₦airaland Forum

nitrogen:
Lol. Tell me banks or lenders that provide 90 percent of debt in an acquisition transaction? If you know what you are saying and you want to be transparent, you would have known or told us that they put in convertibles/PIK loans and equity. Equity was 10 percent, sub debt or PIK loans make up the 90 percent debt. Most times, you are not required to service the PIK loans. They are closer to equity because debt servicing is not mandatory!

Okay, back to how much they used to service loans. Yes, they spent 948 million on debt servicing for almost 20 years and spent over 1.5 billion on transfers on a 4 billion enterprise. That’s not bad at all. It shows they are good on the business/financial side of things. Moreso, they only paid dividends of 125 million in the same period. Can you tell me how much that is annually (that goes to them)? Less than 10m per annum. So tell me how they are taking money out!

What kinda further development do you want? Spend 3 billion on transfers in 20 years? You want us to spend more than what we’ve spent on transfers when we are the highest spender in Europe? That’s prodigality!

Honestly, you guys are just naive!

You are still typing on discussions with zero to little knowledge about. They continue to siphon tens of millions of pounds out of the club in dividend payments each year. They haven’t reduced the overall debt by any meaningful amount in years. We are still ~£500m in debt, the second-largest debt in English football after Spurs, who just a state-of-the-art football stadium whilst Old Trafford hasn’t had as much as a lick of paint in recent years. This is a club debtless before your darling owners Came in.

ChristoBam:
I'll keep this short.

Before the Glazier we always spent the most. We pretty much almost broke every tranfer record. Why? Because we had great revenues coming in.

And guess what we were debt free . Since they came in, we've been balls deep in loans. We spend 900m on transfers? Guess how much we spend on debt repayment? €700m+.

They've personally drained the football club off more than £1 billion in debts, interests and fees.

And they still have the audacity to take out millions In dividends each year.


And you're Fvcking telling me it's their right as owners and I should support another club if I don't like it. I'll just chill on name calling.

Who is the biggest spender in the EPL post Fergie era?

Lisandro on Erik ten Hag: "I was with him three years at Ajax and I know his style of playing. With him, I improved a lot, to be honest. He’s here in Manchester now, so again the opportunity was there and for sure he’s very important in my [career]."

Lisandro: "[Ten Hag is] very intense, for sure. Good football. Winning mentality, you know? That’s the most important [thing]. Every player needs to have things clear. I think he’s very clear also."

Lisandro: "How did he [Ten Hag] help me to improve? In how we can understand fully the situations, the decisions inside the pitch. He’s there in every detail."

Lisandro: "I really like to help my team-mates, but every player – I want the best for everybody. If everybody is fit & everybody is good, then we can win, you know? — I’m really aggressive, I love to win - It’s all about winning. I’m a good friend, also!"

Bombblacks:
You are still typing on discussions with zero to little knowledge about. They continue to siphon tens of millions of pounds out of the club in dividend payments each year. They haven’t reduced the overall debt by any meaningful amount in years. We are still ~£500m in debt, the second-largest debt in English football after Spurs, who just a state-of-the-art football stadium whilst Old Trafford hasn’t had as much as a lick of paint in recent years. This is a club debtless before your darling owners Came in.

You obviously don’t understand what I typed. Reason you keep saying shyte!

How much has been siphoned in dividend payments since 2005? 125m. Please tell me how much that is on an annual basis and tell me how many players 125m will buy!

Illimitable:
This dodgy net spend stats you have shown is actually because United don’t really make any money from player sales. You people should stop holding a brief for the Glazers with incomplete picture of squad investment.

Out of all the clubs that have spent over £900m in Europe, United have the lowest amount of the players sold in the last 10 years. This is why their net spend is skewed.

Okay, I agree that we don’t make money from player sales. But then, are we not among top 4 spenders? Also, what’s the gap between the top spender and Utd?

