Far too early to make that assumption, seeing as there hasn't been a single major signing by any of the Premier League's big clubs.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
Far too early to make that assumption, seeing as there hasn't been a single major signing by any of the Premier League's big clubs.
Drivel.
He has a habit of posting shite - one time he tried to tell me that amortisation was debt repayments
Fair enough I realise I could be totally wrong but I had a hunch that Cole could possibly be our big name signing, simply because it fits our financial situation, first to take it back if I am wrong
Are you for real?
Oh I am for real all right, anything of real substance to say ?
I don't believe it has anything to do with our financial situation. SAF has been interested in Cole since his West Ham days. I highly doubt Chelski would consider selling him to us while he was under contract, hence, no bid. Now that he is out of contract, it is no longer in their hands. Why look a gift horse in the mouth?
That said, there is no guarantee we will sign him. We don't hear about a lot of our transfer business until it is all but done. Berbatov is obviously a major exception.
Am I supposed to take what you've written there seriously?
See above.
If it's true, Chivas de Guadalajara are going to be plenty peeved.
Well when you have people who are completely ignorant of the true facts accusing you of being a Glazer lover/ proGlazer/ Glazerapologist and various other annoying shite like that then it is difficult to keep emotions in check.
I have always said that I am not the best at explaining the technicals behind everything - I did my best in the absence of there being anyone else about to do it.
I know what to look for when analysing a P+L account or balance sheet and have a good understanding of what is going on but I am not an accountant so I am happy to leave the detailed explanation to people like GCHQ.
Eventhough he has a different POV, I would also welcome someone like Andersred to the mains - I have no problem with an alternate view as long as it is backed up by correct financial analysis.
Shareholders would definitely expect dividend payments to be made to them considering the level of profit we're talking about. And indeed those dividend payments would of course have been made.
The figures for corporation tax and dividends are perfectly fair assumptions based on the financial results over the period concerned.
Quoting the £437m figure as money that had already left the club was most definitely spurious.
Cash earnings (EBITDA) will be much higher in future years so the interest payments will have proportionally less and less of an effect on the club's overall financial position.
Oh yes, the rest of us have had take all that nonsense or should I say pro Glazer rubbish you have been spouting out since you unfortunately got promoted, seriously. By the way do you ever go to bed?
Your opinon mine differs.
Do you dispute anything that I said? I would like to know why your opinion differs from mine.
There you go calling me pro Glazer again when it couldn't be any further from the truth.
Some of us are simply mature enough to enable us to appreciate the reality of the club's financial position.
Would you? I seriously cant be bothered, really all that needs to be said on this subject has been said. If you wish to know my opinons you could spend a while reading over my old posts. The sooner this thread ends the better.
You could be 2 or 52 for all I know so I dont know if you are mature or not. I have decided however that exchanging with you is only giving you license to let loose with all that nonesense you are so commited to spouting. There is nothing more I could say that I have not said before so in the hope it slows you down a bit Im out and I would encourage others to do like wise. I hope you are as enthuastic about posting about actual football when it returns. Goodnight and good luck
Is it £40m on transfer fees for new players now since Ronaldo left? Oh and then there was the £30m bid for Benzema which does tend to get conveniently forgotten by certain individuals.
''Because I don't like the fact that some people have gone to the trouble of actually spelling out the reality of the club's financial position as it annoyingly doesn't fit in with what I want to believe''
The truth not sitting comfortably with your delusions, eh, lads?
He'll be wanting the whole bloody forum shut down if god forbid we do spend more money on new players for next season.
"No! All of you, stop talking about it! It's not fair! Why do you keep talking about it!"
I don't want to be to personal or unpolite but you write like a child. You haven't back up your word with one single evidence, only abuse and drivel.
If you don't like the reality and want to belive in propaganda it's OK, but don't try to misscredit good poster who do there best to analys and explain difficult figures. Not one single poster like that we are in dept. Nobody like gready owners. But sensible posters can accept that businessmen want maximum profit of there investment. It's also not hard to knowledge the good and bad with Glazers plan regarding our club.
It's bad for STH but the club is healthy, we service the interest and the club generate profit. And TBH the future look good (regarding the clubs finance).
