Whilst I generally dislike the Glazers, the availability of transfer funds was never an issue. Rather it was the complete lack of savviness to understand the requirements needed to manage a football club of United's stature. They had the wrong people in charge starting with Woodward. The implications have been colossal.
General Glazer Discussion | To receive the majority of £11m stakeholder dividend today
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
It depends. The glazers own the TB Bucks too and they don’t typically talk to the media much. Then you have owners like Jerry Jones and Mark Cuban who lovvve talking to the media and will give an interview/comment whenever.
The posters above are right; they have spent the money. This is not something that can be argued- you can’t debate against numbers. The problem with the glazers is that they are just straight up bad sports team owners. The bucks are a joke and its only after Brady brought his own culture there that they won, but other than that they’re a pretty shit run organisation. Same with United- they never should’ve given Ed the job or at the very least fired him after the first 2 disasterous years.
As everyone here said. They have, they just missed consistently. Like none of our big purchases ended up working out. However, they could spend more to overcompensate that, and that's where the issue lies.
You have to spend money to increase shareholder value.
Did the Glazers buy the players that the coaches of the time wanted?
Or did they buy prima donnas for commercial purposes?
Van Gaal seems to have made his views on this clear
Or did they buy prima donnas for commercial purposes?
Van Gaal seems to have made his views on this clear
Are these #'s accurate from transfermarkt? Says United has outspent City the past 5 years-- and the past 10 years. Once again-- United spends money-------- but they spend it very poorly. That's the problem.
https://www.transfermarkt.us/premier-league/fuenfjahresvergleich/wettbewerb/GB1 apologies if I'm not allowed to post a link of the transfer activity over the past 5 years.
The thing is, they've spent United money. Not any of their own money or any of the money they've syphoned out of United since they "bought" the club.
They have spent money. They just allowed power to the wrong cnut (Woodward) to make the decision on how the money is spent.
They have allowed the club to spend lot of money but the issue is that they have allowed this mess to continue for too long without taking any action of changes sooner on the board department to solve the football issue.
I've always thought this, I wasn't sure if it was SAF and his reluctance to bow to agent fees etc, but the lack of investment under him the last few years of is tenure really boils my piss, we'd have gotten a few more titles and a CL for sure - it was a running joke about our midfield problems.
You see the likes of Klopp and Pep getting £100m plus investment a year guaranteed and you'd wonder what SAF could have done with a billion worth of players instead of getting Owen, Valencia and Obertan.
He is right and I don't think we can criticize him for that. Allowing a bunch of money minded accountants a free ride to play football manager simulation....that's another story entirely.
They refused to spend the Summer after after Jose got 2nd. We desperately needed the follow up investment then.
They kept Woodward in charge for 8 years, failure after failure, wasting the transfer money we did spend in that time.
Yep, the Glazers authorised the spending of decent cash for players, problem was the muppets they left in charge to do that. The terrible duo that was Woodward and Judge were possibly the most incompetent pair when it came to fees and wages, and that occurred over 10years, wasted millions of pounds on wages on players who were extended possibly for book keeping reasons! Certainly not for ability and use on the pitch.
This rebuild or whatever name is given t9 the task, will take years. Most EPL clubs have access to decent transfer funds due to tv rights and with no Champions league, it’s probably difficult to shop in the West End, more like the better high street shops. Let’s enjoy the ride as it may take time.
This rebuild or whatever name is given t9 the task, will take years. Most EPL clubs have access to decent transfer funds due to tv rights and with no Champions league, it’s probably difficult to shop in the West End, more like the better high street shops. Let’s enjoy the ride as it may take time.
We do yes (but sadly not been spent well) but the point is it could have been even more if it wasn’t for the huge debt (be it spent on the stadium or anything else)
$-44.77m 21/22 Grealish transfer fee paid to Aston Villa was for the amount of £100 million
But you didnt select the people running the club carefully enough.
They never spent any money, it was always the clubs. All they did is pay out dividends no matter what
We've spent a billion since Ferguson left ffs. We have one of the highest wage bills in football. The money has been spent, that can't be argued.
The club that they own?
Have they ever put in a penny of their own money?
Jesus, not this bollocks again. They may own it but they never paid for it.
Aren't we always bemoaning city and Chelsea for their owners chucking their own money while we just spend the money the club makes which is how its supposed to work.
I am no fan of the glazers and there are many issues with their ownership but we have spent more than just about anyone else since fergie left so it's a bit silly for people to pretend they haven't allowed massive investment. They own the club, it is sadly their money whatever people like to pretend.
The issues are obviously how much debt we have serviced and how the money has been spent.
And he quite clearly meant we as in Manchester United, which he owns.
