Woodward (old thread)

[ravelston]

Links please regarding the funding of previous years... If You are going to make a sweeping statement about the financials at least supply evidence that backs up your point...

Also thanks for ignoring the majority of the rest of my post in relation to rivals and increase in revenue. It's clear you are just arguing for the sake of it. To suggest on any level that the glazers invested in the squad proportionately to the success on the field is downright thick.

It's all public information. The easiest place to get financials is Companies House - just go on their web site and figure out what you want to download (that's what I did). Anyone who wants to go further than just spouting the andersred company line really ought to be familiar with the financials from both before and after the takeover.

In those first two years SAF bought VdS, Foster, Kuszczak, Vidic, Evra, Rafael, Fabio, Park, Carrick, Hargreaves, Anderson, Nani and Tevez (plus a couple of lesser lights). That's over £100m in talent which, with the talent already in place (Giggs, Scholes, Fletcher, Brown, Neville, O'Shea, Evans, Rio, Rooney and Ronaldo), formed the basis of a team that was very successful for 7 years. The idea that SAF somehow managed to cobble a team together with £5m is heartwarming but not entirely accurate.

Did we spend as much as the sugar daddy clubs in the subsequent years - probably not, but why would we? Our team was already in place, they were playing catch up. Should we have shored up our declining midfield over the last two or three seasons - probably would have been a good idea. Why didn't we - that's something you'd have to ask SAF.

I'm sure you could dig up all the information you want about Real, Barcelona and Bayern and that's what you'll have to do. I'm getting married in a couple of months and I'm not going to spend my limited spare time sifting through data for you. I guess my final answer would be that the proof of the pudding is in the eating - our success was comparable to that of Real, Barcelona and Bayern, so we must have been doing something right.

 

[ravelston]

The Andersred blog has links to financials here:

http://andersred.blogspot.com/p/resources_28.html

Rounding from each year's consolidated cash flow statement yields the following net spend, calculated by subtracting proceeds of players' registrations from purchases of players' registrations.

2006: £32.4M net spend
2007: £10.5M net spend
2008: £26.5M net spend

Total of £69.4M, which is consistent with @ravelston's post.

Thanks Ken - my data [ Edit: almost] all came from Companies House - I could never find what I wanted on andersred (that and I don't entirely trust him). Your number is correct - I had a little dyslexia in my spend figure for 2008 (47.5 instead of 45.7).

 

[KeninDC]

Thanks Ken - my data all came from Companies House - I could never find what I wanted on andersred (that and I don't entirely trust him). Your number is correct - I had a little dyslexia in my spend figure for 2008 (47.5 instead of 45.7).

No worries. I was intrigued to see if I could foot to your numbers.

BTW-Congrats on your upcoming happy day. Best of luck.

 

[MDFC Manager]

CEOs travel frequently all the time, nothing to read here.

This. CEO in going back to his office shocker.

 

[ravelston]

No worries. I was intrigued to see if I could foot to your numbers.

BTW-Congrats on your upcoming happy day. Best of luck.

Thanks.

 

[Drummer]

It's all public information. The easiest place to get financials is Companies House - just go on their web site and figure out what you want to download (that's what I did). Anyone who wants to go further than just spouting the andersred company line really ought to be familiar with the financials from both before and after the takeover.

In those first two years SAF bought VdS, Foster, Kuszczak, Vidic, Evra, Rafael, Fabio, Park, Carrick, Hargreaves, Anderson, Nani and Tevez (plus a couple of lesser lights). That's over £100m in talent which, with the talent already in place (Giggs, Scholes, Fletcher, Brown, Neville, O'Shea, Evans, Rio, Rooney and Ronaldo), formed the basis of a team that was very successful for 7 years. The idea that SAF somehow managed to cobble a team together with £5m is heartwarming but not entirely accurate.

Did we spend as much as the sugar daddy clubs in the subsequent years - probably not, but why would we? Our team was already in place, they were playing catch up. Should we have shored up our declining midfield over the last two or three seasons - probably would have been a good idea. Why didn't we - that's something you'd have to ask SAF.

I'm sure you could dig up all the information you want about Real, Barcelona and Bayern and that's what you'll have to do. I'm getting married in a couple of months and I'm not going to spend my limited spare time sifting through data for you. I guess my final answer would be that the proof of the pudding is in the eating - our success was comparable to that of Real, Barcelona and Bayern, so we must have been doing something right.

That's not proof at all.. The club was successful in spite of the spending constraints not because of them.

