Totally get the general point you’re making - we’ve spent billions going toe to toe with them on transfer and wage spend - but umm…Haaland?
You don't think we could've matched their offer if we wanted? We paid Ronaldo half a mil per weak and duds like Sanchez not that much less
People like the poster you replied to don't use any fecking common sense. Why the hell would investors give money to the Glazers for a minority stake and let the Glazers keep control when the club is a mess.
God you need to think about this. Why would oil state take a minority stake and keep the Glazers in control when the Glazers have run the club badly. No investor would do that. Think before you post that.
I'll give you that one, we were close to Haaland iirc when Ole was manager and there's also the whole history Haaland has with City but other than that I don't remember any, the only other instances I remember where we were directly competing for a player was Sanchez, Ronaldo (debatable), Fred (debatable) and Maguire (debatable).
He asked when have City ever beaten us to a player. They beat us to Haaland. I’m not sure we could have bought Haaland and paid him that wage on top of Ronaldo. It wasn’t just financial though - obviously no CL and the fact we’ve been a mess sportingly was the major reason. They beat us to Nasri too. That was financial from memory.
They’ve been trying for a partial sale for years, no one’s been interested in giving them just to take it out in dividends or let Woodward waste it.
Reluctance to pay the agent, if I remember correctly, right?
Liverpool are the ones that could get a partial sale because they have been unfortunately successful. Manchester United will be a full sale. Glazers have been unsuccessful for a partial sale because people aren't stupid enough to give it to them. That won't change either
They didn't beat us to Haaland though. We already had Ronaldo by then and weren't in the running for Haaland at that time.
You'd be happy being joint owned by Qatar, Avram and Joel?
All the negatives of a sportswashing project and stingy US owners looking for dividends combined
Oh I completely agree. The money we’ve spent hasn’t been the issue. The managers we’ve hired and how we’ve spent it have. It took an incredible amount of incompetence to achieve the little we have this last decade with what we spent. However, the glazer model is now incompatible going forward to compete. We can’t go toe to toe with City, Newcastle, Chelsea and potentially an oil state Liverpool AND invest the billion necessary in infrastructure AND pay the debt AND pay 30m dividends every year plus have our commercial revenue stagnate due to the toxicity their ownership brings to the brand. Hence why they’re selling.
Every club wanted Haaland. He had his pick of anyone. He didn’t want to join us.
Some couldn't afford him, there was probably only United, City and PSG in with a genuine shout.
All very good points, we're on the same page here. Is there another club with so little to show for considering the sums we pumped into the squad the last decade?
When do you think news will ramp up? It's been a bit quiet. You reckon that's because the Fifa world cup has been on
Barcelona haven't won much and spent a lot
They're also terribly run, true, but won the CL and five La Ligas since we last won the PL
It's been ramping up for weeks now, we've been following the stock market and all the financials for a long time and everything has suggested sale. It's no coincidence that they waited until the WC was on in Qatar before they announced they're looking for a full sale, it's perfect timing.
Also the "more than a club" trophy.
Yeah but that wasn't this decade. Can't believe they won 5 La Liga's though, seems like a lifetime ago since they won that.
We had the highest wage bill in EPL history last season - nearly 400m which is completely absurd - and we finished 6th. Barcelona have clearly been financially mismanaged to a larger degree and Chelsea match us in the wasting hundreds of millions on poor transfers but they have a habit of fluking trophies - I mean 6th!
Thing is if these states are interested they will bid the highest. No question on that. The Glazers will accept the highest offer. They won't accept a lower bid from a US consortium. Hence the Arab state will be successful. I don't believe the Glazers will accept the lower US consortium bid. While they have owned Manchester United, they have shown they only care about money due to their neglect of the club and paying themselves dividends. I don't believe the line they will sell to US investors. They aren't that stupid and will accept whoever bids the most.
Been a bit busy so admit I haven't been closely following it. So you reckon it will be an Arab state that will buy the club? It would be exciting as it least they would employ quality people to run the football club and not people like Ed Woodward.
