Manchester United Banter Archive October 27 2012

 

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


27 Oct 2012 23:38:51
Don't forget the clocks go back an hour tonight. This doesn't apply to Liverpool fans though as they're already living in the past.
:D

Believable33 Unbelievable1

27 Oct 2012 21:11:56
team i want to start vs chelsea

--------------- de gea--------------

rafael--------rio-----------evans------evra-----------

--------------------carrick---------------------------
------------ando--------------clevs------------------

--------------------rooney---------------------------

--------------RVP-----------Welbeck--------------However i think the team will be a stupid slow boring beatable/thrashale old team that starts with the same back 5

------carrrick------------scholes-------------giggs---------------

--------------------cleverley--------------------

-------------rvp-----------------rooney------------

the midfield will be over run over powered and out played, with this team i fear we have no chance, however fergies team selections against big team leads me to think this will be the team that will play a team like this or something similar. i do hope fergie pick my team or something similar. with my team or something similar i am predicting 1-1 rooney and hazard to score the goals after we go 1-0 up. also we will miss a penalty and ivanavic to get sent off.

Coombesy {Ed007's Note -

Believable1 Unbelievable5

Forgot to mention Tunners sneezing on 60 mins in the stands. And Phelan looking disinterested throughout.

DodgyBanter

Agree1 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 21:09:14
Further to the discussion about the Glazers ownership...

If you were a completely unbiased observer of the Glazer ownership, i.e. you had no affiliation to any club, would you all be as angry about it?

Let's face it they've done nothing wrong, nothing illegal, and despite what all the doom and gloom merchants say, the club is in a strong financial position. The only difference between the club and any other business, is the that the club has fans. The fans are the only reason there is any scrutiny of the Glazers. And I of course completely understand this, but the fans have no power over anything at our club.

Also I saw the argument earlier that 'the clubs fans are paying the Glazer's debts, is like my neighbours paying my mortgage', well no, it isn't, unless you own your neighbours also.

Believable3 Unbelievable6

Thanks for leaving no name you complete imbecile. Explain why using the club to pay hundreds of millions of pounds in interest and debt servicing is a good idea. Oh you can't? Then shut up and move on.

AJH

Agree5 Disagree1

The debt is an issue and not a great situation. BUT the way the glazers have moved the club forward is remarkable, not necessarily on the pitch (but we haven't done too bad), but in term of expansion internationally, it's exceptional. Ultimately utd are reaching a peak in the UK, so the chance of growth come from abroad, with so many untapped mkts, they are going in the right direction...

Agree1 Disagree3

27 Oct 2012 23:33:06
The Glazers have taken out close to 500m from the club in interest, debt repayments, loans and fees. But they haven't taken out dividends, although I am sure that will come once the debts have been eradicated.

Agree2 Disagree1

Hi i'm the OP imbecile...

Using the club to pay so much debt off is perfect for the Glazers.

WARNING: These are just the latest figures I could find from Wikipedia, the clubs SEC filings, the Andersred blog, and some basic math. I know next to nothing about finance, but enough to know the final figure could vary wildly, so don't take them too seriously, no really don't.

Now...

The Glazers bought the club in total, for around £800m ($1.5bn at the time).
They took out £660m in loans to do so, secured against the club and their other assets. So they spent £140m ($263m at the time) of their own money.

As it stands the club is valued at £1.27bn and has net debts of around £360m. 
The Glazers own ~ 90% of all the shares still. So if they were to sell the rest of the shares at the current prices, effectively sell the club, the sale price would be let's say £1.27bn, the debt doesn't concern the Glazers now as its on the clubs new owners. So the Glazers pocket 90% of this, roughly £1.15bn ($1.88bn).

So they've effectively made ~$1.6bn in 7 years. Of course theres the PIK's that disappeared etc., etc., but either way, they've made a huge amount of money in 7 years.

Now please tell me how loading the club with loans has not been a good thing for the Glazers? 

Agree1 Disagree1

Eds there was a bit of a discussion about big companies employing people to scout out general opinion on the internet, and try to alter it... very interesting.

anyway on a different note:
^^^ whats happening here? ^^^

Agree0 Disagree0

They have taken out dividends - or they've paid themselves cash separate to the loan and debt servicing. {Ed002's Note - Rubbish.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Look guys this is pointless as it is very emotional issue for some. First off all the financial analysis by no name is not accurate and we are not going to get into a who can work a company balance sheet best.

