Most United fans aren't happy with the Glazers but tolerate them due to the success they have had despite them. But the scale of money lost is staggering. Here are some recent articles that are very interesting. http://www.theweek.co.uk/football/p...mily-get-blame-man-united-let-title-slip-away http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/01/manchester-city-manchester-united-glazers
How lucky have you guys been to have fergie over this time??? Without him, these glazers really could have bled you completely dry with limited success
The way United was taken into private ownership is a real scandal. How someone could take a public company into private hands on borrowed money with no or very limited own money invested? It would not happen in Spain or Germany. Has the FA or premiership learnt any lessons? Can it happen again?
It begs the question: how the f**k did we manage to finish on the same number of points as City? By rights we should have been behind the scousers in mid table obscurity and mediocrity.
"It begs the question: how the f**k did we manage to finish on the same number of points as City?" Is there much difference between United's and City's wage bill? It was only 2m difference in 2010.
If you want to argue at least get your facts right. Moron. The difference is massive as is the income. Manchester City Formed: 1880, by St Mark’s Church, as Manchester City FC, later Ardwick, then Manchester City again. Stadium: City of Manchester Stadium, capacity 47,405. Major honours: 2 league titles, 5 FA Cups, 2 League Cups, 1 Cup-Winners’ Cup. Owned by: Sheikh Mansour. Manager: Roberto Mancini. Lastest income: 2010-11 = £153.2m. Latest total wages: 2010-11 = £173.97m. Latest pre-tax profit (loss): 2010-11 = (£194m). ————————————————————————————————————————————————— Manchester United Formed: 1878, as Newton Heath. Stadium: Old Trafford, capacity 75,769. Major honours: 19 league titles, 11 FA Cups, 4 League Cups, 3 European Cups, 1 European Cup-Winners Cup. Owned by: The Glazer family. Manager: Sir Alex Ferguson. Lastest income: 2010-11 = £331.4m. Latest total wages: 2010-11= £152.9m (group). Latest pre-tax profit (loss): 2010-11 = £29.7m. -------------------- City has spent £20 million more in wages while United has earned nearly £180 million more in income. This is what Wenger called financial doping. On the other hand, we have owners who bleed our club dry.
QUOTE=Christiansmith;2873111]If you want to argue at least get your facts right. Moron. The difference is massive as is the income.[/QUOTE] I'll try to make this as simple as possible because your comprehension skills are abysmal. 1.I didn't want to argue. 2.As far as I know the facts I quoted regarding 2010 are right,here's a source stating the difference was 1m. http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16008504 3.The difference on the latest wage comparison is 20m which isn't massive in the grand scheme of things.(I didn't mention income you stupid clegnut)
I'll try to make this as simple as possible because your comprehension skills are abysmal. 1.I didn't want to argue. 2.As far as I know the facts I quoted regarding 2010 are right,here's a source stating the difference was 1m. http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16008504 3.The difference on the latest wage comparison is 20m which isn't massive in the grand scheme of things.(I didn't mention income you stupid clegnut)[/QUOTE] You are just a stupid moronic ****. You must be severely ******ed if you regard £20 million more on wages in the same as £2 million. If you were trying to wum, then it is massive fail. Go back to your board you silly c**t
Do you kiss your Mother(who is also your sister)with that potty mouth? I said the difference was only 2 million in 2010 but some source's state only 1 million difference.So no,it appears I'm not "severely ******ed" after all,phew. TOP PREMIER LEAGUE WAGE BILLS 2009-10 Chelsea - £174m Man City - £133m Man Utd - £132m Liverpool - £121m Arsenal - £111m Source: Deloitte http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13679632 Is there much difference between United's and City's wage bill? I asked a genuine question because I couldn't find a link to last seasons wage bill,instead of replying with a courteous and well mannered response you call me a moron.Seriously,what is your problem? by that logic Manchester utd spent less on their wage bill than Liverpool for it to be a valid point,again I can't find a reliable source for last seasons wage bill so could you please provide a link with that info(abuse optional) I wasn't trying to wum,so no fail.You seem perfectly capable of winding yourself up without my help. I don't have a board yet.How do I acquire my own board?Do I have to accumulate enough points to purchase my very own board Should I start with a lowly team like Accrington Stanley and hope to gain enough rep points to work my way up to a premiership team board. You've done incredibly well to own the Mighty Manchester United board,you must be one hell of a big shot on this site
Have you never heard of Phillip Green? Bought Arcadia (owns Topshop) for £800 million most of which was debt, sold it straight to his wife, then took out more debt and paid her a £1.2 billion tax free dividend. By comparison the Glazers have been pretty responsible owners of Utd. Aye, but in 2010 the difference in points was 19 in Utd's favour In 2010/11 the difference in wages was around £20 million in City's favour, and the difference in points was nine in Utd's favour. Who knows how big the difference in wages will be this season? Somehow I doubt it's still £20 million what with City adding Dzeko, Aguero, Nasri, Savic and Clichy to the wage bill, whilst Utd lost VDS, Neville, O'Shea and Brown. Nah, that's a fail
But now order is restored. The team with the highest wage bill are the most successful-Chelsea=FA cup,Champions league. Second highest-Man City=Premier league. Third highest-Man utd=no silverware...(champions league place secured better than league cup granted) I'd like to know how many of United's Premiership titles were won whilst United had the highest wage bill? I know United's income is superior because of global branding and take into account their right to spend..
That is a fail. The scousers are there because they have had a buffoon as a manager ( rightly booted out of Anfield in humiliating fashion) bought some rubbish at inflated prices, conned by Newcastle who promptly overtook them with some canny buys, and even struggled to beat a mid table championship side on penalties.
What a f**king ****** !! He goes on and proves it to all. In 2010 City was well behind United even though their wage bill was more. We are talking about this year and the wage bill diffence would have been massive, bigger than the £20million of the previous season. Give up lad
What the hell are you flapping on about? Prove what?...I asked a question,that's all.I wasn't trying to prove anything(nice swerve on the other relevant parts of my reply) Is it your carers day off? Please don't respond unless you've regained a non vegatable state.
Your figures for the City wages in 2010 are totally irrelevant. The current 2012 wages would dwarf those in 2010 and those of the United players too. Give up digging a hole for yourself you twit ..
When in this thread have I said that the 2012 wages didn't dwarf those of 2010? Listen carefully,I will only say this one more time..I asked if the respective wage bill was much different.It was a question NOT a statement! Well done for getting through the whole post without using the word ******.I know it must have been difficult for a person of your limited Vocabulary. You're still a cabbage though.
One. According to a Liverpool fan, Liverpool had a higher wage bill than Utd for almost every season from 1990 to 2001: http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2010/11/exclusive-liverpool-vs-man-united-wage_07.html Since 2002/03, Chelsea have topped the PL wage bill, until the last two seasons where they were overtaken by City: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13679632 So the only time we topped the wage table, out of the 12 times we have won the Premier League, was in 1997. And that's assuming Newcastle or Arsenal weren't ahead of us that year. Who say's it's all about the money? Unless you're Chelsea or City of course...
Wow,that's remarkable if true in regards to 90-01. Those kids you would never win the league with probably helped to keep the wage bill down for a while.
