Unrealistic summer transfer wankfest III

Manchester United chat
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 24883
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

fat maradona wrote:
1 month ago
Word is that the Glazers have told Ole that it's just Sancho and no other signings and that he is to make do with the squad he has. Hence why we are stalling on Smalling moving, hence why we didn't pay the Upamecano release, hence why we aren't bothering with Thiago.

I get that finances will be tricky with no crowds and merch sales dropping and still paying out to keep the club running, I get that. I run my own business with 50 employees and I know just what it means to need to balance the books and keep a cap on spending. And so if we don't buy Sancho for £110m, well that's just good business sense. Not so good for the footballing side. But it's the lack of progress in other areas which really grates my nuts. Where is the DoF, why haven't we shifted the dross, why make all the noises pre-transfer window and then make man look like a fool during? And then there is this story about the owners taking out £90m in dividends and how the other owners of the top 6 haven't.


Staggering this. So much money leaving the club.
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 24883
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago



838m on financing in 10 years! Nearly half a fucking bil in interest! Fucked up
User avatar
jason_uk
First Teamer
Posts: 413
Joined: 6 years ago

1 month ago

Sid wrote:
1 month ago


838m on financing in 10 years! Nearly half a fucking bil in interest! Fucked up
Yep.. and people still go on about how the glazers aren't a problem, look at how much they have spent bla bla bla.

Its sick looking at those numbers, total parasite on the club.
Money spent on financing alone 80mill transfer in each season. Can you imagine if we had done that since 2010 when fergie and Gill were still on board.

Fuck sake, its depressing thinking about it.
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 5788
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

But these are internal matters. I only care about what's spent on transfers and wages.
United have outspent everyone bar City post Fergie. Perhaps Chelsea would have caught up this season.
Idk about other spends like upgrading club facilities but I don't recall hearing complaints about that either.
If the money was spent well and we were winning titles like City then I woudn't care about the dividends.
But since the lateral hires have been crap, I'm pissed at the club; again the dividends here don't matter. I"d still be pissed if nothing was taken out.
User avatar
FuB
Legend
Posts: 6123
Joined: 4 years ago
Location: Littlewoods Data Entry Department

1 month ago

dozer wrote:
1 month ago
But these are internal matters. I only care about what's spent on transfers and wages.
United have outspent everyone bar City post Fergie. Perhaps Chelsea would have caught up this season.
Idk about other spends like upgrading club facilities but I don't recall hearing complaints about that either.
If the money was spent well and we were winning titles like City then I woudn't care about the dividends.
But since the lateral hires have been crap, I'm pissed at the club; again the dividends here don't matter. I"d still be pissed if nothing was taken out.
You just love to be contrary, don't you?

These are all "internal matters" that have been dumped on the club by parasites.

The original buyout of United was 790m... they've spent more on just the financing and still haven't actually finished properly BUYING the club... yet they're still taking a slice of something that still doesn't wholly belong to them.
I may be able to fix a forum but I can't fix a fuckwit
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 24883
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

If we'd have spent that 1bn on players we'd essentially have a sugar daddy and could spend like fuck, only better cos we'd have no rich dickhead to satisfy / regime to wash
User avatar
bman2
Legend
Posts: 7944
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

Honestly, isn’t two billion pounds a small price to pay for the genius of Glazers’ leadership?
User avatar
swampash
Legend
Posts: 4774
Joined: 6 years ago

1 month ago

Yup, I cannot see us signing anyone else now.
Fats is right - faced with reduced income the owners want to cut costs to protect their take. Because at the end of the day it’s not about the sport for them, it’s just about their short term financial take.
The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits...
User avatar
dozer
Legend
Posts: 5788
Joined: 7 years ago

1 month ago

FuB wrote:
1 month ago
dozer wrote:
1 month ago
But these are internal matters. I only care about what's spent on transfers and wages.
United have outspent everyone bar City post Fergie. Perhaps Chelsea would have caught up this season.
Idk about other spends like upgrading club facilities but I don't recall hearing complaints about that either.
If the money was spent well and we were winning titles like City then I woudn't care about the dividends.
But since the lateral hires have been crap, I'm pissed at the club; again the dividends here don't matter. I"d still be pissed if nothing was taken out.
You just love to be contrary, don't you?

These are all "internal matters" that have been dumped on the club by parasites.

The original buyout of United was 790m... they've spent more on just the financing and still haven't actually finished properly BUYING the club... yet they're still taking a slice of something that still doesn't wholly belong to them.
Point is so far they haven't held back on throwing money at transfers, wages and perhaps other areas of improvement at the club. The other financial matters I don't understand enough. How is it impacting the club? Less money on transfers? Don't think so.
User avatar
FuB
Legend
Posts: 6123
Joined: 4 years ago
Location: Littlewoods Data Entry Department

1 month ago

dozer wrote:
1 month ago
FuB wrote:
1 month ago
dozer wrote:
1 month ago
But these are internal matters. I only care about what's spent on transfers and wages.
United have outspent everyone bar City post Fergie. Perhaps Chelsea would have caught up this season.
Idk about other spends like upgrading club facilities but I don't recall hearing complaints about that either.
If the money was spent well and we were winning titles like City then I woudn't care about the dividends.
But since the lateral hires have been crap, I'm pissed at the club; again the dividends here don't matter. I"d still be pissed if nothing was taken out.
You just love to be contrary, don't you?

These are all "internal matters" that have been dumped on the club by parasites.

The original buyout of United was 790m... they've spent more on just the financing and still haven't actually finished properly BUYING the club... yet they're still taking a slice of something that still doesn't wholly belong to them.
Point is so far they haven't held back on throwing money at transfers, wages and perhaps other areas of improvement at the club. The other financial matters I don't understand enough. How is it impacting the club? Less money on transfers? Don't think so.
Once upon a time, we'd just go out and pay the money for a player we needed. In recent (-ish because it's become a thing of the past) memory, we paid a record transfer for Rio without quibbling, Ferguson went round to Keane's house on a saturday and signed him (another record) from under Blackburn and Dalglish's noses and when Newcastle put in a bid for Rooney, we just went and outbid them... immediately. When the players raved to Ferguson about how good Ronaldo was, they just bought him more or less then and there. No quibbling over prices. Not like stalling over dogshit like Fellaini and then paying MORE than they originally needed to, or trying to play hardball for Bruno and then having to stump up the same amount of cash 5 months later in a desperate bid to save the season.

Once upon a time, we'd not still be talking about Sancho because they'd have just paid the fucking money and he'd be in the starting line up on saturday.

You mentioned earlier about "improving club facilities"... Try this google search: https://www.google.com/search?q=old+tra ... +disrepair

In the end, mate, the graphic posted by Sid shows that, whilst other clubs are receiving a net cash injection, the Glazers are using the club as a cash cow. Not only are they STILL using it (15 years later) to fund their heavily leveraged purchase, they're all taking out a tidy sum for pocket money.
I may be able to fix a forum but I can't fix a fuckwit
Post Reply