At the end of the day it is what it is and, we have bing game today and United will continue to prosper both financially and On the pitch for many years to come and i am looking forward to it.

Wouldn't it be great if we for once jumped out to a 2 goal lead today.

Shahram

Agree0 Disagree0

28 Oct 2012 08:40:48
If the Glazers flogged the club they would need to settle the debt first or they would have to use the proceeds of the sale to settle the debt or they would need to accept 360m less for the club. The new owners would not be lumbered with the debt whilst the Glazers walked off with 1. 27 billion. They could walk away with 910m though. Pedro {Ed002's Note - It is not as simple as that - I rather think this whole thread is nonsense.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Imbecile here again...

The whole point of those calculations were not to be precise and accurate. It was to prove to people that loading the club with huge debts has been a great thing for the Glazers. I don't know the true value of the 90% of the club the Glazers own is, but nobody but the Glazers does. It's pretty evident their stake is priceless to them, they've said plenty of times that they won't sell up, and why would they?

Agree0 Disagree0

Thanks Ed002 well said. Now that we have you moderating, what are the chances of us selling Nani in January and in general buying even if Nani is still here come February.

Shahram {Ed002's Note - I guess if a suitable offer is made for Nani and the palyer wants to go, the club will let him.}

Agree0 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 20:50:31
Gds you have actively abused people on here who have been slaggin the glazers,granted youve tried to wind your neck in a bit now cause youve been shown up a few times,so lets not rewrite history eh kiddo.
Mick the red fireman.
__________________

Mick,

Can you search my name on here and find the post where I actively abused somebody, because I am struggling mate. I have never been 'shown up' and I listen to other people's opinions and then give my own, pretty sure that's what banter is about?

Nothing like trying to make someone feel 2 foot tall eh kiddo?

GDS {Ed007's Note - I would/should have edited the word 'abuse' out of the OP. Anyone abusing anyone gets automatically banned. Don't worry about it GDS.}

Believable5 Unbelievable0

No worries bond, won't beat myself up!

Let's get behind the boys tomorrow!

GDS

Agree4 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 20:03:06
Did anyone see the arsenal match? Wilshere was miles above his teammates. Looks like he never got injured, what a player.

Believable4 Unbelievable3

27 Oct 2012 21:28:02
is that you stoner by any chance?

Agree5 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 16:14:50
expect a good biffing on sunday utd, i am thinking of a scoreline of-
chelsea 5 man utd 1
anyone else thinking the same lol..............lfc {Ed007's Note - 'A good biffing'??? You sound like that snobby school from the University Challenge episode of The Young Ones.}

Believable5 Unbelievable7

You best hope that's the score lfc to take the attention off your lot. What we reckon? Everton 3/4 Liverpool 0?

Even if you scrape a win, West Ham will still be above you!

Ports

Agree2 Disagree2

If I was you I would be worrying about losing to Everton.

Agree2 Disagree2

Ports, ed007 , remember to drink lashings and lashings of ginger beer after the match , it cures every ill lol...............lfc

Agree2 Disagree2

Donkey, you guys have been getting biffings for 20years now. Look forward to you gusy you are always walking alone lol.

Shahram

Agree1 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 21:16:06
How do you score three quarters of a goal?

Whistler.

Agree1 Disagree1

Whistler. Nice LOL.

Agree1 Disagree0

Whistler mate i think thats when it's almost but not entirely over the line. lol.

Shappy

Agree3 Disagree0

I think you talking about the Merseyside derby.

19-20 MUFC

Agree2 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 15:31:51
Petrucci did not play for the U21's again...

Does anyone know if he is currently injured or what the situation with him is?

oxred

Believable3 Unbelievable0

He is injured, I think. So no worries.

Agree2 Disagree1

Our record without Petrucci in the reserves : DDWL. Against tottenham we produced one of our worst perormances in recent years, and the 4-2 scoreline doesnt do tottenham justice. They could have scored at least 6 or 7 but luck ( and johnstone ) was on our side.

Mick

Agree3 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 15:23:11
is fabio still out ?

Believable0 Unbelievable1

On loan till the end of the season.

