I think he shouldn't be so hands on this summer and let the club's reps make all of the decisions. Don't get me wrong it could well be the Glazers refusing to pay the agent fees, but IMO I think it's the manager who tells Gill to pull the plug on certain deals.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree2

Jred, although the extra money the Glazers have wasted would have been very nice, I still do not believe we would pay over the odds for a player. We certainly wouldn't give into agents holding the club to ransom over agent fees. I wish for this summer only we would pay over the odds to buy 1-2 players, but it's highly unlikely. Extra money available is irrelevant as it's not about lack of money to why we are not able to get the players we want, it's about not being held to ransom. Principles I guess.

Just because we would have more cash available, does not mean we will blow it on a player. Each player will have a maximum value when valued by the club and the club will not exceed it. For example if we were interested in Hazard for £32m, just because we had £32m put aside for him doesn't mean we will spend that on Modric. The club may value Modric at £28m and they will not exceed that amount. Each player will have an individual valuation and the club will not pay over the odds for a player. Sadly. Having more money will not make a difference as we will never pay over the odds for a player.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree1

Syd
my op was
is therea chance the 500 mill in debt repayments has affected our ability to compete at the top end of the market.

a simple yes no answer would of done

but for some reason you never really consider other peoples opinion you never answer a question you just continue to tell people what you think and what your opinion is and further more you put your opinion across as absolute fact and dismiss everyone else with out any hard evidence at all. (papers and twitter dont count)
its like the bloke in the pub you avoid because , he knows everything, is never wrong and doesn't listen to a word anyone else says.
you dont know
"we certainly wouldnt give in to agents demands"
might we for the right player?

"the club will not pay over the odds for a player"
might we for the right player
did we for berb and ferd.

you dont know what our money is going to be used for how much is available for transfers or what the glazers/fergys/gills plans are.

-------------------------------------

" is there a chance the 500 mill in debt repayments has affected our ability to compete at the top end of the market."

the truth is I dont know but YES i think there could be a chance.

this really should be the end of it because yet again a simple question has been blown out of per portion
jred

Agree2 Disagree0

Jred, I have already said that IMO it HAS effected it on some level. I guess your brain is refusing to accept that?

I have said that the debt has forced our manager to be almost too careful in the market. So the answer is yes. But like I have said extra money or not we would not overpay for players.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

We paid over the odds for Berbatov, but not Ferdinand. £29m for Ferdinand was a steal. Lets not forget Leeds paid £18m for him 18 months earlier (I think).

It's the manager who makes it clear he will not overpay for players. Not sure why you are questioning me on that matter. Write the manager an email.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 20:01:50
I'm gonna say this now and have everyone to have a look at Cleverley and his partner for GB Joe Allen. Caught my eye in the first game and again against UAE on Sunday. And was wondering with everyone desperate for a centre midfield player, would it be a bit much to suggest Joe Allen would be a contender. He's had a terrific season with Swansea and I know there is interest from Liverpool but he has played well with Cleverley for GB and I know Giggs has give positive reviews on his performances and in training.

fearny

Believable1 Unbelievable4

If we were to buy a midfielder then I would expect one who is much better than Cleverley is now, Joe Allen isn't as good as a 95% fit Cleverley now. So I would stick with Cleverley and buy someone better than him.

Sydney!

Agree5 Disagree0

No. Frankly. Tidy player but offers little else IMO. Especially not for the money being quoted by Swansea.

TK-Red

Agree4 Disagree0

Joe Allen is probably en'route to Anfield mate. He looks very good during these Olympics, Cleverly looks average.

That's because Cleverly is average.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree5 Disagree7

Good little player, very efficient passer, but better options available for the quoted 15m price tag i personally think

=v1=

Agree2 Disagree1

Blair,

Allen has looked great during the Olympics, but so has Cleverley, looked better and better with every game, very impressed with the 2 of them. You would have a midfielder better than everything you already have if you sign Allen (apart from Gerrard)

GDS

Agree0 Disagree1

Lmao but I suppose Allen is the next big thing? Like Dempsy aswell? And Downing? And Henderson? And Adam? Liverpool fans are the best comedians :D haha

Big Mac

Agree3 Disagree1

To be fair you probably know a lot about average players Blair, being a Liverpool supporter and all.

