Moriarty
Full Member
He knows a lot more that yer average forum dweller that's for certain. I don't always agree with what he says but he is connected.Does he know what he's talking about? And what more did he say?
He knows a lot more that yer average forum dweller that's for certain. I don't always agree with what he says but he is connected.Does he know what he's talking about? And what more did he say?
I'm not confused about what a loan facility is, thank you very much. The last I read, was they had drawn down on that to pay for the escalating, unplanned, construction costs. The club would typically keep most of the operating cash on hand, as they will need to reinvest in the squad sooner rather than later, and given their debt load, a lot of that will have to be done in cash.You've confused having arranged a loan facility with actually using it all. Spurs declared a huge profit (£113m) after tax in those most recent accounts. Some or all of that money can be used to pay for further construction costs instead of just borrowing more from the banks.
I was expecting that of the Glazers, based on what I read about Tampa around the time of the takeover. I can't remember exactly what it said but the point was they didn't want to spend one dollar on anything related to a stadium. Although of course in America it works differently, why would they then spend the money here.Rivals' grand designs put Glazers neglect of Old Trafford in spotlight.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-glazers-neglect-of-old-trafford-in-spotlight
Will the Glazers invest in a refurb?How many times is this thread going to get bumped and we go through the below again and again?
- The railway bridge issue
- We don't actually need more capacity apart from a few games a year
- Glazers wouldn't dream of investing so much
- Refurb needed not a rebuild.
I don’t know much about sports finance as I work in corporate finance but I’d expect a loan for stadium construction is going to be significantly cheaper than any money you would borrow to sign players. That means if you have any cash reserves you are indeed better off spending it on squad.I'm not confused about what a loan facility is, thank you very much. The last I read, was they had drawn down on that to pay for the escalating, unplanned, construction costs. The club would typically keep most of the operating cash on hand, as they will need to reinvest in the squad sooner rather than later, and given their debt load, a lot of that will have to be done in cash.
Tampa Bay is a perfect example of Glazernomics. They’ve not made the play-offs in eleven consecutive years, sacking their manager every second or third years, sticking with general managers who say the goal is to spend wisely, looking for value in the market. Simultaneously, the value of the club has increased six-fold.I was expecting that of the Glazers, based on what I read about Tampa around the time of the takeover. I can't remember exactly what it said but the point was they didn't want to spend one dollar on anything related to a stadium. Although of course in America it works differently, why would they then spend the money here.
Sounds eriely familiar.Tampa Bay is a perfect example of Glazernomics. They’ve not made the play-offs in eleven consecutive years, sacking their manager every second or third years, sticking with general managers who say the goal is to spend wisely, looking for value in the market. Simultaneously, the value of the club has increased six-fold.
Incidentaly, a new stadium was built: paid for by the city/state because the Glazers threatened to move the club elsewhere. Milton Keynes take notice.
Well the state or council will not pay for OT to be refurbed etc.and nor will they have the audacity to able to move the club.Sounds eriely familiar.
Probably not, but there's the railway issue, and also, how many times a year do we need more capacity?Will the Glazers invest in a refurb?
I mean refurbish the ground. Not increase capacity. It does look in need of a refurbishment imo.Probably not, but there's the railway issue, and also, how many times a year do we need more capacity?
Probs even less chance of that, as they wouldn't see any profit from it.I mean refurbish the ground. Not increase capacity. It does look in need of a refurbishment imo.
That's my thinking on it too. They're looking like leaving us behind the competition both on the pitch and off the pitch at this rate.Probs even less chance of that, as they wouldn't see any profit from it.
It surely must get to a point where they realise that with the fees needed these days, they're fighting a losing battle. The value of the club surely won't go much higher, so it'd make sense to sell when they can.That's my thinking on it too. They're looking like leaving us behind the competition both on the pitch and off the pitch at this rate.
I think the ground's getting to the point where the hospitality and boxes are looking seedy as well. I know people who've given up boxes as they can't impress their customers any more - instead they've bought a few expensive seats in the hospitality areas for people who actually want to go to the match, but the pre-match/post-match entertaining is done away from the ground.Probs even less chance of that, as they wouldn't see any profit from it.
Brave of him to post that article the week Spurs belatedly moved into their new ground. Fantastic journalism.Rivals' grand designs put Glazers neglect of Old Trafford in spotlight.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...-glazers-neglect-of-old-trafford-in-spotlight
Also coincidences with Real reveling the plans on their ground. It's not about being brave, it's about emphasising a point.Brave of him to post that article the week Spurs belatedly moved into their new ground. Fantastic journalism.
I wish more people would start talking about how amazing Spurs' new stadium is, honestly I've barely been able to find a murmur. Oh and don't even get me started on the Glazers I mean, we've only spent more on transfers and wages than any other cub in world football since Sir Alex retired, muppets. Should have spent some of the money we spent on DiMaria on new carpets for the press room or something and kept our reputation intact.
True, but I think it's a bit harsh to start having a go at the Glazers on the stadium (at the moment) when they've been authorising a lot of spend on the playing squad - because they're trying to compete with a club in the very same city that has repeatedly broken FFP laws not long after being gifted a stadium off the tax payers.Also coincidences with Real reveling the plans on their ground. It's not about being brave, it's about emphasising a point.
