Manchester United Banter Archive July 05 2012

 

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


05 Jul 2012 21:59:19
Can I repeat my Q to KLOOT from last night...

"So KLOOT I take it you think the flotation is a bad idea and we should keep funding the debt repayments out of our revenue alone?

Gav"

How can you see this flotation as a negative given we are in the situation we find ourselves in, and the owners are going nowhere soon? Surely the debt needs to be cleared to make us more competitive

Gav

Believable1 Unbelievable0

Gav it doesn't make us more competitive they only want to take money out of the club. Can't you see they can't believe their luck. It has cost them not one single penny they can keep taking money out and we keep putting money in. I AM KLOOT

Agree3 Disagree0

My exact point Gav i have been wondering why people have a negative feel towards it people always have to put a dampener on things especially our own fans ! getting debt free is what we all want yet people totally disregard it and start slating the Glazers when there the ones that are putting it for flotation when they didnt have to

Agree0 Disagree0

If we win another 9 trophies in the next 7 years I don't care if Kenn Dodd owns the club and neither do our fans your just being led down the garden path by the ABU press nothing will change with this flotation ticket prices frozen 2 nd year ask l,pool fans and city fans about prices but the press don't expose that avenue!!
Tiger

Agree0 Disagree1

Being debt free will not change the amount of money going out of the club,instead of going on interest payments it will go into the glazers bank account.we are a very big cash machine for these people they wont change johndenton. {Ed002's Note - You simply do not know that to be the case.}

Agree1 Disagree1

Strangely, and it has shocked me if I am honest. The Glazers have said in the IPO prospectus that they will not be taking dividends for the foreseeable future.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

As far as I am aware nobody knows exactly what the Glazers will do, they may take all the money for themselves, or they may realise they need success to make more money and reinvest in the club like any good businessman would do.

Nobody knows either way, so the people just having a go at the Glazers are doing it because of their hatred for the Glazers, not because of the facts.

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

Nobody knows either way, so the people just having a go at the Glazers are doing it because of their hatred for the Glazers, not because of the facts.
GDS

I really dont get that post, i dont see many people having a go at the glazers about what might happen in the future i think it is more to do with what has happened over the last few years.

nobody knows whats going to happen in the future
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Jred,

Kloot keeps saying the Glazers are going to get rid of the debt and then take the money from the club, so the club won't have money and the Glazers will. If this happens the club won't be as successful and they won't maximise the profits like they would want.

I don't like what the Glazers have done over the last few years but we can moan about that all day, we cannot turn back the clock, let's look forward.

As I said, nobody knows either way, which you repeated yourself, so not sure why you don't get the post?

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

Gds
i dont think people hate the glazers because of what might happen in the future i think its because of what has happened.
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Jred,

They are right to be upset about how the club has been run and what has happened, I have no complaints about that.

What I am questioning is people complaining about what will happen in the future before it has even happened and slagging the Glazers off just because it is what they always do, rather than looking at it from a positive standpoint.

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

Fair enough pal
Jred

Agree0 Disagree0

KLOOT - but my point is we ARE in debt and that debt needs to be cleared. Surely you would rather that some or all of it is cleared via the flotation rather than it all coming out of our revenue?

As for you and JohnDenton saying it will make NO difference to the cash available - nobody knows that for sure so it cannot be said with any authority. My personal opinion is that we will have more to spend, but not loads more. Just guessing though

Either way - I would prefer our club be debt free and would prefer that be done with money from the flotation rather than our revenue alone

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 21:08:46
I have a feeling we may be signing a keeper soon. Reason being Johnstone and Amos are going out on loan and we only have Gollini and Sutherland for the academy. There is room for a ressie keeper.

Sydney!

Believable1 Unbelievable1

We have Lindegaard and Amos unless one of them is leaving ?

Agree1 Disagree0

Sorry Syd i was rushing the post i missed Amos off yor list ! my bad

Agree0 Disagree0

I cant rember his name but it was in the papers a couple of days ago that amos was going on loan and we were signing a yoiung keeper , i think he was spanish
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Rodrigo Alvarez?

Yeah it turns out he doesn't exist.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Well that could be a worse signing than bebe
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Nope, Rodrigo Alvarez will still probably be better than Bebe even if he dont exist ;)

U.T.I.D

Agree2 Disagree1

05 Jul 2012 20:52:58
According to Italian magazine Corierre dello Sport Inter have sent a delegate out to broker a deal for Lucas. I believe this sures up beliefs that United have found an interest in him and are looking to sign him due to such a prompt reaction from Inter.

Believable1 Unbelievable0

Inter have all ready bid for him this summer and have had an interest for the last 12 month
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 20:31:50
Sambafoot reports that Santos president Luis Alvaro Ribeiro admits the club could cash in on Paulo Henrique Ganso, another Brazilian who has been strongly linked to United and other clubs.

“Only Neymar is not negotiable,” the Santos chief told Record. “All other players, including Ganso, have the door open, depending on the proposals as they arise. If the will of Ganso is to leave, and there are clubs interested, then we are willing to listen to offers for him.”

Think it was last week someone said about Ganso...

Believable1 Unbelievable0

Yeah there were a few posts about him all right, one from myself. I think if a delegation has gone to Brazil, it's to look at Ganso...not Moura!

Andy

Agree0 Disagree0

His a top player but has a bad knee , also a couple of his team mates have said in the press that he wont make it to the very top unless he gives up his party lifestyle
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 20:08:37
red squaddie..

lets talk managers guys...

moyes..mourinho..keane?!

fergies getting on now and im not trying to start a riot by stying fergie OUT..im just wondering if my opionon is the same as every one else//

my shout... keep it in house..mike phelan ! in about 3-4 years

Believable1 Unbelievable5

LOL

G.A.G.U.S

Agree1 Disagree0

No chance.

Devil for Life

Agree1 Disagree0

I'd have quieroz instead of Pelhan as he know the style of football we play!

Agree1 Disagree0

Is it April 1st?

If Mike Phelan gets the job I give up lol.

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

Keano ?? are you serious ? absolute legend as a united player but his record as a manager speaks for itself. Don't know if Moyes has the pedigree and everyone know Mourinho wants the job ( even has a get out clause in his new Madrid contract) but he loves himself more than united. What about Guardiola with Ole as number 2 ?

Agree0 Disagree0

Solskjaer is the one i would like to see take over, i think he would do brilliantly and he knows the young players that are emerging from the time spent as reserve team coach.

Agree1 Disagree0

If we want continued success then we have to get Mourinho, he has never come lower then second in any league during his career.

For sentimental value i'd love to see Solskjaer but for stability we need someone who is proven and has the ego and confidence to deal with the pressure of taking over from SAF, the greatest manager of all time.

Red Joe

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 20:01:58
sum of you guys need to stop playing FM12 and wake up...

united + RVP.. get a grip

united + moura... get a grip

we need to face facts..any player we go for..we cant afford we aint spending big no more..

we will sign one player and it wont be a midfielder.. itll be a defender..hopefully left back~!

squaddie red

Believable1 Unbelievable2

Fergy said we will get 2 players?

-JakeW

Agree0 Disagree0

So we didn't go in for hazard then mate no? Learch

Agree0 Disagree0

Mate you talk absolute meatballs ! we cant buy players anymore lol ? We bought the Bundesliga player of the year and spent 50million last summer nothings changed we have cash its Fergie who is reluctant to spend what we have as recent transfers for big money like Berbatov and Anderson have failed

Agree0 Disagree0

We were in for Hazard. 32m... I would consider that spending big don't you. So if we offered that for Hazard why wouldn't we put the same money into Moura or other young talents.

Agree that there's no chance in hell we'll go for RVP.

Red Joe

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 19:36:22
Well if you were to believe the posts on the rumours page today we are definitely about to sign:

Ba and Tiote, or
RVP, or
Lucas Moura, Witsel and Rodriguez, or
Willems, or
Albrighton, or
Anthony Pilkington and Moura (strange combo!)

Obviously not all are true (most aren't) but that's quite a wide range in terms of price and quality to try and pick the realistic targets from!

Me, I'm still holding out for Modric/Moutinho/Cabaye and a LB (Baines is the best IMMEDIATE option I can think of, I'm not interested in another young LB with potential a la WIllems to block Fabio and Blackett)

Gav

Believable2 Unbelievable2

Cheapest option (Glazers option) would be Ba (£5M & overpriced at that) and Moura (Probably cost £10M but not even worth the taxi fare).

Agree0 Disagree1

Moura for 10 million? Get a grip mate! If he was only costing that he would of been in Europe last season!

Andy {Ed002's Note - A bid of more than £32M has already been turned down.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Lucas Moura 10million ? are you having a laugh more like 30million and worth every penny at that

Agree0 Disagree0

Moura for 10m pounds? You make me laugh.

Devil for Life

Agree0 Disagree0

Moura for 10m ??? Sao Paulo rejected a 32m bid for him from Chelsea!
SmilingRed7

Agree0 Disagree0

Lucas Moura for £10m would be a bargain. He'll cost about £35M - and still be a bargain for whichever club manages to sign him...

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

Shows you don't know a lot moura last year had a 60mil price tag I think it was, going to be around 30-35mil who ever signs him ( hopefully united )


Dwright

Agree0 Disagree0

Considering Moura's club turned down 32mil from Chelsea, and United, Chelsea, Madrid and Inter are all going for him, I think your claim of a price of 10mil means you probably drank a taxi fare worth of rubbing alcohol.

Agree0 Disagree0

I would take a gamble on this kid 40mil+ if fergie looks after him like ronnie and he has a great world cup 2014 he could potentially become 1 of the worlds best and be uniteds best asset.

Agree0 Disagree0

...and then we could sell him like we did Ronaldo.

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 18:55:09
What is with some of our fans on here!

We find out the Glazers want to test the market etc then people suddenly start all this hate Glazer rubbish and start rambling on about past events .... you have to move on and look at what there trying to do.

If we do go debt free i do not see our transfer policy etc change anyway as it is the manager that is reluctant to spend big imo as players values have rose dramatically in the last few years and he is reluctant to move with the times especially after Berbatov's failings.

How can we be negative in anyway at this moment in time ! we go debt free and make 100million easily each year and they take 30 million dividends from THEIR club which would leave us with 70million plus from sales etc!

Its a positive time to be a Manchester United fan whether you like the Glazers or not a debt free club is what we all want yet blind side it and start going all Glazer hating instead of thinking fist.

Every time our finances are publicised or mentioned people start going on about the Glazers yet when we are winning matches etc nobody even mentions them .

Believable2 Unbelievable2

True but the current manager wont be around for ever so does the replacement get sme cash to spend as i can imagine Jose, or Laurent for example would not be so reluctant to spend money.

Agree0 Disagree0

You honestly think they will only take 30 mill per year ,they will bleed us dry for years to come then sell up
johndenton

Agree0 Disagree1

Debt free or not they will still take the same levels of cash out of the club

Agree0 Disagree0

Dont be so silly, Sir Alex spent 30M on Veron, 30M on Rio, 30M on Brebatov, so to say he wont spend money is ridiculous, the fact is we dont have any!!

