If you were the GGs and knew you were going to spend £200m-300m, would you give the money to Moyes???
Then why appoint him in the first place? Surely you shouldn't be appointing him if you don't trust him.
it's called an investment, own money? you mean the batch of dodgy sponsorship deals? the type of deals you'd scream bogus if City had them? All the top clubs have a monopoly not just United or City or Chelsea. FFP is a joke in terms of leveling any playing field, record fees spent this window while the other clubs are not allowed to invest hence maintaining the status quouo. FFP only came about becusse non Europeans with money were buying clubs and challenging the already established clubs, basically trying to prevent competition to the monopoly. it happens in all walks of business life. Though anyone who supports a top 6 side is having a laugh saying any club is trying to buy success.
This......and this again..... I wouldn't exactly call Dodgy sponsorship deals, exploiting Asian markets, whoring your brand and floating on the stock market as "Earning your money". Its not like United are so successful because of their on field success, as United fans are quick to point out, even during their **** periods, they had a bigger worldwide fanbase than the clubs topping the league, like Arsenal, Liverpool, Everton and Leeds. I suppose its down to the magic of United in that they are so god damned wonderful that people will part with their cash no matter what? Or maybe they just have a smart marketing team who know how to work the industry. Whoring your brand>gift from a Russian Ogliarch You say Potato, I say Potarto.
sisu, every time I see one of your comments on here, your political statements at the bottom remind me of Woolfie in citizen Smith. The only difference is that his political nonsense was meant to be construed as comedy. You however class it as serious. "Here's to the Tooting Popular Front" and "Power to the people" Best of luck Citizen Sisu.
This is really highly unlikely. Can you ever imagine the GGs having "virtual" sponsorship deals and spending their own money just to bring success to the club?. I can imagine this of other clubs like City and Chelsea, PSG, Monaco whose owners put the money in for the prestige and who are used to spending their petty cash. Not credible for the likes of the GGS who care more about grabbing more of the cash than the winning of trophies. Before anymore screams " what about the splashing of the hundreds of millions this summer"? Simple answer: they had to spend because they had no choice. They would lose (could still do) far more than the money theyve spent.
This is more like it. This is the GGs exploiting capitalism. Using the banks to grab a club. Using the markets to recoup the money invested while at the same time keeping control of the club.. United have a global following which will ineviatbly increase with the purchase of DiMaria and Loan of Falcao. The lack of CL does not make the slightest bit of difference to that support. The club will recoup a large amount of the money spent on shirt sales, Tv deals, sponsorship deals, friendly matches in the Far East. I bet the owners and executives couldn't beiieve their luck when Falcao became available. Even better that the deal being offered was cheaper than offered to City. Like Madrid have shown, you do not lose money when you get a top player, even a very expensive one. You get your money back in all sorts of different ways...
Common sense again Christian. But the thick wum's can't grasp it. They expect a bargain basement purchase of 8 players costing 110 mill to be the purchase of the century. Football is just like everything else in life, you get what you pay for. If you pay cheap money, don't expect perfection
Manchester United are a huge club, possibly the biggest brand in world sport, who are spending money generated by the club to re build. Chelsea and Man City are small clubs with very rich owners who have spent years in mid table/relegation scraps and spent hundreds of millions over 3-4 years to buy titles. No way in hell can Utd's spending be compared.
Are they though? For all that money spent you still are at least 1 decent combative midfielder short and have a weak looking Defence. It's actually quite shocking the money you have spent since Jan and still haven't adequately addressed these problems. Having spent around 200 million in 7 months and appointed a world class manager, most fans and pundits still don't expect you to seriously challenge for the title. That's unacceptable for such a huge team that were champions just over a year ago. What has gone so wrong at United?
Spending money doesn't guarantee overnight success. 1 title in 8 years is testament to that. 0 titles in 25 years is testament to that as well!
It doesn't, but it should guarantee that your problems in the squad are addressed, I see it like this. This is how good Man United squad were prior to this summer in percentages (1% being turd, 100% being awesome) Attack 86% Midfield 41% Defence 14% In my opinion now with your summer signings, it is: Attack 94% Midfield 71% Defence 39% And im high on Tramadol again Seriously though, I would have been much more scared of United if, instead of Falcao and Di Maria, they had gotten Hummels and Vidal.