Also, no one questions the amount spent, it's how the monet has been allowed to be spent...very scatter gun approach
Agree. By no means do I think the Glazers are doing the worst job, however, they need to employ the correct people at the club for the correct job. Ed and his boys just aren't cutting it on the football side of things.True, but I think it's a bit harsh to start having a go at the Glazers on the stadium (at the moment) when they've been authorising a lot of spend on the playing squad - because they're trying to compete with a club in the very same city that has repeatedly broken FFP laws not long after being gifted a stadium off the tax payers.
Normally I'm in K stand but had some corporate hospitality in both the Charlton and Ferguson stand. The Ferguson stand was ok but the Charlton stand felt like you were entering a nuclear bunker. Narrow corridors and low ceilings. It's a joke main stand for one of the biggest clubs in the world. Companies are going to be sending clients to the Etihad if they want to impress.I think the ground's getting to the point where the hospitality and boxes are looking seedy as well. I know people who've given up boxes as they can't impress their customers any more - instead they've bought a few expensive seats in the hospitality areas for people who actually want to go to the match, but the pre-match/post-match entertaining is done away from the ground.
The silence to your question speaks volumes. Glazers too busy milking their cash cow.Have we made any significant capital improvements at the club in the last 14 years under the Glazers? I would appreciate if someone can guide me to a list.
We did some work on Carrington a few years ago; I think around the time Sir Alex retired? There was talk about us being able to do medicals on-site now as opposed to at the Bridgewater hospital like before. They also did some work on the car park to set-up a display with the club's name for when guests arrive.Have we made any significant capital improvements at the club in the last 14 years under the Glazers? I would appreciate if someone can guide me to a list.
They've put some Dyson Hand Dryers in the South Stand toiletsWe did some work on Carrington a few years ago; I think around the time Sir Alex retired? There was talk about us being able to do medicals on-site now as opposed to at the Bridgewater hospital like before. They also did some work on the car park to set-up a display with the club's name for when guests arrive.
LVG also requested some changes with the floodlights and planting trees to block the wind, among other small-ish things.
Can't remember anything at OT since the quads were done, not counting the disabled supporters area that I think we were forced to do?
You can't replace OT but it requires some updating. We should always be seen as having the best.Have those wanting a new stadium been frequenting OT all their lives? I can't imagine doing so and wanting one. An update, sure, but a soulless bowl stadium with loads of rounded edges and extra corporate space, nah.
The United legacy is more than bricks and mortar, sir.Have those wanting a new stadium been frequenting OT all their lives? I can't imagine doing so and wanting one. An update, sure, but a soulless bowl stadium with loads of rounded edges and extra corporate space, nah.
Yes is the answer to your question...Have those wanting a new stadium been frequenting OT all their lives? I can't imagine doing so and wanting one. An update, sure, but a soulless bowl stadium with loads of rounded edges and extra corporate space, nah.
That's fine. Strange and some may say wrong, but somewhat acceptable.Yes is the answer to your question...
Definitely. Nicer seating, a more modern roof but still incorporating the famous white stanchions (possibly in a new way), and an update to the halls perhaps. That'd do me. No mean feat with the roof, but nothing a few architects shouldn't be able to work out.You can't replace OT but it requires some updating. We should always be seen as having the best.
Of course, but you lose OT and you're losing some soul, without a doubt.The United legacy is more than bricks and mortar, sir.
A new stadium if done right can still retain the soul. Imagine the Old Trafford look but with completely new parts and a modernized twist. Not to mention more seats across the spectrum + internet access.Have those wanting a new stadium been frequenting OT all their lives? I can't imagine doing so and wanting one. An update, sure, but a soulless bowl stadium with loads of rounded edges and extra corporate space, nah.
Tampa Bay is a perfect example of Glazernomics. They’ve not made the play-offs in eleven consecutive years, sacking their manager every second or third years, sticking with general managers who say the goal is to spend wisely, looking for value in the market. Simultaneously, the value of the club has increased six-fold.
Incidentaly, a new stadium was built: paid for by the city/state because the Glazers threatened to move the club elsewhere. Milton Keynes take notice.
Not underestimating the huge differences between US franchises competing in a socialist regulated market, and the European blend of protectionuism and free market capitalism.Not supporting the Glazers but ...
NFL teams have an equal cap and the Buccs are currently one of the teams closest to the cap.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001020137/article/nfl-salary-cap-for-2019-season-set-at-1882m
We could do with a cap given what we blow on wages.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...age-bill-balloons-almost-300m-second-highest/
Is the Buccs lack of success more down to not drafting a top quarterback? Winston hasn't delivered what's expected of a no 1 draft pick. Maybe this is what we share with Buccs, in that we have both failed in recruiting the right players. United certainly have players using the free agency market to get the best salaries.
NFL teams often get the tax payer to pay for the stadium, but if they could get away with that owning United, then they would definitely be threatening to go off to MK.
Same, although I can't see serious talks even happening for a while and at this rate it'll be about 2025 before we have a chance of seeing anything begin.Every time this thread gets bumped I get a glimmer of hope for some sort of renovation