Its amazing how ****ing stupid some people are. Take this guy for example. I dont have a clue what hes on about prior to this but it seems hes questioning the fact that United earned their money to buy their big money signings. What are you questioning guy who doesnt actually know who Liverpool are?
**** me...... 2004 eh......... I dont think many of them played for us in 2004. Tevez was £5million for the record, Nani 14, Rooney 25.6 and Hargreaves 17 Numbers, financials and football clubs are not your strong point.
You taken me off the ignore list or did temptation get the better of you! Either way, pipe down or the teacher will hear you headbutting the keyboard!
Heres some clearly legit information on Liverpool* You are 20trillion YEN in debt. Andy Carroll £98million Suarez £158million Downing £250million Henderson £765million How can Liverpool keep spending these sums when they are in debt. **** you Liverpool and your stupid blue kits and home ground called goodison.....oh, wait, thats the other Liverpool. * Figures are not correct
There no getting away from it UIR... Man Utd used to buy the league just as badly as Man City and Chelsea have. The other clubs dug deep and got better without running to Platini with tears in their eyes
Oh and swarbs, dont quote the ****ing gimp again, means I dont have to see it and then help correct the backwards ****ing simpleton. Goes to you cape man eric
Here we go with the Chuckle brothers reject again - Teves cost United in the region of £32 million, where do you get £5 milion from - That was the amount West Ham were fined in the process you ****wit! If you want to claim to support a team, at least know a little bit about them! And you keep going on about me and LFC because I stupidly posted a thread on the incorrect board once years ago - As you lot like to remind us "That's history!"
And of those Newcastle United, Leeds United, Blackburn Rovers, Aston Villa, Sheffield Wednesday, Crystal Palace, Norwich City and Nottingham Forest only managed to get near the top four before Abramovich came along. Since he came along, only Everton and Spurs have managed to crash the "Big Four". QED. 2004? Epic fail there: Tevez was on loan Hargreaves joined in 07/08 Carrick joined in 06/07 Nani joined in 07/08 Anderson joined in 07/08 Vidic joined in 05/06 Evra joined in 05/06 Rooney joined in 04/05 Better luck next time
As I understand it, FFP was designed so as to try and ensure that: 1 Clubs were financially sound so as to ensure that a future Portsmouth/Rangers did not happen again. 2 That it would ultimately produce a situation whereby it was possible for any qualifying club to win a competition. These are very laudable aims. However when they are encoded and SMART objectives attached to them the problems for different clubs emerge because of their differences. We like taunting the Yanks about their debt levels. We can also poke fun at City and Chelsea regarding their ownership status. We like to remind everybody that we were nearly closed down 18 months ago and are now in a financial recuperation status. They are all differing facets of the same problem and no one set of rules will adequately or equitably cover them. Yet for the continuing wellbeing of the game, we need to start somewhere and FFP are a decent 'first stab'. FFP will effect each club differently and there will be unforeseen consequences, but we have to start somewhere.
FFP is setup to protect the big clubs from the likes of Chelsea and Man City and whoever else gets a massive cash injection in the future. Dont be fooled into thinking its to protect the small clubs, this was setup by the greedy so-called big clubs to help maintain their dominance. UEFA dont give a crap about Portsmouth.
This. FFP isn't perfect, and won't solve all the problems with the game, but it's a good start in building a more sustainable future for football.
This post sums this thread up. Thick fans who havn't got a clue and post absolute ****e!!! (not all) Figures wrong years wrong Utd spend what they earn. And always have! The management of UTD through the 1990's and the investment in the stadium, facilities has led to them leading the market and being the global brand they are. Through hard work and clever decision making. Clubs like City & Chelsea wants to reap the rewards of the same with out the work and thats wrong. Liverpool will benefit from FFP in the premier league and have backed Utd's motion. Read up on it and try to understand it better before posting your ****e on here,
It is borrowed, you nitwit. The Glazers bought you with a leveraged buyout, therefore they bought you with a loan, thats why you're in debt, that is why you have interest repayments. Those interest repayments come up as expenditure on the balance sheet. Therefore its what you take in-minus what you pay out=what you have left. When the FFP comes in, all it will mean is that the owners will not be able to compensate for having small amounts to invest. Therefore if United have a turnover of £230 million and expenditure of £210 million(including interest repayments) they will only be able to spend £20 million on players. If they go over that, they will recieve a European ban. This will apply to all clubs.
It wouldn't just protect the big clubs. Think about last season - if Chelsea and City hadn't been propelled to CL and PL success by their owner's money, the top four would have been Utd, Arsenal, Spurs and Newcastle. Are you not even a teeny bit pissed off that you've been kept out of the CL by rich blokes who would are determined throw their money at overpaid, spoilt footballers in the never ending quest to prove who has the bigger cock?