CnM

Agree1 Disagree0

GDS, exactly the manager says he will only buy better than what we have already got or something different. Buying a Joe Allen when you have a Tom Cleverley defeats the purpose. Anderson & Cleverley in the middle is better than Allen & Cleverley in the middle.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Lucas is one of the best CM's in the world, GDS mate. Allen, Gerrard and Lucas. Looks a lot better than Scholes (15 games), Carrick and Cleverly/Anderson. And you've got a 47year old youngster in Giggs as cover.

Keep an eye on Shelvey mate he already looks better than Cleverly. Cleverly is overated but just looks good in your sh!t midfield.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree1 Disagree3

I would rather put a £12m bid in for Ramsey.

Sydney!

Agree2 Disagree0

I know a crap footballer when I see one, CnM mate. United seem to have more than most.

'Bebe' lol

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree1 Disagree2

So we have Bebe, a player with hardly any appearances for the club, and we have more crap footballers 'than most'. So we have more crap footballers than all the other clubs in the Premier League.

I appreciate you are here on a wind up Blair but how do you expect to wind people up when you talk such rubbish.

Lucas is one of the best midfielders in the world, did you seriously just say that. If I asked 1000 people in the world to name the best 50 midfielders how many do you think would include Lucas? Or does it depend how many deluded scousers I ask?

You know that our s*** midfield finished 2nd in the league last season, a minute away from the title? Cleverley looks good in the midfield because he is good, and you suggest Shelvey is better than him, you have got to be kidding?

How many points / positions behind the ageing, terrible, 'sh!t' United team will Liverpool finish this season? 30 points / 6 positions?

Or is this year going to be your year??!! I think I have heard that before. I am fine with you coming on here talking a bit of sh!t because that is what scousers do, but the way you talk it is like Liverpool won the league and Champions league last season and United are miles behind you, can't you appreciate how pathetic you sound being all bitter?

GDS

Agree3 Disagree0

Blair mate i have no doubt you can spot a crap player, you do spend alot of time at Anfield. lol.

Shappy

Agree4 Disagree0

Lucas is a fantastic footballer. Would get on ahead of Carrick, Cleverly and Anderson (lol) no probs.

Didn't read the rest of your post mate. Olympic water polo is on the Tele. And I have 50 big ones on Nigeria to win.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree0 Disagree3

Joe Allen has looked good, but nothing to suggest he is worth £15m or anywhere near that mark. (So Liverpool probably willing to pay £20m?)

APC

Agree2 Disagree0

50 big ones on the football blair? Wow your brave blowing all your pocket money on that lol

Chris the REDman

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 19:34:48
Watchinc Rafael at the Olympics he is showing what Ferguson has always seen in him, a top class attacking full back and I feel if he is given a run in the team he will become a very good right back.
I also feel that the Lucas deal is dead in the water, can I get the eds and regular posters views on the potential deals? E.g Lucas, RVP, LB and CM

Believable1 Unbelievable2

I reckon Moura will be in a United shirt this coming season, Fergie wants him and he wants to be at United it appears. The price tag IMO is too steep, but considering a lot of the arguments on here regarding why not spend the money on Cabaye, Martinez or Witsel or players of a similar playing style, I have a point to make. If we're aware of players such as those i've just mentioned, sure as hell SAF is too! If he thought he wanted one, he'd make a bid. I think it signifies how he wants us to play football this season and it's largely concerned with attack, some more attack and then for good measure...just a bit more attack. Get the ball up towards the opposition goal and keep it there until we score.

But back to your questions...Moura will be at United IMO, I doubt we'll sign a CM (unless Fulham will accept a low end fee for Dembele...unlikely) and I think SAF is placing a lot on the shoulders of Anderson, big performances are needed. Cleverly and Carrick are up to the job though so I reckon we'll see a lot of them. LB does need to be addressed and I think we will still get Baines. Everton have looked at Oveido and could be considering a bid. An alternation between Evra and Baines, and the Fabio and Baines in a few seasons time would be just fine by me. Baines likes to attack, has a wicked cross and his free kicks aren't bad either. If the price is right then we'll have him. When the RVP rumors started floating around I didn't want him anywhere near the club, and I still think that. Hernandez is a goal scorer and so is Welbeck, last seasons shaking up of the team with injuries and what not didn't help either of them because if there's one thing a young player needs it's rhythm. Something which neither had last season! Moura, Baines, Kagawa and Powell would be a great summers business with plenty of options available to us for squad and formation rotation.

