Serious question NOF, 'if' they do sell they will want a profit y/n? So Utd's next owner/s will have to stump up in excess of $2.3bn(or thereabouts), so the the next owner/s will saddle more debt onto the club. Unless you actually think someone will pay the Glazers up front from their own personal wealth?
United hired Tevez off his owners, they may have been asking for £32mil to buy him but we never did that is why City never paid us for him
Man Utd did agree a deal with Tevez but he ****ed them off probably because he was better than being the workhorse/water carrier of the team. What I found funny about that was he then rejected a move to Liverpool because he claimed to love Man Utd and their fans too much, only to move to Man City, their geographical rivals! And then celebrate widly when he scored against them in the League cup. Not to mention starting a fight with Neville and then wearing the R.I.P. Fergie t shirt, which was blown out of proportion and context in fairness.
He turned down Liverpool and joined City for money mate, nothing to do with love of United or any kind of loyalty.
I know mate! I was just saying its what he claimed, and that its funny looking back at it because of who he later joined and how he acted towards Man Utd since! If he had any respect for Man Utd he would've moved abroad IMO.
Shouldn't we concentrate on making the league fairer by severing United's control over referees and the FA?
They will want a profit but so did Laurel and Hardy. The Glazers haven't put their own money into United. The club has been paying off the debt, not the Glazers. The remaining debt isn't 2billion dollars, it's around 440million pounds. You seem to have added on the debt to the supposed value of the club. That's like saying you have a 500k house with 150k left on the mortgage which you will only sell for 650k.
Can someone else please put KPR right. Both myself and Swarbs have tried explaining to him that indviduals and companies are both seperate legal entities but the guy just refuses to accept the obvious truth. Still KPR it's good to see you have reverted back to private lives with songs about managers sons etc. I've really missed you
Morning everyone hope you're all as fresh as I am after a cracking nights sleep. See UIR is still bitching about a thread I accidentily posted on the Everton board for some unknown reason as if I can't tell the difference between EFC and LFC. OK let it go mate, it was funny about 5 years ago, oh watit, no it wasn't! Debt interest repayment is £70million and you can deny that all you like, I have proved you wrong with accurate financial reports. All you lot have done is provide me with a link to the 2001 annual report. ****ing hell, you can have ours from 1989 if you want to play that game. KE, the two are tied together and again, because you don't avknowlegde it, doesn't make the fact incorrect. The Glazer sons even took 'personal loans' from the club for what they described as 'personal interests' now, why don't you get yourselves back over to your board and start bitching about when I once fell off my bike as a kid as I'm sure that's as funny today as it was when it happened - 20 odd years ago! All jokes aside, I have repeatedly provided evidence of financial issues surrounding your 'Debt free; club and yet you dispute those facts and all relating sources. Add to the money pilphered from the club by the Double Glazer family with the excessive spending of Quick fix Phil and you have a club now screaming for PL FFP - That is what the thread was about in the first place, and was started as a discussion between myself and my fellow kopites, if you don't like what you have been presented with feel free to **** off to your obviously sad and quiet board instead of constantly squatting on ours - IT GETS BORING!
So is that the clubs debt ? That is actually a club debtor but do try again Nobody has denied the 70 million interest and charges but this is on the actual loans that United have not the ones that the Glazers have privately. I don't think anyone has denied the club is in debt but do feel free to continue to make things up. Also if I acknowledge it or not the FACT is incorrect.
KE07 please do try and keep up or like NOF and UIR, feel free to **** off back to your own board, you've become tedious and boring! I was indicating that you can't deny the fact that they are connected to the club. Simple way of explaining this to you bunch of simpletons is the club are in debt, they are currently paying £70 million a year in interest alone and are still syphoning money out of the business and you lot are so ****ing blinkered you'd rather squat on our board and deny it. Seriously, if you don't like what we write on here slide back to your board - You won't be missed but your debt will still be present!
Well done you have managed to work out the directors are connected to the company. Have a gold star However that does not mean that the directors personal debts are debts of United. A point I have been arguing with KPR for 3 days. Do try and keep up before we send you to the naughty step. As for 'this is our board' . Are you 12 ?
If City got the DHl deal Mancs would be crying "dodgy" and now that united are securing 40m DHL logos on kits for training sessions... !?! it then makes sense that Fergie ended his BBC ban as posted on here already. As soon as City won the league, Manchester United are all "Lets play Fair" when they have not for 15 years, before that they were just noisy neighbours and there was none of the crying about Money until they became a threat in hte race to the league title. United paid an amount for Rio that most clubs then could only dream of spending at that time for a CB in the prem.
KE it's all relative as the loan taken by the owners from the club is added to the debt of the club as it is owned by the Glazers - Quite simple in a logical persons mind.
The difference is even after spending all that money on a defender, money that had been earned through sustained success, the club still showed a profit. United was a well run, profitable entity. Obviously the Glazers have killed that.
Do you realise that if you went back in time and told some 1970's Liverpool and United fans that their fans of the future's banter would involve Bullsh*t about net spend, commercial revenue and that the well thought out arguments would be backed up by "accurate and reliable" financial reports, that both sets of 1970's fans would kick the living sh*t out of all of you?! What in f*ck happened to football....geez! People say theres no loyalty any more and that the players and clubs only care about money.....well it seems that goes for the fans too
how often do you wail about Chelsea becoming a rich man's hobby? The 70's Chelsea was very different to the one that just won the CL thanks to Roman's rouble.