And even at that, now you are changing the argument. Using more specific information that on its own means and proves nothing other then that creative accounting can be used in any argument.

I'm not sure what getting married has to so with anything. Just a throw out comment to imply that your opinion is somehow correct because you couldn't be arsed validiting it! Good logic that....

 

[Drummer]

The Andersred blog has links to financials here:

http://andersred.blogspot.com/p/resources_28.html

Rounding from each year's consolidated cash flow statement yields the following net spend, calculated by subtracting proceeds of players' registrations from purchases of players' registrations.

2006: £32.4M net spend
2007: £10.5M net spend
2008: £26.5M net spend

Total of £69.4M, which is consistent with @ravelston's post.

Went to the link and I'm not spending ages looking for the relevant information. Since you read it. What part of the document relates to the figures you quote?

Also, so we can look at this in context , what were other clubs spending in comparison? Since you want to complicate things why not include squad annual salary? Oh and really it's barca, Madrid and perhaps Chelsea and city that are only comparable clubs if we compare epl wins, cl final appearances and club world stature...

These figures mean absolutely nothing on their own.. If you can't compare them with rival teams they mean nothing....

And if those figures do include transfer fees from previous seasons then I don't see how they can be added as the glazers investment in the first team. They were simply paying debts owed from the previous board and limited future spending.

Good tactic though. Try to confuse people with information that's difficult to properly analyse and with absolutely no comparable club as a benchmark.

 

[Jammydodger7]

Only had a chance to watch the interview today, few things I took from it,

1. Sounds like we have at least one deal done going by Woodwards confidence. I don't think he'd risk losing face after last summer.

2. Most on here hated the guy last year and wanted him gone, he's managed to talk almost everyone around, which goes to show how good he is at being able to convince people of his ability. If he can manage to do that with caftard then it looks good that he can do it to future signings.

3.I honestly think that he looks on Redcafe, He mentioned in the interview that he looks at social media to get a perspective on how the fans feel, The caf is one of the biggest united forums, and lets be honest he seems like the kinda guy that would google his own name.

So if you're looking Woody, sign Vidal and Hummels please, and maybe Ronaldo if you have cash to spare.

 

[Kag]

The similarities with last summer persist...

Aside from the fact we've spent £60 million.

 

[gooDevil]

Only had a chance to watch the interview today, few things I took from it,

1. Sounds like we have at least one deal done going by Woodwards confidence. I don't think he'd risk losing face after last summer.

2. Most on here hated the guy last year and wanted him gone, he's managed to talk almost everyone around, which goes to show how good he is at being able to convince people of his ability. If he can manage to do that with caftard then it looks good that he can do it to future signings.

3.I honestly think that he looks on Redcafe, He mentioned in the interview that he looks at social media to get a perspective on how the fans feel, The caf is one of the biggest united forums, and lets be honest he seems like the kinda guy that would google his own name.

So if you're looking Woody, sign Vidal and Hummels please, and maybe Ronaldo if you have cash to spare.

Um, 77% plus wanted him to stay, per this thread's poll.

 

[Nights]

Aside from the fact we've spent £60 million.

Exactly. On players that can actually play as well. Not to mention signing a decent manager too.

All with over a month left to go in the transfer window.

 

[Gladiator]

This 3-4 weeks evaluating the players line is complete bollocks.

LVG will know what he needs and what he doesn't from the squad.

You don't walk into your first press conference and declare that half the squad is shit and needs replacing. His 3-4 weeks comment was the diplomatic approach.

Plus he has been in extensive talks with Woodward and Giggs even before his first presser. Plus publicly, it's a message to the fringe players to shape up or you're out

 

[Gladiator]

@Drummer if you dont understand how the finances work, perhaps tone it down a bit. If you're so heavily invested in the topic, why not look up the net spend of other teams? it's not that hard to do

 

[Walrus]

Woodward seems to be a bit of a transfer muppet.

Last year there was the whole flying back from Australia on "urgent transfer business" which turned out to be absolutely disastrous (and possibly nearly cost him his job). So what does he do this year? Comes out saying we have money to spend and there will be lots of awesome high profile signings (not quite in those words...)

Either we already have some deals 99% done, or that man is an idiot/balls of steel.

 

[ravelston]

That's not proof at all.. The club was successful in spite of the spending constraints not because of them.

And even at that, now you are changing the argument. Using more specific information that on its own means and proves nothing other then that creative accounting can be used in any argument.

