Have state funded oil clubs ruined football?

[Noodle]

They are selling and loaning 17 players to buy 1 player for 160m. Your club bought 6 players for more than 380m euros in 1 year.

We actually spent 259m Euros and not 380m last season, big difference, and in any case our net spend over the past three years stands at around £50m!

Over the last 10 years our net spend is half of Utd's. I admit we spent a fortune nearly 20 years ago and have our part to play in the hyper inflation we are seeing but we now operate relatively modestly compared to a lot of clubs

 

[Giggsyking]

We actually spent 259m Euros and not 380m last season, big difference, and in any case our net spend over the past three years stands at around £50m!

Over the last 10 years our net spend is half of Utd's. I admit we spent a fortune nearly 20 years ago and have our part to play in the hyper inflation we are seeing but we now operate relatively modestly compared to a lot of clubs

Your club is in debt to the owner for 1 billion. 365m is what transfer market say.

 

[Noodle]

Your club is in debt to the owner for 1 billion. 365m is what transfer market say.

No it doesn't it shows £222m which is the correct figure, as is the net spend of £50m.

The club owes the owner £1bn, correct, however the club is worth £2-3bn according to Deloitte so if he sold he'd double his investment and the club would be debt free. I don't get your point

 

[Iker Quesadillas]

Oil Club finance didn't make Arsenal the modern day Newcastle. The mismanagement did. Arsenal invested alot in the team for the past 10 years. Lack of investment is not the answer why we finished 8th for the past 2 season.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/251152/revenue-of-fc-arsenal-london-by-stream/
https://www.statista.com/statistics/267743/revenue-segmentation-of-manchester-united/

Yeah Arsenal used to lose high-quality players to the top PL teams or abroad.

That basically stopped happening after 12/13, except 17/18.

Stopped signing good players, basically.

 

[tenpoless]

They asolutely ruined it. Imagine the amount of titles that the other clubs would win if there werent Oil version of PSG and City. Because that means the top players would play for other clubs as well.

 

[Jeffthered]

Good topic and good thread... I do feel this issue, (the structure of the global game..) will be an issue which warrants increasing debate. To answer the question, I do not think the Petrol / Natural resource supported clubs have ruined the game, because I think this issue of the ridiculous disparity of money between clubs, has been ruining the game for over two decades. There are a number of issues to consider:

1. The fact that the money and associated branding has led to the formal (and this is key..) establishment of this super elite of clubs.
2. That you have clubs who have over-stretched themselves (Leeds for example..) as well as Sheff Wed, Derby to name a few, who have created real problems trying to compete with the 'big boys'. A lot of this is poor club management, granted, but, that search for being on par with clubs that have financial clout which is way beyond certain clubs, has been in the past, problematic... but i do acknowledge that many clubs have learned lessons, and interestingly, it is relatively smaller city clubs..Leicester, Swansea, Bournemouth, Burnley.. that have mixed excellent management, with shrewd business dealings, and reaped rewards.
3. The fact that players now 'ask for' salaries that are, in my opinion, obscene. No footballer needs £400k a week, and this has created a distance between players and fans. Games at Arsenal and Chelsea for example can cost £160... new kits for kids, game day costs etc. It's way out of control and all of this is due to silly money being thrown around. Tottenham asked for Government (our taxes!!!) to bail them out, yet can pay Kane £300k and look to 'improve' his contract. This is simply, wrong.
4. And there seems to be little scrutiny. Who articulates these issues on behalf of fans?

 

[JustAGuest]

They asolutely ruined it. Imagine the amount of titles that the other clubs would win if there werent Oil version of PSG and City. Because that means the top players would play for other clubs as well.

I know Lille happened to succeed against all odds last season, but French football seems to have become a one club competition. I will leave it up to those who follow it more closely to determine whether it has ruined it for them or not. The gap between PSG and the rest is laughable - and it's all because of their Qatari ownership.

 

[Bestietom]

If we had an owner like that here at Utd, this thread wouldn't be here.

