12 Feb 2012 16:39:32
I think if we can win the league this season, and Real Madrid win La Liga then we and them will get stronger and Man City will become weaker.
I think if Madrid win the League then Ronaldo will be happy, and i think he will achieved what he wanted to achieve and then may head home - i'd be happy to put all of the available transfer money on him.
I think that Madrid are going to be in for at least two players from city - Silva and Aguero. I can see them both leaving to Madrid who want to do work on their midfield. That way i think that they will have Silva, Ozil, Aguero and Benzema makeing up the main attacking players. The reason for this is that they need more possesion against barca and all of the above mentioned are great at doing that.
So Ronaldo in to us, City's Silva and Aguero to Madrid.
LOL it is like you cheated on Football Manager and did exactly what you wanted to happen.
None of this will happen, and what does Madrid or United winning the league have to do with anything else you mentioned?
You must be dreaming... It's not going to happen.
I don't know which of the above is the most un believable.
Cant really see an ex athletico madrid player (aguero) signing for real madrid MG
I do see Aguero at RM in 2 season or so, but i don't see how City will get weaker, if anything they'll just chuck cash at other players.
I think either this summer or next summer Ronaldo will move to City with Aguero going in the other direction.
Sydney!
'MG'
Aguero wanted to move to RM when he was at AM. He made that clear. If RM could have afforded him he would be a RM player now.
Sydney!
If Real Madrid want Aguero then they will get him.
If Uefa stick to their FFP rules City spending will be in accordance with their turnover, which means in time they will become weaker. FFP is based on how much a club makes nothing to do with owners cash, so UTD and Arsenal will be far ahead of them in that respect
Sorry Sydney that will never ever happen
Ronaldo has to much respect for the way United made him the player he has become and if he returns to the EPL it will be to regain the famous number 7 shirt
ARB
Aguero will go to Real Madrid within 2 years, i think that is his dream. As for Ronaldo, i think he'll return soonish, but i certianly don't see him at City.
RedDevil19
If real wanted aguero they would've got him.
I've seen 'Ronaldo's loyalty' crop up a few times, I must say I agree with Syd here really. The only thing I'd question is if he'd come back to England, I know he said something the other day, but he's been there and done it.
I love the original posters' thinking by the way - it's a little bit like the Spud interview in 'Trainspotting' (when he's had the speed). There is a sense of logic to the post, but that certainly doesn't mean it will happen.
Jack
As I mentioned before FFP will affect all the clubs that have sugar daddies, The only clubs that can afford Ronaldo and his wages are UTD and Arsenal should he return, and he would quite obviously never go to Arsenal so UTD is the only destination. However he might not even leave Madrid so lets not get ahead of ourselves
It is a possibility though that in a year or so ronaldo is sold to us and Real use the money to buy Aguero, City might have to sell to help balance their books due to FFP
Dan S
Dan S, Arsenal could afford Ronaldo's wages? They couldn't pay fabregas or nasri enough, so how on earth would Ronaldo be possible? Chelsea are more likely to pay his wages but i doubt it. I don't even wanna think what will happen with him, just gonna wait and find out..
Ozwald
Ronaldo is not coming back people, let it go.
You guys are like that stubborn Ex-girlfriend who refuses to let go, even after being dumped for someone 'supposedly' better and being rejected numerous times.
Anyways, the only way we could ever see ronaldo back at the end of this season is if all of the following conditions are met:
-Ronaldo wins both the la liga and Champions league this season. They will probably win la liga, but will they win the champions league? lets wait.
-Jose leaves Madrid at the end of the season, possibly for united.
-Ronaldo wants to leave badly enough to force a massive price-cut, resulting in united being able to afford his transfer fee. I don't him being that desperate to leave. I mean, this is the same guy who said, just a few months ago that he was willing to sign a 10year contract extension if Madrid asked him.