Flimbo

Agree1 Disagree0

I agree

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

JohnDenton

Are yo serious ! they can only take a certain amount in dividends and its around 30 percent of what we make a year so say we make 100 million they take 30ish then we still have plenty {Ed002's Note - This is incorrect.}

Agree0 Disagree0

The Glazers have confirmed in the IPO prospectus that they will NOT be taking dividends for the foreseeable future.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 18:46:24
People need to forget about the "ronaldo money" as since he has left we've spent over £100 mil on players.
Valencia-£17 mil
Smalling-£10 mil
De Gea -£20 mil
jones-£16 mil
Young-£18 mil
Chico-£7 mil
Obertan-£3 mil
And now
Kagawa-£12 mil raising
Powell-£4 mil
And maybe some fees for youth players that have joined plus I might have missed some players out. So can we please just let it go. Just because we did not buy a big singing for £50-60 mil people seem to think we've not spent any money since ronnie left.

Robbie b

Believable4 Unbelievable1

And how much money have united earned since ronaldo left....

Agree1 Disagree0

Our net transfer spend in the seasons since Ronaldo left is below £80m (we've sold another £30m worth of players and spent £98m). Considering we're supposed to get a £25m transfer budget every year we would have been expected to have a £75m net spend over the past 3 years. As of the moment it's around £67m.

It's fair to say 'the Ronaldo money' is gone - but it seems to have gone into the Glazers' pockets rather than back into the squad...

T0MB0Z

Agree2 Disagree0

The thing with the 25m budget every year is that was said before the near collapse of the financial markets which i think scuppered their original plans and they've had to do what they can to keep things working with the world in financial meltdown. Something was always gonna give and it looks like we may have had our transfer budget squeezed. But for the most part it hasn't been too detrimental to the team, but now we need to invest to keep pace with everyone else.

Shappy

Agree0 Disagree0

It hasn't gone into their pocket, it has gone into paying the debt off, surely that is obviousl?

Without the debt I am sure some of it would go into Glazers pockets but some would go into the transfer kitty, surely that is obvious as well?

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

Shappy
but even tho the financial markets have collapsed united are actually making more money than ever before
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Why would that affect the 25 million per season transfer fund when or income has grown in the current economic meltdown.
johndenton

Agree0 Disagree0

GDS
to be fair if the glazers used the ronaldo money to pay off there debt is that not the same as putting it in there pocket
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Agree with jred on this one...

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

Because the interest on the debt has shot up and people were demanding money back sooner than first agreed. So we had to increase income to cover the rising costs.

Shappy

Agree0 Disagree0

Shaps, our interest has decreased. 3, 4 & 5 years ago it was £68.8m, two season's ago the interest was £50.7m and this season it has cost us £45m. Debt interest is falling.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 19:17:44
Really hope we try to sign Lucas Moura, they are only rumours at the minute but this kid is exactly what we need - young, energetic and plays beautiful football. Many talk of the risk of buying another young Brazilian but this kid has too much potential to bottle it unlike Anderson who rarely performs to his potential (granted he hasn't played his natural position much).

And why do some think he is a CM? He is an attacking midfielder who can play left, right and centrally.

Foozeball

Believable2 Unbelievable1

05 Jul 2012 19:09:27
sky sports put up net spending of the last 5 seasons:
1.chiteh £382.2m
2. chelskia £190.7m
3. stoke £60.1m
4. aston villa £50.6m
5. man utd £36.6m
7.liverpool £26.8 m
12. norwich £7m
14. tottenham £6m
15. swansea £4.6m
19. arsenal £ -21.3M

now this was used to show that arsenal arnt spending to compete but it also highlights our naivety that we can compete on all front with the players we have and the spending we do. now im not looking for a huge 35-50mil pound player to be brought in but id wnt 2 players brought in with that amount of money. last year it was shown our squad lacked in depth we depended on players like vidic and rooney too much, without vidic we conceded alot of goals and without rooney we lacked creativity and goals. ppl may argue but how many of our players wud start in the mancity, cheslea, madrid barca teams.
its obvious we need a left footed left back to come in this summer i dnt know how long fergie can blindly ignore evra as hes a huge liability.
i also beleive this cud be ferdinands last season, his performances over the last two years hav dipped due to him losing his pace. i think smalling is a great player and can only get better. we will see how jones develops over this season and which position on the field he makes his own. we will also see how rafael develops before we get another rb dont think will we go for clyne because i think fabio will be used as rb at qpr, and as competition for rafael next season.

I think valencia is top quality and deserves the number 7 shirt. i also think we need nani he gived us something nun of our players has the ability to skin a player both ways. im not a fan of young but hes a good squad player.
mf lets be honest giggs is done. scholes is quality but for how long and cnt play everytime all the time. anderson i dnt rate he always seems overweight cnt use his rightfoot and always tries a longball which is never on and which he cant complete because he doesnt have the ability. fletcher has been a great servant seen a picture of him at wimbeldon he looked really underweight and week dont think he'l be back. for me carrick is ok but not united quality for some reason this season ppl hav been sayin how great he is and callin him our midfield maestro but 18months ago ppl wanted to get rid of him and hated the way he could not defend or attack and called him side pass. i think we got so used to our poor quality mf that we now rate carrick highly. now tom cleverly alot of ppl on here think hes the new scholes but no proof of that so far he only made 10 league appearances last year and is going to be 23 in august so i dnt see how he can become so highly rated and compared to scholes without any proof and another thing is hes been injury prone.

rooney top quality, welbeck alot of potential, and chicha is a proven goal scorer and just had a bad season last year and yet still scored same amount of goals as welbeck and less appearances.

so basically in my opinion we need a left back and will see how the rest of the defence develops over the season raf/jones/smalling/evans and how rio declines and how much vidic is still the same.

i think we need 2 more mfs. 1 in the safe of tiote/mvilla/martinez/strootman/sissoko not nessacrily these players but these type of players and another mf who is a better version of carrick = modric/cabaye/moutinho/sahin/ who can link up the play.

now to back up these players we have the likes of tunniclife, powell, petrucci intergrated into the team eventually so we dont end up losing them at the end of next season like ravel, pogba and maybe fryers.

rant over hopefully this flotation will help generate some spending money

majorlazer

Believable4 Unbelievable1

It's interesting to see that City's net spend over the past five years is double our net spend since the beginning of the premier league...

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

You have to remember that those figures are for net spending so our figures will always be distorted by Ronaldo leaving. That means we have spent about 115 million.

Welsh Dragon

Agree0 Disagree1

Haha arsenal..

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with many of your points mate.....but regarding the list at the top of your post - to me all that shows is that United, Spurs, Swanse and Arsenal are the clubs who have gained the most value for money. Chelsea havent exactly made much of their £190m over 5 years. City have 1 PL and 1 FACup over 5 years for £382m! Stoke got into Europe once but look like they've massively over spent (if these figures are true). AV - well they've hardly got success in recent years from that investment either!

If anything this list shows that it's not necessarily how much you spend but how you spend it!

Gav

Agree0 Disagree1

Ye but the whole point of the net spending is how much were investing ye ronaldo was sold for 80mil pound that means we shud of spent more with that 80mil pounds, always trying to improve and to maintain our status for the future. i dnt want to see a decline and end up like arsenal or worse liverpool. look at chelsea for example they won the champo and fa cup but becos they came 6th in the league they are investing heavily to improve. look at madrid city barca all 3 teams have the best squads in europe and every year r looking to improve. even they way we look at players weve become 2nd class. wer linked with modric and then madrid r linkd with modric and all of a sudden you see us going "its good that madrid r getting modric this means we can get sahin", not saying sahin is a bad player just sayin that we are not competing like we used to and still expect the success standard of these teams.

majorlazer

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 18:28:01
I don't get how we are even linked with Lucas Moura... last summer he was rated the 60million pound teenager and now how much is he worth!?

1redarmy

Believable0 Unbelievable0

I think if he moves on it will be for £35M. If we had £32m for Hazard - I'm sure an extra £3m isn't too much to ask for. It's a big 'if', though.

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 18:20:21
The Glazers have done a lot of good as well as bad, even if some people are unwilling to admit it.

GDS......................I really can't believe this person and the pro Glazer guff he post on here. Under a brilliant manager we have managed to win trophies in spite of not because of the Glazers. From having a squad that was the equal of any in Europe we now have a shadow of the squad we should have if our owners invested properly. I know GDS will say they have increased revenue streams but that is no use if the money is leaving the club and going into their pockets or buying the children sea front houses.We have seen season ticket prices rise dramatically since they took over, So please GDS explain what good these money grabbing leeches have done for our club. Please don't insult our intelligence by saying this is a good United squad at the moment. Even last year when we won the league we knew we were falling behind. As for your comment about me phoning radio stations, it was them who phoned me for my opinion on the share issue. Keep trying to put dirt on my name Judas but don't you get it people are starting to see the truth about you and your masters. Till the day we get rid of the stench of those money grabbing scum out of our club then I will keep fighting. I AM KLOOT

Believable3 Unbelievable3

GDS

You say the Glazers have increased revenue streams. You think they could've gotten all those sponsors without United?

G.A.G.U.S

Agree0 Disagree0

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

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

What are you doing to keep fighting?

Agree0 Disagree0

I AM Klot you are begining to sound pathetic, like some cantankerous old fart who lives in the past.
We know the Glazers aren't what we would ideally like but we have them,they have increased the clubs commercial side hugely, we have won s**tloads.
What happens when they have sold shares what will your whine be then?

Pardoe

Agree0 Disagree0

RFT,

My masters, are we going down that route again, do you think the Glazers have asked me to come on here lol?

I have slagged the Glazers off many times over many things, you just hate it when I say anything good because you are so bloody negative and miserable.

I just like to be positive and optimistic. I keep asking the question, what do you want us to do? The solution to your constant moaning seems to be 'go back in time and don't let the Glazers put the debt on the club'. This has already happened, IT IS NOT A GOOD THING (I keep saying this but you always ignore it when you slag me off, maybe you will read it this time). We need to look forward, surely the best thing they can do now is get rid of the debt? The other option is we continue as we are now, so which would you prefer??

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

I think TOMBOZ has cracked it
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

I think T0MB0Z should be careful as his pro-Glazer posts from only a fortnight ago were pretty sickening.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Lol. Never miss a chance to try and get a dig in, eh Syd? Just out of interest - what exactly did I say 2 weeks ago that was so sickening? I'd love you to enlighten me...

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

Pardoe,

Thank God, I thought I was the only one with that view!

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 18:07:19
Right Sydney so you're either deluded or in denial regarding the state of the club. The very fact that we are looking, sorry let me rephrase that, the very fact that THE GLAZERS are looking to float the club on the stock markets has been overwhelmingly seen as an admission that they saddled the club with too much debt while trying to buy it and thus caused a decline in our ability to compete with our competitors should be reason enough for even the biggest fool to see they have been bad for United since the very beginning yet you are somehow trying to say you know something the rest of us dont with this "transition" BS! A club like United doesnt have time for a "transition" period with the way football works these days, what happens is, you invest money in the team or you win nothing, end of!

