Man Utd Thread:

[118cmal]

Yeah I would class and Irish lad going over to united at 15/16 as being different than a German/Italian/French lad going over.

Would you not?

[Ping Pong Santa]

I try not to.

[TacadoirArdMhacha]

Given that the the language and culture differences are going to be much less for an Irish youngster rather than one from mainland Europe, it probably is easier for fellas from Ireland to go over at a young age.

[118cmal]

I don't mean to harp on about the culture thing again, but there is also a tradition of Irish lads going over to England from a young age to play professional football.

[full back]

In all honesty, does anyone really give a flying fcuk where a player comes from?

If a club had stuck to homegrown players they would be left behind a long time ago

[Ping Pong Santa]

I was really just taking issue with British and Irish being classed together.

[thebigfella]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.

There's nothing that can be done about someone coming in and buying an asset which he is perfectly entitled to do. 

I've heard some nonsense but that it pure turd.

This is how the real world works, bigger companies buy smaller companies/assets with borrowed money from banks or venture capital companies. Rarely does that money come directly from the profits/cashflow/revenue etc. from the company negotiating the take over. The company manages the debt and continues to run it as a going concern (most of the time). The debt does not affect the day to day running as long as it is managed.
This is the case with Utd, the debt has not affected their revenue/expenditure and all that sh*te. Not being competitive would affect sponsorship revenue, ability to attract players of the highest caliber and it would take a further 10 years (after your 5 years of trophy-less seasons) to get to the dominance they are at now.
Personally I think you are taking out your arse (no offence) and should forget about the debt as it does not (or appeared to have) affect Utd's ability to compete at the highest level.

[Ping Pong Santa]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.

There's nothing that can be done about someone coming in and buying an asset which he is perfectly entitled to do. 

I've heard some nonsense but that it pure turd.

This is how the real world works, bigger companies buy smaller companies/assets with borrowed money from banks or venture capital companies. Rarely does that money come directly from the profits/cashflow/revenue etc. from the company negotiating the take over. The company manages the debt and continues to run it as a going concern (most of the time). The debt does not affect the day to day running as long as it is managed.
This is the case with Utd, the debt has not affected their revenue/expenditure and all that sh*te. Not being competitive would affect sponsorship revenue, ability to attract players of the highest caliber and it would take a further 10 years (after your 5 years of trophy-less seasons) to get to the dominance they are at now.
Personally I think you are taking out your arse (no offence) and should forget about the debt as it does not (or appeared to have) affect Utd's ability to compete at the highest level.

Did they not have £44m worth of losses last year?

[thebigfella]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.

There's nothing that can be done about someone coming in and buying an asset which he is perfectly entitled to do. 

I've heard some nonsense but that it pure turd.

This is how the real world works, bigger companies buy smaller companies/assets with borrowed money from banks or venture capital companies. Rarely does that money come directly from the profits/cashflow/revenue etc. from the company negotiating the take over. The company manages the debt and continues to run it as a going concern (most of the time). The debt does not affect the day to day running as long as it is managed.
This is the case with Utd, the debt has not affected their revenue/expenditure and all that sh*te. Not being competitive would affect sponsorship revenue, ability to attract players of the highest caliber and it would take a further 10 years (after your 5 years of trophy-less seasons) to get to the dominance they are at now.
Personally I think you are taking out your arse (no offence) and should forget about the debt as it does not (or appeared to have) affect Utd's ability to compete at the highest level.

Did they not have £44m worth of losses last year?

And your point being?

[corn02]

To be honest I was more questioning the Irish part of your 'British/Irish' phrase. It made me cringe a little that you would think any English club should have a loyalty to developing homegrown talent which classed Irish players as being homegrown.

Edit: Homegrown is probably the wrong word here as even an Italian snapped up at the age of 14 would be probably considered homegrown. But I think you get what I mean.

Have to agree, MAL only way you can save this is by saying Irish players have a similar style to British players and would suit it, otherwise there is no affiliation there at all.

[118cmal]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.

There's nothing that can be done about someone coming in and buying an asset which he is perfectly entitled to do. 

I've heard some nonsense but that it pure turd.

This is how the real world works, bigger companies buy smaller companies/assets with borrowed money from banks or venture capital companies. Rarely does that money come directly from the profits/cashflow/revenue etc. from the company negotiating the take over. The company manages the debt and continues to run it as a going concern (most of the time). The debt does not affect the day to day running as long as it is managed.
This is the case with Utd, the debt has not affected their revenue/expenditure and all that sh*te. Not being competitive would affect sponsorship revenue, ability to attract players of the highest caliber and it would take a further 10 years (after your 5 years of trophy-less seasons) to get to the dominance they are at now.
Personally I think you are taking out your arse (no offence) and should forget about the debt as it does not (or appeared to have) affect Utd's ability to compete at the highest level.

Thank you for your detailed analysis of how the 'real world works'.  But tell me this, what would happen if the Glazers decided to walk away in the morning?

[full back]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.
 

No chance
Many large clubs go into debt
How else do they attract the big names, build large stadia etc etc
In this scenario it would be brilliant having no debt but not so brilliant when we are struggling to have any success

[Ping Pong Santa]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.

There's nothing that can be done about someone coming in and buying an asset which he is perfectly entitled to do. 

I've heard some nonsense but that it pure turd.

This is how the real world works, bigger companies buy smaller companies/assets with borrowed money from banks or venture capital companies. Rarely does that money come directly from the profits/cashflow/revenue etc. from the company negotiating the take over. The company manages the debt and continues to run it as a going concern (most of the time). The debt does not affect the day to day running as long as it is managed.
This is the case with Utd, the debt has not affected their revenue/expenditure and all that sh*te. Not being competitive would affect sponsorship revenue, ability to attract players of the highest caliber and it would take a further 10 years (after your 5 years of trophy-less seasons) to get to the dominance they are at now.
Personally I think you are taking out your arse (no offence) and should forget about the debt as it does not (or appeared to have) affect Utd's ability to compete at the highest level.

Did they not have £44m worth of losses last year?

And your point being?

Well if they made a loss of £44m, then has the debt not affected the finances of the club?

[thebigfella]

I would happily sacrifice 5 trophy-less seasons If it meant United no longer had debt, but it can't happen.

There's nothing that can be done about someone coming in and buying an asset which he is perfectly entitled to do. 

I've heard some nonsense but that it pure turd.

This is how the real world works, bigger companies buy smaller companies/assets with borrowed money from banks or venture capital companies. Rarely does that money come directly from the profits/cashflow/revenue etc. from the company negotiating the take over. The company manages the debt and continues to run it as a going concern (most of the time). The debt does not affect the day to day running as long as it is managed.
This is the case with Utd, the debt has not affected their revenue/expenditure and all that sh*te. Not being competitive would affect sponsorship revenue, ability to attract players of the highest caliber and it would take a further 10 years (after your 5 years of trophy-less seasons) to get to the dominance they are at now.
Personally I think you are taking out your arse (no offence) and should forget about the debt as it does not (or appeared to have) affect Utd's ability to compete at the highest level.

Thank you for your detailed analysis of how the 'real world works'.  But tell me this, what would happen if the Glazers decided to walk away in the morning?

In what way can they walk away? Are they gonna wrap up what is one of the most successful brands in the world and valued over 1 billion?

[118cmal]

It's a hypothetical question.  What if they died??  What if they lost interest?