- Ronaldo takes a pay cut, but why would he. People say ronaldo is very loyal to united and would never join city, but why did he not rule city out when asked which teams he would never play for? the ONLY team he mentioned is barca. Why did he not mention city?...i ll tell you why, its because there is a possibility that only city might be able to afford his transfer fee and wages should he choose to leave Madrid. If they were winning trophies, why would he not join them? he is a PROFESSIONAL footballer not a SENTIMENTAL footballer.
All in All, i don't see him coming back just yet, maybe in 3years time when he hits 30, becomes less influential and madrid discover the next best thing.
Millz
If Ronaldo ever goes to Man City, I will stop watching football. If ever he comes back to England, the only club I'd like him to play for apart from us is Spurs.
Ozwald you are incorrect, its a case of Arsenal and Wenger are tight. Arsenal made a profit of 56 million a year, your telling me they cannot afford 10-12 million in wages? not having a go, but use your common sense Arsenal. Also as the debt on their stadium gets paid back more and more, their profits will increase. Chelsea? lmao not under FFP rules again do your research, Chelsea have massive losses year in year out, funded by their owner, under FFP this cannot happen. Chelsea need to balance the books their big spending days are numbered
Dan S
Also Ozwald Fabregas dream was to play for Barcelona no matter how much Arsenal would pay him. He give Arsenal some good years service and a massive profit on the fee originally paid. Nasri got offered 230k a week by Man City, as I have stated a few times now when FFP comes in full force, Man City will not be able to afford these wages for new signings. Clubs like City and Chelsea are artificially rich through their owners. Clubs like Arsenal, Utd, Liverpool, Barcelona, Real Madrid don't need mega rich owners. Even if they did you should know Arsenal's owner is a billionaire and his wife is part of the Walton fortune as well. Arsenal have plenty of cash. Just do your research next time m8
Dan S
Hey Dan S, you are totally right.
Hope the FFP are enforced, that would keep City out of the Champions League for the next decade. Can't see them break-even before, or qualify with their revenue.
About Arsenal's owner though, the wife is the billionaire, the husband is only the one wasting/investing her families money ;-)
Jonny8
I can actually see FFP driving sugar daddies away from the game again, since they can't buy success, all they can invest in to get their clubs a headstart will be a new shiny stadium, but you have to fill it to get a higher revenue stream out of that. Or accept you won't be playing in the Champions League for a couple of years (at least 3) to invest heavily
'Dan S'
A few points, first of all City could easily afford Ronaldo as the transfer fee would be amortised over the length of his contract, for example £50m would be £10m a year over the five years. But I think Aguero plus £20m or so would be too much for RM to turn down. £20m over five years is £4m a year and Aguero's & Tevez' wages will comfortably compensate for Ronaldo's.
My second point is about Arsenal, they made a £56m profit through property sales, without properties or players like Cesc or Nasri to sell, they will not make much profit in the near future and what they do make will be eaten up in dividends by their investors/owner. I am not saying Arsenal are skint, because they are not, but they could not afford Ronaldo & his wages. More importantly they wouldn't want to as it means less dividends to take and it would also upset the applecart within the camp. If they refused to pay Nasri, Cesc & now RVP more than £110k a week, do you see them paying £300k a week for Ronaldo? Not that Ronaldo would have any interest in going to Arsenal anyway.
Sydney!
Hi Sydney
I never said Arsenal would get him as they and Wenger are too tight
Arsenal make more turnover than Man City, and when their stadium loans are fully paid back they will have an estimated 40-50 million profits per year on a regular basis without player sales
Man City are way over on wages, free up Tevez? when Financial Fair Play comes in Syd they need to trim their wage bill by 500k-1 million a week
Arsenal have more fans than City, they have more turnover and a bigger stadium, they got a cash balance of 89 million
I study football business and finance
City can only afford players because of their owner. Their current wage bill as stated is miles over what they can afford within FFP regardless of whether Tevez is sold or not.
