meltonblue (U10617)

You are way too sensible to have any place in this mud slinging inanity

So just be clear it's okay to spend money you don't have as long as you have an understanding bank manager.

---

If you're referring to United's debt, we haven't spent any money we don't have. The Glazers took out the loans in order to buy our club, and used the projected profits of the club in order to secure said loan. United aren't actually in any debt from any football related matters.

That's by the by Jay - it's synonimous to me. All one in the same.

So it's okay to spend money that you do not have if you have an understanding bank manager but it's not okay to spend your own money and not get in debt as that would be bad.

I think you might be right Joey!

I'll try to put it simply. We still continue to make profits, even while paying the debts off. We haven't done anything to get ourselves in to debt, and once the debt is gone, there is no part of our club that loses money. We are a well run, financially stable club. If our owners leave, it doesn't matter, because the club as a whole generates money, rather than losing it.

In comparison, if City's owners leave, their wage bill was something like 150% of their turnover, if they don't do something about the players on extortionate amounts then in a few years, they will have debts which they are unable to pay off. Hence VC's Portsmouth comment.

Hoody

Quick question for you.

If the banks, bond holders etc wanted to call in the debt, who you you think they will call it in on? United or the Glazers?

comment by Jay MUFC (U16498)
posted 15 seconds ago
I'll try to put it simply. We still continue to make profits, even while paying the debts off. We haven't done anything to get ourselves in to debt, and once the debt is gone, there is no part of our club that loses money. We are a well run, financially stable club. If our owners leave, it doesn't matter, because the club as a whole generates money, rather than losing it.

In comparison, if City's owners leave, their wage bill was something like 150% of their turnover, if they don't do something about the players on extortionate amounts then in a few years, they will have debts which they are unable to pay off. Hence VC's Portsmouth comment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
See, the plan is simple. Knock United off their perch before the debt is gone and we might have another Leeds on our hands here.

I'm not saying City's owners will leave, but in that situation, they'd be in trouble. They are going to need a hell of a turn around within the club to be able to generate enough money to pay for all of their players, and stay competitive. Something which I don't think they'll manage when you have players on as much money as some of City's. That is why most of the fans are up in arms about ffp, finding any reason to deride it, because the fact of the matter is, unless City do something, soon. They're in trouble.

Knock United off their perch before the debt is gone

You're going to win 15 more titles in the next 3 years?

In comparison, if City's owners leave, their wage bill was something like 150% of their turnover,

Wrong, it's about 80% and falling year on year. If City outsource a lot of the jobs that are currently included in the figures like admin, legal and sales staff it will fall well within UEFA guidelines.

Mancini, how is our situation in any way comparable to Leeds? Last season we posted record profits, there is no way we will fall that hard. I highly doubt we'd even get to administration, investors would be willing to take on some debt in order to get a piece of the profits that we reap, of that I'm certain.

See, the plan is simple. Knock United off their perch before the debt is gone and we might have another Leeds on our hands here.

..............

Wishful thinking by someone who clearly has trouble thinking.

Arab, I didn't realise you'd become a Scouser.

City are Champions and don't forget it.

I hope you're right about that Boris, but I'm almost certain you made an absolutely huge loss last season, less than the year before, but if you don't win the league again this season that will be much higher than last season.

United didn't post record profits last year, if it wasn't for tax credits you'd have made a loss.

Merchandising will take a hit if United fail to win the PL this year. And this translates into £s.

Line of the day right there by VC!

looks to me like City and their fans are getting very worried about this. To have a taste of our life and then to have it snatched away would be cruel indeed. But very funny !

My apologies, it was record revenue in 2011 at 334m, as opposed to 315m last year. I still don't think that is anywhere near a loss though. Especially when you consider we went out in the group stages of the Champion's League.

Unlike most other clubs, City's wage bill a shown in the accounts covers more than 400 non-playing staff. That can soon be changed with outsourcing and a bit of sensible accounting.

what an excellent article,the truth was out there after all
united inflating the cost of football since 1981,not by 10% per annum but on occasion 100% and 400 %
now City are spending more,its united who say how much you can spend,
hypocrisy has lost its meaning

Sensible, or creative

Sorry

what an excellent article,the truth was out there after all
united inflating the cost of football since 1981,not by 10% per annum but on occasion 100% and 400 %
now City are spending more,its united who say how much you can spend,
hypocrisy has lost its meaning
......

*United plus many other clubs, you keep forgetting that you silly Billy's

posted 2 minutes ago



Merchandising will take a hit if United fail to win the PL this year. And this translates into £s.

Uniteds non gate receipt income has gone up every single year. The glazers for all their faults seem to be able to make money from nothing, they are wizards at it.
Brennan made a completely erroneous point about putting all the income in a pot and sharing it out equally . That is in fact exactly what happens with 5.5 billion quids worth of overseas TV rights despite the fact that over 60% of the viewing figures are for United games. United in effect subsidise the rest of the league. By my calculation United should be getting 3.3billion over the three seasons. So quit moaning. In Spain United would get all their own TV money. If that happens here, which is always possible, even the sheiks or Russian mafia couldnt compete.

comment by Jay MUFC (U16498)
posted 58 seconds ago
Sensible, or creative
---------------------------------------------
Simply follow the United accounting theory and we should be fine.