Andy

Agree2 Disagree1

Why do you think its dead? personally i think its still on, why else would his parents fly to London and why else would his club offer a new deal? Maybe the new deal is to alter the terms of the current one whereby he gets and extra 10% of the fee? I think the biggest problem is his agent. Shyster.

Agree0 Disagree1

Maybe because their son is playing in the London Olympics

Agree2 Disagree1

I am still not convinced about Rafael. He looks great going forward, but he still has critical lapses in concentration. The goal that Belarus scored was his fault, the latest example. Same as last year when Everton came back to tie 4-4, that final goal was when he did not bother to track Pienaar's run. Never mind him getting beat for 2 other goals that day. I still like him though, but I think his concentration is what he needs work on the most.

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 19:16:01
I know every1 is tired of the Glazers but I think they will get as much money as they can and sell. I think they will run away like the greedy pigs they are and will have new owners that hopefully will stop this b.s.

Believable2 Unbelievable1

Why would they run away from United? Manchester United are a cash cow for the Glazers, all their other businesses are leaking money. They need United to prop up the other companies, they are creaming off the profits of their one business that makes a profit to keep the others afloat.
Mitch.

Agree4 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 19:05:16
in the age of Oligarchs and Sheiks, Glazer supporters will say that United cannot look to compete with such ‘silly spending’. Yet for a club with such a turnover and fan base, not to mention designs on the biggest prizes of all – two seasons in a row without a trophy is something out of the question for Ferguson and his players, money much be spent and teams must be revitalised. Yet the question that now lingers is an uncomfortable one for those at Old Trafford – just how far is Fergie being allowed to do so, and more vitally, how much money is he really able to spend?

Believable1 Unbelievable2

01 Aug 2012 16:54:42
Is there real interest from united to sign Victor Wanyama? Seems like a good pospect and would come at a cheap price .

Believable2 Unbelievable1

He would be a marvelous piece of business. He's strong, quick, good tackle, young and just what we need behind Kagawa!

Agree2 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 16:47:49
as a arsenal fan i do enjoy the league meetings between our clubs and cup matches so entertaining.so sad to see the glazers ruining your club.
should sydney have not told you more.joel ewanick was fired from general motors because of the chevrolet deal.they payed 25% more than aon did.gm are also not advertising during the 2013 super bowl and stoped advertising on as of no benefit to them. a company that ahas lost$16.8 billion since 1999.the new share offer would value your club at £1.8 billion. the glazers being greedy forbes say $1.6 billion they over valuing utd like they do baseball clubs creedy people.
the ipo could well turn out like groupon or to make the sellers a bundle of money and leave investors high and dry.this would plunge the share price down.
also if the glazers dissapeared and you had no debt you could buy really good players.though you would still be only the 3rd biggest money making club in the world.as of now debt is not factored into the deloitte list.cheer up though as 1 year ago bankia put ronaldo up as collateral to the ecb.shows how much trouble the biggest money making club real are in.football seems in a bad way generarly.

Believable3 Unbelievable1

25% or 50% more than AON?

Sydney!

Agree1 Disagree0

Also we are valued at $2.235 billion by Forbes, but valued at $3 billion by the Glazers for the IPO.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree1

I assume though that if the Glazer's 'dissappeared' as you put it we would be left with new owners? Who's to say they would not take even more out of the club? Yikes, I know!

Lots of people bang on about how much 'better off' we'd be without these owners - £500m to £1bn according to some posters. But surely that would depend on who else would own us in this hypothetical non-Glazer world people elude to?

Unless we get a United supporting oil tycoon billionaire who never meddles in the manager's business - then not everyone will be happy!

E.g. would we be happy with Abramavic bank rolling us but chopping the manager and picking the team as he pleases?