City need to trim massive losses, no way on earth can they afford ronaldo and meet the regulations, even if they sold 2-3 of their top stars, as they are already way above their means.
Dan S
Also as I stated its just an example of the only two teams that can realistically afford him in England with the up and coming FFP. He would as i stated never go to Arsenal. But they are financially much better off than Man City
during my studies we have studied the Arsenal business model and it is very good. Financially they are leaps and bounds above Man City. Of course they need to keep making the CL to keep revenue up.
Arsenal are sensible and always tend to be regarding signings and wages. similar to us at united. we don't need sugar daddies. and even if arsenal did the owner and his wife are worth like 11 billion joint.
Syd in normal circumstances you would be right, free up Tevez and Aguero for Ronaldo's wages. However that would only work if city was currently within budget regarding FFP. Even if they sold Tevez and Aguero for good money and freed up their wages they would only just make the regulations. so add to that buying ronaldo and then replacing a high wage with a high wage kind of defeats the object.
Its a good thing for us UTD fans anyway. Because one day the Glazers will leave, and with UTD's turnover we can financially over power any UK club
Dan S
Just wish people would realize Arsenal, UTD and even Liverpool are self funded
CITY AND CHELSEA are artificially rich. Nothing to do with their club finances, its owners money. {Ed002's Note - Nobody is going to worry too much about the FFP rules at the moment and certainly it will not impact transfer policy this year. Quite how you see Liverpool is self funding is beyond me. They have been making a consistent loss and continue to do so. The owners pick up the tab for that. It is no different to Chelsea asiude from the scale.}
'Dan S'
If you study football business and finance then you would know that Arsenal do not finish paying their stadium debt off til 2031. In the past two seasons they have paid just over £10m off of their stadium debt. Arsenal are comfortable, but will never make £40m-£50m a year in profits via football revenues.
Sydney!
Yeah Jonny8 your right it will deter some away
sometimes I think football makes most these top business people lose their marbles
for instance if Roman had brought Utd instead of Chelsea the initial price would have cost him anywhere between 800million-1.5 billion. But he would have easily been able to the sell the club on for that amount.
Also Chelsea would not have challenged for the title because he wouldn't have owned them, The only competition around that time in the league was Arsenal.
from an investment point of view he would have been much better off buying United, because Chelsea has cost him well over a billion. He of course is getting this back or so he thinks in the form of an interest free loan to the club.
But I doubt he and his family will see that in another century or two lol {Ed002's Note - Your study of the finances of Chelsea are rather far from correct. And quite how you would support the value of Manchester United as being anywhere close to £1.5B in 2004 is beyond me.}
'Dan S'
Lets not forget City have a lot of deadwood to offload and that will knock off a few quid. Players like Bridge, Adebayor, Hargreaves, Johnson, Santa Cruz, Weiss, Tevez. These players alone would be on around £550k-£600k a week. lets not forget that they could get other (friends) to sponsor them to make the numbers up. You can also deduct £15m or so for the academy expenses. City will be fine when the time comes, but of course Arsenal are in better shape financially.
Sydney!
At the end of the day we hope ronaldo will come back but it is very unlikely too. of course I hope I am wrong.
Arsenal was just a point I was making. like people mention City freeing up wages and all that. Arsenal could sell van persie and arshavin and get 45-50 million combined easily, most of that from Van Persie of course lol
that would free their wages up to the tune of 150,000 a week, so people want to tell me arsenal couldn't afford the transfer fee and pay ronaldo 150-220k a week based on that? of course they can. Wenger is a tight one, which is all the better for us at UTD :D
Dan S
P.S does anyone from here use the talking reds forum over at manutd.com?
'no name'
In 2004 Roman could have bought United for around £750m. Perhaps a little less as United's shareholders would have known that there would be no leveraged buyout. Also I have looked at Chelsea finances this month and they are looking pretty good, if you take away the exceptional costs they are not too far away from breaking even. When Terry, Torres, Lampard, Drogba etc are gone they should fall in line in a few years time. Roman will always need to pump in some cash, but not as much as he has done over the last eight years or so.
