Man Utd Thread:

Started by full back, November 10, 2006, 08:13:49 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

magpie seanie

Quote from: Maroon Manc on January 11, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
arf, you're just on the wind up.

If someone won't listen to logic then that's a fair assumption.

Minder

United in for Sanchez apparently
"When it's too tough for them, it's just right for us"

GJL

Quote from: Minder on January 11, 2018, 03:08:18 PM
United in for Sanchez apparently

Seen that. Genuine or a price tactic?

magpie seanie

Now Sanchez is an excellent player. Probably just rumours though.

Il Bomber Destro

Quote from: Maroon Manc on January 11, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
arf, you're just on the wind up.

Because I can present facts that are contrary to the line you're putting forward, I am on the wind up?

magpie seanie

Quote from: Il Bomber Destro on January 11, 2018, 03:47:22 PM
Quote from: Maroon Manc on January 11, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
arf, you're just on the wind up.

Because I can present facts that are contrary to the line you're putting forward, I am on the wind up?

They're not facts though. They're not even half truths. They're cherry picked numbers used to make extraordinary and fanciful conclusions.

Il Bomber Destro

Quote from: magpie seanie on January 11, 2018, 04:17:58 PM
Quote from: Il Bomber Destro on January 11, 2018, 03:47:22 PM
Quote from: Maroon Manc on January 11, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
arf, you're just on the wind up.

Because I can present facts that are contrary to the line you're putting forward, I am on the wind up?

They're not facts though. They're not even half truths. They're cherry picked numbers used to make extraordinary and fanciful conclusions.

If you have some facts that contradict what I have said be my guest and put them up but I think you will struggle as the facts suggest throughout the Glazer's era United have consistently been one of the highest spending clubs in world football.

magpie seanie

Quote from: Il Bomber Destro on January 11, 2018, 05:06:40 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 11, 2018, 04:17:58 PM
Quote from: Il Bomber Destro on January 11, 2018, 03:47:22 PM
Quote from: Maroon Manc on January 11, 2018, 02:12:54 PM
arf, you're just on the wind up.

Because I can present facts that are contrary to the line you're putting forward, I am on the wind up?

They're not facts though. They're not even half truths. They're cherry picked numbers used to make extraordinary and fanciful conclusions.

If you have some facts that contradict what I have said be my guest and put them up but I think you will struggle as the facts suggest throughout the Glazer's era United have consistently been one of the highest spending clubs in world football.

The Glazers have taken hundreds of millions of pounds out of the club that should have been spent on players. I don't have time to research the numbers to contradict you though I am sure United are not spending at the same level as others like City, Chelsea, PSG, Barcelona or Real. That in itself though is irrelevant to an extent - I'm only interested in United. For years towards the end of Ferguson's time he had to make do with spending little or no money and that chronic underinvestment, completely due to the clubs financial situation caused by the Glazers, has resulted in where the club is today - reduced to bringing in a mercenary who has a good relationship with a powerful agent.

magpie seanie

Glazers took majority control in May 2005.

Net spend on transfers by season:
2005/6 - £1,000,000
2006/7 - £4,100,000
2007/8 - £26,550,000
2008/9 - £33,750,000
2009/10 - (£64,500,000)  - subtotal to this point £4,900,000 over 5 seasons.
2010/11 - £13,550,000
2011/12 - £38,150,000
2012/13 - £51,100,000
2013/14 - £66,700,000
2014/15 - £104,200,000
2015/16 - £28,150,000
2016/17 - £102,000,000
2017/8 - not complete yet.

Figures from transferleague.co.uk.

Averages out at less than £35m per season. Which is a very small figure for a club generating the income and profits (before interest) that United deliver.

Maroon Manc

I don't have the figures prior too 2009 but in the 5 summers from 2009 to 2103 £397m was spent on net finance costs. Imagine if Fergie had access to just half that figure, he'd have left a totally different team.

Fergie was allowed to spend during the summers of 07 & 08 because the board knew they had a prized asset in Ronaldo who would be sold  in 2009. The Glazers were so desperate for the money by 09 they insisted that Real paid the £80m upfront which very rarely happens as a club would pay for a player in installments over a 3 or 4 year period.

The Glazers were penny pinching from the moment they bought the club and got lucky because Fergie bought VDS, Evra & Vidic on the cheap and they all turned into world class players along with the return of Scholes who looked finished through an eye injury I think around that time. Fergie's best years as a United manager was from 2005 when he turned a team who looked like going nowhere into Europe's best team within a few years without spending a fortune.

Fergie wasn't backed in the transfer market from 2009 to 2011 and no top player was bought in that time to replace Ronaldo and Tevez or the ageing stars we had in Rio, Vidic, Scholes & Giggs. In the 3 summers prior to the Glazers arriving Fergie spent huge money on Veron, Van Nistelrooy & Rooney and nearly had a deal agreed for Ronaldinho.

By 2012 United were in a better place financially and Fergie had access to more money but the damage was already done and we've been playing catch up ever since.

magpie seanie

Exactly correct MM.

If anyone ever says the Glazers have "invested" in players ever again please refer to the above. They have taken possibly a billion from the club (in interest/finance payments plus their personal "management consultancy" fees) that would otherwise have been available for transfers.