I don't like the Glazers or anything - obviously I wish we weren't nearly £500m in debt but I just wonder who the people who call 'Glazer's out' would envisage running the club if they left?

Gav

sorry for the long post and so many questions!

Agree2 Disagree0

Good post Gav,

Lots of valid questions....First thing to think about is whoever buys Manchester United is going to be out of pocket by about £1.5 to £2 billion. Thats an awful lot of cash. Most of these oil rich mega billionaires seem to buy clubs for much smaller prices. After that they would have to bankroll a massive rebuilt that could cost £100 to £150 million.

For these reasons alone, I feel we're a long way from getting our wish of a new owner.

We as fans have fallen for the biggest fault of many years of success....we believe it should be our year every year. Football tells us, it's not so. Other clubs will come a long and win titles. Clubs will have more wealth than us and bigger budgets.....that's life!

Every season I hear fans and the press, telling me our time is up. We hear that Chelsea or City will dominate for years...but I am still waiting for this to happen. What I do believe is that there will come a time, when this will happen.

Liverpool had their time, and we've enjoyed a much longer period of success than them. We've had the time to catch up and overtake them. If City or Chelsea or any other team emerge and dominate, then that's football. As fans we can become complacent with regards to success. We just assume that we will win....but that's what's so great about sport and football.....it's all swings and roundabouts...

If we we're not to win the league for another 5 years...I wouldn't give on Man United....win, lose or draw I will support them to the end.

I like you, don't agree with what the Glazers have done with the debt. However I feel I have to trust them, as they are businessmen....and rich people tend not to want to lose money. In the years that they have owned the club, we have had great success and I hope that this continues. However I am not worried that we don't spend as much as City and that we don't buy as much wages. What worry's me, is that if we did and Uefa did start coming down on teams with sanctions with regards the new Finance rules.

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 16:06:28
RVP at Carrington.
Chadster

Believable5 Unbelievable6

RVP in italy
Paul Belfast

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 15:19:42
This isn't a rumour but just wanted to say how impressed i have been by Raphael's performances lets hope he can keep this level for the upcoming season.

Believable3 Unbelievable0

If you have watched him that much, surely you would know his name was Rafael, not Raphael

Ste-Utd

Agree2 Disagree2

The turtle? I always preferred MichaelAngelo.

GDS

Agree8 Disagree1

Bebop and rocksteady made that show ;-)

Jono

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 15:17:40
The US filing warns potential investors: "Anti-takeover provisions in our organizational documents and Cayman Islands law [where Manchester United are incorporated] may discourage or prevent a change of control, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our shareholders, which could depress the price of our shares and prevent attempts by our shareholders to replace or remove our current management."

Believable0 Unbelievable0

01 Aug 2012 14:23:51
Is sneijder in England? Just what I heard but god I hope we could get him cut price!
Q

Believable2 Unbelievable3

01 aug 2012 13:53:19
fair play guys everyones going banananas ere!

hows this for a possible realistic scenario?

fergie meets the owners lets say 5 weeks ago to outline potential players he wants and tells them if i can get three of the following we'll be challenging next year.

eden hazard
shinji kagawa
luca modric
leighton baines
lucas moura
rvp

he tells them he has been advised that a combination of any 3 of those will cost say 70m

70m is made available.

this whole business starts up with the glazers,ipo and the rest that i still dont fully understand as i am not an accountant, they make a nice earner for themselves at 90m each, lurvely jubbley.

but hang on, whats happened to the 70m that was promised???????

absolutely nothing, it is still there! 17m of it has been spent along with a couple of million on a quality youngster, eden hazard has gone to chelsea because he felt he was getting a better deal, modric hasnt happened because spurs want too much money for him,quite possibly the same with rvp and baines.

stop worrying people.

we have bid for 3 players that have actually moved clubs and got 2 of them.

jessop1982

Believable1 Unbelievable1

01 Aug 2012 13:48:20
found this on the spurs site...

Rumours that Manchester United are considering a bid for our promising youngster Tom Carroll... I hope not! he is the future of our club!interesting.. would fit in with the plan of getting potential wc youth players in now ready for when fergie does go........ torres at athletico is another who would be a very good buy