Flimbo

Believable2 Unbelievable1

Flimbo, it's not my opinion that we are going through a transitional period, it's fact. Players like VDS, JOS, Neville, Brown, Park, Berbatov, Owen etc being replaced by DDG, Jones, Rafael, Smalling, Young, Welbeck, Hernandez etc.

It is what it is, it's a transition.

Sydney!

Agree1 Disagree3

You saying the Glazers haven't invested in the team or not gone down the crazy short term route city & Chealsea have trying to catch up to us?
Utd is geared up for mid to long term success a proper club unlike the above mentioned which can implode at any moment

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 17:50:54
Moving off this IPO for a while, who does everyone realistically see being signed between now and August 31?

G.A.G.U.S

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Realistically? Maybe Baines and another mediocre player like Clint Dempsey.

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

Baines and I really think Lucas moura I have a gut feeling he will come to us. IMO he's a better player than Ronaldo was at his age!

Agree1 Disagree0

Wake up. There's not a chance we can afford Moura...

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 17:30:45
''What you have to remember is if
we were to spend £80m this summer and all the players were signed up for four years, it isn't £80m out of the club in one go, it's £20m over four years.''

Sydney!

I think you have misunderstood how these deals are structured syd. The
£20m over 4years would be an accounting charge called amortisation and it has nothing to do with the structure of payments. Its non-cash related. For example, if chelsea sign hazard for £32m over a 4year contract
, the amortisation charge would be £8m a year(32m/4years). The actual payment could be the entire 32m up-front or 80% up-front or even £8m a year, or whatever dependin on who wants the deal more between the buyin and sellin club. But the amortisation charge taken into account when computing profits would stil be £8m a year regardless of the timing of the payments.
United received almost the entire ronaldo fee up-front, and not 80m spread over 6 years.

Millz

Believable3 Unbelievable0

United have pretty much always paid for player in installments. I understand that other clubs do pay it off in a lump sum or in a shorter amount of time than the length of a player's contract.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree3

05 Jul 2012 17:16:41
Not so much a rumour as an opinion, do not rate baines at all seems such a waste of 15ish million. Evra will be 1st choice and i would rather not spend the £ and have kept fabio instead of loanin him out and we should have made sure we kept fryers aswell, even failing that we could still use jones or rafael as a LB but Baines just NO! id much rather have a youngster with speed such as wellens.
Also i really dont want Modric he is overrated at 30+million, we would be far better with Moutinho or defour or witsel. Defensive mid i cant see us signing anyone because i believe Jones will play there more than as a defender eventually.
Heres my teams IMO who agrees?
Ideal Team: (based on realism e.g no messi etc)
Degea/Lindegaard/Amos
Jones/Rafael Rio/Smalling Vidic/Evans Evra/Wellens
Mvilla/martinez/strootman(any of them3) Carrick/Fletcher
Kagawa/Moutinho/Scholes/Cleverley/Giggs
Nani/Valencia/Young/Rodriguez
Rooney/VanPersie/Hernandez/Welbeck

Probable Team:
Degea/Lindegaard/Amos
Jones/Rafael Rio/Smalling Vidic/Evans Evra/BAINES Carrick/Fletcher
Kagawa/MODRIC/Scholes/Cleverley/Giggs/ANDERSON
Nani/Valencia/Young/PARK
Rooney/BERBATOV/Hernandez/Welbeck

Believable1 Unbelievable3

I dont see modric or berbatov

players to join could easily be moura
rvp and james .R.

Nani will leave, nailed on is this,...
Strootman maybe a poss for DEf mid,

Cretins and the Emu..

Agree0 Disagree1

Jones or Rafael at leftback? Really? Pretty stupid comment really, are you that against signing Baines?

Fryers is a jumped up squirt so good riddance really.

Fabio needs a loan to prove he can stay fit. Personally i wouldn't have sne thim to London but to Wigan.

Who the heck is Wellens?

Hmm Modric over-rated? Not really a game watcher are you. Moutinho, Defour or Witsel non of whom have played in the Prmeier League and 2 of whom have never played in an international tournament. And Moutinho, well yes good player but only mentioned on here since the Euro's.

Team based on realism so you put down Martinez and van persie....

Agree1 Disagree0

This post makes no sense...why would you prefer to play someone out of position instead of getting someone who is naturally a LB and is already established in a decent team? Baines is probably the 2nd or 3rd best LB in the Premier League. And if you aren't happy with that...there's Willems of Izzaguire. Younger players with plenty of potential. Also your midfield is all over the place! Has everyone forgot that Carrick is not a DM? He prefers to play on the edge of the opposition box, having him sitting back is a waste! You are right with Moutinho or Witsel...they'd be a great addition! But Jones as a DM? Not going to happen...SAF doesn't like using DM's, he never really has! A LB and a CM to sort the midfield out is all we need, to add to Kagawa and Powell...that's a successful summer!

Andy

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 17:12:03
if we do land RVB (unlickly) chicarito would probably be an impact sub with kagawa on the wing because fergie goes for a 442

Believable1 Unbelievable3

05 Jul 2012 16:49:00
I seriously hope we are in for James Rodriguez or Lucas Moura to replace Nani on the left wing then a central midfielder like Axel Witsel, Javi Garcia, Joao Moutinho or Luka Modric

Believable2 Unbelievable2

Witsel
Rodriguez
And Moura all look very likely. {Ed012's Note - Moura would be very surprising considering Sir Alex's distrust of Brazilians as he believes they're poorly suited to the English lifestyle and Premier League football- even though the twins have adapted alright}

Agree1 Disagree0

Cretins and the Emu.
Last post ...

Agree1 Disagree0

Moura or Rodriguez would be epic signings. Not too keen on any of the people you've suggested for the CM. I'd still like to see us go in for M'Vila who'd sure up the midfield and allow Kagawa to push forward without having to worry too much about defensive duties.

T0MB0Z

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 16:18:24
MANUTD TO SIGN SNEIJDER BY THIS MONDAY..see guys i wil be first to inform u....!
note it

SRK

Believable2 Unbelievable4

Source

Agree2 Disagree0

If this happens I'll eat my shoes.

Agree3 Disagree0

If this happens ill eat my hat, and all the ones in texas!
sak {Ed012's Note - Not this again *bangs*head*against*wall*}

Agree1 Disagree0

I never believe rumours that say 'we will sign player X by Z-day'...never seems to happen!

Even when the Kagawa rumours were flying around loads of posters felt the need to add 'will join by XXXday'. Why try to guess by when any transfer will be done? There are always complications and negotiations to be had which keep delaying major transfers...how on earth someone could know exactly what day these issues will all be sorted out by is beyond me

Cheers for the info though! ;)

Gav {Ed012's Note -

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 16:11:41
United have signed a couple of players already, kagawa and Powell seem good signings. The amount of names being linked with us again has me wondering, how much have united got to spend, where I the money come from? Cash reserves from the ronaldo sale? What impact will this have on the financial fair play next year as united can show they can generate millions in revenue. Thoughts please!

Believable2 Unbelievable0

United don't have much money despite being the wealthiest club in the world, thats why there raising money to service debt.

Agree2 Disagree1

They are raising a small amount to establish a valuation of the club actually.

Supasub {Ed012's Note - Just to clarify, they're not looking to raise £64m only, that is simply the minimum amount they have to sell- they could potentially sell up to five times that if there is sufficient interest}

Agree1 Disagree0

"United don't have much money despite being the wealthiest club in the world, thats why there raising money to service debt"

Well yes we do need to raise funds to service debt, as we are in debt after all. We can't just ignore it and hope it goes away! We still spent over £50m on player transfers last summer though and if we do again this summer I'll be satisfied with that

Don't get me wrong I wish we didn't have debt to pay off leaving more for transfers but I still believe there is money to spend

Gav

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 16:01:32
y wud van persie sign for city with tevez augero balotelli 2 compete with surely he wud b better suited 2 united and get more starts

Believable2 Unbelievable0

He's better than Balotelli and Tevez that's why.

Simmo

Agree2 Disagree1

Cos he will get more money, united wont sign rvp..

Agree3 Disagree1

And we dont need him.
he'll Only halt the development of welbeck.

TRUMORS

Agree2 Disagree1

05 Jul 2012 14:56:43
Forget RVP. Everytime a player is nailed on to join Citeh, we are always linked to make a late desperate bid to hijack the deal and seem to just fall short. Don't think he would even be on United's radar.It all sells papers!
The Word

Believable6 Unbelievable0

We have first refusal.
Setup way before end of season.

Cretins and the Emu.

Agree1 Disagree3

05 Jul 2012 12:35:22
tar Sports, ESPN may go separate ways in India after 18 years together

ESPN Star Sports (ESS), the 18-year-old sports broadcasting joint venture between ESPN International and News Corp, is under review for a possible operational split of its Indian business. The move aims to boost the Indian footprint ESPN’s parent Walt Disney and give flexibility to both parties to pursue expansion in India’s booming pay TV market.

Disney, which recently completed the acquisition of Mumbai-based UTV and its several television channels, is keen to expand its Indian footprint. Internationally, Disney controls a majority interest in ESPN Inc. The ESS venture, set up by the overseas arm of ESPN Inc and News Corp in 1994, is India’s leading sports broadcaster. The joint venture also operates 17 channels in the Asia-Pacific region.

According to sources, there are several options before the ESS promoters, including an outright split in the global JV or an operational split in the India business, among others. In an operational split, ESS will need to work out the modality of dividing the subscription and advertising revenues. “Talks for a split between the two partners were recently renewed. Division of sports broadcasting rights between ESPN and the Star Sports channels and a model to split

India revenues are being

reviewed,” said a source in the sports broadcasting business. Any decision will take several months as there are complex issues which need to be reviewed, sources indicated.

When contacted, an ESS spokesperson said: “We do not comment on speculation and rumors.” When asked whether a split in the joint venture is expected anytime soon, thecompany said: “ESPN STAR Sports continues to run the business as usual.”

Leading consultant PricewaterhouseCoopers too declined to comment, since it audits both ESPN and Disney. However, experts said the two parties have been discussing the matter forsome time. “Currently, the JV is neither being fully run by Disney nor by Star. Once ownership issues are settled, other things will fall in place,” said the head of media and entertainment practice of a leading consultancy firm.

ESS operates in India through ESPN Software India and operates channels including ESPN, Star Sports, Star Cricket and ESPN News. The venture has revenues in excess of R2,500 crore including advertisingand subscription revenue. The joint ventureowns television rights for key sporting properties like the ICC World Cup cricket, BCCI’s T20 Champions League apart from overseas cricket rights from England and Australia, among others.

According to one person, ESPN may retain the ICC cricket rights while the Star bouquetof sports channels may get the T20 Champions League.

