Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

MSP Sports Capital

Status
Not open for further replies.
You do realise those clubs only spend what they make due to being economic powerhouses - Everton in turn dont make much money and wont do unless we turn into a regular CL club overnight.

Im sure our fans would be happy spending 2 bob a season if the Glazers owned us :oops:
Kin ell, give it a rest

Coming off like a yankaphobe. Sure this will be a "thing" soon.
 
But through their business acumen they generate enough to outspend your 'petro nation' clubs?

NOW I'm being pedantic

Yeah... its the Glazers business acumen that is behind what generates Manchester United so much revenue.

Ffs do you believe in the Tooth Fairy ? lol
 
Last edited:
Yea, who knows.
I'm sure Abramovic 'loaned' Chelsea money.
This won't be like that.
I doubt it'll hamstring the club either tho as it's not in their interest to financially cripple something they are so invested in.
Here's hoping!
Depends on their end game. But yes, here’s hoping I’m just reading too much into it. Maybe it’s a zero interest loan with a 20 year period. Knowing how capital firms like this work, I just very much doubt it.
 

Yeah... its the Glazers business acumen that is behind what generates Manchester United so much revenue.

Ffs do you believe in the Tooth Fairy ? lol
Woodward was very good at finding additional sources of revenue, which was why they kept him on so long. The problem was that he had no idea what to do with it. The Glazers were very good at finding ways to loot the club of goodwill. Whether that's 'business acumen' is in the eye of the beholder.

Club projections for an annual increase in revenue from the new ground are between £40 - £60 mill a year mate.
That doesn't make up the shortfall between us and West Ham in revenue, much less Arsenal. Long term, it positions us better than West Ham.

FB's correct to assert we would have to convert that into regular European placement to catch Arsenal, Spurs and the rest on revenue. Doable. Not easy.
 
Woodward was very good at finding additional sources of revenue, which was why they kept him on so long. The problem was that he had no idea what to do with it. The Glazers were very good at finding ways to loot the club of goodwill. Whether that's 'business acumen' is in the eye of the beholder.


That doesn't make up the shortfall between us and West Ham in revenue, much less Arsenal. Long term, it positions us better than West Ham.

FB's correct to assert we would have to convert that into regular European placement to catch Arsenal, Spurs and the rest on revenue. Doable. Not easy.

We won’t on the facility led approach for two reasons, one because Arsenal and Spurs grounds are bigger and have more premium seating. But mostly because of the North/South divide and the clubs you mention will charge the London price, that wont wash in the North West mate.

I suspect we will see, but won’t see any gains in our margins in the early years anyway mate - if you know what I mean, I think we will be paying significant enough interest in the early years - particularly in the current market we are seeking investment.
 
We won’t on the facility led approach for two reasons, one because Arsenal and Spurs ground are bigger and have more premium seating. But mostly because of the North/South divide and the clubs you mention will charge the London price, that wont wash in the North West mate.

I suspect we will see, but won’t see any gains in our margins in the early years anyway mate - if you know what I mean, I think we will be paying significant enough interest in the early years - particularly in the current market we are seeking investment.
Agreed re: the facilities limitiations. I doubt the plan included the huge bump in interest rates, which is why Moshiri has his hand out. However, the big competitive loophole is that we can spend a percentage of revenues on players starting in a couple seasons. West Ham can do better on the bottom line using their sweetheart deal for Olympic, but we can spend just as much if the owner will tolerate the bottom line discrepancy. As we pay the balance down, that gap closes, but that will take a while.

Where the club lags behind the bigger fish is the global fanbase. The big advantage the club has against the competition is that its values are very attractive. It puts its money where its mouth is on stuff like EITC. What it needs is the same level of global media coverage as the bigger fish, to get that word out, which means silverware and regular European placement. Get that, and the club can start attracting a larger global fanbase and a bigger share of the sponsorship pie than Spurs and Arsenal, to close that gap.

What the club cannot do, I suspect, is close the petrodollar gap. In any event, climbing the ladder here is no different from at any other club. We start from a better position than most, but we made a hash of it in recent years. The first rung is to become a high-finishing, selling club again.
 
Yeah... its the Glazers business acumen that is behind what generates Manchester United so much revenue.

Ffs do you believe in the Tooth Fairy ? lol

You do realise that United’s revenue has grown significantly under the Glazer’s, don’t you?
 
Certainly don't want to be run like those clubs. Much rather be fighting relegation every season instead of competing in Europe.

The main difference being that those clubs were all already high value, high profile and/or cash rich.

Would Man City have ever elevated themselves to their current level under the Glazers....? Not a chance!
 

The main difference being that those clubs were all already high value, high profile and/or cash rich.

Would Man City have ever elevated themselves to their current level under the Glazers....? Not a chance!

All true, however, this tedious exchange all stemmed from a lazy comment by one of our resident trolls stating that United/Liverpool and Arsenal all have "limited spend" solely due to American ownership, in spite of all 3 having a higher net spend than City across the last 5 years.

Silly me for nibbling.
 
All true, however, this tedious exchange all stemmed from a lazy comment by one of our resident trolls stating that United/Liverpool and Arsenal all have "limited spend" solely due to American ownership, in spite of all 3 having a higher net spend than City across the last 5 years.

Silly me for nibbling.

Tbh, if Man Utd had continued on their pre-Glazier's trajectory, they would probably be out of sight in terms of income and already in a fully refurbished 90k Old Trafford. They were carpet bagged and the club itself has essentially paid off the Glazier's initial Loan. They've had their cake and ate it.

They're all outspending city now, because they've been playing catchup and because they were naturally much bigger and richer to start with, also with none of the FFP constraints that City may be facing.
 
Tbh, if Man Utd had continued on their pre-Glazier's trajectory, they would probably be out of sight in terms of income and already in a fully refurbished 90k Old Trafford. They were carpet bagged and the club itself has essentially paid off the Glazier's initial Loan. They've had their cake and ate it.

They're all outspending city now, because they've been playing catchup and because they were naturally much bigger and richer to start with, also with none of the FFP constraints that City may be facing.

That would also be ignoring Alex Ferguson leaving which, certainly for me, has made the single biggest impact on that club.
They're not just outspending City now, they've been consistently doing it for a while.
I don't want to get stuck in a loop with you as well mate so I'll leave it there.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Back
Top