Sydney!
{Ed002's Note - Nobody is going to worry too much about the FFP rules at the moment and certainly it will not impact transfer policy this year. Quite how you see Liverpool is self funding is beyond me. They have been making a consistent loss and continue to do so. The owners pick up the tab for that. It is no different to Chelsea asiude from the scale.}
Hi again Ed but people are worrying about FFP already, Mancini wouldn't stop banging on about it, and how its affected his plans, he mentioned De Rossi was a player he liked, and also said he felt he would stay in Roma, and one of the things he mention was City couldn't afford his wages anyway because of FFP
I don't know a massive amount about Liverpool's finances, but if they was to make top 4 and be wise, they would be in a better position than both City and Chelsea. And anyway I know I brought these clubs up, but I couldn't care a less TBH as long as our United are ok :D {Ed002's Note - Manchester City have a benefit in the value of the unused assets (Bridge, Adebayor, Tevez etc.) and the issue they likely have is the reluctance of teh owners to keep money being pumped in without any of these players being sold on. I have no idea where you come up with this strange rationale over Liverpool from. They have accounts to June 2011 to report and there will be a loss. They will also make a loss this year. If you are going to attempt to rationally discuss finances try and do it without making comparisons - you are just digging yourself a hole otherwise.}
HI Syd
I agree Chelsea and City will be fine when the time comes and FFP takes full effect.
But they won't be able to spend like they have done in the past. Which is good for Utd. Because we are more of a financial power house. We just need them Glazer Leaches to leave.
Not suggesting we will go mad we never have. but out rivals will be spending a lot less, and we will be more of an attractive proposition to top talents again, like for instance the last few seasons any player coming to City was getting crazy wages, their being a bit more cautious. They have got a lot of deadwood true.
But I doubt we will see city have squad/backup players on high wages as now, so over time I expect them to get weaker than they currently are.
they will still be a lot better of than they was before the owner took over
Dan S
{Ed002's Note - Your study of the finances of Chelsea are rather far from correct. And quite how you would support the value of Manchester United as being anywhere close to £1.5B in 2004 is beyond me.}
Hi Ed I said between 800 million to 1.5 billion and it was more towards the lower value was the club was realistically worth around what the glazers paid.
what part of Chelsea's finances are far from correct?
{Ed002's Note - Just nonsense to mention anything more than £800M - particularly when you quote figures of £1.5B. As for the Chelsea statement "because Chelsea has cost him well over a billion. He of course is getting this back or so he thinks in the form of an interest free loan to the club" is way off the truth. Could you please then substantiate this "well over" figure, and this "or so he thinks" statement, and the "interest free loan".}
'Dan S'
United and Arsenal are self sufficient, but Liverpool are not. They are estimated to make around £170m in May, outgoings will be way above £220m.
Sydney!
Yes Syd but Arsenal like Wenger has mentioned in the past some years Arsenal over pay on the initial term. They will be debt free within 10 years. The stadium has mentioned by directors helps Arsenal to a 15-20 million profit more than Highbury did.
Take the Glazers out the mix ourselves and Arsenal are an example to football in the way a club should be run.
Dan S
'Dan S'
I think Arshavin will cost a maximum of £5m, RVP £25m at the very most, so not sure how they could easily get £45m-£50m for these two players. I think Arshavin as an intangible asset is still worth around £3.75m too, so not sure Arsenal will be much better off when they offload him, it will free-up £70k or so a week in wages mind.
Sydney!
