United Rant Log in | Register to Post
AJ – see my reply to Mark earlier. Net transfer spending is key because it’s about the talent pool available. Clubs can spend loads and still have a shit team if they sell their best players too. Just see Liverpool for evidence.
danniitronix – the issue is when the good players start retiring (Giggs, Neville, Scholes, VDS) or ailing (Ferdinand) or leaving (Ronaldo, Tevez) and we don’t invest appropriately then decline is surely a matter of time. We can try and buck the market, invest in ‘youth’ and hope that works out for us. Hasn’t for Arsenal. Perhaps we’re just inherently better. But I suspect that lack of investment will start to impact the team’s performance eventually.
Alfonso Bedoya
Moderator
Unregistered User said:
Since Glazer take over: Van Der Sar 2m, Flopster 1m, Park 4m, Vidic 7m, Evra 5.5m, Carrick 14m rising to 18.6m, Larsson -loan-, Kuszczak 2.125m, Anderson 17m, Nani 17.3m, Hargreaves 17m, Tevez -2yr loan for 6m-, Manucho -free-, Possebon 3.5m, Da Silva’s 5.2m, Berbatov 30.75m, Tosic 8m, De Laet 250k, Owen -free agent-, Valencia 15m, Obertan 3m, Doiuf 2m, Smalling 10m, Chicharito 6m, Bebe 7.4m. This is the list of the signings under those Glazers and the accurate amounts, around £188m spent in 5 yrs.
Aj you dope... you're not even including outgoings players.
And what about the promise of £25 million a year transfer kitty?
Do all the math, not just the bit that suits you.
Anonymous
Unregistered
@ Alfonso Bedoya …well said .
Alfonso – “we should be setting budget targets for other clubs to only dream of, not scrimping to save money.”
Quite. I’m not some plastic that thinks we should buy the a-z of any player that’s fashionable but football is a simple equation. Transfer investment + wage investment = success. Spoilt? Yes probably, but what’s wrong with wanting our club to get the best players. This PR bullshit about never buying the best only making it… its like some Stalinist propaganda that fans are buying into. Facts are facts as Rafa used to say and we’re not buying the best any more. Not only is net spending down but if the next brilliant player comes along, kid or established, I just don’t see us paying the money and being competitive. I don’t know where the next Rooney is coming from but I’m certain that United won’t go and pay £30m for a 17 year old again.
Ed said:
danniitronix – the issue is when the good players start retiring (Giggs, Neville, Scholes, VDS) or ailing (Ferdinand) or leaving (Ronaldo, Tevez) and we don’t invest appropriately then decline is surely a matter of time. We can try and buck the market, invest in ‘youth’ and hope that works out for us. Hasn’t for Arsenal. Perhaps we’re just inherently better. But I suspect that lack of investment will start to impact the team’s performance eventually.
That has to be true but I'm just saying that this line is why Fergal is probably using to justify to himself that things are dandy.
Any business needs capital investment, machinery, technology - a business plan. Since the essence of any club is - players, manager, ground, training infrastructure, lack of investment in any of these key areas will haunt any club.
I still think that we need to finish third or worse in the EPL or get knocked out of group stages in UCL before the majority of fans are and Fergie is actually shocked to the core; only then will militant action be taken to get the funds and get Fergal to spend the cash.
Alfonso Bedoya
Moderator
uncleknobheadforfucksake said:
the ronaldo money does skew it a bit but so does the berbatov money, we wouldn't have signed berbatov if we hadn't agreed to sell ron (if only)
This is extremely hypothetical, but something to consider.
If not for the Glazers, we might still have Ronaldo.
He always said it was his dream to play for Real, but there was also no dubt that we couldn't compete with the money they were offering him... or the team they were offering him to play with.
But between Ronnie and Rooney, we had two of the three most marketable players in the world, (Beckham not included)... if not for the Glazers, what could we have offered Ronnie, both money and potential team?
Alfonso Bedoya said:
This is extremely hypothetical, but something to consider.If not for the Glazers, we might still have Ronaldo.
He always said it was his dream to play for Real, but there was also no dubt that we couldn't compete with the money they were offering him... or the team they were offering him to play with.