I'm not sure what getting married has to so with anything. Just a throw out comment to imply that your opinion is somehow correct because you couldn't be arsed validiting it! Good logic that....

I didn't say anything to suggest that my opinion on the relative spending patterns of Real, Bayern and Barcelona is correct - I don't have an opinion because I haven't seen the numbers. What I said was that I don't have time to do the research - if you really want to know you'll need to do your own research. Ken and I have provided enough information (with sources) to suggest that a lot of what you say is just plain wrong. If what you want to "prove" (and it's hard to prove anything if you're not prepared to do the work) is that United spent a smaller proportion of their revenues on player related costs (transfer fees plus salaries) than the other three clubs, then I think you're almost certainly correct. Our finance costs provided an extra level of expenses that they didn't have. (Doesn't mean they spent more on transfers - Real and Barcelona have a significantly higher wage structure than us.) But it comes down to, so what? Why should Real, for example, be a benchmark - they've spent much more and had much less success (as have Chelsea and City). Bayern and Barcelona have brought through more "home grown" players - they did't need to spend like Real. We built a winning team and played it until it fell apart - hopefully we're now in another rebuild cycle. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Empire]

Drummer loves thinking about the Glazers, it is a little worrying that.

 

[bishblaize]

Went to the link and I'm not spending ages looking for the relevant information. Since you read it. What part of the document relates to the figures you quote?

Also, so we can look at this in context , what were other clubs spending in comparison? Since you want to complicate things why not include squad annual salary? Oh and really it's barca, Madrid and perhaps Chelsea and city that are only comparable clubs if we compare epl wins, cl final appearances and club world stature...

These figures mean absolutely nothing on their own.. If you can't compare them with rival teams they mean nothing....

And if those figures do include transfer fees from previous seasons then I don't see how they can be added as the glazers investment in the first team. They were simply paying debts owed from the previous board and limited future spending.

Good tactic though. Try to confuse people with information that's difficult to properly analyse and with absolutely no comparable club as a benchmark.

The reality is there are no comparable clubs, there's no-one to compare it to. You can only compare like to like and there are no clubs like ours (financially speaking)

City and Chelsea have sugar daddies and so can afford (til recently) massive losses year on year; Real have a hard on for big transfers and have the biggest income around. So we didn't spent as much as them and the PLC wouldn't have either.

On the other hand Barca have produced much of their own talent recently, so their transfer fees barely make a blip, even with Ibra and Neymar valued at full price; Bayern just cherry pick the best players in Germany with no competition, so there's less transfer fee and wage inflation there. So we spent more than either of those teams (on transfers anyway) but that doesn't mean anything either.

There isn't really another club out there to compare us to. If anything the comparable club is Arsenal - a club with a big debt to pay off that can only spend what they earn. However our revenue is a lot higher, so even there its hard to compare.

in the end its not a question about whether the PLC would have spent the same as Real, City or Chelsea. We wouldn't. The real question is whether the overall finances, had we stayed as a PLC, would have been better than with the Glazers. Since that's a hypothetical we can never answer it.

FWIW, my own opinion is that the club lost out on cash in the short term but its spectacular (no other word for it) commercial success under the Glazers has put the club into a place where the shirts on our backs earn us twice as much as winning the Champions League would do. Looking back at the PLC, and considering what drove that change in attitude (debt) my guess is it wouldn't have happened under the PLC.

 

[Spoony]

I'd love for us to sponsor condom manufacturers. Condoms with our name plastered all over them. Imagine the possibilities and potential jokes.

May as well whore the brand properly...

 

[Adnan]

 

[Pexbo]

I'd love for us to sponsor condom manufacturers. Condoms with our name plastered all over them. Imagine the possibilities and potential jokes.

May as well whore the brand properly...

Super sensitive to ensure that like our sponsors Manchester United, you always come first.

 

[Baxter]

If Woody keeps on going on about us being capable of getting any player, and that it doesn't matter if it is a record transfer then he should get his finger out and actually sign someone.

 

[ottosec]

Again big words, will look like an idiot again if we fail to sign any big players.

 

[KiD MoYeS]

Again big words, will look like an idiot if we fail to sign any big players.

He's done if he doesn't deliver now I think, I'm prepared to be patient but I feel he should have kept his mouth shut. The majority of the fan base will not forgive if we fail to add a significant player before the window closes.

 

[Rado_N]

I preferred it when he was quiet.