 

[LARulz]

Rumours are Qatar want Arsenal now too

I started losing interest in football, or at least the passion I had, years ago as I got a bit older and had actual stuff in my life to deal with as priority. But it's getting to the point I almost have 0 interest. When I go to a game it's for the day out and fun, not cos I am so desperate for a result - that's more the bonus. It's sad but that's how I feel now. I don't watch any non United game as I can't be bothered and even United games, I won't take time out of my day for - if I can I will watch, if I can't then it's OK

More situations where the game is removed from fans and the club's, which many people have a strong emotional affinity to, and that's what will happen. The players themselves are now markets and fans follow them than the club - it happened in American Football, Basketball, Baseball, Cricket and now football. At least for the big teams, smaller/more local teams are less of a hostage to it but equally they are being buried by the money of those big boys

It genuinely feels different now. When clubs and players give no loyalty, it makes it really hard for the average fan to give back so much energy. At least to me, they shouldn't

 

[kaiser1]

I know Lille happened to succeed against all odds last season, but French football seems to have become a one club competition. I will leave it up to those who follow it more closely to determine whether it has ruined it for them or not. The gap between PSG and the rest is laughable - and it's all because of their Qatari ownership.

Didn't Lyon win like 7 in a row before oil money?

 

[Crimson King]

Didn't Lyon win like 7 in a row before oil money?

They did I think, but wasn't that due to buying some cheap players and developing them really well, selling some of them for big bucks to keep the whole thing moving, and combining that with some incredible academy products? Maybe there was a wealthy benefactor too, I can't remember.

I just remember them having some great UCL runs and selling players like Essien, Diarra and Benzema for what were, at the time, large fees.

 

[MUFC OK]

This trend is only going one way.

 

[iammemphis]

Abramovich was bad enough, but in answer to the question then absolutely. Let alone all the sports washing that goes along with it.

 

[Oly Francis]

They did I think, but wasn't that due to buying some cheap players and developing them really well, selling some of them for big bucks to keep the whole thing moving, and combining that with some incredible academy products? Maybe there was a wealthy benefactor too, I can't remember.

I just remember them having some great UCL runs and selling players like Essien, Diarra and Benzema for what were, at the time, large fees.

A bit of both, Aulas did inject money to take the club to the 1st places of Ligue 1, but they also managed their player very well on top of using a Bayern like tactic. The academy wasn't really the reason they succeeded back then.

 

[OleBoiii]

So PSG has Mbappe, Messi, Neymar and Di Maria in attack despite playing in a farmers' league. And City just won the league for the 3rd time in 4 years, has the best team in the league, and still spends 100 million on Grealish and then throws in C.Ronaldo after failing to get Kane, because why the feck not.

Fun times this.

 

[MattofManchester]

Pretty sure FFP is a figment of our imagination.

If we had an owner like that here at Utd, this thread wouldn't be here.

I'm quite sure many of our supporters did not want the Saudis anywhere near the club, which would mean we join their ranks, so not sure about that.

They way we built success feels special. We came on leaps year upon year both off the field and on it, making us into the financial powerhouse we are now. It was not instantaneous.

Having an owner who shits out money to bring success wouldn't remotely feel the same.

 

[SirReginald]

Pretty sure FFP is a figment of our imagination.


I'm quite sure many of our supporters did not want the Saudis anywhere near the club, which would mean we join their ranks, so not sure about that.

They way we built success feels special. We came on leaps year upon year both off the field and on it, making us into the financial powerhouse we are now. It was not instantaneous.

Having an owner who shits out money to bring success wouldn't remotely feel the same.

Ok it was built up, particularly after the plane crash. That I can respect. On the flip side, at your heights you had more money than most clubs.

You bought a lot of players under fergie. Many other clubs could not afford. Your core was academy supplemented by World class players. Not too dissimilar to Barcelona at their peak. However the difference is, I don’t think your core alone would have had the amount of success you achieved. So you too have bought success.

Money is money. If your going to shit on other clubs at least accept you too have a history influenced by it.