Believable1 Unbelievable1

01 Aug 2012 13:36:40
Expect the Lucas Moura deal to be concluded by Friday or not at all - RVP not going to happen - think it was a smoke screen, no bid has been made and RVP unlikely to stay in the EPL

Believable0 Unbelievable3

01 Aug 2012 12:58:54
You can bet your bottom dollar or 200. Million that fergie and gills unwavering support for the glazers will be rewarded with some tasty share options,more value in the Market ...andog

Believable2 Unbelievable3

01 Aug 2012 11:48:44
Van Persie has 'signed' for Juventus, ....found this on yahoo sports .....id say its just more mind games from an agent urging the player to make a decision...

Believable0 Unbelievable3

01 Aug 2012 10:37:34
I'm an American disgusted at the Glazers right now. Insulting to the fans that absolutely devoted to the club. Shameful. Wear your Gold and Green scarves at every home match to show a message."""
dear unnamed sir
so ngiak understands we should not buy manchester united scarves cos the proceeds will go to the club
but we have to buy gold and green scarves whose proceeds will go to...? a company of yours that produce them?
and your company will help manchester united in what manner?
would you mind enlightening ngiak please?
and how will all these "distractions" help our players on the field?
some psychological effect it will surely cause,
but will it be a positive one?
all in all, the whole plan does not seem to make any sense to ngiak...
gan

Believable4 Unbelievable2

01 Aug 2012 10:33:09
So David Moyes has been to Copenhagen to look at Oviedo...Baines could still be an option for us. Or we could hijack their bid for messing us around and valuing their players at ridiculously high prices...

Andy

Believable0 Unbelievable0

01 Aug 2012 10:06:04
The hostility in here tonight is absolutely hilarious. I told you all last month when you thought the flotation was a good thing, it was bad news. The Glazers are doing exactly what I said they would do 'be going absolutely nowhere'.

But you thought you knew best BUT again I am proved correct.

Cheers

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96"""
dear mr blair mayne ynwa
ngiak is so glad to bear witness to your taunting again! you have always been so successful at that..
so much more fun when a personality like you turn the children here on...
but ngiak wants to clarify "going nowhere"
money wise?
well manchester united commercial earnings are almost 3 TIMES more than 7 years ago..
team performance wise?
err... stats and league position dont lie, dont they?
ownership?
ngiak does wanna go down the path of mr rainfishtrombone/ mr kloot/ mr gagus
broken rambling record but the truth of the matter is..
they are here
and are not good for the club until the debt is gone
afterwhich, we will be the biggest earning club in the world by a mile due to their efforts now
owned by them... or a board of directors... large payments out to these people's pockets are the norm... EITHER WAY
but hey!
ngiak is sure thats not the issue right, dear mr blair mayne ynwa?
any of these numbers can NEVER be compared to the team you support, right? by a multiple of 300 to 400% right?
but ngiak guesses that why you are here anyway
cos you just cant bear to awake to the realization of the ONCE GREAT club of yours are now... errrr... where are they, sir?
please remind ngiak please?
gan

Believable2 Unbelievable2

You have also been proved wrong on many occasions.
Andy Caroll.

Whistler.

Agree0 Disagree0

Haha Gan, sometimes to be honest you post some cryptic twaddle. All is forgiven though when you respond to such drivel in such amusing clarity, gawd bless ya and ya penguin
Invisible STuey

Agree1 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 10:05:51
Iv just read that dzecko(spelling) could be stayin at city if so they really don't seem to be shifting the players they wanted to shift which could mean no room for more signings i.e RVP an wit juve sayin they are loosing interest could we really bag RVP . I can't see it myself but then again I never thought I woUld see Owen in a utd shirt. Also wasn't today near enough the deadline for the Moura deal % wise. Which has me thinking we ether have a deal in place as its gone very quiet or we've turned our heads elsewhere. Please don't post back anything about the IPO I really couldn't care less I will always support this club regardless of owners or floatations but some of you guys are beyond the joke right now.

CAIN

Believable1 Unbelievable1

01 Aug 2012 08:55:21
We need cover at left back. What about this S Houghton I keep hearing about. 3 goals in 3 matches and one against Brazil......