-JakeW

Agree3 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 15:07:04
Lets just say Pep becomes our next manager. I'm not worried about him finding youth talent or attracting big names. I wouldn't be surprised if he brought Barca players to our club. My worry is when he was at Barca he was supported my hefty budget. I think he'll be a bit intimidated but it could be a great challenge. What do you think?

Believable0 Unbelievable5

I think having a 40-60 million budget a year for United would do him fine.

-JakeW

Agree2 Disagree2

I think he is perfect for us and not a guy who will demand huge money like Mourinho to buy a new team. He will load up our academy and young enough to realistically be there for 10 years.

Shahram

Agree1 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 14:28:00
I like this new guy that the Glazers have sent on here to bat for them I think he is called Tetrahydro Trying to make it sound all nice and cozy Completely ignoring the fact that we were a club with No that is Zero debt and the words football club on our badge. Yet he will tell us it is childlike to expect people to put into a club as people like me and you do. Real grown ups and businessmen like his beloved Glazers just asset strip and take everything they can out of the club because that is the real world and one we should according to Mr Hydro accept in fact we should embrace. I am sure Sydney and GDS will be getting all moist at the thought of another Glazer apologist joining this site. But remember we see through all of you. To quote your hero Judas Gill. "Debt is the road to ruin". Mr Hydro let the games begin. I AM KLOOT

Believable13 Unbelievable2

You seriously think the glazers have sent people to a website? You are more deluded than I thought.

GDS {Ed007's Note - It is more common than you think GDS. A lot of major corporations (and not so major) employ people to scour the net looking for any bad publicity, gauging public opinion etc about them.}

Agree4 Disagree1

Agree with him or disagree its hard to surpress a smile or two when you read what KLOOT has to say about the Glazers and anyone supporting them. Coming to the point, say what you want but there would never be enough logic to back what the Glazers have been doing for years. Its a shame! The only good part IMO, they do not directly tinker with the football part of it.

Btw BOND if you are around, do you have a Chic Charnley-Samurai-Traffic Cone page? Lol.... Scottish Legend!

Deeps... {Ed007's Note - He actually made one single appearance for CFC and it was against Man Utd at OT in Mark Hughes Testimonial match.}

Agree2 Disagree1

27 Oct 2012 16:20:51
Syd has always been critical of the Glazers and their debt. What he doesn't do is blame everything on them when things are not all cozy. Like he has said 130 mil has been spent by the boss since 2010, its not the Glazers fault the manager has spent the cash in other areas. You cannot defend the Glazers, but they are not always to blame. Pedro

Agree4 Disagree4

I am aware of that but think we are being a bit up ourselves to suggest somebody could come on here and change the opinion of people. Kloot isn't going to change his mind is he?!

Kloot always puts my name in his posts despite the fact on a number of occasions I have said I hate what the glazers have done. Is a little frustrating.

Kloot hates me because I dare to be positive about the future and not spend my time moaning.

GDS {Ed007's Note - They aren't hoping to change anyone's opinion, they are giving another perspective to the argument. Would you believe me that stories we have deliberately made up have ended up in papers and on S*y? Like I said, people are paid to scour the internet for material about their employers. I am not accusing Tetrahydro of being one of these people I am just saying that we have had people like that on most of the busier sites at some point, they always get caught out in the end though then vanish.}

Agree0 Disagree1

Also ed,

Do you really think the glazers care what we think?

GDS {Ed007's Note - Of course they care GDS, they still have a business to run and what about their PR department?}

Agree1 Disagree0

Hmm I'd like to think they care but nothing they have ever done would appear to be to please the fans.

I agree with Sydney on the glazers, they have done some awful things but you cannot blame them for our crap midfield, fergie has had plenty of money to fix it.

GDS {Ed007's Note - They care to the extent that the fans keep buying their STs and merchandise and the club keeps attracting major money-spinning sponsorships and advertisers etc. I would agree with you on the midfield though. It looks like it is roughly £50 million a season seems the transfer budget (plus any sales) and I am as surprised as anyone 1 or 2 MFs have not been brought in.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Gds you have actively abused people on here who have been slaggin the glazers,granted youve tried to wind your neck in a bit now cause youve been shown up a few times,so lets not rewrite history eh kiddo.
Mick the red fireman.