 

[Crustanoid]

Chesea/City/PSG mopping up all the transfers. Football is truly dead. Their fans are more of a problem than their murdering sportswashing owners to be honest and anyone else enabling this shitshow. If you're happy for these three plastic turdfests to parasite themselves onto the beautiful game for good and basically take it over then you are part of the problem.

 

[stevoc]

Ok it was built up, particularly after the plane crash. That I can respect. On the flip side, at your heights you had more money than most clubs.

You bought a lot of players under fergie. Many other clubs could not afford. Your core was academy supplemented by World class players. Not too dissimilar to Barcelona at their peak. However the difference is, I don’t think your core alone would have had the amount of success you achieved. So you too have bought success.

Money is money. If your going to shit on other clubs at least accept you too have a history influenced by it.

Obviously we would have bought a lot of players under a manager who was in charge for almost 30 years.

And yes all top clubs buy players most other teams cannot afford.

But United didn't buy success under Ferguson though, in fact United were rarely ever the biggest spenders in the first 20 years of the PL. Yet the myth that they were persists.

 

[Dancfc]

Chesea/City/PSG mopping up all the transfers. Football is truly dead. Their fans are more of a problem than their murdering sportswashing owners to be honest and anyone else enabling this shitshow. If you're happy for these three plastic turdfests to parasite themselves onto the beautiful game for good and basically take it over then you are part of the problem.

Someone's really upset their plastic gloryhunting backfired!

 

[Crustanoid]

Someone's really upset their plastic gloryhunting backfired!

I don't think we're dealing with individuals here, plastic. It's pretty much an entire sport. If you had supported an actual club you would recognise the emotion is not being 'really upset' - actually its a realisation that a couple of corrupt cnuts came into the sport to employ sportswashing for their own devices and a load of imbecilic plastic morons like yourself giddily enabled it. Its more contempt than upset, plastic. But you wouldn't be able to comprehend that in your little plastic glory hunting sub 90 IQ mind.

 

[Hammondo]

No, money is the problem and we have been part of it. It's easy to cry about it now we are not at the top, but money has been a problem for a long time.

This is just the newest extreme version of it.

 

[Dancfc]

I don't think we're dealing with individuals here, plastic. It's pretty much an entire sport. If you had supported an actual club you would recognise the emotion is not being 'really upset' - actually its a realisation that a couple of corrupt cnuts came into the sport to employ sportswashing for their own devices and a load of imbecilic plastic morons like yourself giddily enabled it. Its more contempt than upset, plastic. But you wouldn't be able to comprehend that in your little plastic glory hunting sub 90 IQ mind.

Course it isn't, the obvious reality is you supported United because they were hovering up the trophies and all this moral ranting is a smokescreen to cover up the fact you're furious teams have had the audacity to challenge your club.

If this is all about morality as you're claiming then answer me this, why aren't you lashing out at all the other clubs who have benefited from owner backing to get into a higher position than they were before? (Leicester for example) pretty obvious answer that one isn't it?!

 

[Hammondo]

I don't think we're dealing with individuals here, plastic. It's pretty much an entire sport. If you had supported an actual club you would recognise the emotion is not being 'really upset' - actually its a realisation that a couple of corrupt cnuts came into the sport to employ sportswashing for their own devices and a load of imbecilic plastic morons like yourself giddily enabled it. Its more contempt than upset, plastic. But you wouldn't be able to comprehend that in your little plastic glory hunting sub 90 IQ mind.

Lots of clubs have thought we have been part of the problem in the past, that our money (along with other teams, ruined football).


Also it sounds like you are arguing against the fact we have had a lot of plastic fans.

 

[Red Daz]

Part of me says yes but then before the oil money we were top dogs, took our pick from talents and out bid anyone else for big players, suddenly we can’t do this anymore, as much as I hate not being on top or near as damn it every year I take comfort from the fact we done all of that with a great manager and we’re benefiting from our own progress and success, now money is our rivals strength that has not only levelled the playing field but has tipped it in their favour .