Please contribute with som constructive analyse or sit back and watch. I think everbody know your stance and accept it. Peace brother.
Why would you do that?
Good post...
Why attack him? he's turned out to be one of the better posters in this thread
It all seems to have gotten personal with you fred, I remember at the beginning you still used to get stick but you had good valid points that I agreed with but that's all slipping away, step back a bit.
The Glazers need to stop rinsing the fans, they must know this. Their business plan seems to be working, the facts are starting to come out and the propaganda/scaremongering seems to be subsiding but as a whole, the fans aren't happy.
Wall Street: Greed is good.
Greed used to be good, but look where it ended up. How about decency now? Glazers.... just think about the fans.
If the fans do turn then not only do they fcuk up their business plans, but they could destroy (or seriously set back) MUFC, something much bigger than just another football club.
Wall Street: Greed is good.
Greed used to be good, but look where it ended up. How about decency now? Glazers.... just think about the fans.
If the fans do turn then not only do they fcuk up their business plans, but they could destroy (or seriously set back) MUFC, something much bigger than just another football club.
Nobody's forcing anyone to read it, I think this thread is excellent. I'm not pro Glazer but I do have an open mind as to whether their ownership is damaging to the Club or not.
It's refreshing to see a well constructed counter argument to all the negativity that has prevailed for the last few years.
The personal jibes should be left out of the discussion as it would be a pity to derail what has on the whole been an excellent thread to date.
Did Fred ever get around to 'exposing' GCHQ? I wondered what that was going to turn out to be last night but had to pop out.
Not yet, he's still working on it, gathering evidence, interviewing witnesses and what not.
Oh yeah, Fred, what are you waiting for?
The thing that's confusing me at the moment is how some posters are jabbering about how we have no money and yet as far as I can make out we've committed more money to transfers this summer than the rest of the prem combined up to this point in time. Given that there are three months before the window closes and noone else has signed anyone of note how have they come to this conclusion?
Fred, minger, crerand?
Fred, minger, crerand?
Nail on the head, same goes for Fred and A1Dan.....Their MUST driven propaganda is being exposed as hogwash, the reality of our financial situation not even close to the doom prophesising they’d love the world to believe and hence you get what you see, diversey tactics to take the discussion off track.
Id suggest its not GCHQ/Roodboy/Cider/redrichio/myself etc who are 'Glazerapologists/glazer lovers or any other ridiculous comment along those lines and evidently more Fred/Crerand/A1dan etc are so fuelled with this anti glazer hatred and MUST’s propaganda spinning doom mongering that when the reality of our situation is analysed beyond the surface they cant bring themselves to accept that what they’ve all been told to believe is actually so far from the reality it hurts….they cant bring themselves to see what’s actually there and get extremely angry when their “were skint/were fecked/the worlds ending talk is actually corrected and they’ve no reply, hence the same questions get trotted out over and over in a steadily more heated fashion.
No one believes the Glazers are 'good owners' no ones defending them either, what people ARE actually doing is trying to show (Roodboy and GCHQ especially) that if you actually take the time to look at the figures, understand them and what not the reality of the situation is not at all bad and thats what their saying, in a calm and educated manner whilst the likes of Fred types in big bold capital letters hissing at everyone who wont just accept his "were fecked lets kill em" speeches because their a load of shite.
unfortunately much of the reaction is based on instinctive hatred rather than logic.
They also havent realised that mobile streaming could in fact place football clubs in direct conflict with the ***L.
Broadcasting any live football match on a saturday ( by any method ) is illegal in the uK between the hours of 2.45 and 5.15 on a Saturday. All other matches are the property of PL which they then "rent" to TV companies.
Therefore its not up to United or any other club to decide what matches can and cant be shown. That rests solely with the PL and the respective companies.
United would have no power to decide to show their live matches on any form of media simply because United doesnt own the rights to them. They still belong to the PL. Why do you think all these pubs are getting prosecuted for showing matches that are shown on foreign channels..
If United were to show live matches via moblie phones they would be in breach of the PL rules and suffer hugely for it. It could even result in them being hoofed out the PL. If you think the Glazers are going to take on the PL head to head you have another think coming...