The owners are spending. Nobody should come tell me that they are not spending or interest payments is affecting player acquisition.

eph12:
Hmm so its not for the club but to appease Ronaldo

mention 7 quality players this window that we could have gotten.. the new coach obviously believes in a lot of these old players, he's not been forced to use them..

nitrogen:
Okay, I agree that we don’t make money from player sales. But then, are we not among top 4 spenders? Also, what’s the gap between the top spender and Utd?

The owners are spending. Nobody should come tell me that they are not spending or interest payments is affecting player acquisition.

United make the most money in England. There’s no reason Chelsea, Man City(who can’t fill their seats) or even Juventus be in the same level as United.

£600m revenue per annum is £6 billion in 10 years. How are we spending only £1.3 billion of that on players?

Do a ratio of how much Chelsea, Man City, Juventus have spent on players in the last 10 years to their total revenue and you would get a true picture of how things have been under the Glazers.

550m original loan, over 700m paid on interest alone. Which kind wicked loan those owners take.

nitrogen:
Okay, I agree that we don’t make money from player sales. But then, are we not among top 4 spenders? Also, what’s the gap between the top spender and Utd?

The owners are spending. Nobody should come tell me that they are not spending or interest payments is affecting player acquisition.

You're almost talking like you're not a United fan.

Do you know how many signings Pep got in his first summer? Imagine, the following season, Pep spending was limited to 80m. And he had to bring in just cheap players. How do you think that'd have turned out?


They brought in LVG spent more than 150m first summer. How much did they spend the next?

They brought in Mourinho, spent crazy the first summer, how much did they spend the next?

They brought in Ole and did the same, spent crazy, how much did they spend the following summer?

I wonder how much we'd have spent last summer if not for the outrage from the super league.




You bring out all of the money spent and tell us we've spent bla bla bla. Meanwhile the Glaziers sign on a manager, spend like crazy then tell him to make use of what he has after.

Trevor012:
550m original loan, over 700m paid on interest alone. Which kind wicked loan those owners take.

Some of you don’t understand how financing works. If you take a long term loan, you will pay more interests. Businesses that obtain short term loan due to some constraints refinance every now and then to extend the life of the loans and maintain a proper capital structure that will drive profitability.

Without debt, most businesses won’t be very profitable. Leverage enhances profitability!

Meanwhile, do you have a mortgage? Go calculate total interest you will pay over the life of the mortgage and tell me if it’s not well above the original mortgage amount.

Illimitable:
United make the most money in England. There’s no reason Chelsea, Man City(who can’t fill their seats) or even Juventus be in the same level as United.

£600m revenue per annum is £6 billion in 10 years. How are we spending only £1.3 billion of that on players?

Do a ratio of how much Chelsea, Man City, Juventus have spent on players in the last 10 years to their total revenue and you would get a true picture of how things have been under the Glazers.

So, you think we should spend revenues on player acquisition? Lol, who/what will take care of operating costs? You think players don’t receive salaries? There are other staff in the business, and there is lots of marketing costs that drive some of the revenues.

I am surprised that you even want Utd to spend beyond 1.5 billion on player acquisitions in just 10 years. Are you a prodigal son?

If we spent 70m on Antony and it turns out it was a wrong signing. Guess what?

It's fvck off and make use of what you have from the Glaziers. No way, they'd spend on another RW.

This is a club that makes crazy money every year. From sweats of legends of this club(some who lost their lives in the process of trying to play for the club). These people put the Club on the world map and made it one of the most marketable in the world.

nitrogen:
Some of you don’t understand how financing works. If you take a long term loan, you will pay more interests. Businesses that obtain short term loan due to some constraints refinance every now and then to extend the life of the loans and maintain a proper capital structure that will drive profitability.

Without debt, most businesses won’t be very profitable. Leverage enhances profitability!

Meanwhile, do you have a mortgage? Go calculate total interest you will pay over the life of the mortgage and tell me if it’s not well above the original mortgage amount.

But United was debtless before the owners Came in. Can you list any advantages of having the glazers as owners and their debt on the club?

ChristoBam:
You're almost talking like you're not a United fan.

Do you know how many signings Pep got in his first summer? Imagine, the following season, Pep spending was limited to 80m. And he had to bring in just cheap players. How do you think that'd have turned out?


