25 Jun 2022 09:30:40
Here is a personal view on the Glazers for what it's worth.
I used to work as an accountant for ENWL the electricity distribution company that services the NW of England.
We were bought by an American investment company in the same way that MU were. It was a similar leveraged buy out where they use the asset value of the company to borrow debt against it and they rely on the annual dividends to provide income whilst also hoping for an increase in the asset value of the company making it a more sellable asset in the longer term.
They have no emotional attachment to the club whatsoever, so long as it pays its dividends (over and above what they would make from sticking the money in a bank account etc) then that's great for them.
Most investment companies have experts in each investment stream so they can maximize dividends/ asset value in the medium term thus ensuring its a successful investment. However the EPL is an unknown territory for the Glazers and they have royally f**ked it up, sure they still have the dividends but from all accounts the asset value of MU has shrunk over the last few years.
I don't think selling the company is an option to them at this point in time due to its lower asset value.
Personally (and I am a right wing capitalist lol) I think leveraged buyouts are an abhorrent way to conduct business and would want to see them banned.
Good luck in getting rid of these parasites but don't hold your breath guys, even as an LFC fan it gives me zero pleasure to see these people holding your club to ransom.
25 Jun 2022 13:10:19
Where’s all the Glazer apologist’s to explain to the Liverpool supporter why he’s wrong?! Oh The irony!
25 Jun 2022 14:03:47
DLIB I have not encountered one Glazer apologist on this site.
25 Jun 2022 14:15:25
DLIB, I don't honestly think I've ever seen a Glazer apologist on here.
I've seen a few realists who don't live in a fairy land where someone empties their life's earnings out to buy a the club for 2bn+ then spend a further 1bn of their own money on a state of the art new stadium, while also dipping into their personal account to buy a 4th 100m signing each window. Someone who doesn't have the audacity to take dividends out of their own business. Just someone to own and fund the club out of the goodness of their own heart.
The reality is simple, if the club had won 6 of the last 10 titles and a hat full of domestic cups and perhaps a UCL title or two then the fans wouldn't give two rubbishs that they just paid themselves 11m in dividends.
The only reason we haven't been able to win trophies is due to who is making the decisions at the club and nothing to do with what money is going out.
For all the issues people think about how much money is leaving the club, here's the reality.
Spurs first team squad wage bill is 67m a year.
Arsenal is 81m a year.
City's is 129m a year.
Liverpool's is 137m a year.
Chelsea's is 148m a year.
Manchester United's is currently at 196m a year.
We pay our squad more than both Man City and Spurs COMBINED.
Let that sink in for a second. We pay our players more than the league champions and the fourth combined.
We talk about the new money that City and Chelsea have, how their owners spend cash and allow them the funds to become great sides.
Yet our owners massively outspend them in terms of wages and outspend them in terms of transfer fees paid.
Where our owners do let things slide is in terms of investment in the Stadium and training ground. Yet who is to say that money wouldn't have been there to spend on upgrades if so much hadn't been wasted on transfer fees and wages for players who aren't good enough and don't fit into an overarching plan/ vision.
Over the last 10 years we have spent between 700-800m MORE than Man City on wages.
There's a new stadium if we wanted one.
We've also spent around 400m more on players transfer fees.
There's the new training ground if we wanted one.
That's with all the debt repayments and dividends still leaving the club just as they have.
our problem isn't having enough money, but what to do with it and who to entrust with it.
So yeah I'm not a fan of the Glazers, I'd rather someone else owned the club. I blame them for the poor running of the club as ultimately it is their responsibility over who they put in charge to run things.
The reality though is they aren't going anywhere and if anyone else took over just as much money if not more would leave the club in debt repayment and dividends.
I just want the club run properly, to shed the label of amateurs, to cut the wage bill and better spend the money, to have a plan and a vision and bring in the right people to make that happen.
In theory there is nothing stopping that happening under the Glazers, and maybe the shock of seeing the asset value of the club plummet might be wake up call to make them sit up and change things for the better.
In reality I'll believe it when I see it.
25 Jun 2022 14:53:18
Shappy right on cue. I despair!
25 Jun 2022 16:03:42
Okay DLIB, how much more money should the Glazers spend?
Would another 1.4bn of signings make us any better than the last 1.4bn worth.
Should we go and buy Mings from Villa for 80m, would that make you happy?
How about we double the wage bill to 400m a year. Give Ronaldo 1m a week, and give Maguire and co a big pay rise.
People complain that the Glazers taking money out is the problem but conveniently forget (willful ignorance) that no club in world football has spent more money on transfers in the past 10 years.
Not PSG, not Chelsea and not City.
While no team in the EPL spends anywhere near what we spend on wages.
The problem isn't that our owners don't spend money, they do. They just spend it very poorly.
If City can win 6 EPL titles in 10 years, and Liverpool can make 3 UCL finals in 5 years spending less than us on both wages and transfers then we can surely do it with the money we have available. Regardless of how much goes on debt and dividends.
I don't want the Glazers in charge, they have shown incompetence. Yet I'm not foolish enough to believe there are plenty of other better options.
Who do you want to own the club? Viably.
Who do you think has the money, and has the know-how to run the club as you think it should be run?
Name them, come on.
25 Jun 2022 16:21:31
Dlib who are the glazers apologists?
I don't know of any on here.
Why do you despair? Is it because somebody has the gaul to and audacity to hold an opinion different to yours?
The glazers are going to continue to do what they have done for years. They are not obliged to do anything else they own the club the sooner you get your head around that the better.
It's a business and a profit centre nothing more than that, so from their point of view that's the most important thing. You may not like it but that's the way it is.
Nobody like it but if you want or expect too much different or change then your going to be disappointed and frustrated.
