Van Piorsing
Lost his light sabre
Resetting the toxic relationship ? Every experienced bloke or lass will tell you it's suicide.
Hope the fanbase won't let go and stay vigilant.
Hope the fanbase won't let go and stay vigilant.
Did he say if they're buying Sancho? Speak on squad investment?
Said they have made significant investment with high net spend and will continue to do so, no actual details or promises so we might be investing in Sancho, Rice and Varane or we might get Hal Robson-Kanu on a free.Did he say if they're buying Sancho? Speak on squad investment?
It's part of the bullet point list. They basically said feck you, we're not paying off a dime.so no comment about the debt? Has anyone seen their answers directly to the fans?
There was a comment was there? They have said they have no intention of paying it off. Presumably very happy to just keep paying the interest and leaving us with THEIR debt.so no comment about the debt? Has anyone seen their answers directly to the fans?
Point 8 by itself is inexcusable. This is a debt they put on the club.
Morality aside, carrying debt is not unusual for a large entity. Interest rates are incredibly low making the servicing costs negligible. While some would argue that over time the costs could have been put toward the purchase a world class player, it's unlikley that the club would have put those funds into savings year over year so it's basically missing out on a squad player each season, something we can leverage our academy for instead. If the argument is that it could have been put to stadium upkeep or training ground improvements, again, the marginal annual amount would not likely have a significant impact.Is there a reason why they’re not paying it off? I mean, beyond the money going in their pockets instead. Some sort of financial shadiness/tax avoidance or something?
Old Trafford AeroflotIt can be done and still use Old Trafford name as well.
What on earth you on about here? I certainly have no ideaIf those 'concessions' is all we get, our fans have bottled this worse than our players in the semis and EL final.
We've shown them we won't kick them out the same way the scousers did with their previous owners. In fact, we'd be willing to accept the crumbs they've thrown our way and will probably won't deliver on half of those promises to 100%, based on recent and past experiences.
Yep. A real opportunity for some fan ownership and representation at board level. And some people still shit on it. Amazing.We've every reason to be suspicious BUT there are some potentially significant positive outcomes all as a result of fan protest and pressure and thats something to be proud of.
And when interest rates sore again after the pandemic is a forgotten stain in our distant memories and the world's economy starts to recover.....what then?Morality aside, carrying debt is not unusual for a large entity. Interest rates are incredibly low making the servicing costs negligible. While some would argue that over time the costs could have been put toward the purchase a world class player, it's unlikley that the club would have put those funds into savings year over year so it's basically missing out on a squad player each season, something we can leverage our academy for instead. If the argument is that it could have been put to stadium upkeep or training ground improvements, again, the marginal annual amount would not likely have a significant impact.
There may be some tax advantages to carrying the debt when it comes to the dividend payments but I'm not 100% sure it applies to United.
This. And it’s something that so many opposition fans bring up to defend the Glazers. They’re basically bragging about completely wasting the clubs money.The two things they brag about are is high net spend and high wages ( could argue its because they have incompetent idiots negotiating) and not increasing ticket prices ( fair) . That line about our commercial successes being crucial rings especially hollow when they are literally sucking money out of the club and loading us with long term debt.
It's not unusual but it's also unnecessary. We were debt free before these parasites leveraged the club in order to buy it. I don't know where you get the negligible amount from Doc but I've read it's been almost 1 billion taken out the club since they've been here. (Someone could correct me with the exact numbers)Morality aside, carrying debt is not unusual for a large entity. Interest rates are incredibly low making the servicing costs negligible. While some would argue that over time the costs could have been put toward the purchase a world class player, it's unlikley that the club would have put those funds into savings year over year so it's basically missing out on a squad player each season, something we can leverage our academy for instead. If the argument is that it could have been put to stadium upkeep or training ground improvements, again, the marginal annual amount would not likely have a significant impact.
There may be some tax advantages to carrying the debt when it comes to the dividend payments but I'm not 100% sure it applies to United.
Well, it's not my job to improve your reading comprehension.What on earth you on about here? I certainly have no idea
Interest rates aren't going to "soar" anytime soon, they certainly won't be going up during a recovery. If they go up they go up incrementally quarter to quarter to lessen the shock to consumers who also carry debt.And when interest rates sore again after the pandemic is a forgotten stain in our distant memories and the world's economy starts to recover.....what then?