 

[Steven Seagull]

Please shut up now. Interview the other day was alright now shut the feck up and deliver

 

[J-Stander]

Has he given another interview? What was said?

 

[Sam]

Talking again

Never has one man set himself and his company up for such a fall. This is going to be messy when we sign no one of note.

 

[Sean_RedDevil]

Please shut up now. Interview the other day was alright now shut the feck up and deliver

He has probably given the MUTV interview on the same day as the others

The Guardian interview comes out just now

 

[redevil2]

I love how one of the best players in the Premier League constantly gets referred to as a Chelsea reject.

I love what Patrice said about joining Man United. He said you find your true identity when you come to Man United. So true. United is the place to let you find out what you are really made of.

 

[redevil2]

So, which flight did he take from L.A? So we can follow it on Flight Radar

Please don't say thing like these... with the current MH17 plight of flight, its creepy to talk about tracking and following!

 

[hungrywing]

He probably saw the positive-ish response to his interview on fan forums and then got a bit giddy/manic.

Seems like the type.

I guess in theory it's possible that LvG has put his foot down regarding irresponsible spending and Woody's in sponsor-appeasement mode.

 

[Truedevil]

 

[Crackers]

Jesus christ Woody, shut up your mouth, and talk with your cheque book.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

I can date a different member of The Saturdays from Monday to Friday, take Saturday off to evaluate the week and then bang the best one again on Sunday.

Until I actually do it I haven't proven anything.

 

[Ubik]

Going by the MEN article, he actually said:

“The reality is that we're not afraid of spending significant amounts of money in the transfer market.

“Whether it's a record or not doesn't really resonate with us.

“What resonates is a top, top elite player that the manager wants that is going to be a star for Manchester United.

"Of course it's in our capabilities (to spend £60m or £70m on a player). You think about the money in a way that I don't.

"I get pointed in the direction of a target that the manager wants and there is an assessment of what that might cost and I'll negotiate hard to do the best I can on the trade.

“I think there is a philosophy in the club that the board, the owners have which is we want to see the best players play for Manchester United but we are not imposing that on anybody.

“It was never imposed on Sir Alex (Ferguson), it was not imposed on David (Moyes), it’s not going to be imposed on Louis.

“If Louis says I want a player, get X, Y, Z, and it’s achievable and it’s viewed by you as a top player then we’ll end up with a top player. It’s what the manager wants. That’s the starting point.

“There is no budget. We are in a very strong financial position. We can make big signings. That doesn’t mean we go and throw money around.”


So he didn't exactly just come out with it unprompted, it looks like a direct response to a question.

 

[FreakyJim]

"We can but that doesn't mean we're going to." is what I read.

"We can sign midfielders but it doesn't mean we're going to. Deal with it."
Go on Woody, tell em!

 

[KingMinger22]

Exactly. On players that can actually play as well. Not to mention signing a decent manager too.

All with over a month left to go in the transfer window.

I think most people at back in May would say they would be disappointed if we had only signed Shaw and Herrera at this stage, considering the amount and quality of players needed. It could all change by the end of the window though, of course.

Woodward seems to be a bit of a transfer muppet.

Last year there was the whole flying back from Australia on "urgent transfer business" which turned out to be absolutely disastrous (and possibly nearly cost him his job). So what does he do this year? Comes out saying we have money to spend and there will be lots of awesome high profile signings (not quite in those words...)

Either we already have some deals 99% done, or that man is an idiot/balls of steel.

Agreed.

If Woody keeps on going on about us being capable of getting any player, and that it doesn't matter if it is a record transfer then he should get his finger out and actually sign someone.

Basically, he loves to say we could buy a Bale or a Neymar or whatever. And it is true, we could but like feck will we.

 

[Oo0AahCantona]

Frankly getting tired of these quotes. how about he goes out and signs us a world star THEN claims we will continue to do what's necessary. Right now its just empty words. i admire the positivity, and the club outlook does seem fantastic, but now is the time to shine woody.

 

[J-Stander]

Frankly getting tired of these quotes. how about he goes out and signs us a world star THEN claims we will continue to do what's necessary. Right now its just empty words. i admire the positivity, and the club outlook does seem fantastic, but now is the time to shine woody.

Yep. We've heard all this before, then nothing happens. He ax speak after we've signed a couple of top players.

 

[Americano]

Kind of funny these quotes are coming out after all the super expensive massive signing type players have found new clubs (Kroos, Suarez, Sanchez, James, Di Maria, etc).