Agree0 Disagree1

United's net spend in the lastb5 years is circa £50M which is peanuts for 'the richest cub in the world'. The Glazers are not to blame for our crap midfield but they are to blame for £500M going AWOL over the last 7 years.

AJH

Agree7 Disagree0

Aaaah the murky underworld that is football rumours sites. You've got to love it. Ed007, next time you uncover one of these rapscallions can we have a big group reveal when you pull his mask off like in Scooby Doo?

TK-Red {Ed007's Note - I'll see what I can do TK.}

Agree0 Disagree0

I can never work out why anyone feels the need to defend them
Jred

Agree1 Disagree0

GDS has "abused" people? Slightly precious don't you think? Not entirely sure about that. The guy has only given as good as he has got.

TK-Red

Agree1 Disagree1

'Jred'

This is the problem. There are some on here that just accept the fact that we are stuck with the Glazers and think that, in the long term, our future looks bright. That is once we have gotten rid of the debt (which we can do nothing about). Then there are others that see such a point of view as "Glazer defending". It's just a difference in perspective.

TK-Red

Agree2 Disagree2

27 Oct 2012 11:36:34
This is how I think that SAF will line us up tomorrow:

__________De Gea
Rafael__Evans__Ferdinand__Evra
Tony___Carrick__Scholes__Young
___________Rooney
_____________RVP

However I think that that team will get overran in midfield and we will struggle. I would much rather see this:

__________De Gea
Rafael__Smalling__Evans__Evra
___Ando__Carrick__Cleverly
___Rooney__RVP__Welbeck

That I feel would be much stronger in midfield and much more dangerous up front. Then we could keep Nani/Young/Valencia on the bench to provide some width and stretch the play later on in the game.

I feel that if Scholes or Giggs starts then we are in big trouble. However if we are winning then seeing Scholes come in at 60/70 mins we will see out the game and keep the ball.

Fresh!

Believable9 Unbelievable0

I highly doubt that Young will start.

Percy

Agree9 Disagree0

I would prefer Chicharito instead of Welbeck after his performance against Braga.

Agree7 Disagree0

Young probably won't start, you're right. Giggs may in all honesty start left as I don't see Nani starting. If Scholes and Giggs do start then as I said, I think we will get badly beaten.

Fresh!

Agree5 Disagree0

This is how i would line up against Chelsea:
_____________De Gae
Rafael___Evans___Ferdinand___Evra
_____Toni___Carrick___Cleverley
_______Van Persie___Rooney
___________Chicharito

Chicharito imo deserves to start tomorrow, and cahill does tend to struggle with chicha's movement.

kdevil10

Agree9 Disagree1

I would prefer
Ddg
Rafa rio evans evra
Carrick fletch
Clev roo rvp
Hernandez

Agree3 Disagree1

As much as I would like Chicharito to start, I can't see SAF being bold enough to play 3 strikers at Stamford Bridge.

Fresh!

Agree0 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 10:31:14
Every time we face a quality opponent this season, we get a defeat with either team selection error or wrong tactical decision or players not in good shape.

I think that would happen again this weekend and the next, and it will increase 6 point gap from Chelski to about 10 point.
Sad to say so, but i really don't think we can make it with the new Chelski and the midfields of Arsenal(maybe we will have a chance to get a level with them).

Believable4 Unbelievable7

If we lost to Chelsea, how would a 6 point gap be increased to 10? Do teams get 4 points now for winning Super Sunday matches?

Agree2 Disagree1

Check your maths. we are only 4 pts behind

Agree1 Disagree1

The guy was talking about this weekend AND next weekend I believe. Not just if we lost to Chelsea.

TK-Red

Agree1 Disagree0

27 Oct 2012 10:23:00
Here is some thoughts about the chelsea game.

Whilst we all recognize our issue in the centre of the pitch, I actually think the chelsea injuries/suspension will help them put a better team out than when Lampard and Terry are in the line up.

I think the key is going to be the right side our left side and how we neutralize Mata and Ramirez. I think we will go with Valencia and Rafael on the right and personally believe they will handle Hazzard as I rate Rafael very highly.

