Man Utd Thread:

[Boycey]

The most important day of the year today, the shareholder's conference call, 1PM Irish time

https://services.choruscall.com/links/manchester1905163IwPSAkZ.html

It will contain this line Net debt as of 31 March 2019 was £301.7 million, an increase of £0.4 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged.

[Helix.]

Rashford looking set to be offered new contract with up to 300k per week.
Absolute madness from the get go. To be getting that wage after finishing 6th defies logic!
Thoughts?


http://www.thehardtackle.com/news/2019/05/19/transfer-news-manchester-united-plot-bumper-contract-extension-for-marcus-rashford/

Kompany leaving Man City also puts them in the look out for Harry Maguire most likely also. Hoping for as much a clear out of overpaid and bringing in bit of youth and build a team with a bit of heart again!

[magpie seanie]

I don't get to see many games bar United and defintely not the Championship - how is Tuanzabe doing for Villa? Is he potentially a viable option as a centre back for United next season?

[trailer]

The most important day of the year today, the shareholder's conference call, 1PM Irish time

https://services.choruscall.com/links/manchester1905163IwPSAkZ.html

It will contain this line Net debt as of 31 March 2019 was £301.7 million, an increase of £0.4 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged.

Who gives a f**k about the debt. It not as if it's coming out of your pocket. What's 300 million nowadays anyway? Couple of tours of China and that be covered.

[general]

Daniel James from Swansea agreed terms this morning.

Looks a real player

[Maroon Manc]

I don't get to see many games bar United and defintely not the Championship - how is Tuanzabe doing for Villa? Is he potentially a viable option as a centre back for United next season?

I've seen him a few times for Villa this season, think their bad patch coincided with him out injured. He needs to improve in the air, his heading is the one aspect that will stop him from becoming a really top player.

[Geoff Tipps]

Daniel James from Swansea agreed terms this morning.

Looks a real player

Good work from Woodie. Beat off stiff competition from Brighton.

[Cunny Funt]

11 years ago today


Full of leaders on and off the field back then the opposite of now.

[bigarsedkeeper]

11 years ago today


Full of leaders on and off the field back then the opposite of now.

John O'Shea at that point was very much a bit part player. A 2008 version of JOS today is a better right back than Young, better centre half than Jones, Smalling and Rojo and probably a better left back than Shaw (still might be a player there but not convinced). The defenders Utd had at that point were on a different level to most squads - never mind the forwards they had that year

[trailer]

Imagine if this happened. Ashley Young Captain of Manchester United. What next? Fred the Red on the right side of MF?
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/man-utd-young-captain-pogba-16311430

[GetOverTheBar]

The most important day of the year today, the shareholder's conference call, 1PM Irish time

https://services.choruscall.com/links/manchester1905163IwPSAkZ.html

It will contain this line Net debt as of 31 March 2019 was £301.7 million, an increase of £0.4 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged.

Who gives a f**k about the debt. It not as if it's coming out of your pocket. What's 300 million nowadays anyway? Couple of tours of China and that be covered.

Not much point in some of the lads in here crying about City and their financial outlay when Utd have been in debt for a decade. Both just as bad if we are being honest - just one is seen as acceptable.

[TabClear]

The most important day of the year today, the shareholder's conference call, 1PM Irish time

https://services.choruscall.com/links/manchester1905163IwPSAkZ.html

It will contain this line Net debt as of 31 March 2019 was £301.7 million, an increase of £0.4 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged.

Who gives a f**k about the debt. It not as if it's coming out of your pocket. What's 300 million nowadays anyway? Couple of tours of China and that be covered.

Not much point in some of the lads in here crying about City and their financial outlay when Utd have been in debt for a decade. Both just as bad if we are being honest - just one is seen as acceptable.

Taking on debt in itself is not an issue. All successful companies generally use debt to maximise their returns. It only becomes a problem when the company cannot pay that debt which is not a material consideration for United. I do see the United fans reasons for being pissed off with the Glazers as so much cashflow over the last decade has gone to service the debt. Unfortunately there is nothing you can do as it is a business and the fans dont own it, the shareholders do.  Plenty of shareholders sold to the Glazers at the time because the price made sense and the Glazers were then  able to force through a highly leveraged buy out and they have made a fortune off the back of this. Thats one of the dangers of being publicly listed on the stock exchange, you do not necessarily get to choose who makes a play for you.