According to Mihir Shah, India analyst for Media Partners Asia, such a move will help UTV get a channel driver. “The general entertainment channel space is crowded. If ESPN actually comes under the Disney fold, it will become the bouquet driver. It is interesting to note that when MediaPro was formed, the sports broadcasting business of both Star and Zee were kept out. May be this was the reason. A split in the JV has been on cards for some time now,” Shah told FEWTF

Believable0 Unbelievable2

Ok NoName but it would not affect the number of games telecasted in India at all, i'm sure we'll get to watch the same number of EPL games as we watched last season.

Coz as far as football is concerned ESPNStar broadcasts only the Premier League and CWC.

Carling and FA is telecasted by Sony Six, UCL/EUROPA by Ten Action+.

So the split wouldnt matter.

MUMBAI_BOY

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 12:33:36
The English Premier League has reaffirmed its position as the most popular football league in the world following a record breaking television deal worth £3.018 billion with pay TV broadcaster Sky Sports and British Telecom for the UK market.

BSkyB, which has built its British sports broadcasting business on the back of Premier League, has secured five of the seven packages totalling 116 matches while British Telecom has secured two packages totalling up to 38 matches for seasons 2013/14 to 2015/16.


The deal represents an increase of £1.25 billion on the current broadcast settlement, which shares rights between BSkyB and ESPN, which has lost out on the rights this time around despite a strong bid. Sky will fork out £2.3 billion for the audio-visual rights over the three year period, while BT will pay £738 million.

ESPN Star Sports (ESS) has the exclusive rights to broadcast the Barclays Premier League (BPL) on multiple platforms in 18 markets across Asia including: India, Indonesia, East Timor, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, North & South Korea, The Philippines, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Maldives, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and in partnership with Astro for Malaysia & Brunei.


Premier League CEO Richard Scudamore said, "As ever, the security provided by broadcast revenues will enable our clubs to continue to invest in all aspects of their football activities and plan sustainably for the foreseeable future. This deal allows them to keep delivering what fans want; top quality football in some of world’s best club stadia and an increasing focus on and commitment to areas such as Youth Development."


NJOY EPL

Believable2 Unbelievable0

Good read cheers pal.

Cretins and the EMU!

Agree0 Disagree0

I saw the press conference for this live on SSN was amazed at the figures being talked about! I guess this means PL clubs will be receiving a lot more from 2013-2014 onwards (I assume most of that cash goes to the clubs)

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 13:04:51
Is RVP really a target for utd?All this talk about him going to city,where would he fit in?They already have ballotelli,tevez,aguerro and dzeko,although they are willing to sell dzeko.That would be four world class strikers,impossible to keep them all happy.Would like to see him at utd but still think the money we are going to spend(if any) should be to strenghten our average midfield.

quinner99

Believable4 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 12:52:09
My (hopeful) team for us at the start of the 2013/14 season:

------------DDG-------------

Rafa---Jones--Small--Williems

Toni--Powell--M'Vila--Rodriguez

-----------Kagawa-----------

-----------Welbeck----------

Quality team? (Yep.)

MelonRed {Ed004's Note - Were is our best player and leading goal scorer? Rooney? Also too much pressure on Powell imo}

Believable0 Unbelievable7

Ed. he has put for the start of he 2013 season but YES I would still expect Rooney to be here, and for that matter Vidic too...

I would also have clevs in instead of powell at the mo but after another year who can say....

Oxred {Ed004's Note - Sorry my bad...}

Agree1 Disagree0

How good is this Williems? I haven't seen much of the guy except for the Euro's in which he didn't play particularly well imo.

Gar

Agree1 Disagree0

What does "sorry my bad" mean Ed004 ?
Is it more street lingo creeping in "innit?"
Stanley Unwin {Ed004's Note - Just simply me stating that I got it wrong...}

Agree0 Disagree2

05 Jul 2012 12:50:58
Has anyone seen the interview with Barry Silkman interview on Sky Sports?

Reckons van Persie will want between 250k to 300k a week after siging on fees. Really? If he's telling the truth and it is for silverware, I can't see it being anywhere near that, maybe 150k most.

He also reckons that only PSG, City, Barca and Madrid could afford him but he would turn down PSG.

But he says we are a great club. At least he's definitely right about one thing.

SK

Believable0 Unbelievable0

He also said it would be SAF who would opt against paying that amount for RVP. So it's not just me who believes the manager has the last say on the transfers.

Sydney!

Agree5 Disagree0

I find it hard to believe tbh, what must he be on at Arsenal £100k max? I guess we'll see from his decision whether he's really after 1) the chance to win trophies 2) money, or 3) regular playing time (or perhaps a combination of those tbf)

I don't see him coming to United in any case, not sure we'd be in for him even

I will lose a bit of respect for him if he joins City though, not because of the money more because theres no guarantee he will be their 'main man' which he should be looking for at this stage of his career. If he goes 2 games without a goal and Tevez comes on to score a hatrick he could be benched in an instant. I still think he may go overseas

Gav

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 12:37:59
I have read a lot of this IPO thing everywhere, but i still don't get whether it's a good thing or a bad thing
?

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Imo it can only be good if the interest on debt is gone it can only give more transfer funds etc to the team

Pardoe

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with Pardoe. Is it better for United to be in debt or to try to get clear of debt? I would say it is the right direction to go in

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 12:09:09
anyone agree with me when i say i wouldn't go near Robin Van Persie with a barge pole ? 29 (old), injury prone, 1 good season in a weak team which made him look better, wouldn't do wonders for Welbeck and Chicha, AND will be very overpriced.

or is it just me ?
save the money and spend it on someone else. leave Robin Van Persie well alone.

Believable11 Unbelievable3

I am totally split on RVP agree injury prone, 29 etc. but there is a part of me that thinks he is the type of player suited to us.
a few years ago are side when rotated put fear of god into sides. when we where 1-0 down 10 mins to go. the Cavalierly would arrive on upfront would be ronny, rooney, berbs and that person (you all know who). i am sorry but we dont have that anymore. Rooney, RVP, Welbeck, Kagawa, Valencia, Nani, Young, chico. That is a decent strikeforce. all rotate all able to play in any of the front positions.

There where people back in May on here saying RVP perfered the move to United. Do any of them have any information now for us (they where convincing to me at the time you see.
me personally i have always felt city and i havent heard anything from sources etc.

Jenny {Ed004's Note - I would prefer Lewandowski, cheaper in both wages and price and could become better}

Agree1 Disagree0

Not sure about the barge pole, but I would rather the 20+ million Arsenal want for him spent in other areas, mind you I wouldn't be devastated if he did come.

Hoppy

Agree2 Disagree0

I'm split on this like Jenny. Let's face it if RVP came in and gave us 2 full-ish seasons of what he's capable of we would probably win 2 PL's and challenge for the CL. He has at least stayed fit for the last 18 months, played well and scored consistently. BUT - the more ppl on here mention his injuries and his age the more it gets lodged in my brain...so I'm not sure he's worth the risk. If he's after over £200k p/w it would be a straight NO

Gav

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 11:27:04
Apparently Luke Chadwick is in line to star in Britains next top model.

ITK!!

Believable3 Unbelievable0

Barringtons ugliest ever resident

Agree4 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 11:18:16
Heres a question to all those who slate those of us who hate the Glazers..

If United don't win a trophy, major or minor, next year who, in your opinion will be to blame for such a catastrophic decline?

Flimbo

Believable3 Unbelievable1

We are not in decline, we are in transition.

Sydney!

Agree6 Disagree5

Evra haha

Jono

Agree2 Disagree1

Sydney - there is a fine line between transition and decline, don't forget you kept telling everyone that Pogba and Morrison were our future during transition. In the last few weeks you posted a list of 5 or 6 players saying we should sign them, sounds like major surgery not transition. For months you said we only needed one or two players and shouted down people who suggested we needed more, then posted your list. Let's wait and see what the season brings, hopefully a challenge for some silverware.

Keanooh

Agree4 Disagree0

I would have to go with blaming the people who burdened us with 500m pounds of debt and constricted our ability to complete in the high end of the transfer market.

Millz

Agree2 Disagree0

Keanooh, well obviously if we have lost both Morrison & Pogba we would need more players wouldn't we? It Isn't rocket science is it lad?

Find me a single post where I have said we only need 1-2 players to complete the transition. Good luck.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree5

1 or 2 players wouldn't be a transition either

Pardoe

Agree0 Disagree0

I would blame Kloot!

Because he creates such a miasma of depression as he goes on and on and on (etc ) about the same bloody thing all the bloody time.

The really sad thing is that he frequently has insightful and interesting things to say but it gets drowned out in the utter depression of his obsessive hatred of the Glazers .

Yes Kloot the Glazers may have got away with grand theft football (ably abetted by the ex shareholders / and geez do i wish we the fans had thought of it) but for Christ sake man LIGHTEN UP

Agree0 Disagree0

Sorry - forgot to sign the Lighten Up comment

Mike

Agree0 Disagree0

Right Sydney so you're either deluded or in denial regarding the state of the club. The very fact that we are looking, sorry let me rephrase that, the very fact that THE GLAZERS are looking to float the club on the stock markets has been overwhelmingly seen as an admission that they saddled the club with too much debt while trying to buy it and thus caused a decline in our ability to compete with our competitors should be reason enough for even the biggest fool to see they have been bad for United since the very beginning yet you are somehow trying to say you know something the rest of us dont with this "transition" BS! A club like United doesnt have time for a "transition" period with the way football works these days, what happens is, you invest money in the team or you win nothing, end of!

Flimbo

Agree0 Disagree0

Flimbo, it's not my opinion that we are going through a transitional period, it's fact. Players like VDS, JOS, Brown, Berbatov etc being replaced by DDG, Jones, Smalling, Welbeck etc.

It is what it is, it's a transition.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

You can make an argument for us being in transition
But you could also make an argument for us being in decline
Depends what spin you want to put on it
Jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes you can make an argument for us being in decline, you can also make an argument for us not being in decline. However you cannot make and argument for us not being in a transition, because we are in a transition. That's a fact.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Well it would depend...if SAF has £50m+ to spend again this summer and fails to get success then either he or the players will be to blame...if we don't spend anymore on strengthening the squad this summer because theres no money to spend (due to debt repayments) then it's the Glazer's fault

Only time will tell

Gav

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 11:13:15
I just want to make my feelings about this IPO clear. Floating 30-35% of the club on the NYSE to raise money to pay down our debt is VERY good news. The head of (MUST) and financial adviser of (MUST) Duncan Drasdo and Andy Green respectively are also behind the floatation and have said it's very good news, just a shame this wasn't done earlier. Now I am not silly and I do know there is more to this than what meets the eye. The Glazers will have other reasons for this IPO and saying we cannot compete in the market is just an excuse for them to float the club. Anyone who has seen our finances can see that there is money there to compete in the market for the likes of Hazard, Nasri etc. What there wasn't room for was for them to pay interest, make transfers AND take dividends. We could compete in the market and continue to pay Interest, but in order for them to take dividends they needed to either a) Not spend on transfers or b) Not pay the interest and neither are possible. So they needed to eradicate the debt which will remove the interest. IMO this floatation has nothing to do with us being able to compete better in the market, I personally do not think we will spend more than we do currently, what I think will happen is they will take dividends. All in all this isn't a problem for me as it's their club and they are entitled to take dividends, but I for one do not think the Glazers are planning this IPO for the fans benefit, not a chance.