I’m torn, I hate the fact the likes of City and PSG can just throw money at the situation but at the same time they didn’t earn it, they just paid more than the next guy.
It’s bad and it’s going to get worse, I can see City winning the PL every year for the foreseeable unfortunately, we can’t compete with with a state , sad but true, I’m slowly loosing interest

 

[ThierryHenry14]

Course it isn't, the obvious reality is you supported United because they were hovering up the trophies and all this moral ranting is a smokescreen to cover up the fact you're furious teams have had the audacity to challenge your club.

If this is all about morality as you're claiming then answer me this, why aren't you lashing out at all the other clubs who have benefited from owner backing to get into a higher position than they were before? (Leicester for example) pretty obvious answer that one isn't it?!

It is because Aston Villa, Everton and Leicester are not shopping in the pool of elite players in the transfer market as Man Utd. They are not positioned as the end of the food chain in EPL like Chelsea, Man City and Man Utd. They do not compete with Man utd for the signature of elite players like Haaland or Sancho. If they do, then they will be labelled as plastic clubs right away.

 

[Dancfc]

It is because Aston Villa, Everton and Leicester are not shopping in the pool of elite players in the transfer market as Man Utd. They are not positioned as the end of the food chain in EPL like Chelsea, Man City and Man Utd. They do not compete with Man utd for the signature of elite players like Haaland or Sancho. If they do, then they will be labelled as plastic clubs right away.

Exactly which is why his fake moral outrages are hilarious.

I bet he thought a Whelan funded Wigan's top flight story was nice and romantic aswell, ofcourse that opinion was conditional to them not taking the next step and challenging his team but still.

 

[redrobed]

Someone on here mentioned a ‘Utd tax’ the other day. What if we actually start penalising clubs based on the source of their income?

What if we had a list of clubs that were subject to tax and a list of clubs that aren’t? Let’s say City, Chelsea, PSG, Liverpool pay an extra 20% on top of their transfer fees to their leagues’ governing body that then gets distributed to clubs in that league that have gone about things the right way.

That way income is distributed more fairly and football isn’t ruined when an average player like Grealish is signed for 120m. We could then afford to sign a CM and actually compete with these clubs.

 

[Zaphod2319]

I am pretty sure all this Man Utd fan outrage toward clubs who spend money would not be at this level if they still had ownership that put the money into the club instead of it going to bank accounts in Florida.

 

[Dancfc]

I am pretty sure all this Man Utd fan outrage toward clubs who spend money would not be at this level if they still had ownership that put the money into the club instead of it going to bank accounts in Florida.

And the ironic thing is the biggest winners out of supporters taking the moral high ground over this subject are owners like Kroenke and The Glazers.

 

[P-Ro]

I don't think we're dealing with individuals here, plastic. It's pretty much an entire sport. If you had supported an actual club you would recognise the emotion is not being 'really upset' - actually its a realisation that a couple of corrupt cnuts came into the sport to employ sportswashing for their own devices and a load of imbecilic plastic morons like yourself giddily enabled it. Its more contempt than upset, plastic. But you wouldn't be able to comprehend that in your little plastic glory hunting sub 90 IQ mind.

Sounds like you're a bit Crustannoyed.

 

[Ludens the Red]

Ah I see eight pages in and there’s still a few who can’t seem to work out why clubs backed by an entire countries oil wealth is seen differently to self made millionaires acquiring football clubs and supporting them with their own personal wealth.
There is obviously a clear fecking difference between the spending of Wigan, Villa, Leicester etc to city, Chelsea and PSG. One set of these clubs has the financial backing of a few businessmen, the other set are backed by an entire countries resources.

This seems really obvious. Chelsea and city fans, why do you continue with this? And get all defensive? Why do you insist on these whataboutisms? Just accept it and embrace it. Who cares? Enjoy your trophies and stop whining. Nobody is ever going to like, accept or respect you. Let alone Fecking Man United fans who have more reasons than any other club to dislike oil clubs.

