You must be AVB since your name is the next special one

i was the next special one before that imposter came along

how dare you call AVB an Imposter!!!!!!

how dare you mistake me for AVB

apology accepted fernando....your a quick reader btw if you read before u first commented, impressive stuff

Thank you
Youre my favourite Man utd fan

this may mean that actually very few extra funds are given to saf for transfers as they may deem the club successful enough already.

=========================

This same rubbish has been spouted since the Glazers first bought the club and put the club into debt.

Yet, those dire predictions haven't come true.

oh wow, i feel so honoured fernando

Most of them have filtered me, I think

the next special one (U6262)

&

Fernando Torres aka el nino del Chelsea (U10019)


Would the two of you like a private room to yourselves?

im not criticising the glazers manyoo mancees or saying they haven't made funds available. im just stating there wont be additional funds to what there currently are. there is a major belief on these boards that if the sale goes ahead we'd be able to break the bank every summer comfortably, this may not be true as i believe the glazers will take quite healthy dividends

Would the two of you like a private room to yourselves?
--------------------

manyoo mancees im ever so sorry for not bringing you in. your my favourite manyoo mancees

Im sorry Manyoo Mancees
you can join in

im just stating there wont be additional funds to what there currently are.

=====================

And you know this because you're privy to the Glazers' private thoughts, are you?

My argument is that no matter who the owner, they can take extortionate dividends. So I don't see why we should speculate about the Glazers on that issue?

As long as all (or close to all) the debt is paid then really you have to assume they'll behave in the same way any other owner of a successful club would. No better no worse?

And you know this because you're privy to the Glazers' private thoughts, are you?
-------------------------------------------

This.

How can you know what they will do, just like how you can know what any owner will do?

And you know this because you're privy to the Glazers' private thoughts, are you?
-----------------
of course not, and unlike others on this board i don't claim to know more than others. i just gave my opinion. you of course are welcome to yours. however, the glazers have thus far never shyed away from taking money out of the club, and i believe they wont in the future either. do you seriously believe theyre willing to relinquish 25% of the club as a good gesture to the fans?

Not as a gesture to the fans but as prudent businessmen wanting to maximise profits?

My argument is that no matter who the owner, they can take extortionate dividends. So I don't see why we should speculate about the Glazers on that issue?
-------------------------------
actually, very few major companies pay extortionate dividends. most actually retain the profits for further reinvestment allowing the company to grow and the value of the shares rise, which will ultimately benefit the company and shareholders more. this is something the glazers have shown themselves to be quite unorthodox in there approach

Not as a gesture to the fans but as prudent businessmen wanting to maximise profits?
-------------------------------
yes profits that will, if they want to see a direct return on such a manouevre, be taken as dividends rather than pumped back into the club. especially considering the club is doing extremely well financially (debt aside) and can be seen as a means to subsidise other elements of their portfolio

The one thing that is true about the glazers is that they have NEVER given a flying toss what match going reds think about them.Time to change it?

comment by the next special one (U6262)


posted 17 minutes ago

My argument is that no matter who the owner, they can take extortionate dividends. So I don't see why we should speculate about the Glazers on that issue?
-------------------------------
actually, very few major companies pay extortionate dividends. most actually retain the profits for further reinvestment allowing the company to grow and the value of the shares rise, which will ultimately benefit the company and shareholders more. this is something the glazers have shown themselves to be quite unorthodox in there approach
-------------------------------------------

Really? What about Arsenal's main shareholders? If Glazers pay off the loan these are the only two clubs I can think of in the unique position of having no debts AND making a profit every year. Perhaps they're entitled to take some dividends?

Regardless, how can you be sure the next owner won't? You can't and that's the only point I'm making.

Really? What about Arsenal's main shareholders? If Glazers pay off the loan these are the only two clubs I can think of in the unique position of having no debts AND making a profit every year. Perhaps they're entitled to take some dividends?

Regardless, how can you be sure the next owner won't? You can't and that's the only point I'm making.
--------------------
I was referring to companies in general, giving one example and conflating it to undermine my argument isnt quite enough im afraid. and on the point of arsenal, the reason they're profitable is simply because of the extortionate ticket prices they have (highest in the pl) and wengers refusal to spend big money. in that sense you have to actually argue taking these dividends is hampering the clubs progress as it could be better used to improve the squad. man utd however aren't quite in the smae situation, as we'd be able to have a decent transfer kitty whilst also paying dividends which the glazers are entitled to by all means. what i was simply stating was that i personally dont believe additional transfer funds will be made available as any additional income will be taken out by the glazers. so imo being debt free will give us greater stability but will not improve are transfer fund as some believe.

lol you seem to continuously skirt around the issue. I don't care if it is one example, it's the one that's the closest seeing as both are football clubs, both would be making profit and both would have owners/shareholders taking dividends. Also, the reasons why Arsenal's main shareholders do what they do is irrelevant, the fact they do it is the point. So I'll repeat my point, you have no guarantee that another owner wouldn't do the same.

You also have nothing to back up the point that transfer funds won't be made available under the Glazers when the last 6 years have clearly shown they have - If as Gill says there is/was £150m in the bank and the fact Fergie could have quite easily spent £80m in this transfer window.