Glazers have also taken out more than 1 billion from the club. The money could be invested in the club. Glazers also use "zero" of their own money to buy the club.
We are not asking for Abramovich, Qatar or Abu Dhabi type of owner but the 1 to 2 billions taken out to fill the Glazer's pockets could easily double our spending towards building the club without any money from the owner. The money is totally generated by the club.
How competent the board spend the money is another story altogether.
Well that's how it works unless you're owned by a state or something.
Nothing wrong with the club spending its income on players
Yes they have. But a football club is more than it's players. It's about having the right management and directors, scouting, trainers, medical, analytics and of course top notch facilities and stadium.
We've fallen behind on many of those things, and it's not only the mineral wealth clubs I'm talking about. And that starts at the top.
We've fallen behind on many of those things, and it's not only the mineral wealth clubs I'm talking about. And that starts at the top.
Yeah I always say my gripe with them is how the continued to let the money be misused. Our recruitment should have been heavily scrutinised after lvgs tenure.
Valencia was Ronaldo's replacement, not Owen and/or Obertan.
No one can convince this guy is not a full-time Oswald Cobblepot cosplayer. Fecking hell...
Every time I see him I always think he looks like the potential fourth Langmore brother in Ozark, looks far more like a trailer park dwelling hillbilly than a billionaire.
Maybe there should be a balance?
Edit: I do agree that the amount we've spent is absolutely fine by the way. Investing their own money could come in different ways.
I'm no expert, but did they even put up any money to buy us?
What you're saying here makes things more ridiculous, given how they came into owning the club in the first place. The club pays for it's own transfer fees. The club is also owned by the Glazers, by way of a leveraged buyout, which I understand is a debt taken on by the club. (someone correct me if I'm wrong here). The Glazers also collect yearly dividends from the club straight into the pockets. At which point do the Glazers actually put up their own money?
They're parasites, in every sense of the word.
People may hate the Glazers, but the man is right.
We have spent so much money over the years.
We have spent so much money over the years.
We should be so lucky. How nice of them to let the club spend its money, fecking wankers.
It’s like Graham Souness all over again. It’s not about transfer spend, it’s how you spend and everything else that goes into running a football club.
It’s like Graham Souness all over again. It’s not about transfer spend, it’s how you spend and everything else that goes into running a football club.
We don't need them to spend money from their own pocket, because then they'd find some ways to recoup those money later anyway. It's perfectly fine if they only spend United money. What we need and cry for is them spending it wisely and be more responsible.
The way they have run United these past years is like those rich parents who just pump money to their kid and the serving maids, thinking that alone makes them great parents. The truth is the opposite. Their "child" (Manchester United FC) needs better care and correct guidance from them, not just senseless money being pumped in with no coherent direction. And Woodward is like that private tutor of the kid who only got the job because he is close friend with the parents. He helped the kid got in fancy clothes, events and various "trendy" institutes just for the image, without actually looking in to see what's best the kid's development.
I know the comparison may put some people off. But that's how I see United under the Glazers and Woodward's leadership. We don't lack money. We lack direction, and accountability in leadership. I still dislike the Glazers due to all above reasons, but I think they deserve time to show how the new "spine" of leadership (Arnold-Murtough-Erik-Rangnick) would work.
I'm liking what I see so far, ever since Arnold got appointed. The way we approached Erik/Pochettino (With due process, interviews...etc instead of jumping on the bandwagon) and the way we handle players who are out of contract (Taking back Pogba's offer) make sense. In a way, we can say that the board has earned themselves this summer.
He's not wrong, just selectively right.
Hasn't understood how to run the footballing side of a football club still, but pretends that's not important. We're where we are because we don't have the right players, and that's that. It's the kind of band-aid behaviour that has wrecked this club.
Hasn't understood how to run the footballing side of a football club still, but pretends that's not important. We're where we are because we don't have the right players, and that's that. It's the kind of band-aid behaviour that has wrecked this club.
If you buy a Big Mac for 30 pounds when you’re not hungry, it’s nothing to shout about. They’ve spent money on players, but they’ve spent it badly. Their decision making is atrocious. They need to understand that the fans’ problem is not related to the amount of money they spend.
I don't know how can anyone argue that we don't spend on players. We clearly do. The problem is that their guy Ed did a monumentally shite job during his time here, wasting all that money. Also spending money on players shouldn't cover the fact that we spend feck all on anything else like training ground, stadium etc.
It's not how much he you spend, but on what you spend it on.
So far, United threw and wasted away so much money on utter rubbish.
So far, United threw and wasted away so much money on utter rubbish.
For Christ's sake get a haircut, Avi.
I would guess they sold some players for the amount of £100m - $44.77m