Sydney!

Believable10 Unbelievable2

Syd
there is no doubt the money is there thats not the issue , what the issue is is how much of that money is available for transfers.
we may have x amount in the bank but how can you know what the club intends to spend it on

i know you have been adamant that we can compete at the top end of the transfer market but could you be wrong?

could the fact that we have not been able to get the top players the manager apparently wants plus the glazers now saying we are struggling to compete be evidence of this.

i think your right i think the glazers want to take dividends, after all they want to make money and to do this they have to get the debt down.
over the last few years i think they have tried to do this with uniteds own money, look how much they have spent on the debts interest etc over the last 3 years, but can any club spend that amount of money and compete at the top end of the market.
Also now that the cash reserve moneys is getting lower can they continue to buy the bonds back at the rate they have been?
why would they need to make an excuse like they cant compete in the market when most fans would be more than happy that they were going to pay some of the debt of.
I know its all about opinions pal and you may well be right but at the same time im sure you can understand why some people may think your wrong.
i think the debate about us being able to compete at the top end of the market has been going on for a while now, what would it take to prove it one way or the other.
maybe us signing a 30mill player or
may be the glazers saying we are struggling to compete?
jred

Agree2 Disagree0

Jred, the Glazers saying that we want to continue to be able to compete at the top end of the market was not for our benefit, it was for the investors. Anyone who can dissect accounts can see that we were able to to bring in top players. What they couldn't do is bring in top players, pay the interest and take dividends. What you have to remember is if we were to spend £80m this summer and all the players were signed up for four years, it isn't £80m out of the club in one go, it's £20m over four years. The club could have offered Sneijder and Hazard £200k+ a week and afforded their transfer fees and it would have been a drop in the ocean compared to our finances. Probably £15m over four seasons and a further £20m a year in wages. We could have done that as we wouldn't have needed more than Hazard and Sneijder for more than four years I am sure you would agree?

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree1

Oh now its 30-35% of the club we are floating,thought it was just $100 mill enough to buy rodriguez yestrrday,now ive educated you on the ipo your on here trying to act like you know whats what without any thanks to .
big red bob {Ed004's Note - I am pretty sure Ed 2 explained it in detail to them}

Agree0 Disagree0

Frankly the Glazers' have never really released fully detailed accounts of the club because they don't have to.
My question has always been how did it come to the fact that this family was aloud to take over the club with debt? who or what O.K'd this? I find it disgusting that they could borrow someone else's money to take over the club.....then take the fans money out as dividends....handicap us as a club in the transfer market (anyone who says they haven't is a fool) and now use other peoples money to pay down the debt? I'm not sure if you can swear on here but WTF is going on??
I don't care what any body says the Glazers are bad for the club and always will be.

Agree2 Disagree0

No name, completely agree and you can blame the EPL for allowing the takeover as they obviously judged the Glazers as 'fit and proper'. The sad thing about this is it could happen again to another club tomorrow and the EPL cannot do sh1t about it.

Bob, I never believed the 100m dollars was the only amount to be taken, I thought it was the only amount to be taken from the NYSE with the other 25-30% coming from the Far East. I thought it was a little strange that they are only taking 100m dollars and thought it could be an advance to support the manager's transfer budget.

It wasn't until I read Andersred's Tweets at 12am saying that it was a bare minimum that I realised. The Editor told us months ago that the club with look to float 30-35% of the club. He was right about it all going to pay the debt so I will trust the rest of his info regarding this topic.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree1

It also strikes me as strange that they are floating just before the new TV deals were to come into play. We will receive around £34m more as of 2013/14 season. That is some growth and that alone would have paid for 90% of the annual interest.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree1

When Sneijder turned down United’s offer last summer (and again when Nasri chose City over us), the sticking point was wages. Now no football club should be held hostage by greedy players, but there is something distinctly odd about a club like Manchester United being unable to “compete†for the best talent. So what is the reason we can’t compete? As with transfer spending (or the lack of it), it is a conscious choice by the owners.  Andy green

it doesn’t really matter if we have about £60m in the bank (we do). It’s that unfortunately for us the club is run to make money for a distant family in Florida. Andy green
Like I said it what the money gets used for
Jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Jred, you are missing the point. There is enough cash flow running through our club to pay for the £45m interest and pay for Hazard & Sneijder and their salaries. I am not fussed about what the money is for as that is irrelevant to my point. I am saying there is enough cash flow to buy these players. The prospectus may say that the Glazers are filing for the IPO because they believe the club cannot continue to compete at the top end of the market, but I do not go along with this. The accounts show there is enough money to compete and that's not including the new windfall of the TV money. I just think they are taking advantage of us being overvalued in the market. It is a great opportunity to pay this debt down when they are valuing the club at £2bn, when we are really only worth around £1.2bn.

So I am saying they are thinking of themselves here, not the fans.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree1

Jred, you've hit the nail on the head. I welcome the idea of flotation to clear the debt but as you say it's what the money is used for which is essential. And by that I mean the big profits we would be making once the debt is cleared. The thing is none of us know this and we just speculate. When SAF says 'no value in the market' some think he is stubborn and others will think the Glazer's are holding back the money. We will never know for sure, which is why this debate will go on and on and on and on. Poor Ed's, lol

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

Sydney - What a difference 24 hours makes, when I suggested last night that we may not get the benefit of any extra available cash if the debt was reduced / cleared and the Glazers would continue to 'milk' the club, you immediately said profit £100m and Glazer dividend £30m leaves an awful lot of money. So what has happened in the last 24 hours to make you think the £70m will no longer be for the benefit of the club.

Keanooh

Agree1 Disagree0

Keanooh, nothing has changed. After all the outgoings minus transfers we are left with around £50m. If the Glazers cleared the £45m interest and took dividends of £25m-£30m instead we would be left with £65m-£70m after outgoings. BUT I found out yesterday that it says in the IPO prospectus that the Glazers will not be taking dividends for the foreseeable future, which means after outgoings we would be left with around £100m after outgoings once the debt is cleared. Yes we would have more money to spend, but I do not believe this is why the Glazers have filed for an IPO. I genuinely believe it's because they have a chance of clearing the debt by overvaluing the club. Anyone would do this, you would be a fool not too.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 11:00:22
Blackett signed professional terms

Believable4 Unbelievable0

HE has the potential to be as good as a.cole.Way better than Fryers

Agree1 Disagree0

No pressure there then! I'll be happy even if he's 90% as good as Cole tbh, lol

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 10:58:47
My post was my opinion, it was not 'a load of drivel' and I can voice my opinion on this matter and be optimistic and positive. Nothing I have read so far has given me anything negative other than pessimistic people on here.

When you say a business is based around having a better product, figures show that United are bigger around the world now than they ever have been. Do you think they care about you or RFT, if you didn't buy your ticket, they have millions of fans around the world, 1 or 2 moaning will do nothing, most of the fans will still buy their tickets because they love the club, not necessarily the owners.

The tickets are worth what people will pay for them, if they mostly sell them all, then surely they are running the business pretty well?

Too many people think they have a say in how the club is run. At the end of the day you support the club, as long as the club is still there to support then all good for me.

I want us to be successful and I think getting rid of the debt will make that much more likely in years to come, but if we are not successful I will still be there every week.

I just see this as a positive, at the end of the day it might not be, but at least the club will be there and hopefully debt free which is what most people have wanted for a long time.

GDS
____________________________________________

Basically you are confirming everything I said about the Glazer's "business" plan. But adding that your are happy to comply with a smile on your face.

I don't give a flying fig how adapt the Glazers have been a generating a global fan base for brand United. Not because I don't welcome these fans, but because the extra money goes to the Glazers and not to the club. And I am quite aware that the Glazers don't care if I don't buy the "product" because others will. But that just demonstrates their contempt for core supports, they don't care if someone is a life long or week long supporter, like any cheap trick all they care about is if you're willing to pay on the day.

As I have said the Glazers are banking, in both senses, on the fact that supporters will buy tickets, merchandise, watch the games on tv, buy the jersey, etc if the team is able to maintain a certain level of competitiveness. This is why have witnessed the Glazers operating on the cheap, putting plasters over the holes without really investing the money necessary to resolve underlying problems. It's a business strategy revolving around trying to balance investing as little as possible while maintaining the belief that United can compete against the world's best. This year should be a wake up call, dumped out of the weakest champions league group, annihilated by Athletic, and so terrified of City that we tried to Ji Sung Park the bus.

But now it should be abundantly clear that we are unable to compete for the top class players we need to be able to challenge the top teams. I repeat: the Glazers took over a debt free, highly profitable club. They have never put a single penny of their own money into the club but have taken over £500 million out of it. Now people like you are delighted that they are going to float shares with the intention of paying off their debt, not with the intention of reinvesting it in the club. The Glazers have saddled the club with massive debt and now people are praising them for the possibility, and it is just a possibility, that they may allow the club spend slightly more of its own money.

Danny Pughnited

Believable5 Unbelievable1

Danny
i have got to say that is an excellent post (in my opinion ) and sums up a lot of fans feelings
jred

Agree3 Disagree0

I fail to understand why GDS feels the need to stick up for the glazers.

Millz

Agree0 Disagree2

So lads,

What do you suggest we do?

Millz, I do not stick up for the Glazers, if you have read my posts I have said I do not agree with what they have done to the club, but they have done it now and we have to look forward. We do not have a time machine. At this current time the best thing that can happen is for us to be sold or for the club to float.

I appreciate people are upset by how the club has been run but that is now in the past and we have to look forward.

Danny,

As with any business the owners do not really care whether their 'customers' are new or long term, why should they? Obviously people who have supported the club for years and years like ourselves don't like new supporters, but these are the ones that have made United the club they are in the first place with the global appeal, you have to understand that surely? You might not care or want any other fans but anyone running a successful business would need this.

Again I ask you, what do you suggest? Do we continue to moan, or go with this and hope beyond hope it makes us a better team with more money to spend. Then if not, we can moan. But the Glazers need the club to be successful, that is how they make their money!

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

You've blatantly ignored my points and come up with some silly argument that I'm hurt because of new supporters? Where are you getting this from?

I repeat I have nothing against new supporters, wherever they come from. My problem is that the Glazers are convincing more and more people to support the club, and getting more and more money for that but the money supporters pay is not going back into the club, it is going into the pockets of Malcolm, Larry and Moe.