But between Ronnie and Rooney, we had two of the three most marketable players in the world, (Beckham not included)... if not for the Glazers, what could we have offered Ronnie, both money and potential team?
I think the money was too much - 80m.
Winger has the same issue - Fab wants to go but Barca are broke - they offered 25m for
Fab, fuck right off - had they offered 40m plus, guaranteed he would have gone. Le Arse will still be paying for their stadium in 5 years time.
Barca are broke to shit, you may have head but they just took out a 100m loan from a number of european banks to guess what - pay their players.
from a finance side Barca are fucked and it is a combination of luck and skill that got them a home grown generation of players that are the best in the world, otherwise, they would be cunted.
danniitronix – Barca/Real Madrid broke yes but the local banks will underwrite them forever and they both generate more cash than United. The whole story about taking out a loan to pay players was over dramatised though. Barca was still able to write off a €60m loss on Ibrahimovoch and buy Villa/Mashcerano. With the revenue generated they’re not going bust any time soon and will keep on spending freely.
Alfonso Bedoya
Moderator
My take on Ferguson is that, I think he's being played.
Imagine the scenario...
Glazer... "Sir Alex... it's great to see you again... can I offer you some tea?... biscuits?... some of this 18 year old, single malt?"
Fergie... "Och aye... just leave the bottle"
Glazer... "Right, ok... we're so pleased to have the greatest soccer coach the world has ever seen in charge of this great club... and it gives us great confidence to know that you're on board with our plan... mmm would you like ice with that?"
Fergie... "Och no... but d'ya got any haggis?"
Glazer... "urm, ahh, no... but we can send out for some if you'd like."
Fergie... "Nay mind.... let's just get doon t'business about transfer money."
Glazer... "Well that's the thing Sir Alex... we were talking to some of our American friends, and we mentioned you, and they all said they'd heard all about you... you are well known even in Florida... but they're not big soccer fans... they say that there's no strategy in soccer"
Fergie... "WHAT?"
Glazer... "Yeah... they said that whoever's got the most money, has the best team, and wins all the cups."
Fergie... "Cheeky Yanks... no offence mind..."
Glazer... "non taken... more scotch?"
Fergie... "nay mind, I'll help m'self"
Glazer... "mmm... yes I can see that... thirsty aren't you?..."
Fergie... "So... did ya put your Mates right?"
Glazer... "well of course... we told them that you were the master... the supreme tactician, and that's why Manchester United has been so successful."
Fergie... "Good one... bet that shut them up"
Glazer... "well no actually... they said that if it wasn't for money, you wouldn't have won anything."
Fergie... "WHAT?" *takes a big swig straight from the bottle*... "did ya tell em about me success with Aberdeen?"
Glazer... "urm... oh yeah... sure... more scotch?"
Fergie... *another glug from the bottle*... "Bah! fook'em... what do Yanks know about football anyway?... hic!"
Glazer... "mmm, quite... anyway, one of them said, if Ferguson was any kind of coach, he could win cups with tactics and strategy, and not lots of money"
Fergie... "Fooking bastard... you tell the cunt...hic... I'm Alexander Chapman Ferguson, and I can kick your fookin arse into next week..."
Glazer... "ummm, maybe you've had enough"
Fergie... "Fook off... get me...hic... some fookin haggis ya wee cunt" *takes another gulp*
Glazer... "yeah, ok... anyway Sir Alex... if you think we need to buy more players, so you can win cups, then..."
Fergie... "You sit the fook doon, ya cunt... hic... we'll show them smarmy yanks a thing or two... hic... you go oot and sign me a couple a no marks... hic... aye... hic... I'll win the fooking title on me own, just like I used to...zzz"
Glazer... "Sir Alex?"...
Fergie... "zzzzzz... hic..... fooking cunts....zzzzzzzzz... I'm Alex... hic... Ferguson...zzzzzzzzzzzzzz"
Glazer... *smiles*... "whatever you say Sir"
Anonymous
Unregistered
I’ll tell you why, because it wasn’t needed. Once again the whole transfer market issue is just a massive pile of steaming bullshit because we’ve managed to be successful on the pitch. Are people suggesting we spend money on players we don’t need like Barca and Madrid?