Believable4 Unbelievable0

31 Jul 2012 17:28:39
I posted last month about your flotation and was set upon by Ed004, Disney etc,etc..When all I said was this flotation means the Glazers are going absolutely nowhere. Ed004, Disney etc, reassured me that when the 10% of shares were sold ALL of the profit from these shares, will go to reducing your debt. Now it seems that your fine owners will make 25 mill each and your debt interest only being reduced by 5 mill a year.

I would seriously love to know how Ed004, Disney etc, are going to sugar coat this latest development?

Your owners, Disney, Gill and Slur Alex keep lying to you but still you do nothing?

If you're in trouble and urgent need of assistance. If you can find them, maybe you can hire the Spirit Of Shankly.

Cheers

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Ps. Disney stop worrying about us mate. You've enough on your plate.

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Ps. Disney stop worrying about us mate. You've enough on your plate.
------------------------------------

Oh sweet irony...

TK-Red

Agree4 Disagree0

First off the IPO hasn't happened as yet Blair, so perhaps a little premature there. If the IPO goes ahead the Glazers will take £96m and £75m will go towards the debt. This is JUST 10% of the club floated, the Glazers were willing to float up to 35% a month or so ago when you were last talking about the IPO, so this will not be the only money going towards the debt. Still perhaps another 25% to float at a later date.

Also debt isn't a big problem for us as we can pay the £35m/£40m interest with ease and still make massive profits. Liverpool on the other hand are making huge losses. You are losing all of your decent players and replacing them with average Joes. Trust me when I say that United are sitting very pretty compared to Liverpool.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Blah, blah blah Disney mate. Same old BS with you isn't it? Why don't you just once admit you were wrong (again).

I won't hold my breath, you're never wrong.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree0 Disagree0

But Disney!

If the Glazers float another 25% the money will go in Gills, Sir Alex and the Glazers wallets.

The more shares you sell the more money they make. Is this so hard to understand Disney? Your so called best manager who ever lived has tucked you up bigstyle.

I told you the man has no scruples. But as long as he keeps winning you things on the pitch. He can steal what he wants off it. I detest calling this shyster a 'Sir' he is a 21st century highway man.

Or, Dick Ferguson as he likes to be called.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree0 Disagree0

Blair, you are again talking your typical nonsense. What exactly was I wrong about?

Please enlighten me to why the Glazers clearing £75m off of the debt is bad for the club?

My god you are brain-dead.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

The very shyster that seen off that babbling mess of a man and lame duck of a manager Kenny Dalglish.

I wonder if he still has his Suarez T-shirt to cry into every night.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

I heard a rumour today that newcastle utd are renaming them selves newcastle highwaymen united after being so pleased with the way they robbed liverpool out of £35 million pounds,joeyored

Agree0 Disagree0

But didn't the Glazers and you say that ALL monies raised from the flotation, will go to clearing the debt, Disney mate?

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree0 Disagree0

LOL, so I repeated the quote from the IPO prospectus that said the Glazers were planning on using all of the proceeds to reduce debt and because the Glazers decided to go in another direction and not use all the proceeds, I am now wrong? Clutching at straws again Blair.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

I told you to stop believing media BS mate. Especially when it comes from the Glazers.

How gullible are you? Lol

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes, how gullible of me to believe an IPO prospectus to be the truth ;)

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 09:05:19
You did it we did it, Ed mate. Why can't the Mancs do it? They are the self acclaimed 'biggest club in the world' but still they can't seem to drum up enough support to get the ball rolling?

They lack passion. Something us LFC fans and Celts, have plenty of.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96
----------------------------

How is that self acclaimed Blur? Its pretty well documentated.

Believable1 Unbelievable0

You still living in your mothers basement blair?

even with all our debt and issues of the pitch we still finish higher than you and still out do you in everything..

