So according to Andersred...

United's match-going fans' contribution of £54m a season is irrelevant, but it was only really the sale of Ronaldo for less than double that that saved the club

Eventually it will be accepted that the commercial and media cash cow was always there to be milked and that there was never the slightest danger of the takeover failing. If only finance industry types like andersred had been less divisive and concentrated their wrath on those that bankrolled the takeover instead of perpetuating hatred of United itself then the last 8 years would have been a hell of a lot less angry :shakehead:



http://andersred.blogspot.co.uk/

I seen this yesterday and thought I'd leave it but thanks for bringing it back to my attention.

Andersred is starting to make himself look pretty stupid, just like the rest of the public eye, anti Glazer protestors tbh.

Does £54m even service the debt?
This contribution is still off the back off unprecedented price rises and acs etc
Yes they're very good at milking everything they can out of united commercially but they're still milking fans dry as well

Originally Posted by thenorthwillriseagain

Does £54m even service the debt?
This contribution is still off the back off unprecedented price rises and acs etc
Yes they're very good at milking everything they can out of united commercially but they're still milking fans dry as well

they're not really though are they? They are charging a price for a ticket that is pretty much in line with the rest of the teams in the same division.

Originally Posted by believe

they're not really though are they? They are charging a price for a ticket that is pretty much in line with the rest of the teams in the same division.

Unprecedented for us, 55% rises for a club so well run we were one of the few not in debt is scandalous
No matter what anyone says united fans have had to buy the club for glazer to profit from, this is undeniable

Originally Posted by thenorthwillriseagain

Unprecedented for us, 55% rises for a club so well run we were one of the few not in debt is scandalous
No matter what anyone says united fans have had to buy the club for glazer to profit from, this is undeniable

I don't know where the 55% comes from because mine certainly hasn't gone up that much. Mine hasn't even gone up 25%.

what will people moan about when we're debt free?

Originally Posted by believe

I don't know where the 55% comes from because mine certainly hasn't gone up that much. Mine hasn't even gone up 25%.

what will people moan about when we're debt free?

Average and people will moan about things that need moaning about, glazers business plan has always been about asset stripping and cost cutting. There are numerous examples of them lot pinching pennies and £#%&!ing people over to get every penny they can out of a situation. This won't change if we're debt free it's just more money they stand to make and they will take everything that isn't nailed down before they go

Wish people would stop starting sentences with 'So'. £#%&!ing Americanised mugs.

Originally Posted by thenorthwillriseagain

Average and people will moan about things that need moaning about, glazers business plan has always been about asset stripping and cost cutting. There are numerous examples of them lot pinching pennies and £#%&!ing people over to get every penny they can out of a situation. This won't change if we're debt free it's just more money they stand to make and they will take everything that isn't nailed down before they go

have you got any examples of them doing this at United?

Originally Posted by thenorthwillriseagain

Unprecedented for us, 55% rises for a club so well run we were one of the few not in debt is scandalous
No matter what anyone says united fans have had to buy the club for glazer to profit from, this is undeniable

ticket prices rose steeply as predicted - but lets not kid ourselves that united weren't gagging to put them up

look at the 4 years leading up to the takeover and united had 1 title and 1 fa cup, were already moving away from buying high-end established players and were already buying players on instalments

i thiunk there's a good argument to say that the road they've gone down under the finance industry (fronted by the glazers) is a road that suited the club just fine, but which it couldn't have navigated anything like as well itself

this obscene football bubble will burst eventually - sooner or later. i hope united don't start throwing £50m at players before it does, because if you think ticket prices have gone up too much so far wait and see what happens when that kind of transfer policy backfires like it did a decade ago

Originally Posted by believe

have you got any examples of them doing this at United?

Our transfer spending as a percentage of turnover versus other leading European clubs exacerbated by the hundreds of millions they've taken out in "management dividends".

Originally Posted by Charlestown Rouge

Our transfer spending as a percentage of turnover versus other leading European clubs exacerbated by the hundreds of millions they've taken out in "management dividends".

I thought we'd been blaming that on the managers incompetence?

Originally Posted by believe

have you got any examples of them doing this at United?

Banning canteen staff from having breakfast at carrington, offering carrington up for sale(did this go through?), our transfer policy has hardly been in line with former levels since we have a net spend that is less than stoke, letting players like pogba go because we won't pay what they're worth etc etc etc

Originally Posted by believe

I thought we'd been blaming that on the managers incompetence?

I've answered your question specifically - the dividends they have been paying themselves are the equivalent of asset stripping.

Originally Posted by Charlestown Rouge

Our transfer spending as a percentage of turnover versus other leading European clubs exacerbated by the hundreds of millions they've taken out in "management dividends".

This is the thing. People are talking like the only cost of these @#%&!s' "ownership" is the cost of servicing the debt. It's not, it's making them loads and loads of money. For them it's working out very nicely indeed. But £#%&! them. We care about the actual football team. Silly us focussing on such an irrelevance.

Originally Posted by thenorthwillriseagain

Banning canteen staff from having breakfast at carrington, offering carrington up for sale(did this go through?), our transfer policy has hardly been in line with former levels since we have a net spend that is less than stoke, letting players like pogba go because we won't pay what they're worth etc etc etc

ffs

Originally Posted by Charlestown Rouge

I've answered your question specifically - the dividends they have been paying themselves are the equivalent of asset stripping.

is that not the equivalent of paying Ferguson a wage as a director? They bought the club, albeit with borrowed money, to make money like any business person would. Is making money asset stripping?

much as i dislike the owners and resent them making money out of united, i'm struggling to see why they wouldn't


i'm also struggling to work out quite why people think that spending £100m a season on players would have brought the club more than 5 titles in 7 seasons. a club buys players to build a team and a squad, and united seems to have done this quite well. and yes, i'm aware that various reasons have been invented to conveniently explain how this is in spite of the transfer policy...

Originally Posted by believe

ffs



is that not the equivalent of paying Ferguson a wage as a director? They bought the club, albeit with borrowed money, to make money like any business person would. Is making money asset stripping?

You ask a question, get an answer and laugh like you've won some kind of battle of wits no wonder you're so accepting of the glazers
And as a managing director of a business do you think it's acceptable when in hundreds of millions of debt to do this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...t-of-club.html

They're laughing all the way to the bank

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

much as i dislike the owners and resent them making money out of united, i'm struggling to see why they wouldn't


i'm also struggling to work out quite why people think that spending £100m a season on players would have brought the club more than 5 titles in 7 seasons. a club buys players to build a team and a squad, and united seems to have done this quite well. and yes, i'm aware that various reasons have been invented to conveniently explain how this is in spite of the transfer policy...

never thought I'd see the day. PM me your name pal and I'll add you on facebook.

Originally Posted by thenorthwillriseagain

You ask a question, get an answer and laugh like you've won some kind of battle of wits no wonder you're so accepting of the glazers
And as a managing director of a business do you think it's acceptable when in hundreds of millions of debt to do this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...t-of-club.html

They're laughing all the way to the bank

your answer was pretty £#%&!ing ridiculous though to be honest. When you start your American studies company are you going to pay yourself a wage? Will you be buying everyone who works for you breakfast?

And I'm not going to even entertain your Pogba nonsense.