They brought in LVG spent more than 150m first summer. How much did they spend the next?

They brought in Mourinho, spent crazy the first summer, how much did they spend the next?

They brought in Ole and did the same, spent crazy, how much did they spend the following summer?

I wonder how much we'd have spent last summer if not for the outrage from the super league.




You bring out all of the money spent and tell us we've spent bla bla bla. Meanwhile the Glaziers sign on a manager, spend like crazy then tell him to make use of what he has after.

Nawa o, but you said we don’t spend enough, not it’s they’ve wasted money. Which one are you sticking with? Stay for one place now, so thunder can fire you well.

ChristoBam:
If we spent 70m on Antony and it turns out it was a wrong signing. Guess what?

It's fvck off and make use of what you have from the Glaziers. No way, they'd spend on another RW.

This is a club that makes crazy money every year. From sweats of legends of this club(some who lost their lives in the process of trying to play for the club). These people put the Club on the world map and made it one of the most marketable in the world.

Manager is asking for a player, they want to buy, you are complaining, if they don’t buy for the manager, you will still complain. What is your problem gan?

Illimitable:
United make the most money in England. There’s no reason Chelsea, Man City(who can’t fill their seats) or even Juventus be in the same level as United.

£600m revenue per annum is £6 billion in 10 years. How are we spending only £1.3 billion of that on players?

Do a ratio of how much Chelsea, Man City, Juventus have spent on players in the last 10 years to their total revenue and you would get a true picture of how things have been under the Glazers.

you're not adding the operating cost, we have one of the biggest wage bill in Europe.. are you saying we should spend even more, even if we are the highest spenders... juve you mentioned don't usually even spend much on transfer they are free agent destination for players, they pay high salaries. Wring coaches, and buying players that suit different system depending on the coach, is the reason we're in this mess

nitrogen:
So, you think we should spend revenues on player acquisition? Lol, who/what will take care of operating costs? You think players don’t receive salaries? There are other staff in the business, and there is lots of marketing costs that drive some of the revenues.

I am surprised that you even want Utd to spend beyond 1.5 billion on player acquisitions in just 10 years. Are you a prodigal son?

The FFP have a 50% benchmark on wages/turnover.

If United’s turnover in the last 10 years is £6 billion. FFP allows them to spend at least £3 billion of that amount on players. United haven’t even spent half of that on players and you wonder why the squad is shit.

The Glazers must love you. You put up a better defence for them than any of their PR people trying to pacify angry United fans. By November, United would hover around 10th position and you people would start demanding another protest or a push to get ETH out of the club.

nitrogen:
Nawa o, but you said we don’t spend enough, not it’s they’ve wasted money. Which one are you sticking with? Stay for one place now, so thunder can fire you well.

Did you even read what I said. Where did I say we've wasted money there. Back a manager every summer with transfers. That's what is expecting from a club like United.

I remember how hyped I was about LVG's second window. It was supposed to be a busy summer. Would have been an utter failure if not for the late purchase of Martial.

Don't let me even talk of Mourinho.



This is why we're where we are.

nitrogen:
Manager is asking for a player, they want to buy, you are complaining, if they don’t buy for the manager, you will still complain. What is your problem gan?

And why do you think Ten Hag is not ready to risk on signings like SVS or Neves or Rice and co.

Buy them and you've gotten your midfielder. Don't even disturb them again.

ChristoBam:
If we spent 70m on Antony and it turns out it was a wrong signing. Guess what?

It's fvck off and make use of what you have from the Glaziers. No way, they'd spend on another RW.

This is a club that makes crazy money every year. From sweats of legends of this club(some who lost their lives in the process of trying to play for the club). These people put the Club on the world map and made it one of the most marketable in the world.

Exactly. We are Manchester feckin United, what’s the point in being a sporting powerhouse of a brand if we don’t have any financial power to outmuscle our rivals and retain our spot at the top table. Yeah we’ve wasted money, sure, but we should be able to spend double and correct it ffs! Its our money generated by the club and fans so should be spent on the club and infrastructures.