Unfortunately on the left is where we have a challenge with Ramirez making runs at us and we will need a midfielder who can neutralize him. This has me thinking Anderson might be a good option and then we have to pray every time mata has the ball against evra and he will need some defensive help, which leads me to think maybe fletcher sitting in front of the back four to come across and help or carrick.

Starting eleven,

Degea

Rafael--Ferdinand--Evans--Evra
-------------Carrick/Fletcher---------------
-----Valencia-Cleverly/Carrick--Anderson----
-----------------------Rooney-----------
---------------RVP-------------------

I think the team offers us enough defensive cover as well as offense to score at their end and I expect us to do more damage on their right side.

Key to the game, Neutralize Matta and Ramirez

IF we go with Scholes, Oscar will have a field day and hope SAF recognizes we need some legs in the middle of the pitch and can always bring him on in the last 30 minuted depending how the game is going. I expect Carrick to start so it will be a choice what combination he goes with and where he plays Carrick.


Shahram

Believable4 Unbelievable2

27 Oct 2012 09:39:07
giggs
"I think it's important to have flexibility. In the game against Newcastle at St James' Park, that first 20 minutes was probably the best football we've played all season. That was with the diamond.

"With Antonio missing the game and Ashley Young injured we were short of width a little bit. So the diamond made sense and it means we have that flexibility now.

"Wayne can drop deeper, Shinji Kagawa can play in the majority of midfield positions, Tom Cleverley can play behind the strikers... we have the sort of personnel where we can chop and change and play different systems.

"Maybe we'll need to use it in some big games – you might see it in Europe – but United, more often than not, will play with wingers."
jred

Believable1 Unbelievable3

27 Oct 2012 07:16:27
This sunday sees us feca another true test but here are the key areas i feel manchester united should take note of:
1. Defence needs a fix, although nothing can be done except bringing cover from our midfield
2. Chelseas strength lies in their 3 attacking pair than can devastate any defence
3.Our full backs hv a lot of wrk on their hands

I recomend we play anderson and cleverley in the middle with carrick as a holding cm. I chose ando and clev cos of their high high work rate and they will be able to chase the ball. Carrick should protect defensive line while d fullbacks shoul avoid going forward.

Believable3 Unbelievable2

Personally I'd like to see
DDG
Rafa Ferdi Evans Evra
Carrick Cleverley Ando Scholes
Rooney Van Persie

With van Persie uptop, Rooney behind him.
Scholes Cleverley & Anderson.
Then Carrick just behind him.

We shouldn't go for the kill. Better play like this for 60 mins, Bring on hernandez & valencia then and see out the game.

Better to draw than to lose.

'Cause I feel their trio could be tough to beat.

We can't just drop scholes, cause he can start counter-attacks brilliantly.

Agree1 Disagree5

I agree with the personal but our full backs have to bomb forward when they can, u can't invite sustained pressure from the chelsea midfield by them sitting deep, our full backs are key in forcing chelsea back and releaving the pressure on our team. cleverly and ando should start, but i think ando won't otherwise we would of seen him for a bit in mid week. so by that this is the team i expect to see sunday

DDG
Rafeal-Rio-Evans-Evra
Carrick-Cleverly
Valencia Rooney
RVP Chico

However don't be surprised to see scholes for either carrick(doubtful) or Cleverly(more probable), the bottom line is though, that there is no doubt chelsea have a quick midfield but how many times has that been the case with arsenal, and we have a great record with them, so ill go for a very entertaining win either 2-1 or 3-1 much like a CL away performance maybe with a little heavy handedness (scholes) for there 3 mids.
The key i think is our defence or lack of it over recent weeks, however i do believe there has been an element of unfortunate luck, i.e Kightly running through the middle of them and getting two deflections and it landing plump on his right peg for a half volley or Rooney's OG, not excuses just misfortune and lack of confidence due to lack of personal atm, but hardly a crisis either me thinks.
Chris the REDman

Agree1 Disagree1

27 Oct 2012 00:54:20
A lot has been made of the Glazer's 'evil' leveraged takeover, it's really quite simple. A leveraged takeover is another word for a mortgage; you 'buy' your house with the banks money and repay it over 30 years or so. So it is not as uncommon as you might think.