JK92

Agree0 Disagree0

Mate is the liverfool site really that boring u have to come on here?
Or is that over the last 20+years u dnt have a single flame to hold to united and your SELF ACCLAIMED best fans in the world just want to grab at any stick to try and pull us down to ur level? u had really bad owners who took ur club back 5 steps, and a useless manager who played on all the fans heart strings to hide his bad mangement, difference is our club makes money and history all the time yours just remembers when it was once a decent club, and keeps reminding every1 of that, thats y every1 in england laughs at your fans, £100m+ spent last year and a 6th place finish, and now u have a team of over paid donkeys.
U all make us laugh so keep posting on here we need u to remind us that although our club isn't in the best of shape atm, it could b worse we could all be liverfool fans

Chris the REDman

Agree5 Disagree0

Then get off your asses unnamed poster and do something about your vermin. You're are too busy eating prawn sandwiches, to do anything.

Blair Mayne YNWA JFT96

Agree1 Disagree3

He might be right, i mean we all know they suck big time and yet they manage to pop up here and try to prove that they dont
passion? certainly
DJ

Agree0 Disagree0

This supposed pool supporter sure does love to visit the page of the 'biggest club in the world'.

Agree2 Disagree0

Get off my asses? i've just got the 1 thanks, and the prawn sandwiches are pretty tasty, these are the perks of supporting the biggest club in the world.

Agree3 Disagree0

Blair

We eat our prawn sandwiches whilst you wolf down the greesy burger that Andy Carroll just flipped in the caravan outside your tin shed :) It's just the way things are sorry bud, jealousy won't change that!

You're right too - we are in a terrible position since the Glazers have been here we've enjoyed no success have we? Perhaps we should curageously oust our owners as the hero's of L'pool did (lol) so we can enjoy the same success you guys have managed since!

I do like banter, but your posts are pure comedy tbf

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

01 Aug 2012 02:37:25
So glad that the Glazer 'apologists' are now coming out of the woodwork, it is nice to know were not all living in the woods with tin foil hats like RFT. It could be possible that the Glazers are infact not devil spawn and not the end of the world.....

Believable4 Unbelievable1

01 Aug 2012 01:00:33
Once again Shappy is making an analogy based on the misguided belief that a football club works in the same way as other businesses.

The difference with the tenancy example and a football club is that if you have a crappy landlord who ups the rent while allowing your flat to fall into disrepair, then you're going to move. But if you have a crappy owner who lets your football club fall into disrepair, then you're not going move clubs.

The point that all these redundant business analogies seem to miss is that in a normal company if you allow the quality of your product to slip, then people will buy something else. There isn't a huge emotional investment in goods like flats, cars, and all the other nonsense people have been trying to draw comparisons with. Football clubs grew into what they are today as part of the community, where the community supported the club, the club thrived. The bond between a club and its supporters was that they gave to the club so the club would grow and prosper. They are not products in the sense people want to depict them, they are not so easily swapped or interchangeable.

The modern football club owner, and the Glazers are not alone here, bank on this dynamic. They know that regardless of how poorly the club do on the pitch its loyalist supports will continue to back it. The hardest thing for a business to do is to build up a core of loyal customers, and successful ones do their bloody hardest to build and keep this base because they know without it their product will not survive long term. The Glazers do they opposite, they completely ignore their core supporters and refuse to give the money us supporters pay for the club to the club. Their attitude is that despite us giving more money than we ever have to the club, the club's ability to compete at the top level has actually dropped. The only reason this strategy works is because they are exploiting the fact the football club is different to other businesses.

If I pay money to see Manchester United play, or to wear the shirt, or to watch them on TV. I want this money to go back into Manchester United Football Club. The product isn't just the game or the shirt, its the ideal that my money will improve my club. What the Glazers are doing isn't legally wrong, but it is ethically wrong. They are offering a product under false pretenses. They are telling us that when we pay we are supporting Manchester United Football Club when in actuality we are supporting the Glazer family purse. And after all their lies, the money they have siphoned and their refusal to even have the decency to directly address the club's supporters, we still have so many people willing to stand up and defend them.

Danny Pughnited

Believable3 Unbelievable1

(stands and claps)

Well said mate.

RED_SKY

Agree3 Disagree1

You raise good points, but ultimately the moment we all welcomed the commercial aspect into football was the watershed moment when football teams changed from clubs to businesses. Infact aren't we one of the top Brands in the world? This fact shows you what clubs have become.
We brought our own downfall when we welcomed the devils money into our clubs and now we are paying for it. We lauded it when we were the richest and could out spend everyone, now we have to accept with good grace that some teams can now out spend us.

