Bastian
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2015
- Messages
- 19,529
- Supports
- Mejbri
Of course I can. I was heavily against the LBO when it happened as well. It was way too leveraged and carried to much risk. I thought then.
But fact is that Cubic wanted rid of United and they were going to sell to the highest bidder no matter what. And that would have been a LBO, Glazers or someone else.
Thing is now, 15 years later, we had our most successful period ever during the 10 years after the takeover. I really dont care today if the club paid a lot of interest during that period now in retrospect. I would not have cared if the owners had taken the same amount out in dividends over that period either. Which would have been the alternative. I am sorry, but it is a unicorn that any owner would just keep on buying players, etc when we already were winning. Its a fantasy.
For me what is relevant today is that the club is in an excellent financial situation (does it really matter how we got here) and that the owners are seemingly willing to spend, spend and spend. If the Glazers do sell that could very well not be the case anymore.
I have some real issues with how the club is being run on the footballing side and how the money is being spent, but that is another issue for me. As many other here my issue with this thread is the fake news that is spread, which quite frankly is bad for the club itself. Plus its sad to see the Caf being turned into RAWK more every day.
That was at a time of under-investment in the squad, as numerous posters have been at pains to explain and you also theorise that the same amount would have been taken out as dividends. I think they would have started taken out dividends sooner, for sure, but maybe to the tune of 25m annually and not 60m+.
I find it strange that some United supporters do not care about two issues: 1. Our interest payments (and the leveraged takeover) and 2: (more recently) Whether we massively overspend on some players (because it's "not my money" or something similar) even though that sets a certain bar and obviously limits further spending. (btw, not accusing you of the latter Johan).
With regards to "fake news" I suggest that one of the posters arguing that the Glazers aren't bad owners and that criticism of them is riddled with inaccuracies provide a decent summary of where those inaccuracies lie, especially with regards to all the finances and how that has or hasn't impacted us in the market, instead of just saying everyone is peddling fake news.
Any takers?