 

[Needham]

This shouldn't be happening because Peak Oil was supposed to have come and gone. At least when the oil's gone and there's no industry or economy or food football will be played on a more level playing field.

 

[Zaphod2319]

Ah I see eight pages in and there’s still a few who can’t seem to work out why clubs backed by an entire countries oil wealth is seen differently to self made millionaires acquiring football clubs and supporting them with their own personal wealth.
There is obviously a clear fecking difference between the spending of Wigan, Villa, Leicester etc to city, Chelsea and PSG. One set of these clubs has the financial backing of a few businessmen, the other set are backed by an entire countries resources.

This seems really obvious. Chelsea and city fans, why do you continue with this? And get all defensive? Why do you insist on these whataboutisms? Just accept it and embrace it. Who cares? Enjoy your trophies and stop whining. Nobody is ever going to like or respect you. Let alone Fecking Man United fans who have more reasons than any other club to dislike oil clubs.

What country owns Chelsea?

 

[Needham]

What country owns Chelsea?

Perhaps not state owned now but Chelsea were the original oilies. Abramovich owned Sibfnet (which he sold for 7 billion years ago). And Putin owns/owned Abramovich.

Edit: Sibneft, or something...

 

[Zaphod2319]

Perhaps not state owned now but Chelsea were the original oilies. Abramovich owned Sibfnet (which he sold for 7 billion years ago). And Putin owns/owned Abramovich.

Edit: Sibneft, or something...

Any billionaire from Russia is going to have ties to Putin…or you will never be a billionaire in Russia. I think people go out of their way to find ways to not like other teams. It is bizarre to me. Enjoy the sport, enjoy your team, enjoy the reason you are connected to the team.

 

[Needham]

Any billionaire from Russia is going to have ties to Putin…or you will never be a billionaire in Russia. I think people go out of their way to find ways to not like other teams. It is bizarre to me. Enjoy the sport, enjoy your team, enjoy the reason you are connected to the team.

Don't think people have to go out of their way to not like Chelsea.

 

[Ludens the Red]

What country owns Chelsea?

might wanna check how Romans wealth was acquired

Any billionaire from Russia is going to have ties to Putin…or you will never be a billionaire in Russia. I think people go out of their way to find ways to not like other teams. It is bizarre to me. Enjoy the sport, enjoy your team, enjoy the reason you are connected to the team.

exactly! Which is why I don’t get why Chelsea and city fans puts themselves through coming onto a United forum into threads like these to repeat the same stuff they’ve been spouting for years. You’re never going to get a positive response. No United fan is gonna go “you know what, you’re right, Chelsea and city’s money has been great for football and is just like how United used to spend” etc etc.

 

[Nights]

Chelsea Defence League out in force tonight it seems.

 

[Dancfc]

Ah I see eight pages in and there’s still a few who can’t seem to work out why clubs backed by an entire countries oil wealth is seen differently to self made millionaires acquiring football clubs and supporting them with their own personal wealth.
There is obviously a clear fecking difference between the spending of Wigan, Villa, Leicester etc to city, Chelsea and PSG. One set of these clubs has the financial backing of a few businessmen, the other set are backed by an entire countries resources.

Any "differences" is here nor there in the context of the point I was making. Are you telling me if Leicester owners tomorrow decided to triple their wage bill and load their squad with players to compete at the top of the league and UCL and with it start sweeping up on the trophies it will get taken it lying down with no resentment for their "artificial" spending? I think we both know the answer to that.

The vast majority of people are upset their club is being challenged, moral codes and differences between owners is just a convenient narrative to hide behind (just like it was on the football void or restart debate where 99% of players and fans just happened to side with the position that best suited their club or in your fans case fecked up a rival).

Hate/resent us all you want, but I'm not having this nonsense that it's all out of a sense of morality. In the late Fergie era when you were winning titles and we were safely at arms lengths challenging for top four at best I never heard a peep from the United fanbase, incidentally I've not heard much on this subject from Liverpool fans (who in the mid to late 00s were the most vocal) in recent years, coincidence I'm sure!