Hi Syd and Ed , yeah I am wrong about Liverpool's finances, My friend is a fan of them and told me they was in very good shape, seems I shouldn't have taken his word on that
Utd are best positioned for FFP, and if as I said the Glazers left then we would be laughing
'Dan S'
Arsenal's final payment is due in 2031, they cannot pay it off any earlier without having to pay large 'one off' penalties. AW and Gazidas have made it clear that they have no intention of paying off the debt earlier than planned.
Sydney!
Syd
If van Persie was to leave for around 25 million I would love United to make a bid, doubt Arsenal would sell to us though
Dan S
Hi Syd
but the club said they have paid down more debt than they needed to pay, over the last few years their net debt has been slashed a lot, if you continue to pay down your debt at more than the amount you need to pay, eventually you will pay before the original term date.
I am only going on stuff I have read, and seen in the Financial Times previously where the club had issued statements regarding the debt.
and if it does take them to 2031 all the more good for United again. we all want us to be the biggest and most powerful club,
what is happening with the flotation, I know an investor in Singapore he said the market is still not great, but showing signs it could improve.
Dan S
'no name'
If we were to be bought by someone like Roman and therefore had no debt, we would make around £100m a season in profits. So we could 'in theory' spend over £100m a summer and still break even. Even with owners like Arsenal's or Liverpool's, after they have taken their £48m in dividends, there would still be over £50m for transfers.
Sydney!
'Dan S'
If RVP had more than a year left on his contract, never had a history of bad injuries and was three years younger he would fetch £40m+, but being 29, having a year left on his contract and having a history of bad injuries, he will not sell for more than what Nasri went for.
Sydney!
Yeah that's true Syd if MR A had brought us instead of Chelsea, he would only needed to pay for the club, everything else is self funded.
UTD still has massive potential in terms of future turnover. Its hard what to believe but some reports say we have 330 million fans and some recently have said over 600 million.
Dan S
Fans come with winning. Especially global appeal. Utd built a strong fanbase by winning league titles and champions league. Majority of utd fans are in china and far east hence the no's look impressive. But away from china and looking towards Europe, America, India, South America, Australia.
South America is captivated by Italian and La liga football, Last year the team everyone tuned in to watch was Arsenal, this year its the spurs, in terms of EPL.
In europe its again by region, madrid and barca run away with fans and money, with utd in 3rd and Arsenal, chelsea, liverpool and bayern closely together with united making over 200,000 sales more.
In terms of future potential, If Man city do build their extension plans of an academy and some sort of space ship, they will not only surpass utd in terms of revenue, they will blast them out of the water.
The sheikh who bought city, Mansour i think he is...apparently disliked Man utd, as he felt they always cheated and manipulated games to their advantage.
In terms of fan base, in manchester itself there are more city fans then utd fans. utd are on top only because of the unparalled success.
In modern football there are no forever fans. Its like a relationship, if it doesnt give you what you need, you jump ship. Its not that you can blame people who are in china and far far away, to understand what it feels to be a fan of a club, They are shown the top 4 teams on tv and they follow the best...some years ago chelsea were on top, now utd, its only a matter of time before city start their own wave.
'Dan S'
Arsenal have not been paying down their stadium debt quicker than planned, that is Gazidas working his magic and conning some fans. Arsenal have a gross debt of £258m and a net debt of £97m, £258m minus the £161m cash reserves equals the £97m net debt. But do not be fooled into thinking the £161m will still be there in six months time.
Sydney!
'no name'
United will always have the largest fanbase by some distance. It will take a long time for City to turn their couple of million worldwide fanbase up to 333 million. I think you are also being incredibly naive to think that people from the Far East who have supported United their whole lives will just decide to support City because they are now challenging us. Chelsea & Arsenal have been challenging us for the past 15 years and both of their fanbases combined are probably under 100 million. Liverpool's fanbase is large, but below ours by some distance and I expect Liverpool to always have a larger fanbase than City. Fans love history and United and Liverpool have histories City will never rival.
Sydney!