If you bothered to read the argument I am actually making, you would understand that it's completely inaccurate to class Manchester United as a business in the sense you want to. Businesses spend millions trying to create brand loyalty as they understand that without a core customer base the brand will fail as it cannot survive on casual customers alone. The Glazers don't need to do this because they know that their core customers are not actually customers but supporters who will continue to support the club regardless of the money the owners put back in the club. Regardless of how far we slip behind the European elite and regardless of how many times we end up on the losing end of major transfers. At present the Glazers are abusing the communal dynamics of a football club to make, potentially, billions without spending a penny. It's exploiting the emotional connection we have with our club to line their own pockets.

The Glazers don't care if the club is successful, they make their money off us, that's what our sponsors pay for, they pay for the chance to advertise directly to the largest pool of football supporters in the world. The Glazer strategy is to invest the minimal level of money needed to maintain a certain level of competitiveness that allows supporters to believe that we are among Europe's elite clubs. Last year proved that we are a long way off that, and if we want to be successful we need to start replacing the old guard with top quality players, not just potential.

People like you who think that supporters should just shut up about the fact that our club, and us its supporters, are being fleeced by owners who have never given us anything in return is the type of apathetic apologism that I want nothing to do with. We should all just stay quite and hope that the Glazers start allowing the club to access its own profits. Seriously? The Glazers are setting a dangerous precedent for a type of shameless profiteering on the back of the connection supporters have with their clubs that saps all the joy out of being a supporter. How can I support my club when in doing so I am forced to also support the Glazers and their greed? There's no easy solution to what the Glazers have done, but they have damaged the club for the foreseeable future and as supporters we should never let them or their cronies forget that.

Danny Pughnited

Agree2 Disagree0

Whilst i admire the passion that brings others to hate the Glazers so much , it also makes me despair. What they have done in buying Utd is not too dissimilar to how each and everyone of us purchase the homes we live in (or business if so inclined) - with other people's money and then pay a whacking great interest on it for years to come. Wake up and smell the coffee (to quote our owners famous vernacular) - it is how the world works.

I don't like the fact that it has saddled us with massive debt , therefore restricting our competiveness in the transfer market but it does suggest that they are , at the very least , astute business men (which is surely what you want running utd). Why spend your own cash when you don't have to. I would love to see how many of the anti Glazer mob would actually practice what they preach were they in the postion to do so - not so many , if any at all , i think.

And just look at our record since they took over - why all the whinging. One relatively bad season and it's all doom and gloom again.

This was a road that was always going to be taken as soon as we became a plc and unfortunately the days of the romanticised , fans clubs are long gone. The game is all about money - hence you all calling for the Glazers to put their hands in their pockets and spend the same amounts as City / Chelsea do on players. Do you really want that ? I'm unsure judging by the amount of hassle you post about City buying the title.

And before you all start - i'm a Utd fan 40yrs man and boy and an ex season ticket holder for 6yrs.

We will come back and challenge again next season and i , like all the rest , look forward to it - i just choose not to constantly moan and whine about something that is nothing to do with me (i don't own any part of the club and have a simple choice as to whether or not i spend my money on anything to do with the club).

Just enjoy the football and forget about the Glazers. They have about you a long time ago.

Agree0 Disagree1

Danny,

I read your post and do not see the answer to my question that I asked twice,

What do you suggest we do?

Other than moan...

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

From the first post I made last night.

"They leave supporters with two choices, either keep lining their pockets, and in effect buying our club for them, or boycott and make the club unprofitable."

So we can either keep giving the Glazers money continuing the steady decline we are in at the moment or we can boycott and make the club unprofitable (and unsuccessful) enough to force them to sell. Neither solution is in any way desirable, and I'm under no illusions that a boycott would even work. But that is the position the Glazers have placed supporters in.

Now what is really up for debate here is should we keep pretending that the Glazers aren't bleeding the club dry, ignore it and cheer on the boys anyway. Or if we as supporters should keep voicing our dissatisfaction, not just at their ownership and their debt, but our disgust with the ethos behind how they are running the club. I would much rather be accused of moaning about the Glazers than burying my head in the sand and hoping and wishing that the leprechaun is going to leave us anything other than a steaming pile of dog crud at the end of the golden rainbow of debt repayments.

Danny Pughnited

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 10:44:15
What are everyone's opinions on making a move for Kaka?!
I am not saying we are linked with him because we are not, but surely worth a punt?
Sure, since he left Milan he has never been the player he was, BUT he was world player of the year in 2007, he is world class. He has been frozen out a little at Madrid, and I really think he would welcome a fresh start.
He may never find his form again, granted, but I think Fergie could pick him up quite cheap, maybe around 8mil? If it was up to me, i would definitely take the risk for such a world class player. Imagine if all he needed to restart his career was a fresh start. Imagine if he found his form again?!
Hes 30 years old, could get a good couple of years out of him.
Surely as reds, you all remember how good he is?! I seem to remember him scoring some wonderful against us over the years.
Thoughts people?!

Believable5 Unbelievable7

05 Jul 2012 10:31:29
What are everyone's opinions on making a move for Kaka?!
I am not saying we are linked with him because we are not, but surely worth a punt?
Sure, since he left Milan he has never been the player he was, BUT he was world player of the year in 2007, he is world class. He has been frozen out a little at Madrid, and I really think he would welcome a fresh start.
He may never find his form again, granted, but I think Fergie could pick him up quite cheap, maybe around 8mil? If it was up to me, i would definitely take the risk for such a world class player. Imagine if all he needed to restart his career was a fresh start. Imagine if he found his form again?!
Hes 30 years old, could get a good couple of years out of him.
Surely as reds, you all remember how good he is?! I seem to remember him scoring some wonderful against us over the years.
Thoughts people?!

Believable3 Unbelievable6

05 Jul 2012 09:51:36
so its true antonio valencia will be the new number 7 top performer consistantly but not my sort of old trafford number 7, i like number 7 to be a flarey player! Lets hope we bring in 1 of either moutinho or modric!

Believable7 Unbelievable4

Valencia wouldn't have been my pick for the number 7 shirt either. I would have given it to a player with flair and the ability to be a match winner. But good luck to him.

Millz

Agree5 Disagree2

To be fair, Valencia won us plenty of matches last season, so I would say he is indeed a match-winner.

APC

Agree3 Disagree1

Valencia is a match winner do you not recall many games in the past where he has set up the wining goals, for instance Blackburn he was phenomenal or the year we won 3-2 in the San Siro he came on and was fantastic! Definatley a good choice for the number 7 :)

Agree4 Disagree2

05 Jul 2012 09:41:03
people on here still.thinking we are only floating to the tune of £64 mill,The IPO isn't for $100m. That's the placeholder. The value is determined by the number of shares on offer and the price. Those haven't been disclosed but given that the IPO docs suggest 33% of the company and the Glazers value the company way North of £1bn, then even a fool can see that the Glazers are looking to raise a lot more.the press are jumping on the low figure because it looks more scandalous.
big red bob.

Believable5 Unbelievable0

I wrote a reply to your message the last day BRB but it wasnt posted just wondering is this true eds sydney?? We could be debt free if true no??

GALWAY RED

Agree0 Disagree0

Wether we are eventually debt free or not the leeches will still take similar amounts out of the club every year
johndenton

Agree0 Disagree2

05 Jul 2012 09:13:28
If the Glazers’ latest moneymaking scheme comes off it could make United $100m. That’s £64m, which – to put it into context – is £16m less than they generated from the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo to Real Madrid in 2009. To put it further into context, it would reduce the club’s debts from £423.3m to £359.3m. To borrow a frequently used term in their application to list the club on the New York Stock Exchange, United’s ‘indebtedness’ remains astronomical. Frankly £64m is a drop in the ocean that is still likely to see Sir Alex Ferguson forced to punch below his weight when it comes to the transfer market. That is the bottom line for the average fan. Can the most valuable club in world football – as named by Forbes Magazine for eight years in a row – still compete for the best players? The overwhelming evidence since 2009 is that they cannot. Ferguson has spent around £115m since Ronaldo became the most expensive player in the history of the sport. That’s a net total of £25m. Taking into consideration money made from further sales and the figure comes down to around £18m or £6m-per-year since Ronaldo’s exit. Viewed in those terms – what difference is £64m really going to make?

Believable1 Unbelievable3

Are you not missing the point? This is to test the market demand in preparation for a larger float, which could then eliminate the debt. Then things become very different.

Agree4 Disagree0

I feel that the proposed I P O is just to test the market and if successful the owners will go again with a 25-30% flotation as planned originally, raising approx £500-£600 million, enough to write off the debt. I hope this is the case.

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 09:08:10
i really can not see united being in the running for RVP. why would ferguson pay that type of monay on a 29 year old. this would not make sense. Last season was the only season RVP has had without a long injury. i would not take the gamble. I don't see any big money signings being made. maybe the only one would be baines. personally i would have give fabio a run in the side.

Believable3 Unbelievable2

05 Jul 2012 08:52:05
With all these player's leaving arsenal i would love United to throw into a really cheeky bid to sign jack wilshere, he's young which suits fergies stance in only signing young players and he's already proven his ability he wouldn't be cheap but could do with a player with so much potential

Believable5 Unbelievable1

Good player but been injured for over 12 months now
jred

Agree1 Disagree1

05 Jul 2012 08:21:34
Surely all these rumours point to the fact we are after a striker, cm and lb?
We've been linked with RVP, Ba, llorente
Cm moura, tiote, moutinho, modric, cabaye
Lb tbh only Baines really.
But doesn't this point to the fact there is no idea amongst the media who we are targeting!!
Q

Believable0 Unbelievable0

They are all speculation as the media will never know who we are after. Utd keep deals secret and nobody outside of the club will know for sure until it is official.

fearny

Agree0 Disagree0

Moura is not a central midfielder...we've been linked with as many attacking midfielders as central ones...to be honest I'm a bit confused! We need a boss in the midfield, we have flair already with Kagawa, Valencia and Powell!

Andy

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 08:21:34
Surely all these rumours point to the fact we are after a striker, cm and lb?
We've been linked with RVP, Ba, llorente
Cm moura, tiote, moutinho, modric, cabaye
Lb tbh only Baines really.
But doesn't this point to the fact there is no idea amongst the media who we are targeting!!
Q

Believable1 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 08:15:49
"Right now, there have been a few signs of interest, but no concrete offers enough for M'Vila to leave.

"We will wait for the offers arrive until the end of the transfer window," said Dreossi.

A cheeky bid of between 10 & 15 mil has got to be worth it for a player of M'Vilas quality.......

oxred

Believable3 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 07:59:00
Before everyone jumps on the inevitable RVP bandwagon. It is definately NOT going to happen!
If he is the loyal arsenal boy their fans would have us believe he is off aboad. The options are few!
1. Too young for china. Saudi Arabia or USA
2. No money in Spain. Along with limited opportunities as the only two teams are already over stacked with talent in that department
3. If he has fooled us all and really is money orientated then he is off to the Sly Blues !! Let's hope not cos he is more than a bench warmer!
4. No chance of joining Chelski!
5. We should take a look - but won't!!
6. That only leaves Italy! Can't really believe that one either with the state of their economy and a poor league!

All in all most confusing! The one thing we do know is that mr wenger will be happy for him to walk away in a years time for nothing as with nasri!