We can't remove the Glazers without destroying the club. Maybe we should be more excepting of the way that football has gone. Ultimately the Glazers need us to be successful inorder to profit from us, we may not be the biggest fish anymore.but we will still be up there with the best. We will.still compete, and we will.still.win.

Shappy

Agree4 Disagree0

Actually Danny, your wrong...for example if the Glazers were to allow us to become not competitive then they would run the risk of loosing out on a large majority of supporters as not everyone can be a die hard fan....

Agree1 Disagree1

At the end of the day we are where we are with the glazers , as business men they to of done a good deal and will make a fortune from united , so well done good look to them, as owners of our football club well I suppose they could be worse but at the same time they could of been better.

I think most people would accept that the debt they have saddled us with is a bad thing and this will have had some impact on transfers .
What I don't understand is people's need to defend them or make excuses for them .
The way they have lumped this debt on us makes it difficult for me to defend them and really do wonder why anyone would want to ?
Jred

Agree2 Disagree0

Danny

That post is a bit dramatic isnt it? Your making more of a situation than necessary IMO, The Glazers have invested in the team and the success we have all enjoyed is as a result. Money has been spent on the squad and no-one can state with any accuracy, had the Glazers not bought the club, we would have spent so much more.
I'm not pro-glazer at all, infact i would be more than happy if they effed off tommorow, however lets look at things with a balanced approach. Had the Glazers not bought the club, we would still not be able to compete with City and Chelsea in the transfer market. for me its all about sustainability. The Glazers have hammered us with debt yes, but they have also attracted investors and built revenue. As i have said a million times, i will appreciate your stance alot more if the window shuts and we have not improved the squad further. Until then, they are business owners making money. Lets wait and see

Stuey

Agree1 Disagree1

Perfectly agree Danny but fact is Shappy's analogy was right except we are council tenants with nowhere else to go
Sadly the fact is its uncle malcs club and he can do whatever he likes within legal boundaries, and we the fans have little or no chance to change that and no matter how much people post their vitriol against the glazers they don't give a toss its their club

Pardoe

Agree0 Disagree0

Danny. As a Red of some 30 odd years it is refreshing to read a lot of your well written articles. Get yourself some fanzine work (or do you already?) fully agree with all your sentiments on this one
They have to go!
Red Snapper

Agree0 Disagree0

Just like when you paid the shareholders of the plc.

Agree0 Disagree0

At what point have the Glazers invested in the team?

Investment implies that you put something in in order to then take something out. The Glazers have never put anything into the club. They bought the club with a massive loan which they immediately transfered to the club. Since then they have allowed the club to spend part of its own income while taking millions from the club each year. When you put nothing in and take millions out that isn't investment, it's a case of legally sanctioned theft.

All the deals and sponsorships amount to nothing if the amount of money the club is allowed to spend is relatively worse than what it was before they came. If someone had actually invested in the club (i.e. putting in their own money) of course we would be better off. All the deals the Glazers have brought to the club are dependent on people supporting the club. People pay money to support the club under the belief, as advertised by the Glazers, that supporting the club will improve the club. This is proving to be a massive lie with every year as we get further and further away from where we were before they took over.

Danny Pughnited

Agree1 Disagree0

Whether we like it or not they are here and we seem to be the best business they have. Any business man will be able to tell you the only way they can keep taking money out of the business is too keep it succeaful. Sponsorship, merchandise, tv deals etc all rely on us not only being hugely popular but also successful. As such the last thong the glazers would allow is for us to fall away.

Apologies for typos...on phone
Red Bear

Agree0 Disagree0

So Danny - you want owners who will bank roll us rather than us being self-sufficient (i.e. our spending on transfers coming from our profit)...is that what you're saying?

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

No, I want owners who can afford to own us and therefore allow the club to re-invest its profits rather than use them to purchase what they couldn't afford in the first place. I want owners who don't transfer their economic risks and burdens onto the club. And above all I want owners who won't lie and cheat their way to every quick buck by exploiting supporters' love of the club solely for their own personal gain.

Danny Pughnited

Agree1 Disagree0