United should be challenging Real and Barcelona every year for the CL....not in the state they're currently in.

TabClear

Quote from: magpie seanie on January 12, 2018, 09:59:34 AM
Exactly correct MM.

If anyone ever says the Glazers have "invested" in players ever again please refer to the above. They have taken possibly a billion from the club (in interest/finance payments plus their personal "management consultancy" fees) that would otherwise have been available for transfers.

United should be challenging Real and Barcelona every year for the CL....not in the state they're currently in.

Thats the key there.  With the best will in the world neither Liverpool, Arsenal or Spurs can compete with United financially on an ongoing basis. Each has access to sufficient funds to outbid United on an individual player   but not on a sustained basis. City and to a lesser extent Chelsea are a different matter.

The problem United may face is that they are now "too big" for a secondary buyout. Given the price tag would be well over a billion, that is massive money even for the Sheikhs. Both City and Chelsea were picked up for effectively nothing. Best case for United may be that the Glazers stay in as  I am assuming the original debt is well paid down by now (albeit by the club cashflows) so debt service costs are much lower.

If the Glazers decide to sell, it gives them a massive windfall but (in absence of a Sheik) it could actually increase the debt on the club.  I think the Red Knight bid vehicle that was rumoured to be looking at United a few years ago would have been highly leveraged  so there could have been even more acquisition debt attached to the club.

Il Bomber Destro

#41007
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 12, 2018, 09:20:25 AM
Glazers took majority control in May 2005.

Net spend on transfers by season:
2005/6 - £1,000,000
2006/7 - £4,100,000
2007/8 - £26,550,000
2008/9 - £33,750,000
2009/10 - (£64,500,000)  - subtotal to this point £4,900,000 over 5 seasons.
2010/11 - £13,550,000
2011/12 - £38,150,000
2012/13 - £51,100,000
2013/14 - £66,700,000
2014/15 - £104,200,000
2015/16 - £28,150,000
2016/17 - £102,000,000
2017/8 - not complete yet.

Figures from transferleague.co.uk.

Averages out at less than £35m per season. Which is a very small figure for a club generating the income and profits (before interest) that United deliver.

Lets use Barcelona net spend as a compairson since the Glazers took charge.

17/18 - €98m
16/17 - €91m
15/16 - €4m
14/15 - €84m
13/14 - €39m
12/13 - nil
11/12 - €38m
10/11 - €4m
09/10 - €83m
08/09 - €38m
07/08 - €53m
06/07 - €18m
05/06 - (€10m)


That't an average net spend of €42m per season and converting that to £ using an average exch rate of .80 would leave also under £33m per season. So I think you've disproved your own theory there, United have been one of the top spending clubs in Europe since the Glazers took charge. Their average net spend with Barcelona in that time period is pretty much identical and that's not including the 100m this season you have excluded which would put United ahead of Barcelona?

Do you want me to do Madrid next or will I save you the embarrassment?

TabClear

Quote from: Il Bomber Destro on January 12, 2018, 10:37:56 AM
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 12, 2018, 09:20:25 AM
Glazers took majority control in May 2005.

Net spend on transfers by season:
2005/6 - £1,000,000
2006/7 - £4,100,000
2007/8 - £26,550,000
2008/9 - £33,750,000
2009/10 - (£64,500,000)  - subtotal to this point £4,900,000 over 5 seasons.
2010/11 - £13,550,000
2011/12 - £38,150,000
2012/13 - £51,100,000
2013/14 - £66,700,000
2014/15 - £104,200,000
2015/16 - £28,150,000
2016/17 - £102,000,000
2017/8 - not complete yet.

Figures from transferleague.co.uk.

Averages out at less than £35m per season. Which is a very small figure for a club generating the income and profits (before interest) that United deliver.

Lets use Barcelona net spend as a compairson since the Glazers took charge.

17/18 - €98m
16/17 - €91m
15/16 - €4m
14/15 - €84m
13/14 - €39m
12/13 - nil
11/12 - €38m
10/11 - €4m
09/10 - €83m
08/09 - €38m
07/08 - €53m
06/07 - €18m
05/06 - (€10m)


That't an average net spend of €42m per season and converting that to £ using an average exch rate of .80 would leave also under £33m per season. So I think you've disproved your own theory there, United have been one of the top spending clubs in Europe since the Glazers took charge. Their average net spend with Barcelona in that time period is pretty much identical and that's not including the 100m this season you have excluded which would put United ahead of Barcelona?

Do you want me to do Madrid next or will I save you the embarrassment?

Surely the fact that Barcelona were winning titles and Champions leagues handover fist would imply they didnt have to spend? They had the basis for one of the greatest teams of all time in 2005/06.

Il Bomber Destro

Real Madrid Net Spends:

17/18 - (€100m)
16/17 - (€4m)
15/16 - €68m
14/15 - €20m
13/14 - €53m
12/13 - nil
11/12 - €46m
10/11 - €59m
09/10 - €180m
08/09 - €2m
07/08 - €82m
06/07 - €90m
05/06 - €61m

Again Madrid's net spend in that time is almost identical, their average net spend is €43m, again coverting that to £ will bring to in around the £35m average United spend.

So tell me again how United have not been able to compete in spending terms with Barca and Real?