I would support United no matter what, I doubt a real fan would just jump ship
I go to see United on a regular basis, know extensively about the youth teams and history regarding united. Just love the club, success in terms of trophies is just a bonus.
It amazes me how people call themselves real United fans and when I was telling people about Tunnicliffe and co few years back they had never heard of them. Only glory hunters or sheep will jump ship.
Dan S
I am pretty sure City will never have a bigger fan base than United in my lifetime.
as Syd mentioned a lot of fans love the history of clubs. Utd is one of triumph then tradegy with the Munich air diasaster, then rebuilt to triumph, even in the war Old Trafford was bombed to pieces. The club has overcome everything thrown at it.
UTD are currently 17 league titles ahead of city, they won't even be level in 40 years. City fans who think they will be bigger or macthing United in terms of overall history anytime soon are delusional
Continuous never say die attitude in the teams we field is a UTD hallmark
Dan S
Very interesting thread fair play! Was expecting to see just a few replies all telling the OP to shut up lol
So anyway, it seems the burning questions here are 1) will FFP ever be implemented? 2) to what extent? (regards severity of punishment) and if so 3) when will it be implemented?
For obvious reasons, as a United fan I will be delighted if the answers are 1) yes 2) fully and 3) next season....but does anyone have any real insight or done any research into these answers?
Iām afraid I donāt have anywhere near the patience to look into such things!
Gav
FIFA haven't even decided what the punishments will be, can you really see FIFA standing up to the likes of barce and madrid.
jred
'jred'
Barcelona and Real Madrid are COMFORTABLY within the FFP guidelines.
Sydney!
Hi JRED
external audit carried out by Deloitte for new Barcelona president Sandro Rossel -- who took over on July 1 2011 -- determined that Barcelona are actually 77.1 million euros in the red.
The new audit puts Barcelona's total net debt at a record 442 million euros.
"The figures presented by the former board don't reflect the real image," said Barcelona's vice-president for economic affairs Javier Faus.
"There is a structural problem. The sporting excellence in the last few years has not been reflected in economic excellence. The new board's goal is to bring economic excellence alongside sporting excellence," he added.
Earlier this month Barcelona announced they had taken out a loan of 155 million euros to solve cash-flow problem after struggling to pay wages in the previous month.
this is from 2011, We canāt carry on losing money,ā Faus said. Our objective āis to make us the most solvent club in the world in two or three years.ā
Barca will make it, only the people in barca and any club know the real picture and strategy, so we can all speculate on here but no one really knows, but we would assume barca and real would make the grade of FFP
The thing is Gav clubs should want to be self funded without any laws being implemented, Uefa has asked clubs in the past to be efficient with their finances, but debt around european football clubs continued to spiral, clubs spending like crazy.
One of my goals is to make it to the board of a football club, because the way some of these people run clubs is a joke, Peter Ridsdale, its guys like him that FFP will stop.
One year Ridsdale made the assumption that leeds would finish at least second, I know a leeds fan and he said FFP should have been in years ago and leeds fans would have been spared their crisis, its only being brought in because action was needed, a lot of clubs think its acceptable to just spend and spend
a lot of chairmen think they are playing footy manager or something
Dan S
Sorry but didn't I hear somewhere that set within the deal between utd and Madrid for Ronaldo.doesnt manutd get first choice if he wants to leave?am I right or was dat just a rumour?
