The Prince and cash flow

[ucandomagic]

Is this dogger I see before me.....



(Bows)

If he glisters then Sean must be the Merchant of V(en)ice.

As for daggers, doggers and loans - it is this bloody business that informs thus to my eyes.

But what the fuck - come let me clutch thee, all good businesses are highly leveraged, if I can’t make more than it costs me to borrow then I’m shit at my job.

 

[Kanye]

Would be v unhappy if he’s using it to pay for shares or property assets - that’s basically what the Glazers did at MU, used the clubs money to fund their takeover.

I think I've seen enough to convince me that this is a leveraged buyout, aka exactly what the Glazers did at MUFC. Allow me to be the first to say this is the beginning of the end.

Not sure if this site will remain active after the club folds? If not, I'll see you boys at FC United of Sheffield.

 

[Harry's Game]

Would be v unhappy if he’s using it to pay for shares or property assets - that’s basically what the Glazers did at MU, used the clubs money to fund their takeover.

The real issue at Man U isn’t the Glazzers despite what their fans say. It was that Sir Alex and key players all more or less retired at the same time. Then they appointed the wrong man as successor.

 

[jono_t2000]

Sounds to me English football is one big money laundering scheme using 22 men running around on a field once a week as a distraction

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

As a Muslim, from a wealthy Muslim country, i'm sure he would have no problem raising funds. The problem there is, Muslim money could have riders attached to it, concerning what it was used for and how it was spent.
This way it's a western loan to a western company and the details are transparent. The Prince keeps his personal funding out of club business, by following the example of other clubs in English football.
McCabe has put his own money into the club in the past, and look how that turned out.

And no owner does interest free loans.
The money needs to come in one way or another. It's simple business cash flow deal.

 

[Kanye]

The real issue at Man U isn’t the Glazzers despite what their fans say. It was that Sir Alex and key players all more or less retired at the same time. Then they appointed the wrong man as successor.

They've paid nearly £800m in interest payments alone. Point taken about the managers and players retiring, but you have to imagine that if they'd had that kind of money to spend, they would be a completely different team to the one that we see now.

 

[Kanye]

Sounds to me English football is one big money laundering scheme using 22 men running around on a field once a week as a distraction

Where did the money laundering bit come from? Do you know what money laundering is?

 

[DronnieBlade]

Why what interest rate is it at?
What would the cost be of injecting his own money?

It won’t be 3%. You can be sure of that.

And that’s my point.

UTB

 

[Harry's Game]

They've paid nearly £800m in interest payments alone. Point taken about the managers and players retiring, but you have to imagine that if they'd had that kind of money to spend, they would be a completely different team to the one that we see now.

They have still spent something like £300m on players haven’t they?

 

[Darlington82]

I heard in the summer the club borrowed 50m as the PL money comes in dribs and drabs throughout the season. it is the only way to buy the players and upgrade the ground.

It is so normal I did not think it was worth posting, it it had not happened, now that would have been an issue, as we would not have bought anyone.

Also remember it is the Prince who pushed the boat out.

 

[Kanye]

They have still spent something like £300m on players haven’t they?

Yes, but imagine how much they could have spent on players if they hadn't blown £800m on interest payments?

Based on the commercial power of the club, they should be on a similar level to Real Madrid and Barcelona, unfortunately for them, they're nowhere near- I don't think that is mainly down losing Ferguson or players retiring.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

It won’t be 3%. You can be sure of that.

And that’s my point.

UTB

How much interest did McCabe used to charge?

 

[I should coco]

but you have to imagine that if they'd had that kind of money to spend, they would be a completely different team to the one that we see now.

I'm not entirely sure you can say that with any certainty and there is more than a bit of Pignomic theory, where more money means better players and therefore a better team.

If they had an extra £800m, what you can be sure of is that they'd have paid over £100m for Harry and the world's best player (in his own mind) Pogba, would be on £1m per week by now.

They made poor managerial choices and spunked loads of cash (as we did with Robson/Blackwell). Moyes and Van Gaal could simply have spunked more on crap players with horrific wage demands, so they could still be in the same position today.

On a massively smaller scale, our recruitment was shite until CW/AK/PM. Robson and Blackwell wasted many millions and even Clough was backed to high levels for L1. Pretty much all of that was wasted on the wrong players, while the current regime had bugger all to spend but used what little they had very wisely.