AJH, the dividends 'argument' cannot be put aside. What most people do not understand is the way in which a business is run, the shareholders(owners) elect a chief executive office who is charged with the running of the company, it is his/her job to run the company in the best interests of the shareholders. This means being as productive as possible, which means increasing revenue and decreasing costs. If I were not a Manchester United fan but an investor, I would want the maximum return on my investment. For most companies wages and salaries are the highest outlay, this could be vastly reduced, as in the case of Liverpool. This would in turn mean that, I, as an investor would receive a larger dividend. The formula I previously stated would look like this.

(G) – Money use to repay glazer debts
(D) - The potential cost of dividends
(I) – Increase in revenue as a direct result of glazer actions

(G – D) + I = If this figure were calculable then I believe that it would be a positive value, which would infer that in real terms the glazers have had a positive financial impact.

Now this all might seem way overboard and some will automatically dismiss it but this is the way the world works, no amount of moaning is going to change it. We need to be United as one, not all the silly in fighting. This means supporting out players, staff, fellow fans and owners. It is not an 'us and them' situation, without anyone of the four previous groups of participants the club would not be able to function. And don't give me all the rubbish about fan ownership.

I am interesting in hearing what your opinions are on my views, I am not interested in scaremongering and half witted replies without substance.

Tetrahydro {Ed007's Note - Is asking 'What?' considered half witted?}

Believable6 Unbelievable21

The Glazers screwed their loaves and it hasn't cost them a penny,it's called business

Pardoe

Agree1 Disagree0

Tetrahydro, firstly you don't have to be as patronising, I am fully aware of what a leveraged takeover works or how a business runs.

Let me try and simplify my issue for you. The Glazers bowwood over £500M to find the purchase of the club.

Since then, over £500M has been spent servicing that debt and paying interest charges - costs the club has only incurred due to the Glazer's borrowing.

I said we should put the dividends issue to one side as this is a futile argument - whoever the shareholders were / are, it is likely dividends would have been paid.

My issue, and one some of you seem relaxed about, is that the way the club was purchased has cost an additional half a billion pounds in interests and debt servicing charges - money that need not have been spent if the club had not been purchased the way it was.

AJH

AJH

Agree12 Disagree0

Only in a rab c nesbitt voice ;)

Tetrahydro

Agree0 Disagree0

There are a few different ownership models but in my opinion this is not the best one. We should not lose sight of the fact that the club were debt free and then the Glazers forced their personal debt onto the club. In my opinion that morally corrupt and there should have been barriers to that whether legislation or FA or FIFA rules. We have no choice about that, at least the debts are lower now than they were. A better ownership model would have been the owners buying the club and keeping their damn debts to themselves and if they can't afford it, then sod off !!
On another point, I think much more could be done by the commercial part of the club. I believe that we should sell naming rights to the stadium. Think what that would be worth, levearging the biggest sporting brand in the world. We'd make a fortune. I'd ring fence that money and invest it in a further expansion of the stadium. I'd do this in 2 parts, first target would be 85,000 second target 100,000.
Anyone think this idea is reasonable and if so feasible ?
PerthDave

Agree0 Disagree1

Sorry, had to comment again. Having retread your post it is the most patronising think I have seen on this site. "what most people do not understand". Clearly you are so much more intelligent than the rest of us that you felt you had to explain it as if speaking to six year olds.

I have a mortgage on my house, I pay for it with my money. This is not what the Glazers did. They bought our club with a mortgage, and then used the clubs revenues to pay off the debt / interest. However you want to dress it up, £500M has been spent in the last 7 years that could have been spent on players - over £70M a year.

AJH

Agree10 Disagree0

AJH, I agree that the interest expense has been a huge burden on the club but who is to blame.

The galzers went about and accumulated enough shares, either through buying out other major shareholders or on the open market. I guess the other rubbishs who sold to the are as palpable but they obviously did not give a s..t where and how the glazers where getting the capital to buy shares to take control of the club as long as they got paid and made a handsome profit.

I also question the executives at the club why we did not have a poison pill clause to stop this exact scenario but I guess that is water under the bridge.

Shahram

Agree1 Disagree2

Money that could have and should have been spent elsewhere.

£500 million would have completed the upgrades to the South stand and the last 2 corners boosting capacity up past 90,000.

Also Carrington could have been upgraded.

Not to mention the players that we could have bought over the last 5 years since Ronaldo left.