13 Feb 2012 19:54:48
{Ed002's Note - Just nonsense to mention anything more than £800M - particularly when you quote figures of £1.5B. As for the Chelsea statement "because Chelsea has cost him well over a billion. He of course is getting this back or so he thinks in the form of an interest free loan to the club" is way off the truth. Could you please then substantiate this "well over" figure, and this "or so he thinks" statement, and the "interest free loan".}
Yes I did quote figures which were spoke of by top financiers around the time, as I said the Glazers got the club at the right value which was around the 800 million mark
this is regarding the interest free loan
www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/may/19/roman-abramovich-chelsea-loan-debt
One of Romans's advisers said he had spent over a billion of his own fortune on Chelsea
and regarding the so he thinks, are chelsea in a position to repay that if he left the club today? even over time they would struggle ed, with their squad this season they are struggling to make top 4 which bring in a good revenue stream, without massive player investment they are not guaranteed top 4 every year
Dan S
{Ed002's Note - "Top" financiers? The bottom line is that you quoted a figure which is miles away from reality. As for Chelsea, the article you quote is nearly two years old and the original loans were converted in to equity - so what you wrote is simply wrong. The "billion" figure was in euro after the loans were converted in to equity - but what I was questioning was your use of the words "well over" which make no sense and are not true at all. As for your last point - the "loans" don't exist.}
Hi ed if you have a problem with that figure take it up with the financiers, that was their estimated value of United, please read what i said, I said the glaziers got the club at the right valuation.
at the end of the day ed I know nothing about you, but I was a millionaire by 23, I know business inside out. it is possible for businesses to go for twice their real valuations, its business and does happen, but I for one never suggested utd was worth as high as 1.5 billion, it was what was said around the time. as stated I think the glazers got the club around the right price, so just to make it clear again I said the Glazers got united around the right price
still regardless Roman would have been better of investing in UTD.
not all information is going to be accurate on a site like this,because a lot of sources are false or misleading.
For Instance, I live in Peterborough, and i know this is a rumors site, but some of the stuff people post regarding Peterborough Fc is way of the mark.
I also could have told people not to waste their time here in January, if people know their football they will know SAF son, Darren, is the Peterborough manager, I was invited by the Posh owner to a fans forum in which Darren was present, I briefly spoke to Darren after the event , told him I was a massive UTD fan, and he said no major signings would be made, the same as his Dad, but people kept on posting here day after day.
Dan S {Ed002's Note - For someone who says that they study football finance you seem to have very little grasp of the subject at all with all of the nonsense about (a) Liverpool being self-financing (and then you said you were trusting a friend who told you that); (b) the £1.5B price on Manchester United all those years ago (which you know claim was stated by a top financier and business can go for twice their value); and (c) the financial situation at Chelsea with loans they cannot repay etc. (and then coming back and quoting some two year old article which doesn't reflect the current situation at all). Perhaps you should drop your study of "football finance" completely as it seems to be causing some considerable embarrassment to you.}
So hope you understand now ed, that I have said I felt the glazers got the club at the right price, which I mentioned plenty of times now.
at the end of the day as the great man Warren Buffett says, a company is worth what someone is willing to pay for it. you can also of course get companies for miles less than their worth too
I never once tried to support the 1.5 billion valuation EVER.
as for Chelsea and Romans business, I don't really pay to much attention to it, but chelsea fans I know said they was concerned about the loans etc, I am not that sad to check every detail of every club, at the end of the day I know UTD inside out from a fans perspective, so I would hope my friends who support other clubs, know their information.
Dan S {Ed002's Note - It appears to me that you don't check any of the details as pretty much everything you said was wrong - Manchester United, Liverpool and Chelsea. Why tell us you are someone who studies "football finance" and then one by one claim you were misled by friends or something you have read. So first you write this nonsense about Chelsea; then try and substantiate it by quoting a two year old article that does not reflect the situation as it is now in any way; and now you say it was Chelsea fans you know who were concerned about the loans and you did not check every detail. More plausible (and probably way more accurate) would be for you to share with us "my talking labradoodle told me that ...".}
Ed businesses can go for twice their value, granted buyers of these types of buyouts are not the wisest or level headed investors. also I have told you about a million times now, that the Glazers got the club at the right value, geeze
Regarding my studies we have to pick 3 clubs on which to do analysis, If I took the time to gather all the facts regarding Chelsea and Liverpool then I would have a total understanding.
and tbh considering my aim is to make it the the UTD or Peterborough UTD board in the future, these are the clubs that concern me the most regarding finances.