 

[Kanye]

I'm not entirely sure you can say that with any certainty and there is more than a bit of Pignomic theory, where more money means better players and therefore a better team.

If they had an extra £800m, what you can be sure of is that they'd have paid over £100m for Harry and the world's best player (in his own mind) Pogba, would be on £1m per week by now.

They made poor managerial choices and spunked loads of cash (as we did with Robson/Blackwell). Moyes and Van Gaal could simply have spunked more on crap players with horrific wage demands, so they could still be in the same position today.

On a massively smaller scale, our recruitment was shite until CW/AK/PM. Robson and Blackwell wasted many millions and even Clough was backed to high levels for L1. Pretty much all of that was wasted on the wrong players, while the current regime had bugger all to spend but used what little they had very wisely.

More money does (generally) mean better players and better players do (generally) mean a better team. Hence why Man City and Liverpool are at the top of the tree, and why Morecambe, the team with the smallest budget in the FL are flirting with relegation into the non-league.

You can close the financial gap with better recruitment of managers/players, innovative tactics/training methods and a bit of luck, but ultimately, those with deeper pockets rise to the top.

Sure, Man Utd could have still spent that money poorly, and continued to lurch from one unsuitable manager to the next, but I think it would be silly to say that £800m wouldn't have improved their team.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Yes, but imagine how much they could have spent on players if they hadn't blown £800m on interest payments?

Based on the commercial power of the club, they should be on a similar level to Real Madrid and Barcelona, unfortunately for them, they're nowhere near- I don't think that is mainly down losing Ferguson or players retiring.

The managers they have had have screwed up when spending what they have. Give them more and there’d be more expensive flops at Old Trafford.

 

[Kanye]

The managers they have had have screwed up when spending what they have. Give them more and there’d be more expensive flops at Old Trafford.

Possibly, but not all their signings have been flops, and if you throw enough shit at a wall, some of it will stick.

You could also argue that a larger budget may have attracted a better manager in the first place too.

 

[Sean Thornton]

And no owner does interest free loans.
The money needs to come in one way or another. It's simple business cash flow deal.

Since the Prince came on board any loans at that date were transferred to shares/share premium account. So no interest has been charged on £37.5m.

 

[Houston_Blade]

and if you throw enough shit at a wall, some of it will stick.

Ah, the Neil Warnock approach to football transfers

 

[Kanye]

Ah, the Neil Warnock approach to football transfers

Yes, no doubt Man Utd's approach to transfers and continuity between managers is poor, relative to their competition.

That being said, I have no doubt that if they'd had an extra £50m (on average, obviously) a season for the last 15 years (baring in mind, in 2003, when the Glazers bought the club, £50m was far more substantial than it is today) they would be in a far stronger position today, regardless of their poor choices in recruitment.

 

[BushBlade]

Possibly, but not all their signings have been flops, and if you throw enough shit at a wall, some of it will stick.

You could also argue that a larger budget may have attracted a better manager in the first place too.

Better manager? They could have had anyone they wanted when Fergie retired but he told them to go for Moyes.
What is Man U’s net spend since Fergie retired? What is Liverpool’s over the same period? What were their respective wage bills?
Also, how much did the Glazers borrow?
If PA does leverage the purchase of the assets he’s borrowing around £50m. So we won’t be paying £800m in interest.
Is it ideal? No, what we‘d all prefer is a really rich owner who won’t put the club into any kind of debt and will also invest his or her own money. Is it an absolute disaster? No, probably not.

 

[I should coco]

More money does (generally) mean better players and better players do (generally) mean a better team.

Pignomics do not always hold, in the real world.

Hence why Man City and Liverpool are at the top of the tree, and why Morecambe, the team with the smallest budget in the FL are flirting with relegation into the non-league.

Sorry, you lost me at 'hence why'.

What's wrong with good old 'hence'?

 

[raul]

No it's not. The original was glisters. Glistens is a lazy modernism. And incorrect anyway.

Glisters means to sparkle. Another word for "glitters".

Glisten is a shine on something wet.

I care little for Chaucerian English. Take your little brother and go do some Math.

 

[Mad Mick]

I suppose it makes commercial sense. money is still very cheap and If you take into account inflation it's cheaper still. If the money borrowed is also secured then the rate could be lower than some people might expect.