25 Jun 2022 16:40:52
Shappy makes a fascinating point about our incredibly high wages compared to others and still being appreciably more than even City despite our lack of recent success. Like many, I would’ve loved to have been a fly-on-the-wall at Ten Hag’s interview. Stylistically from what I’ve seen and read he looks a combination of Guardiola in possession and Klopp out of it (likely way too simplistic a view I know) . But I wonder what Ten Hag said in terms of his ability and vision in developing a team from the ground up and the youth team. That’s surely where the Glazers mind is now. They’ve tried the giving managers some of the money they need and trusted them to buy wisely but it’s been a disaster, albeit over 4 permanent managers now. Their asset isn’t as valuable as it once was and risking ‘doubling down’ on us with even more inflated transfer budget and associated wages clearly not in their thinking. I suspect Ten Hag’s brief may be budget for 2 ‘stars’ annually but any additional needs of the team have to be homegrown to eventually start to reduce that huge wage bill.
Interesting times ahead. Think we can forget silverware for another few years but not as though the trophy room has been running out of duraglit in last few seasons as is!
25 Jun 2022 16:53:12
Shappy - The Glazers have done absolutely nothing for the football Club other than leveraged it’s own assets, plunged it into millions of debt and traded on its previous history and success for the sole purpose of making money.
They have no discernible plan, vision or even appetite to bring success back to the football Club which ironically is how they still print all their money simply by trading on our illustrious history, previous success and tradition. They have failed to invest properly in the infrastructure of the Club meaning we now have substandard training facilities and the stadium once one of the best and most iconic in the world now needs urgent modernisation. (Not too dissimilar to the first team) .
Spurs recently invested over £1b in their new stadium.
Liverpool are about to redevelop the Anfield Road Stand. They expanded and redeveloped their main stand 5 or 6 years ago and they also moved into a new training facility last year.
City have built a massive new training complex in recent years. It helped to regenerate parts of East Manchester in the process. They expanded the South Stand a few years ago. They are also building a new 23,500 seater entertainment arena next to the Etihad.
I could go on and on but you get the picture.
Utd have been at Carrington since 2000 and no major investment has been made at Old Trafford since 2005-06 when the NW and NE quadrants were finished.
In case you hadn’t noticed the Club hasn’t won a single trophy in 5 years. We are entering the 10th year without a title, yet the Glazers still take their dividends.
On the back of the worst premier league season in our history and in the midst of our 4th rebuild in 10 years the first thing the Glazers did was take another £11m out of the Club whilst the amateurs haggle over FDJ.
There are no excuses the Glazers are very bad for Manchester United end of story.
25 Jun 2022 17:30:01
DLIB tbh I’ve only read the last line of that- and once again no one will dispute they are very bad for us.
25 Jun 2022 17:40:43
DLIB, the Glazers do have a plan, it might not be a plan you'd be happy with but rest assured they have a plan. They just haven't felt the need to share it with the fans.
They are investors, they bought the club to make money. They have made money.
What might concern them now though is the falling asset value.
I'd imagine the plan was something like leveraged buy-out, maximise income, earn money while the asset increases in value then sell for an inflated price.
Even today at the current valuation if they sold the club they'd pocket well over 1bn, probably close to 2bn after taking into account the debt.
Not bad considering the bought the club on borrowed money, never dipping their hands into their own pocket.
They haven't invested in the infrastructure this is true. Maybe they never intended to, or maybe they needed to funnel so much towards the playing staff in terms of transfer fees and wages that they couldn't afford to do both.
Spurs spent a huge amount on a new stadium, they went into debt to do that.
City have invested in the local area, but then their model is very different. They are trying to drum up good publicity, while they need to create a club from scratch. Their stadium is half empty most weeks. They need to invest locally to create new fans. They bought the club for 210m or just over one years wages at our club. It cost 800m to buy United back in 2005.
The Glazers certainly haven't been good for United. But you are yet to name me who would be a good owner in your learned opinion.
25 Jun 2022 18:13:12
Shappy - Man Utd have always spent big money on player transfers all the way back to the likes of Dennis Law before Bryan Robson, Gary Pallister, Roy Keane, Andy Cole, Juan Sebastian Veron, Rio Ferdinand and Wayne Rooney all arrived at Old Trafford for record fees in one form or another.
We are one of the most successful Clubs because we spend a lot of money. Praising the Glazers for spending money just isn’t a persuasive argument in my opinion and they’ve hardly spent anything in terms of infrastructure.
I agree they do have a plan which is to trade off our previous success to line their own pockets and hopefully make an eye watering amount of money when they finally decide to sell the Club. Unfortunately that has nothing to do with making us successful on the pitch.
To be honest I have no idea who might buy Manchester Utd but I’m convinced there wouldn’t be a lack of interest should the Club be put up for sale. I don’t think we could get much worse than the Glazers and I’d certainly be prepared to take a gamble.
25 Jun 2022 20:01:36
DLIB, it would be a gamble. Maybe we end up with asset strippers, sell off the stadium for redevelopment and sign a deal to lease the Emptyhad every other week from City for our home games.
Maybe the new owners won't agree to spend 1.4bn on transfer, maybe they want to reduce the wage bill.
Sell off high earners and replace them with academy kids or cheaper players from the Championship.
Maybe they will only spend 30-40m a year on transfers rather than an average of 140m.
Maybe they will pay themselves much larger dividends with all the money that isn't going on wages and transfers fees. Potentially and extra 200m a season out the club into the owners pockets.
There is always someone worse. That isn't a good reason to keep the Glazers. Yet if you can't think of a better owner even though you are sure there would be plenty of interest, then doesn't that just prove there are just as many potentially bad owners in the fans eyes?