[magpie seanie]

The most important day of the year today, the shareholder's conference call, 1PM Irish time

https://services.choruscall.com/links/manchester1905163IwPSAkZ.html

It will contain this line Net debt as of 31 March 2019 was £301.7 million, an increase of £0.4 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged.

Who gives a f**k about the debt. It not as if it's coming out of your pocket. What's 300 million nowadays anyway? Couple of tours of China and that be covered.

Not much point in some of the lads in here crying about City and their financial outlay when Utd have been in debt for a decade. Both just as bad if we are being honest - just one is seen as acceptable.

You don't really understand how this works do you? I'll give a small explainer.

United have consistently been one of if the ther most profitable soccer clubs in the world. When the Glazers took over the club in the mid 2000's United were highly profitbale and had zero debt. Once the deal was completed (club value at time of takeover £790M), they brought the loans they used to buy the club onto the clubs books (5 years after the takeover in 2010 this totalled over £700M). This meant that the club went from having zero debt to a dangerously high level of debt (for its size) in a short space of time. Most profits generated were needed to pay down debt (over £60M each year) and the "consultancy/management fees" to the Glazer family and weren't available to buy players. Ronaldo was sold for £70M and replaced by Valencia and Michael Owen for example. Luckily the greatest soccer manager of all time was still at the helm and somehow managed to continue winning titles despite not being able to compete for the top young players in the world. The club's revenues kept growing and the debt has been reduced significantly to the point where it's not an issue any more (it has reduced and the value of the club overall in now more than £3 Billion). From a position of the debt almost being equal to the vlaue of the club it's now about a tenth of the value. This has meant United have has cash in the last few years but as we've seen it has been largely wasted on short termism and quick fixes which haven't worked.

So clearly anyone can see the Glazer ownership has meant something in the region of a billion pounds sterling has left the club since 2005. Around the amount of money City have been given to spend in that time from their owners.

[Keyser soze]

You should stick to the Liverpool thread OTB!!

[GetOverTheBar]

The most important day of the year today, the shareholder's conference call, 1PM Irish time

https://services.choruscall.com/links/manchester1905163IwPSAkZ.html

It will contain this line Net debt as of 31 March 2019 was £301.7 million, an increase of £0.4 million over the year. The gross USD debt principal remains unchanged.

Who gives a f**k about the debt. It not as if it's coming out of your pocket. What's 300 million nowadays anyway? Couple of tours of China and that be covered.

Not much point in some of the lads in here crying about City and their financial outlay when Utd have been in debt for a decade. Both just as bad if we are being honest - just one is seen as acceptable.

You don't really understand how this works do you? I'll give a small explainer.

United have consistently been one of if the ther most profitable soccer clubs in the world. When the Glazers took over the club in the mid 2000's United were highly profitbale and had zero debt. Once the deal was completed (club value at time of takeover £790M), they brought the loans they used to buy the club onto the clubs books (5 years after the takeover in 2010 this totalled over £700M). This meant that the club went from having zero debt to a dangerously high level of debt (for its size) in a short space of time. Most profits generated were needed to pay down debt (over £60M each year) and the "consultancy/management fees" to the Glazer family and weren't available to buy players. Ronaldo was sold for £70M and replaced by Valencia and Michael Owen for example. Luckily the greatest soccer manager of all time was still at the helm and somehow managed to continue winning titles despite not being able to compete for the top young players in the world. The club's revenues kept growing and the debt has been reduced significantly to the point where it's not an issue any more (it has reduced and the value of the club overall in now more than £3 Billion). From a position of the debt almost being equal to the vlaue of the club it's now about a tenth of the value. This has meant United have has cash in the last few years but as we've seen it has been largely wasted on short termism and quick fixes which haven't worked.

So clearly anyone can see the Glazer ownership has meant something in the region of a billion pounds sterling has left the club since 2005. Around the amount of money City have been given to spend in that time from their owners.

Well aware of the above, the question is, why is one, for want of a better phrase morally acceptable and the other not? I'm not doubting your facts, I'm merely asking what is the problem with City pushing the cash in, if they have it when in contrast the United owners take the widely accepted much better generated revenue out. Sounds like the issue is more one of annoyance or jealousy as opposed to any moral principal to me.