So anyone who pretends to know us clearly just guessing!

Believable2 Unbelievable0

Loyal? We will see when he is earning £220k a week at City next season. If he was loyal then he wouldn't leave Arsenal in the first place.

Sydney!

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 07:57:28
Does anybody think with the glazers selling shares in the us stock market they, might be thinking of selling ? or is cos they have no money to give fergie for transfers and that the money we get from selling shares will help get transfer targets?

Believable0 Unbelievable0

The reason they are doing it is because they want to clear the debts. United have spent over £500 million pounds of Interest because of the debt and with the debt cleared all that money will be going in to there and there respective partners pocket

fearny

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 07:30:08
ed do you feel that could man utd have already wrapped up their further signings. With sir alex confirming that they had agreed a fee with crewe for powell even before the playoffs so can we be up for any surprises?????? {Ed004's Note - Possibly}

Believable1 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 07:14:05
ed do you feel that man utd will wrap up their summer signing before leaving for their pre season tour?
please comment {Ed004's Note - I don't know}

Believable0 Unbelievable0

If we were to sign say modric or moutinho, they doubt they will go on pre season anyway because they have been in the euros.

Ste-Utd

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 06:48:12
whats your opinion ED???
please do comment
is this 100 m $ listing at the NYSE is a move by glazers to clear their debt or is to rasie funds for transfers {Ed004's Note - To clear debt}

Believable0 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 04:50:36
Who ever talking s**t about glazers. just search and find out why the club is sold to them... if u think the glazers are for business through the club. they could have sold the club when they were offered billions.
REDMAN

Believable0 Unbelievable1

05 Jul 2012 04:34:41
Ok lets get this straight we obv wont be signing anybody else higher than 15m simple reason we can not afford it. why do yous think we missed out on hazard and wudnt pay the fee for sneijder last year. the glazers are bleeding the club dry. We have just decided to float on new york to raise 64m to try and pay off sum of that 463m debt which is left. why do yous think we dont spend crazy money anymore. i for one im getting worried about this we need new owners asap. alot is going on behind the scenes that us fans dont know about. but we are manchester united and sir alex has to get on with whats hes got. so for now love united and hate the glazers.

Believable1 Unbelievable6

Kagawa was 17 million, Young was 18 million, De Gea was 17 million....

Need I go on?

GDS

Agree3 Disagree1

Kagawa wa only 12 m

most expensive signings for the 4 years before the glazers took over
2001/2002 we paid 28 mill for veron
2002/2003 we paid 28 mill for ferdinant
2003/2004 we paid 12 mill for ronaldo
2004/2005 we paid 27 mill for rooney

in the 7 years since the glazers took over we have only spent over 20 mill on 1 player , so the OP may have a point although he should maybe of said 20 mill instead of 15mill
jred

Agree1 Disagree1

Nani,Anderson,Berbatov?

Agree1 Disagree0

Berbatov - £30.75m?
Anderson - 30m euro
Nani - 25m euro

Also you are right that Kagawa's initial fee is £12.5m, but did you know Rooney's initial fee was £19m? with a further £6.6m in add ons?

Sydney!

Agree1 Disagree0

SYD
LOL i notice you gave berd transfer in pounds and the others in euro is this because at the time 30m euro and 25m euro was about 14 to 16 mill sterling.

syd talk about fudging the figures (not that your trying to stick up for the glazers of course
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Sydney

Am sure the pound equivalent of the Nani and anderson fees at the time did not exceed 20m pounds each. Basically, Since the Glazers took over the only signing exceeding 20m pounds is berba.

Millz

Agree0 Disagree0

The OP said 15 million?

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

Jred, I did it in euros because they were paid for in euros and and Berbatov was paid for in sterling. However 30m euros at the time was £20m.

How is stating FACTS sticking up for the Glazers?

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Syd
Not it wasn't it was about 16.7 mill I checked
Also if you look on the andersred blog he gives a link to transfer fees which he uses for his blog and it has Anderson transfer as 16 mill , I know you have said a few times that andy gets his figures right so I would imagine this is reliable. I'm at work or I would find the link myself

So to be fair your not stating facts but fudging the figures to support the glazers.

Got to admit tho we seemed to be able to close a deal better before the glazers 28 mill on a CB 10 years ago

Gds
I did put in my OP it should prob be 20 not 15 mill

Agree0 Disagree0

No it's not, it's £20.4m.

30m euro left our club and went into Porto's accounts. It was well publicised a year later. Even RFT will back me up on that. Is he a Glazer supporter?

Like I said, just the facts Jred, whether it suits your argument or not is irrelevant.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

Syd
I'm sorry pal but I disagree I think your wrong on the Anderson fee but but I can't check it now
Also what about nani are u trying to tell me that 25 mill euro is more than 20 mill sterling lol
Veron ferdy Rooney you could throw rvn in there as well all big deals done in the 4 years before the glazers took over I think it would be fair to say we managed to pull of the big deals better then
Jred

Agree0 Disagree0

I am not getting into this discussion with you, all I am doing is telling you how much Anderson cost us. He cost us 30m euros, which in June 2007 was £20.38m, Nani was 25m euros and £17m. Couldn't care less about your discussion with GDS, just letting you know how much Anderson, Nani, Berbatov and Rooney cost the club.

Sydney!

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 04:09:13
its no way that berbatov is going to extend his stay further at the club . sir alex have mentioned that he will go with them on the pre season tour thats it . its only a matter of time before he departs. maybe SAF is looking to sell him at the right price

Believable0 Unbelievable0

I have a feeling berba wont be leaving, he will probably walk away on a free next year.

Millz

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 02:26:53
Going to try and move away from all the financial stuff, lets just wait and see how we perform when we do get floated, we'll have a much better idea once we see what kind of reception we get in the markets. Just a general post about what I think we're looking at for next season, no confirmed stuff and just the usual papers and websites as sources. Reckon we'll go for a 4-2-3-1...strange because SAF normally doesn't like a DM, which one of the two would more than likely be!
De Gea
Rafael Jones Vidic Izzaguire
Carrick Witsel
Rafael Moura Kagawa
Rooney

That'd really be my dream outcome...great potential in Izzaguire, Witsel and Moura for further development yet still a fair bit of talent now. If we could get Moutinho instead of Witsel, that would be great! However given the slight price difference and Benfica's desire to get Anderson I see Witsel as a more likely outcome. Let me know what you guys think, and don't be hating...end of the day we're all United fans!

Andy

Believable1 Unbelievable1

Andy - No hate here, your post made me chuckle, another 3 signings to be made, Raphael is that good he is playing in two positions, thanks for making me chuckle

Agree1 Disagree0

Haha sorry mate...meant Valencia, that's what I get for posting at half two in the morning! I actually do think we'll see 3 more signings. Now maybe not Moura because he's be expensive to get! But Izzaguire and Witsel wouldn't cost the earth!

Andy

Agree2 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 02:16:08
I'm not a person in the know just a person who thinks we need a lb, a cm and a striker !
We missed out on alba who was an amazing buy for barca BUT let's get baines. He's old enough to not hinder fabio too much as hes a real talent although baines price is a bit much

For a cm I would personally love khedira, amazing player defensively an going forward. Not always been a favourite in Madrid so could be an opportunity for a bid.

Finally seeing as berbatov looks like he's off :( ha I wouldn't mind seeing a bid made for the obvious players (van persie,lewandowski,huntelaar) but I would love to see a bid for pastore as I'm sure he has the quality to adapt as a striker.

Finally where has sortis ninis gone ? Lots of rumours a couple of years ago about him but no more ! Would be a good signing in my opinion !

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Ninis was poor at Euro 2012... Not utd quality.

fearny

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 02:14:05
I have seen the rumours linking us to Lucas moura, the guy is a star and will be one of the best players in the world easily. This question goes out to everyone, can we sign him? He would cost about 35 million I believe. If we were willing to sign hazard for around that surely we can sign Lucas? IMO Lucas is already a better player than hazard and a better prospect! Hope SAF gets the check book out or is allowed to anyways.

Caolán.

Believable5 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 01:33:07
While RVP, Lucas Moura and Ganso would all be fantastic signings, let's be real. We're not signing any of them. The last big time player who chose to sign for us over our competitors was, well, can't really think of one. And that's the problem! -KG {Ed004's Note - Kagawa... Powell..}

Believable0 Unbelievable2

Jones young,,,,,,,,,,,,

Agree1 Disagree0

I think KG said big time player. Young, jones, powell, kagwa are not big time players yet.

Millz

Agree1 Disagree0

ED04, the fact that you think Kagawa or Powell count as big time players who we had to compete to sign, then you are proving my point perfectly. Kagawa, Powell, Jones, Young vs. Aguero, Nasri, Hazard, Sanchez, Benzema, Ozil, etc. -KG {Ed004's Note - We still had to compete to sign them. And how isn't the bundesliga player of the year not a big signing?}

Agree0 Disagree0

Who were we competing with for Kagawa? City, Chelsea, Madrid and Barca weren't involved. Jones, Powell and Young weren't actively pursued by any of the legitimate transfer competition. Which is why we signed them. That's the difference. The players I listed were actually desired by the big spending clubs. Kagawa cost less than 20 mil and we only got Kagawa so easily bc the other big clubs didn't make offers....KG {Ed004's Note - Yet you forget how City, Chelsea, Arsenal etc were all in for Powell and Jones.. The only reason no one was in for Kagawa was because he made it clear his intent to come to utd}

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 01:03:34
I do not understand the thinking behind people when they say the flotation is a negative move etc how is it ? if we get our debt cleared and make £120million a year and the glazers take 30million of it in dividends we still have 90million to play around with and i for one am not going to turn that down !!

Believable3 Unbelievable1

05 Jul 2012 00:55:24
Miguel Veloso - Moves to Dynamo Viev..
Dodo - Moves to Roma..
Ninis - Moves to Parma..
Asamoah - Moves to Juventus..
Isla - Moves to Juventus..
Alba - Moves to Barcelona..
Marvin Martin - Moves to Lille..

is it fair to say that United were never interested in these players ? They were clearly linked with us !

Believable0 Unbelievable2

Thers a difference between having an interest and actually trying to buy a player.
once united show an interest in a player everyone seems to think we are about to sign him
jred

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 00:55:22
So I'm a little confused with this whole stock exchange deal. I 'get it' - so to speak - but wonder why the Glazers are doing it this way. Yes, the deal would allow them to reduce the debt (which of course is a great thing for the club) - but surely paying off the debt would increase the value of the club?

If so it would make much more sense for them to pay off the debt by some other method (a short term loan against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, for example) enabling them to float the club with a higher share price?

That said - I'm happy either way providing some of the debt is paid off.

