Our transfer business

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

We probably still owe 300 million.

Get Sanchez off the wage bill and that's paid off.

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

Pep asks for the same, and his club's owners say "sure, money no object".

THAT is the difference.

Yep, that’s the only difference. Sure.

Originally Posted by Halloween

This is what I don't get, all the anger for Mou, yeah the football isn't great at the moment but those gaps identified are obvious to all. He has asked the board for support to address it but they aren't playing ball. The real enemy is Woodward and the Glazers, top 4 is our only ambition, doesn't matter who the manager is this won't change.

While this wouldn't surprise me, I'd take any Mourinho sympathy piece from Castles with a grain of salt.

Mourinho has already spent a fortune on two almost 30 players in the last 12 months. The board are right to be cautious about the Willian/Peresic moves. Especially if they fear Mou will follow his usual career pattern of going mental this season.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

While this wouldn't surprise me, I'd take any Mourinho sympathy piece from Castles with a grain of salt.

Mourinho has already spent a fortune on two almost 30 players in the last 12 months. The board are right to be cautious about the Willian/Peresic moves. Especially if they fear Mou will follow his usual career pattern of going mental this season.

We should have a yes man who’ll cover for the board whilst playing pretty football and finishing top 4. I hear wenger is available.

Originally Posted by Jammy Dodger

We should have a yes man who’ll cover for the board whilst playing pretty football and finishing top 4. I hear wenger is available.

Loving the new angle

Originally Posted by dunk

Capitalism..

Indeed

But even in the main country of capitalism you would not be allowed to Malcolm glazer the £#%&! out of the Yankees or Cowboys etc.

Originally Posted by Red Al

Indeed

But even in the main country of capitalism you would not be allowed to Malcolm glazer the £#%&! out of the Yankees or Cowboys etc.

Erm, didn’t they do it to the Tampa Bay Buckaneers first?

Originally Posted by dunk

Erm, didn’t they do it to the Tampa Bay Buckaneers first?

I don't think they loaded the club with the debt to buy it(I could be wrong though)

Plus I was referring to foreign(none American)owners

Originally Posted by dunk

Erm, didn’t they do it to the Tampa Bay Buckaneers first?

Leveraged buy-outs illegal here for sports teams, thankfully the FA have no such safeguards.

Originally Posted by Red Al

I don't think they loaded the club with the debt to buy it(I could be wrong though)

Plus I was referring to foreign(none American)owners

That’s exactly what they didn’t pal. The Bucks were doing alright until them parasites got their claws in and defunded the £#%&! out them. Won a Super Bowl early doors than gradually ran them into round whilst stripping money out of them. Sound familiar?

Have to love capitalism though

Originally Posted by dunk

That’s exactly what they didn’t pal. The Bucks were doing alright until them parasites got their claws in and defunded the £#%&! out them. Won a Super Bowl early doors than gradually ran them into round whilst stripping money out of them. Sound familiar?

Have to love capitalism though

how do you defund an NFL team, you draft and have cap space its not like you can march in with 1bil and start buying players like you can in football

https://www.forbes.com/teams/tampa-bay-buccaneers/

Originally Posted by plopborsky

how do you defund an NFL team, you draft and have cap space its not like you can march in with 1bil and start buying players like you can in football

Took money out and didn’t invest. Didn’t pay high salaries, didn’t hire top coaches etc. Cut staff. Same way as any other business in which transfer fees for employees aren’t involved.

Originally Posted by dunk

Took money out and didn’t invest. Didn’t pay high salaries, didn’t hire top coaches etc. Cut staff. Same way as any other business in which transfer fees for employees aren’t involved.

thats just not true look at the link

compare that to the Detroit lions ran by the ford family.

https://www.forbes.com/teams/detroit-lions/

Originally Posted by plopborsky

thats just not true look at the link

compare that to the Detroit lions

https://www.forbes.com/teams/detroit-lions/

Is that not because we’re propping them up now? When they took over there were all sorts of stories and reports of unhappy bucs fans asthey detailed happenings exactly as they have now occurred at OT. Buying the side while successful and maintaining it for a short period before it fell off completely.

Another example of the glorious effects of capitalism though in the shape of the Lions, and Detroit in general tbf.

Originally Posted by dunk

Took money out and didn’t invest. Didn’t pay high salaries, didn’t hire top coaches etc. Cut staff. Same way as any other business in which transfer fees for employees aren’t involved.

Originally Posted by andyroo

its not true again

Originally Posted by Chris Quayd

Leveraged buy-outs illegal here for sports teams, thankfully the FA have no such safeguards.

Thought they had been banned now, not until after we had been bought of course?

Originally Posted by plopborsky

its not true again

https://www.tampabay.com/news/busine...imilar/2261081

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/bl...chester-united

Originally Posted by dunk

https://www.tampabay.com/news/busine...imilar/2261081

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/bl...chester-united

first article says nothing second one is interesting because the Bucs had to £#%&! off aloud of old dross that year and get younger. That generation was done.

Salary-cap space and actual cash are of course completely different and internet message boards in Tampa and beyond are full of speculation about the Glazers' finances. According to Jim Flynn, the editor of Pewter Report, which claims to be the largest independent site following the team, there is no hard evidence although the signs certainly indicate they might be hurting.


whats the most interesting thing is they paid 192mil for the team

its now worth over a billion, I dont even like these @#%&!s btw you are making me defend them But the Bucs and how you make money on a team is different than united interns of investments. They need a new stadium and will probably threaten to leave Tampa unless the tax payers pay for the stadium. This is normal practice not a malc special teams move over shit like this so the owners dont have to pay.

they’ve done exactly what I said. Defunded wherever possible, spent as little as possible (no there are no transfer fees) commercially @#%&!d the franchise to make money without investing anything. Granted it’s much more the done thing in the NFL for owners to call on the tax payer, but the principal is the same. What we are seeing them do to United is what they’ve done to the Bucs. Take money out, invest £#%&! all, increase overall value all while success on the pitch dwindles.

They’re applying the NFL model, but no draft picks and MCC isn’t giving us a new stadium.