as I say if presented with all the facts, or I have taken time to research its very easy for me to make an analysis
as stated I was a millionaire by 23, from investments, I think I know a thing or two about finances. I do trust friends on issues regarding their own club, next time I will do proper research and not take their advice. if someone has got the time to know the exact finances of every club inside out, then they have got a lot of time on their hands
{Ed002's Note - If you don't have the time to check any of the detail then it is futile you making all of the statements you have about the various clubs. Clearly "football finance" is something you seem unable to grasp at all and I would strongly recommend you don't submit any more posts on the matter. It is embarrassing for you and tedious for me.}
Considering on my studies we haven't looked into liverpool or chelsea, I would say no embarrassment was caused, if i had studied these clubs in great detail and got it wrong, then yes it would be.
I would also love to know when i said united was worth 1.5 i said around the time it was meant to be worth 800m-1.5,
as stated i made my money from investment, and I would not have invested 1.5b in UTD at that time so therefore I have not, and will no way support that. But also I understand financiers put a realistic value on businesses/stocks, then they over value, and have two estimates, hence the 800-1.5
I also then stated a countless amount of times that the glazers got the club at the right price, that means I support the lower valuation. {Ed002's Note - You made a series of statements which were palpable nonsense. I am surprised you are not embarrassed by that and wish to keep dragging this matter out.}
Hello Dan
I study that subject matter as well. Finances from all clubs change so quickly its unfair to expect someone to know the finances regarding every club in existence.
and since you are or claim to be a millionaire, I wouldn't pay any attention to the ed, he obviously has enough time on his hands to know every detail and sit at his pc everyday. The embarrassment is on his behalf working in a deadend job
Tony {Ed002's Note - Dan, something else I need to point out to you is that we can see your IP address and unless Tony is sat on your lap, it appears you are now sending in posts to try and support your rather bizarre views on the matter; something which many would find as embarrassing as everything else you have been saying. It might rather surprise you if you knew what I actually do for a living.}
What have I said regarding UTD that is wrong
have I once said the club was worth 1.5 billion, NO. if i said that then fair enough but i didn't, as stated that's what financiers said around the time, you know the guys, the ones that earn 6-7 figures a year not people who edit websites. also when did I agree with the valuation, please read where i mention many times the glazers got the club at the right price {Ed002's Note - Is this Dan or Tony speaking now?}
Well the person who told me regarding liverpool, is a friend called Leon, who has supported them all his life. he got the details wrong, but doubt he is bothered as also he is a millionaire who owns a landscape gardening business,
your small accurate details have got you fair in life ed. oh wait a minute your working for a rumors website lol {Ed002's Note - Well if I had known it was Leon who told you ...}
What team do you support ed?
at the end of the day is it fair to say we all make mistakes? and I didn't know this site liked to be so accurate with the info, next time I will do proper research into the matter, good enough for you?
Regarding football finance, yes studies are done into a clubs situation etc, but its more of the accounting side, etc, as stated ed my goal is to make it to the board of a football club, you need a grasp of accounting, and the way financing works in football, vs figures from other clubs, you can only concentrate on the club you own or work for.
I
Tony is my friend lol, and he is at my house now. so of course the IP Address will be the same.
if anyone here tells me they never made a mistake then that's nonsense.
Dan S {Ed002's Note - Does Leon give you rides in his wheelbarrow?}
Dan S. {Ed002's Note - I am afraid Dan we cannot be bothered dealing with glifnards like you anymore. But hey, have a nice day.}
What are 'glifnards' ed? {Ed002's Note - Dan S, his friends Tony and Leon The Wheelbarrow and Dan's talking labradoodle.}
This Dan. S guy is not the sharpest is he.
Probably just a kid without enough knowledge trying to pass as well informed.
Funny thing is that he's not smart enough to know when his cover's blown.
Haha