for United life at the moment is about getting used to operating without the talents of Ronaldo and Tevez.

The departed duo were major inspirations behind United's Champions League-winning campaign two seasons ago. And while Tevez ultimately left in bad-tempered fashion, annoyed at his lack of first-team opportunities, Ronaldo was also a key figure in a third straight Premier League title last term.

However, in his 18 years as a United regular, Giggs has seen countless stars come and go. On each occasion, the Red Devils have responded in the perfect manner.

And the Welsh veteran can see no reason why it should be any different this time round.

"Since I came into the team the likes of Bryan Robson, Mark Hughes, Eric Cantona, Ruud van Nistelrooy, Roy Keane and David Beckham have left the club,'' he said.

"But that is what the manager is so good at - reshaping and re-energising the team.

"Carlos and Cristiano were great players but we move on. As players it's like ships in the night. You just get on with it.''

yousouph:

Man city suppose to play  a friendly match with Madrid since there is no avenue of competetive match.

ty_sante:

*Berba: I can do better
Dimitar Berbatov feels he has plenty more to give at United and is determined to better last season’s goal tally.

Berbatov give more?
I laugh in Bulgarian!

MrCrackles:

Berbatov give more?
I laugh in Bulgarian!

Nayani maintains the money won't go towards reducing the club's debt, which remains at an estimated £666m, despite an expected reduction in corporate spending in the current financial climate.

"Manchester United are so far unaffected by the downturn," he said. "It would be foolish to say there would be no impact because you never know what is going to happen down the line but our season-ticket sales stand up well, in comparison to previous years.

"I have been saying that one should expect a downturn in our corporate sales but every club is faced with that. We do have a debt to service and that debt is significant but our interest payments are £43.3m a year while our operating profit was £80m topped off by an extra £25m from transfer sales.

"We are talking about a net amount of £60m and that is cash that can be reinvested in the squad - or if you prefer doing up the toilets or new carpets.

"The point is, there is money coming into Manchester United and one thing is certain that because of globalisation and the growing middle classes in India and the Far East, the appeal of football is set to grow and we are part of that story."

tkb417:



Biina
Not justifying the above quotes but as a follow up on our debate the other time, as much as the debt stays staggering, it is still within a manageable space.

The debt or whatsoever from the look of things will not affect the performance on the pitch and if thts the case, then expect UTD to always be one of the most profitable sporting brands.

in that case, Banks will always be willing to refinance the loan/the loan can be conveniently repaid.

Just like i told you the other time, there must be clear repayment terms between the sponsor and the banks.

ure on ma page now?

Naturez:

They'll don't worry and Madrid will bag them 10 goals each from a player except goalkeeper

RuuDie:

@ great stuff tbk. . . . that boy still has a thing or two to learn about LBOs.

tkb417:

Ruudie dont let Biina come and tear us apart o

tkb417:

Ruudie dont let Biina come and tear us apart o

Una want start this Football finance war again? Make una no make this thread boring abeg!!

Emperoh:

Una want start this Football finance war again? Make una no make this thread boring abeg!!

tkb417:

wetin dey vex u pally?
u never chop today

how runs?

Phony200:

Lol. Emperoh, if biina come now, nah so so debt debt debt we'll talk today. News is boring, nothing is fun except maybe watching Korean girls drool over Rio. Any transfer news in OT?

tkb417:



Biina
Not justifying the above quotes but as a follow up on our debate the other time, as much as the debt stays staggering, it is still  within a manageable space.

The debt or whatsoever from the look of things will not affect the performance on the pitch and if thts the case, then expect UTD to always be one of the most profitable sporting brands.

in that case, Banks will always be willing to refinance the loan/the loan can be conveniently repaid.

Just like i told you the other time, there must be clear repayment terms between the sponsor and the banks.

ure on ma page now?

As at today, the situation is still quite salvageable, but given the current direction,  three seasons without trophies and it could  spell the end for the club. Add to it the fact that SAF will retire soon and things could get really bad, really quickly.

The general idea is simple, you service the loans as much as you can, while recouping their initial investment and getting some profit along with it. But since their priority is to make money, they are willing to let the club take on more debt just to ensure that they get their money out of the system. Evidence of this is that despite high income levels to the club (from success on the pitch), the debt levels are increasing. The worst of the debt is likely the PIK loans which is not serviced at all but rolled over into equity in the club. As at june 2008 the loan was at £699 (25% increase from the initial debt and an increase of £33 million after the refinancing). The required  interest payments are more staggering £68.8 million. All this after record incomes from winning the UCL and premiership resulting in £66 million operating profit for that year.

This is not totally bad, if the club is successful on the pitch, but we all know that football success is cyclic. ManU will likely be in a lull for the next few years and their income, particularly UCL will drop considerably (doubt they will be playing in the UCL finals in the next few years). The Glazers might slow down but will likely not change their plans, and thus manU will continue to taken on increasing debts. At the point that they cannot get more out of united, they will cut their losses and leave.

As to that banks would keep giving out loans, that is a point in time question. The banks will give them loans if they think that the loans will be serviceable, and that is not difficult given that someone will usually get a huge bonus from such deals. But the problem stems from the unserviced loans which are spiraling and not from a new loan. If the current debt levels become too high, no bank will grant them a loan.

As to an Arab buyout, I doubt it will ever happen to manU or any of the big clubs. Such is reserved for medium clubs like Chelsea, Villa, Everton, Man City and co. Otherwise, where were the money bags when ManU was on the open market or wasn't manU available before Roman went after chelsea? The likes of ManU are too big to be acquired as toys. rather its cheaper to buy and turn around the medium clubs which usually costs less than £200 million

If the Glazer ever do decide to leave, it would be because ManU is no longer a profitable venture, and it will likely spell the end of a great club.

Phony200:

I'm travelling between states. Blame MTN,