T0MB0Z

Believable0 Unbelievable0

05 Jul 2012 00:37:45
According to Kloot, Ed002 is now a glazer supporter. lol

G.A.G.U.S

Believable3 Unbelievable1

05 Jul 2012 00:42:54
"I would suggest you have more to be worrying about than us, as your major signing for the summer just signed for Spurs!
GDS"
That's funny, I could have sworn that we didn't actually make a bid. You seem to think that I should not engage in any discussion about anything other than "worrying" about Liverpool, do you realise how ridiculous that makes you sound? I most certainly am not worried about you either.
JFT96
Smithy

Believable1 Unbelievable3

So sigurrson rejected Liverpool and they aren't worried. Well if he rejected the man who brought him to England there must be something wrong with Liverpool Think its funny how Liverpool have gone from supposedly one of the biggest clubs in the world to being linked to mark Davies a wolves reject and an average at best Bolton player. Liverpool fans can no longer take the fact that they have been knocked off their perch. They keep mentioning their european cup wins, only 1 in the champions leauge, I think it's safe to say Liverpool are no longer a threat!

Agree0 Disagree0

LOL did you really bite at that throw away comment? Bless.

Why did you not make a bid, he is better than all of your midfielders except Stevie G and he is a lot younger. You were nailed on to sign him, he was going to go to Swansea under Rodgers, but as soon as Rodgers goes to Liverpool he would rather go to Spurs, surely that worries you?

There are enough negative United fans on here without scousers joining in as well mate.

GDS

Agree0 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 00:34:43
Liverpool fans trying to put a bad spin on the IPO is hilarious. Some of the UTD fans aren't much better either. Its like hating the Glazers is more important than our club's financial health. The Glazers own less of the club and the debt is cleared, what's not to like? -MB-

Believable2 Unbelievable1

05 Jul 2012 00:09:18
I have posted a couple of things below in relation to RFT's most negative, pessimistic comments I have ever seen but anyway, I will state my views here also as I have a little time.

As far as I can see it the reason the Glazers are hated is because of the debt they have put into the club. If they did not bring the debt they would not have to make so many interest payments.

I did not realise until today that people think the Glazers are making money from United. They are taking no more than what any owner would take from a successful business, how else are businesses supposed to be run?

I hate the fact they were allowed to use debt to fund the purchase of the club but unfortunately that happened and over the last few years a lot of money has been taken from the club that could have been used on transfers and wages.

If, and I know it is an if at the moment, they were to float the club and make the money to pay off the loan, it would mean we would no longer have to pay the massive interest payments. In other words we would have a takeover as such. The best thing anyone could hope for was a takeover and people wanted the Red Knights to buy out the club.

From a commercial aspect the Glazers have been great for the club, we are bigger than ever across the world and are hopefully in a position to float and make the money we are hoping for.

Nobody wants the club to continue as it is as we can all see that money is being wasted. If that was to stop and we had the same club but with no interest payments, we would be in an amazing position going forward.

The Glazers are businessmen at the end of the day, they will want to make money from the club. We are just fans and want success....the only way the Glazers can make maximum money from the club is via success so they want that as well.

I would not be too bothered how the club is run if we can get rid of the silly interest payments and carry on being successful. Surely that is what we all want and where we are heading by the look of it?

I appreciate some people will never forgive the Glazers for what they have done to the club, but if we come out the other end of it with a strong club that is well run and bigger around the world, then maybe some people will change their minds (don't worry RFT I know this will never happen)

Apologies for the essay, i write a lot on here as you all know and I read every day, I never realised I was slowly turning into Shappy ;)

Looking forward to the start of the new season and wondering who the 2 players are we are looking to bring in. I just watched a video of Lucas Moura, he would definitely have us on the edge of our seats, will take what the Mirror say with a pinch of salt though!

Goodnight ladies and gents.

GDS

Believable1 Unbelievable2

This is a pile of drivel that completely misses the point that RFT and others make.

The main point you miss is that every penny put into paying off their, not the club's, debt is the Glazers making money from the club. The Glazers purchased a debt free profitable club and did it using not one cent of their own money. Since then they have been literally using the money fans put into their club to buy the club they couldn't afford in the first place. In short we are buying Manchester United for the Glazers and we are doing it every year. The Ronaldo money, all their glowing commercial achievements have been geared toward allowing the Glazers to buy our club with what should be the club's money.

You say what else would business men do?

Most businesses are premised around producing a product that's appealing to customers, either via price or quality. The Glazers have given neither, the costs of supporting the club have risen and the Glazers have shown consistent inability to compete for top class player in terms of both transfer fees and wages (and this has finally been admitted in the past few days). Yet the clubs profits (and this is after debt repayments) have risen continually. In short we are paying more and more and the Glazers are not matching this by reinvesting the profits back to the club. Obviously large profits make the club more attractive to potential buyers, so skimp on investment to improve their own end game.

Every year it is becoming clearer and clearer that the Glazers are willing to invest just enough to keep us competitive but nothing more than that. We're tearing the backside out of our older players and bringing in young players who can be classed like assets with resale value. Bandages and plasters but our major midfield problem for the last 5 years has yet to be addressed in any real way. Now we can't even hang on to young talents because we are unwilling to match other clubs in terms of wages.


If this was any other "business" then customers would go and buy a better product. The difference is that a football club is not just another business, and there are no customers, there are supporters and genuine supporters will support their club no matter what. So the Glazers aren't business men because business men try to provide an excellent and/or cost effective product that eclipses their competitors. The Glazers are leeches who are exploiting the emotional investment Manchester United supporters have in their club to make as much money as possible. They leave supporters with two choices, either keep lining their pockets, and buying our club for them, or boycott and make the club unprofitable.

Danny Pughnited

Agree3 Disagree0

GDS
If the glazers float the club get the money they want , pay of the debt and invest in the team then great.
But what if they dont ,there are a 100 ways this could play out, some good some bad.
RFT does sound negative and pessimistic but what if his right.

I think your right RFT will never change his mind on the glazers but at the same time there are some people who are over positive and will never see anything wrong untill its to late.
its a bit like transition or decline, they are probably the same thing just one person will see a team in transition the other a team in decline.
im not to happy how the club has been run over the last 3 years and i think the team has gone backwards, at the moment i think we are going in the wrong direction but hopefully that will change.
jred

Agree0 Disagree0

Jred,

I am not happy with how the club has gone either mate, we have gradually got worse, even though we are buying quality young players.

I know it could go any of 100 ways, but surely whichever way it goes, if the club is debt free, at least we know we will have a club to support for years to come?

Danny,

My post was my opinion, it was not 'a load of drivel' and I can voice my opinion on this matter and be optimistic and positive. Nothing I have read so far has given me anything negative other than pessimistic people on here.

When you say a business is based around having a better product, figures show that United are bigger around the world now than they ever have been. Do you think they care about you or RFT, if you didn't buy your ticket, they have millions of fans around the world, 1 or 2 moaning will do nothing, most of the fans will still buy their tickets because they love the club, not necessarily the owners.

The tickets are worth what people will pay for them, if they mostly sell them all, then surely they are running the business pretty well??

Too many people think they have a say in how the club is run. At the end of the day you support the club, as long as the club is still there to support then all good for me.

I want us to be successful and I think getting rid of the debt will make that much more likely in years to come, but if we are not successful I will still be there every week.

I just see this as a positive, at the end of the day it might not be, but at least the club will be there and hopefully debt free which is what most people have wanted for a long time.

GDS

Agree1 Disagree0

05 Jul 2012 00:09:02
The impact of the IPO does not seem to be ufficiently well understood. Taken together with the imminent rise of domestic and international income the combination of factors is likely to provide a significant and sustainable competitive advantage for the club.

Consider that the £50+m interest charge could be wiped out alongside the debt and also the additional £40 - 60 million from enhanced tv rights (asuming that performance on the field of play holds up) the club could be generating over £150 m or more of free cashflow annually. Taking out 25% of this for dividends (but adding something back in for interest on cash) would still provide a strong cash base for player investment.

This could be further enhanced by the continuing uplift in sponsorship, mobile broadband and other commercial opportunities.

Our natural domestic competitors are both likely to struggle with the new fair play impositions and the Italian and particularly Spanish clubs are going to suffer badly with stringent fiscal environments and bust banks.

Those who ignorantly berate the Glazers should give due consideration that in the not too distant future we will be the kimgs of the cash castle. And don't forget that for every £ that they have taken out of the club, they have returned like for like with far better commercial development.

I also feel that the IPO will lead in short order to a sale of the club at elevated value once the cash generation of the club has been demontrated.

Quite an interesting prospect.

JS Bach

Believable2 Unbelievable0

04 Jul 2012 23:55:00
People aren't realising what's happening to the club ! Yanks playing us and guess what we will make a big signing to appease the easily led , the plan was bag hazard and offer top fee to say look at our financial muscle. People slated wazza for speaking out . Only thing was he was spot on and lets not forget posters he is undoubtably one of our stars if not top dog !

Believable1 Unbelievable1

So we do not spend enough money or buy big, but if we were to buy big it would just be to say 'look at our financial muscle'. Do you realise how silly that sounds?

GDS

Agree4 Disagree1

04 Jul 2012 23:44:16
I just want to know why you all think that once the debt is removed the Glazers will put the money into United and transfers? Because they said so? Don't be so gullible, they will invest as little as they possibly can, and anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. They are doing whatever they can to make a nice profit out of your club, and I can see the Americans we have doing something similar, but investing slightly more as we make way less. Not on here to wind you all up, I am just curious as why you are suddenly believing what they are saying.
JFT96
Smithy

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Because to run a successful business you need success on the pitch. To get success on the pitch you need to reinvest money to make more money, it is how business works. Without the interest payments we would be so much better off, but I am sure you won't see that from the other end of the M62.

I would suggest you have more to be worrying about than us, as your major signing for the summer just signed for Spurs!

GDS

Agree2 Disagree0

Smithy - so you must believe the same for the yanks running your club, right?

Gav

Agree0 Disagree0

04 Jul 2012 23:44:03
All these great financial minds out today talking about how this is a good thing. This is a disgrace you actuall realised part of our club is being systematically sold off to random Americans who don't understand soccer as they know it. This started a long time ago and is a reaction based on how the glazers muffed their way in and how there playing a financial game with other peoples money. It may seem that one financial move they have made has made you forget why were actually in this position and the glazers are doing this. People like the highly respected Sidney lol saying its a good thing. Do you not know we would be in a better position without the whole rip off saga. And please anyone who go's on about increased revenue ! Yeah some americans bought in however it's been the same increase in line with inflated pricing for all the top ten teams percentage wise. Bigger picture is your thought for tomorrow ! SHANDY ! Incidentally no relation to RFT ;)

Believable1 Unbelievable1

After your post earlier suggesting we all boycott the club and leave them with no money I am unable to take much of what you say seriously!

Of course we would be in a better position without the 'whole ripoff saga' but I am unsure what your solution to that is? Go back in time and don't let the Glazers take over? We are in 2012, we are in the position we are in, it is done, now we must look to the future, and todays announcement would suggest there is a plan for the future which would keep our great club at the top where it belongs.

The Glazers have done a lot of good as well as bad, even if some people are unwilling to admit it.

GDS

Agree1 Disagree1