Anonymous
Unregistered
That’s all ifs ands and buts. We already have Nani in place of Giggs, Rafael in place of Neville etc. How about trusting the fucking manager? He’s earned it no?
Anonymous
Unregistered
But we only sold one of our best players and we sold him for 80m which vastly skews the net spend figure. I hate these fucking arguments.
Ed said:
danniitronix – Barca/Real Madrid broke yes but the local banks will underwrite them forever and they both generate more cash than United. The whole story about taking out a loan to pay players was over dramatised though. Barca was still able to write off a €60m loss on Ibrahimovoch and buy Villa/Mashcerano. With the revenue generated they’re not going bust any time soon and will keep on spending freely.
you are forgetting that the Spanish local banks are themselves fucked. They were the only ones that failed the ECB stress tests along with the greek ones.
the point was that it was the first time barca had gone to the external loan markets for funding of this type. the reason - well the spanish banks have run out of cash funding the likes of Barca and RM which is tantamount to illegal state aid.
it's a complete joke because the spanish banks will get hand outs from the ECB which in effect goes to prop up the spanish football association all of which is on a net basis not profitble - of course they cook the books because net basis for them means not counting the loans (read subsidies) from the govt.
barca and RM are so powerful that no spanish bank in their right mind would ever Not lend - in case of Barca all of Catalonia would withdrawn their deposits in an instance.
nice one Alf <hic> 
Anonymous
Unregistered
Some of the posts and disrespect shown towards our manager in here is absolutely staggering. Also what’s this obsession with transfer spending? Seriously, who gives a fuck? We’ve been successful haven’t we? Who cares how much we are or aren’t spending. We’ve spent 30m or close to it this summer between Smalling, Hernandez and Bebe, how much did people want? How much did people think we need? Does everyone think they know more than Fergie what our squad currently needs?
Most of you come across like a bunch of spoiled little children looking longingly at City and all their new toys. Do you seriously think as seems to be the case that we’re just going to magically implode once the likes of Neville, Scholes and Giggs retire? Has nobody even looked at our squad and all the players between 20 and 30 we have at the top of their game? You cunts can carry on moaning about us not signing players we don’t need, I’ll carry on supporting the shirts thanks.
Anonymous
Unregistered
Yeah you’re right we’re not investing in any new players. The three signings this summer must have nbeen a mirage.
Mark – It’s about the future of the team and where the club is going and throwing around insults just makes you sound like another plastic who worships at the altar of Fergie, whatever the actual facts. I’m pretty sick of you using the words fucking and cunt repeatedly simply because you don’t agree with somebody else’s view. You’re new here so if you want a grown up debate fine, if you just want to trade insults go elsewhere or get deleted. Simple really.
So now lets get to some more facts because you’re very light on it. Spending this summer was £24m, less £14m recouped. So net £10m. Net spend is relevant because its a benchmark of continuing squad quality. If you buy a house, but sell the garage its not worth the same and isn’t going to be as nice to live in.
I haven’t heard anybody here advocating spending money like City. Most people on this site understand the financial implications of the Glazer family’s ownership and understand long-term lack of investment will impact on the club and they’re worried about it and understand that Fergie is playing the politician right now.
If you want to remove all the profit from the Ronaldo transfer you get a net £68m differential – and that’s generous because the whole market rose in value during the time he was at the club (i.e to replace him, United had to spend more on Valencia than would have been the case five years earlier). Net spend under the Glazers would be a tad over £12m per season – and that’s including the Valencia deal. Still less than under previous regimes, in a more inflated market, against greater competition.
But that’s really not the point. The point is that United sold the club’s best player, and is using the profit to pay down debt while increasing ticket prices on aggregate under the current owners.
If you can’t get that, or cant’ make a counter argument without calling people cunts then don’t bother trying.
Anonymous
Unregistered
Love the figures from Ed. These are FACTS! Plain and simple.
bman
Member
I support a football club, not a business. Who cares if we spent more net per season in the five seasons before the Glazers than in the five seasons since? The five seasons before were almost the worst period in footballing terms since Ferguson came to the club, and the five seasons since have been as good as any in footballing terms. If spending more from 2000-2005 had produced three PL championships in a row and CL championship followed by a CL finalist, then it would be a strategy worth imitating. It didn't though, so why are we holding up that period as the period we need to imitate?