 

[Sean Thornton]

I care little for Chaucerian English. Take your little brother and go do some Math.

You cared enough to try to correct me.....

 

[I should coco]

I'm all for a good conspiracy theory, but the simplistic assumption that setting up a borrowing stream means the Prince is going to do a Glazer on us, needs more work.
Ideally a soupcon of evidence might help.

Clearly Steve Parish is going to do something similar, as Palace have just taken a loan out against the £22.5m instalment due for Wan-Bissaka.

Crystal Palace land £22.5m early from Wan-Bissaka deal

Crystal Palace have secured a £22.5million boost after they sold an instalment owed on the deal which took Aaron Wan-Bissaka to Manchester United to an Australian bank in order to receive the money up front.

www.standard.co.uk

 

[Kanye]

Better manager? They could have had anyone they wanted when Fergie retired but he told them to go for Moyes.
What is Man U’s net spend since Fergie retired? What is Liverpool’s over the same period? What were their respective wage bills?
Also, how much did the Glazers borrow?
If PA does leverage the purchase of the assets he’s borrowing around £50m. So we won’t be paying £800m in interest.
Is it ideal? No, what we‘d all prefer is a really rich owner who won’t put the club into any kind of debt and will also invest his or her own money. Is it an absolute disaster? No, probably not.

Granted, the Moyes appointment would have still probably happened, but the subsequent appointments could have been different if they'd had that much more money: they would have been the richest club in the world by some margin.

I dont know what Man Utd net spend is in comparison to Liverpool's. My point about Liverpool (and City) is that they are wealthy clubs, and their success in terms of trophies (compared to Morcambe's lack of success) is largely down to finacial disparity.

And I dont know if you've misunderstood the point I'm trying to make or I've not been very clear but my last few posts haven't got anything to do with the Prince doing a leveraged buyout. I was just responding to a comment that Man Utd's problems stemmed from losing Ferguson, rather than being anything to do with the Glazers (post 66). I'm just trying to make the point that, while there are many factors in Man Utd's fall from the top, the £800m spent on interest is a significant one.

 

[I should coco]

You cared enough to try to correct me.....

Give him both barrels brother!

(Whispered while I stand behind Jeeves, our butler and have Ned the gardener on speed dial just in case...)

 

[Sean Thornton]

Give him both barrels brother!

(Whispered while I stand behind Jeeves, our butler and have Ned the gardener on speed dial just in case...)

Waste not thy time in windy argument but let the matter drop.

 

[BushBlade]

Granted, the Moyes appointment would have still probably happened, but the subsequent appointments could have been different if they'd had that much more money: they would have been the richest club in the world by some margin.

I dont know what Man Utd net spend is in comparison to Liverpool's. My point about Liverpool (and City) is that they are wealthy clubs, and their success in terms of trophies (compared to Morcambe's lack of success) is largely down to finacial disparity.

And I dont know if you've misunderstood the point I'm trying to make or I've not been very clear but my last few posts haven't got anything to do with the Prince doing a leveraged buyout. I was just responding to a comment that Man Utd's problems stemmed from losing Ferguson, rather than being anything to do with the Glazers (post 66). I'm just trying to make the point that, while there are many factors in Man Utd's fall from the top, the £800m spent on interest is a significant one.

And my point is that Man U have received so much income they’ve still been able to compete financially with the biggest sides and that their problems are more to do with the departures of Fergie and David Gill than the leveraged purchase.
Because this thread is about the Blades and a possible leveraged purchase, when posters start to talk about Man U it gives the impression that what has happened to them will happen to us, the logical extension of that being ‘any leveraged purchase will cause serious decline’ whilst ignoring all the other factors such as replacing managers too frequently and wasting huge amounts of money on players who aren’t good enough.

 

[Kanye]

Pignomics do not always hold, in the real world.

I know that, I've already said that the gap can be closed. But while "pigonomics" may not always hold, generally speaking, they do.

Hence w̶h̶y̶ Man City and Liverpool are at the top of the tree, and why Morecambe, the team with the smallest budget in the FL are flirting with relegation into the non-league.

Sorry, you lost me at 'hence why'.

What's wrong with good old 'hence'?

See the above, hopefully this time you won't get lost.