Instead of keeping Giggs, Scholes, Rio and Evra on past their best, all could have been replaced by now. Tranisition what transition?

This is the issue many of us have. Yes the commercial arm has done a fantastic job bringing in all these sponsorship deals, but the money has been effectively wasted on debt interest payments.

Mort

Agree7 Disagree0

People get on their high horses about leveraged buyouts, particularly the Glazer's, but its only like taking out a mortgage. You need a deposit, and an income capable of covering the cost of the loan and any interest accrued on it. That's all the Glazer's have ultimately done. It's the fact that the income comes directly from the entity they've bought, akin to your house paying for its own mortgage, which really annoys people IMO.

Agree1 Disagree1

Where's KLOOT when you need him!

StevieK

Agree1 Disagree0

AJH I do not mean to be rude, but you still haven't understood. As an investor, you can buy a house, rent that house and use the rental income to pay for the property. That's what the glazers have done. I don't like what they have done and we would be much better off even if someone owned the club and took less money out.

The reason you can't put dividends to the side in this argument, is because the '£500m' taken out is a dividend payment. I would also like to know where you pulled that number from?

Tetrahydro

Agree1 Disagree11

I find it incredible that anyone should defend the Glazers for what they have done.

Lenders in nearly all cases require a deposit, business investment even more so, lenders require the borrower to have a stake and will very rarely lend 100 percent to buy into anything. The Glazers managed a neat move for them, they arranged for all the risk and debt to be the clubs , they have none of their own money in our club, if we can't pay our debt it is us that goes down not them.

The club had no debt and was then saddled with massive debt, not to improve the infrastructure or playing staff but to keep the owners safe from risk. What they have done is take out a massive loan and we the club, the team have not benefitted from it by one penny. In fact with interest and charges £1Bn has probably been taken from our spending power, it is a debt we the fans and the club neither wanted or needed. A debt hanging around our necks for years to come preventing us competing at the highest level.

This is a time where we could have powered forward using the money generated by our success, instead we are using it to pay debts that in the long run will only benefit the speculative pockets of our smart businessmen owners. The fact Gill recognised debt as the road to ruin clearly indicates he cannot support the present model but he remains in place.

As far as United are concerned that mortgage has seen huge amounts chucked down the drain , money that will never be seen again, that no matter how much they make, how many deals they do cannot be recovered. It has been totally wasted.

Support these owners for what they have done is frankly an appalling idea. I supported the club when Louis Edwards was the owner and will always support the club but what the Glazers have done is take us from a very top team to one that cannot compete financially for no improvement in the club and only to line their own pockets particularly in the long term.

Red Man

Agree6 Disagree1

Aaaaarrgghhh. Stop telling me I haven't understood you fool. I've run businesses, I fully understand. If there is anyone lacking insight here it is you. The Glazers have take handsome dividends every year. Completely separate to that, they have spent circa £500M servicing the debt. If you doubt the figure, google it and you will find numerous articles from respected sources all arriving at the same figure. We had no debt, we were the richest club in the world. The Glazers rode in and bought the club saddling it with huge debts. I realise we don't know what might have happened if someone else had bought the club but as it stands, we have spent £500M servicing a debt which we wouldnt have otherwise spent. I'm not going to debate it fuher with you as you seem incapable of undstanding the issue.

AJH

Agree9 Disagree0

You say its no difference to taking out a mortgage ? the beverley hillbillys are getting the fans to pay that mortgage ,whereas with mine i pay it myself it would be nice though if all my neighbours paid it for me.
johndenton

Agree10 Disagree0

26 Oct 2012 23:52:55
Saf doing the foreword for peps new book,interesting I AM STOUT

Believable2 Unbelievable0

I am stout.. class name you got there fella.. :D

Agree1 Disagree1

26 Oct 2012 23:26:32
just a thought on the rooney playing CM issue.
i think his best position is striker but he could play CM for united , his not a worldclass CM but his good enough for united's midfield.
i think rooney playing midfield isnt because his better in that position its because his better than what we got in there at the moment.
if we had a worldclass midfield there would be no talk about rooney playing cm.
if any top team bough him he would be playing as a striker.
jred

Believable13 Unbelievable0

He's*
multiple times.

Agree1 Disagree4