Fergie spent a lot after 2000 because he needed to remould the team to be competitive in Europe, that sort of fundamental rebuilding isn't needed now. He also realised that expensive transfers like Veron and Tevez frequently didn't fit in or turned out to be mercenary pricks, while the lads he trained from a young age like Scholes, Giggs, and Neville still left it all on the pitch for him every day they were asked to. I'm sure the Glazers love the idea of buying young cheaper players, but there are also perfectly good footballing reasons for doing so, so all in all everybody is happy. The fact that we splashed out on Berba, Hargreaves, Valencia and so on shows that we're still willing to spend big for an established player if Fergie thinks a piece of the puzzle is missing.
Meanwhile we slate our own young lads like Fletcher and Gibson, while jizzing over some other club's expensive young lad like Ozil and Benzema. Let's just wait and see whose careers work out best -- usually it's the one Fergie's brought up.
I've no love for the Glazers, and debt concerns me, obviously. But the fact is there's no evidence yet that Fergie is seriously starved for funds. You keep saying the Glazers are taking all the money out of the club to pay off their debts, but the fact is they haven't done it yet, they've only taken out a relatively trivial amount and all the Ronaldo money is still sitting there. The reality is the club has wasted something like £50M at least on bad exchange rate hedges, so the kind of money the Glazers and Gill are looking at is much bigger picture shit than an extra £5M or £10M to buy some player. Claiming that we can't afford to buy a Ronaldo or Kaka is one thing, but arguing that didn't buy Ljajic or Ozic because of £5M is fucking stupid -- that kind of cash is a rounding error for the Glazer's tax and exchange rate calculations each year.
But the thing that really annoys me is turning first on Gill and then on Fergie because they refuse to say what you want them to say. it's fine to disagree, but the amount of insults and vitriol thrown at these fine servants of the club is all out of proportion. "Worship at the altar of Fergie?" You're fucking right I do.
I see Giggs has been saying we have a strong squad this week. Is he a cunt now too?
bman
Member
Besides what club are we comparing our spending to? Because we spend competitively compared to every club except Madrid, Barca, and City, and those three clubs live in financial fantasy land. It's not like we'd be competing with them if we were still a PLC. The reality is that the more conservative spending is a Europe-wide phenomenon, it's not just us. And since the Glazers didn't buy up every other club in Europe, maybe they're not really the cause.
Anonymous
Unregistered
Hi Ed – I like this post. However, it would also be nice to see how much the overall salaries of players have changed in the post-Glazer-takeover era. But then again that might be reserved for another post. For example, a lot of people talk about how getting Michael Owen on the free was a no risk transfer. I don’t completely agree since we would be spending quite a load of cash by paying him the salary we are.
Viral – Interesting. I do have some data on the overall transfer budget, will dig it out and post when I have time. I don’t have detailed info on individual players but the overall summary is that wages costs had been rising significantly under the Glazers. That reflects the market. However, its interesting to note that the club has cut bonuses this year, and each of the new signings are on relatively low wages – circa 10-15k per week. When Scholes, Giggs, Neville and VDS retire that’l be 4 very high earners off the wage books.
Anonymous
Unregistered
Gill is a business man, he’s a lying b*sterd and I think its fare to say like them all! His son is coming up the ranks at the moment and I have been thinking to myself about it, will the fans get on the young lads back due to his father being a prick? Hope not but I’m just saying!
Anonymous
Unregistered
And yet in terms of on field success, you could argue that we were more successful under the American ownership given that the champions league was secured in addition to the 3 league titles in the given period. Goes to show, you won’t always buy success
Alfonso Bedoya
Moderator
Unregistered User said:
And yet in terms of on field success, you could argue that we were more successful under the American ownership given that the champions league was secured in addition to the 3 league titles in the given period. Goes to show, you won’t always buy success
Ronaldo!
We had the best player in the world during all that success... where is he now?
You must log in to post.
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