It will be back to no value in the market as the Glazer family simply don't care.
Protests aren't going away. They are only going to get worse. We've had enough of these parasites slowly killing our football club.
Negligible annually, which is how entities look at these values.It's not unusual but it's also unnecessary. We were debt free before these parasites leveraged the club in order to buy it. I don't know where you get the negligible amount from Doc but I've read it's been almost 1 billion taken out the club since they've been here. (Someone could correct me with the exact numbers)
interest payments decrease the level of taxable profit, and this tax. It’s not shady, it’s normal business practice and planning.Is there a reason why they’re not paying it off? I mean, beyond the money going in their pockets instead. Some sort of financial shadiness/tax avoidance or something?
We operated on a much smaller budget as well. For me, it's a case of me and probably 99% of fans not really understanding the true impact/cost/benefit of it so I don't like going into it. If you look at it from a purely owner selfish POV, if it was actually harmful to their pockets they wouldn't want to have it. You could look at it as being extra money that they could pocket anyway. Swiss ramble has goody threads but I just don't know how useful it is to look at some of these figures in absolutes.It's not unusual but it's also unnecessary. We were debt free before these parasites leveraged the club in order to buy it. I don't know where you get the negligible amount from Doc but I've read it's been almost 1 billion taken out the club since they've been here. (Someone could correct me with the exact numbers)
I wasn't asking for an explanation. Just pointing out your post was garbage.Well, it's not my job to improve your reading comprehension.
How exactly do you plan on kicking them out? They are owners of a company valued it £4billion. Nobody can kick them out. The realistic best case scenario was always them to just be better, more engaged owners.If those 'concessions' is all we get, our fans have bottled this worse than our players in the semis and EL final.
We've shown them we won't kick them out the same way the scousers did with their previous owners. In fact, we'd be willing to accept the crumbs they've thrown our way and will probably won't deliver on half of those promises to 100%, based on recent and past experiences.
So was Casey Stoney when they told her two years ago they'd develop better training facilities for our women's team.Sounds promising. Proof is in the pudding and all that but that was about as good as we were going to get. I’m willing to give them a chance but we need to see steps forward every year towards these goals.
They've done it before, why change now?Just been reading my email and I'm fairly surprised. Again I'll believe it when I see it but the investment promises in both the squad and understructure are both hard to hide behind so they'll either deliver or they won't (and they already know what will happen if they don't).
The fan shares and representation is also quite interesting and most certainly positive. Again another one to watch develop.
All in all I think it's the best we could have hoped for bar the pig headedness about the debt and dividends. I don't think anyone thought we'd be at this juncture with one of the Glazers themselves a few months ago and here we are.
Yeah that seemed like an easy win. Although I guess (just like the debt) they didn’t want to make specific financial commitments in view of all the uncertainty around the whole football business model right now.Yeah that was fantasy. I did expect a commitment to at least reign in dividend payments though.
Very goodAlso considering renaming the stadium to pay towards refurb.
£80m available for new players and more through sales of our own
Admitted ESL handled badly, didn't rule out something in future but different than ESL
Not looking to sell but will have more input with fans
What will happen that hasn’t before?Just been reading my email and I'm fairly surprised. Again I'll believe it when I see it but the investment promises in both the squad and understructure are both hard to hide behind so they'll either deliver or they won't (and they already know what will happen if they don't).
The fan shares and representation is also quite interesting and most certainly positive. Again another one to watch develop.
All in all I think it's the best we could have hoped for bar the pig headedness about the debt and dividends. I don't think anyone thought we'd be at this juncture with one of the Glazers themselves a few months ago and here we are.
Sure, negligible only on the condition we maintain our value and income. Not to mention it was only done so they could buy the club. I understand what you're saying in that if we disregard how the debt came about a succesful large business could handle a chunk of debt no problem. I don't think further proof is needed though that our owners are in it for the cash and do not have the clubs best interest in mind therefore I am very hesitant to believe they will ever pay off the debt. We could be looking a few decades down the line at an obscene amount of money paid to banks for the privilege of having the glazers own us.Negligible annually, which is how entities look at these values.