Trevor012:
But United was debtless before the owners Came in. Can you list any advantages of having the glazers as owners and their debt on the club?

Simple, we have more money to spend on players. These guys commercialized man utd. You thing it’s easy to increase revenue to 600m with less success on the pitch?

Man utd has maintained relevance, we expanded our reach to Asia and Latin America under them.

Go check some teams that were in the same level with Utd 20 years ago, they disappeared. Some of them are only beginning to come back to the scene!

One question I have for you is, why did the fans and English big boys allow the sale to an American family? Why did you sell to a businessman, and now you want to tell them how to run the club?

ChristoBam:
Did you even read what I said. Where did I say we've wasted money there. Back a manager every summer with transfers. That's what is expecting from a club like United.

I remember how hyped I was about LVG's second window. It was supposed to be a busy summer. Would have been an utter failure if not for the late purchase of Martial.

Don't let me even talk of Mourinho.



This is why we're where we are.

what we need is a philosophy and director of football, that will buy players that fit that system, and only higher coaches that fit that system, ETH didn't sign any player at ajax, he was given the player, but they were bought, because they could play a particular style of football he wanted... this buying of players, the coaches want is part of the reason we're in this mess, if things don't go well and he's sacked, the next manager comes, and tells you he wants his own.. that's another loss.. we have good players, that fit different styles.. the club should employ a DOF .. identify targets, and work with the manager, to see if he likes or wants them

Sign your manager. Spend 150m first season, 200m next season, probably 200 next season until you're finally completing for things.


These ones will spend 200m first, then 30 the following season. Then you get sacked.
Then new manager gets 200m with joy, then 50m the next summer, then another sack.

But after years, we're supposed to praise them cuz on the long run they've spent more than the ones splashing on the manager till they get sucess?

Yes we've spent a billion on transfers, but we should be spending a billion more. We are not a City or Chelsea who should just be grateful for whatever the owners put in to save them from being irrelevant. This is the club's own money and should be invested in the club, in the first team, the academy, the stadium, the training ground and so on.

Bombblacks:
Exactly. We are Manchester feckin United, what’s the point in being a sporting powerhouse of a brand if we don’t have any financial power to outmuscle our rivals and retain our spot at the top table. Yeah we’ve wasted money, sure, but we should be able to spend double and correct it ffs! Its our money generated by the club and fans so should be spent on the club and infrastructures.

when club like city does this, you say they're buying the league..

Illimitable:
The FFP have a 50% benchmark on wages/turnover.

If United’s turnover in the last 10 years is £6 billion. FFP allows them to spend at least £3 billion of that amount on players. United haven’t even spent half of that on players and you wonder why the squad is shit.

The Glazers must love you. You put up a better defence for them than any of their PR people trying to pacify angry United fans. By November, United would hover around 10th position and you people would start demanding another protest or a push to get ETH out of the club.

I still don’t understand your rationale for spending 3 billion on player acquisition in 10 years. It’s funny and does not make sense to me. Will it bring more revenue to the club or what?

ovoP:
what we need is a philosophy and director of football, that will buy players that fit that system, and only higher coaches that fit that system, ETH didn't sign any player at ajax, he was given the player, but they were bought, because they could play a particular style of football he wanted... this buying of players, the coaches want is part of the reason we're in this mess, if things don't go well and he's sacked, the next manager comes, and tells you he wants his own.. that's another loss.. we have good players, that fit different styles.. the club should employ a DOF .. identify targets, and work with the manager, to see if he likes or wants them

This is what I always say but bros forget it. The DOF will only manage what he's given.

ChristoBam:
Did you even read what I said. Where did I say we've wasted money there. Back a manager every summer with transfers. That's what is expecting from a club like United.

I remember how hyped I was about LVG's second window. It was supposed to be a busy summer. Would have been an utter failure if not for the late purchase of Martial.

Don't let me even talk of Mourinho.



This is why we're where we are.

Back the manager. Oya tell me how much each manager spent during their times at Utd. I want to check something!