Secondly, the other clubs wouldnt allow it. If United were somehow to be allowed to show matches to mobile phones, ipads, whatever, then the other clubs would demand a cut. After all, it takes two teams to make a game of football. Can you see Chelsea agreeing to let UNited stream the match to United fans and getting paid for it, whilst their own fans wouldnt be allowed to watch it or would have to pay United to watch a game with their team in it... No of course they wouldnt.. THe moment United tried to broadcast through other media streams, the other teams would simply out vote them and stop them from doing it.
Thirdly, the PL gain huges amounts of money from foreign channels for the rights to broadcast live premiership games. Do any of you seriously believe that foreign channels would accept United games being shown to foreign supporters whilst they've paid out millions for the rights to show them themselves.. Dont be daft, of course they wouldnt.
Anyone who believes that United will gain millions from sole exlusive rights to broadcast United games in any way shape or form is deluded.. United doesnt own their own games, never have done since the PL.. The only reason MUTV is allowed to broadcast repeats of games is because SKY has a 30% share in MUTV and MUTV was set up as a joint venture. With SKY having a 30% stake in MUTV and dictate to the PL what matches are shown, do you not think they would have already tried to gain exlusive rights to games already, allowing games to be shown live on MUTV on a PPV basis.
As I see it, the logic is, we were debt free, making £50 million a year, paying shareholders, having cheaper seats, and the fans were content.
We are now £700 million in debt, paying banks tens of millions each year just to stay afloat, some fat twat gets to own United for feck all, and the owners cant even step foot inside the ground because the fans hate them so much..
I would suggest, that anyone who cant understand that point is the one defying logic, and its their instinctive "loyalty" to United that is blinding them to the reality of the situation.
Unfortunately, loyalty to the club, and being a true red by sticking there through thick and thin wont get those leeches out of the club.. All it does it prolongs them staying. Meaning more money goes to the banks, the ticket prices keep going up, fans get treated even worse, and the club still remains at risk if something were to go wrong and the team on the field doesnt manage to stay in the top 5 on a consistent basis...
The "logic" that all will be OK if we just sit here and let them get on with it, is not the kind of logic that I subscribe to.
Keep up, slow-mo, the recent mobile communications deals have all been in the far East, with an apparent view to strike similar deals in the States. In case you haven't noticed, outside the UK they can broadcast without draconian UK restrictions; where do you think our streams have been coming from all these years?The point that's been repeatedly made - a point that, somehow, you've managed to let fly right over your head - is that mobile streaming technology is not covered by the same rules as are televisual broadcasts - are you suggesting that the Glazers have dropped a big bollock on this one because they forgot to check the legal implications with fredthered from the internet?
you're joking, surely?
The point that's been repeatedly made - a point that, somehow, you've managed to let fly right over your head - is that mobile streaming technology is not covered by the same rules as are televisual broadcasts - are you suggesting that the Glazers have dropped a big bollock on this one because they forgot to check the legal implications with fredthered from the internet?
The only people legally allowed to stream matches to mobile phones is ESPN.
When all those japs watch MUFC v CFC its ESPN they are subscribing to. Not MUFC.
Man United havent negotiated those deals.
Just like the TV broadcasting, only certain people have the rights to sell live broadcasts on a mobile phone, and MUFC isnt one of them..
BBC SPORT | Football | Premiership | Premier League ends TV deal feud
Note the all important words..
As well as television, the deal covers mobile phone and internet rights
The deal covers ALL broadcasting of matches that come under the jurisdiction of the PL.
Note the all important words..
As well as television, the deal covers mobile phone and internet rights
The deal covers ALL broadcasting of matches that come under the jurisdiction of the PL.
God you are dim..
The companies pay the PL for the privilige to show those games on their TV channels. Nothing to do with the laws of the country you dopey muppet.
Its a deal they have struck with the PL.
The next time you stream a live match, ring up the PL and ask them if they mind you watching it, and see what they say...
I dont suppose the fact that those streams are illegal broadcasts would have anything to do with it would it ?
The streams on the computer are illegal. But home TV in North America shows ever Premier league game . We get Setanta here in Canada and they pay a fee to the premier league.
- Status