Latest Takeover Rumour. The Moores / Noell one

[SerenityNigh]

sunderland spend a fortune on mediocre players and have sacked the manager about twice a season for years. fulham could easily drop to league one this season. if everton are to be run like that, i would consider it a failure.

I didn't realize Sunderland and Fulham were PL stalwarts, my mistake.

 

[PhilM]

Nationality means very little to be fair beyond possible trends of other parties.What concerns me is their intentions and plans for investment etc.

 

[The Esk]

Well they have enjoyed teit most successful era under the glaziers

Whilst I agree, my point is that without the debt, United would be out of sight and have most likely won everything. Relative to their gross resources they have under-performed, increasing as the years have gone by.

 

[MartSlinger]

If anything they'll bring business acumen to EFC and i for one welcome that.

 

[Ashtonian]

Echo saying next fortnight apparently.

Any truth in that

 

[SerenityNigh]

The Glazers - borrowed US $ 525 million on an acquisition costing US $ 790 million.

Despite paying over US $ 700 million in interest and management fees they still have debts over US $ 400 million.

David Gill put together all the enormous sponsorship deals not the Glazers.

How much more successful would United have been if they hadn't had to spend US $ 700 million on financing costs?

I don't see their transfers as a failure to find the cash required to make the purchase

 

[kithnou]

That article suggests 2 Chinese interested parties? My maths makes that at least 4 then who are looking at Everton, if true.

 

[RaleighBlue]

The Glazers - borrowed US $ 525 million on an acquisition costing US $ 790 million.

Despite paying over US $ 700 million in interest and management fees they still have debts over US $ 400 million.

David Gill put together all the enormous sponsorship deals not the Glazers.

How much more successful would United have been if they hadn't had to spend US $ 700 million on financing costs?

None more?

Let's look at United honestly. They had the world's greatest manager, loads of cash and success. The Glazers came in, leveraged buy out, dumped the debt on the club...and they continued to win.

They began to lose when the worlds greatest manager left and he was replaced by someone that couldn't immediately (or, to be fair, ever) replicate the wonders of his predecessor. So they sacked him and brought in a manager that had never coached in the Prem, and was at his peak in the 90's. United's on field or off the field success has nothing to do with money. They spend as much or more than anyone not named Real.

If they hadn't gone down that route would they have sold Ronaldo? Maybe not, and maybe that would be a difference. But we don't have any idea of that for sure.

Debt, in real terms, is meaningless if you can A) continue to make your payments and B) not alter your spending habits while continuing A.

Basically, United and their ownership is meaningless in the context of Everton. We are not kings of the footballing world, with the worlds greatest manager and some of the worlds most marketable stars. We couldn't necessarily survive the sort of leveraged buyout United have. But at the same time, we shouldn't pretend like the ownership group is holding them back. The managers and players are holding them back.

I agree with your point that a leveraged buyout is dangerous, and could be very bad for Everton depending on the way the markets go, but that does not mean the Glazers have failed United (yet, obviously since there is still debt, there is still the looming spectre of a market burst and United being in a bad place...but so long as the television money and sponsorship money is going up...it's very little material harm done).

 

[Parkender]

As a snapshot post Ferguson, (who they inherited), and using him as a yardstick, they have been an epic fail since.

Good kit deals mind.

Clap clap

Who would have thought Moyes and pillow head would have turned out so badly? I presume you knew better?

They should have gone all out for Guardiola but then again, they may have. No one will probably know. And for the record, Im not keen on the yanks, I just think the Glaziers are a bad example as owners who have failed.

 

[MartSlinger]

Still think they'll come in, improve commercial side of things and get us a stadium sorted and flog for a profit.

 

[RaleighBlue]

As a snapshot post Ferguson, (who they inherited), and using him as a yardstick, they have been an epic fail since.

Good kit deals mind.

Clap clap

Using Ferguson as a yardstick is just unfair.

 

[USABlue]

Nationality means very little to be fair beyond possible trends of other parties.What concerns me is their intentions and plans for investment etc.

At this point no one knows the plans for the club of any of the interested parties. People just like to assume the worst

 

[roydo]

None more?

Let's look at United honestly. They had the world's greatest manager, loads of cash and success. The Glazers came in, leveraged buy out, dumped the debt on the club...and they continued to win.

They began to lose when the worlds greatest manager left and he was replaced by someone that couldn't immediately (or, to be fair, ever) replicate the wonders of his predecessor. So they sacked him and brought in a manager that had never coached in the Prem, and was at his peak in the 90's. United's on field or off the field success has nothing to do with money. They spend as much or more than anyone not named Real.

If they hadn't gone down that route would they have sold Ronaldo? Maybe not, and maybe that would be a difference. But we don't have any idea of that for sure.

Debt, in real terms, is meaningless if you can A) continue to make your payments and B) not alter your spending habits while continuing A.

Basically, United and their ownership is meaningless in the context of Everton. We are not kings of the footballing world, with the worlds greatest manager and some of the worlds most marketable stars. We couldn't necessarily survive the sort of leveraged buyout United have. But at the same time, we shouldn't pretend like the ownership group is holding them back. The managers and players are holding them back.

I agree with your point that a leveraged buyout is dangerous, and could be very bad for Everton depending on the way the markets go, but that does not mean the Glazers have failed United (yet, obviously since there is still debt, there is still the looming spectre of a market burst and United being in a bad place...but so long as the television money and sponsorship money is going up...it's very little material harm done).

While I would not disagree with a word, I think the point is that United have been successful, the last few seasons notwithstanding, despite them, not because of them.

 

[Parkender]

David Gill put together all the enormous sponsorship deals not the Glazers.

Was Gill there before the Glaziers or did they bring him in?


I suppose the one good thing about our yanks is that they are after an investment so surely they would want to increase our value with a new stadium and at least some sort of success?

 

[chippy1722]

At least we will have a board, and know who is on the board and who is responsible for the club.

At the moment we have a ghost of a board who only appear when we are doing well, and no one really knows who pulls the strings.

Bill can't do no wrong Cos he's a blue blah blah blah, so no one, even the media will question his failings. If we have a proper accountable board they won't get away with anything.