At least players go fit rest.

Unto Roma. Rashford no need play that game.

nitrogen:


I have been to OT very recently (and a couple of times), I didn’t see any issues. The stadium still looks great which means they do repairs and maintenance every time.

You can check the notes to the financial statement, they would normally disclose costs of repairs and maintenance on an annual basis.

You guys should stop this abeg.

hmmm
I used to think it was just bantz when you are usually mentioned as a 'major' stakeholder.

nitrogen:


Don’t mind them. Football is for the fans koor. Pay good money and ownership will be transferred swiftly.

Some full grown men think "football is for the fans" protests is gonna make a billionaire dash out his billion dollar assets for this nonsense LMAO

Leyqute:


What capital? Didn’t they buy the club with a loan?

That’s the problem with people and the press. You can’t finance an acquisition with just loan, most LBOs is minimum of 30-40 percent equity, with the remaining financed with debt. That’s even if you have physical assets. The only major tangible asset that man utd has is Old Trafford. So tell me how easy it would have been for the Glazers to acquire with up to 70 percent debt.

Infact, the 70 percent would include less than 50 percent bank debt and the remainder in PIK loans provided by other institutional investors e.g. hedge funds and Private equity firms, and the Glazers themselves.

ChristineC:
hmmm
I used to think it was just bantz when you are usually mentioned as a 'major' stakeholder.

I don’t need to be a major stakeholder to know this. Just visit the stadium a couple of times (not match days), you will get the chance to move around. Also, man utd is a listed entity. The club discloses every repair and maintenance cost.

nitrogen:
The billionaire utd fans should get their acts together and bid for the club at min of 4 billion. Let them buy and run it. Forget the narrative that they don’t want to sell, they want the right returns before they can sell, contrary to what is being said, they haven’t recovered their capital. Fact!

Offer them good returns, and they will sell. I can’t wait to see how another owner will run the club sef.

When you tell people who don't have one single share in a club that they own clubs for 2 weeks, inevitably they would do the type of nonsense United fans did today. They pay to be entertained by these clubs. The idea that "fans owns the club" is incredibly funny.

What’s all these talk about self sustaining bla bla bla. Is club business a charity? So they should keep pumping their personal money to run the club so fans can be happy. I don’t understand.

What is happening to City is normal, when you first acquire a business you want to push to the top it’s normal you invest money heavily to push it to that spot. At that moment profit is not your major ish.
At some point City will have to look inward and be self sustainable, cos the owners will start expecting returns. Even the Arabs won’t keep tossing money at it indefinitely.

Leyqute:


What capital? Didn’t they buy the club with a loan?

You can take a loan too and buy it back from them if e easy.

nitrogen:


That’s the problem with people and the press. You can’t finance an acquisition with just loan, most LBOs is minimum of 30-40 percent equity, with the remaining financed with debt. That’s even if you have physical assets. The only major tangible asset that man utd has is Old Trafford. So tell me how easy it would have been for the Glazers to acquire with up to 70 percent debt.

So they bought the club with their money?

They should’nt have been allowed to buy the club with a loan in the first place. Or at least if they want to, the debt shouldn’t be on the neck of the club.

Only one thing will push the Glazers out of United and that's a big fat cheque. Fans can scatter games from now till Jesus comes, that won't change.If fans badly want their club back,they should stump up the cash & pay. That's how to own & control any asset in real life.

kokaneprodigy:
What’s all these talk about self sustaining bla bla bla. Is club business a charity? So they should keep pumping their personal money to run the club so fans can be happy. I don’t understand.

What is happening to City is normal, when you first acquire a business you want to push to the top it’s normal you invest money heavily to push it to that spot. At that moment profit is not your major ish.
At some point City will have to look inward and be self sustainable, cos the owners will start expecting returns. Even the Arabs won’t keep tossing money at it indefinitely.

@bolded The opposite is the case with the Glazwrs.

And Man Coty haven’t stopped spending, despite winning the league on multiple occasions. You think they’ll stop spending once they win the UCL?

Leyqute:


@bolded The opposite is the case with the Glazwrs.

And Man Coty haven’t stopped spending, despite winning the league on multiple occasions. You think they’ll stop spending once they win the UCL?

Winning the league doesn’t automatically make you a big club, Leicester won the league few years back. So?
United wasn’t a small club when they bought it, in fact it was the biggest in England and among top 5 in the world.

United’s case ain’t same with City.

Leyqute:


So they bought the club with their money?

They should’nt have been allowed to buy the club with a loan in the first place. Or at least if they want to, the debt shouldn’t be on the neck of the club.

Why should they buy with 100 percent equity? Wait, so you think that dem billionaires make investments using their cash? Hahahaha when interest rates are fuvking low?

Also, you think that billionaires have cash? most of their monies are unrealized because they are in stocks and equity investments.

The mistake dem Glazers made was, they did not restructure the organization, and take the loan above Man uTd level (like put it in an entity above the club so man utd looks debt free on the surface). That’s what Abramovich and other club owners did and are still doing. I am sure there are reasons why the Glazers have not structured it that way.

Unfortunately, we don’t have access to financials of City Football Group, because it’s not a listed entity. I am sure there is a lot of debt in the books of the entity, while City and other clubs owned by City Football Group appear debt free. If the banks decide to go after their monies, the subsidiaries (e.g. Man City) will be in trouble.

MaziAlaye:
Only one thing will push the Glazers out of United and that's a big fat cheque. Fans can scatter games from now till Jesus comes, that won't change.If fans badly want their club back,they should stump up the cash & pay. That's how to own & control any asset in real life.

Simple! Stop whining and buy the club.

kokaneprodigy:

Winning the league doesn’t automatically make you a big club, Leicester won the league few years back. So?
United wasn’t a small club when they bought it, in fact it was the biggest in England and among top 5 in the world.

United’s case ain’t same with City.

Exactly my argument a few days ago. Utd did not need to spend a lot when the Glazers took over. City was a small club, they needed to spend more to get to a level that makes sense. City needed the owners to look for money and invest heavily so they can be at Chelsea and Utd’s level.

If you check how much both clubs have spent since 2013, it’s almost the same.

They said the Glazers are “taking from United” as opposed to? People are used to oligarchs and state owned oil rich clubs that they don’t know how businesses work anymore
Like these people think their investors are philanthropist and have no intention to make money.

Leyqute:


So they bought the club with their money?

They should’nt have been allowed to buy the club with a loan in the first place. Or at least if they want to, the debt shouldn’t be on the neck of the club.

I want to buy a property or business, what’s the seller’s business how I got my money and what I do with the business after change of ownership?

You really need to drop emotions and think this thing rationally.

MaziAlaye:
They said the Glazers are “taking from United” as opposed to? People are used to oligarchs and state owned oil rich clubs that they don’t know how businesses work anymore
Like these people think their investors are philanthropist and have no intention to make money.

No now. The Glazers should be taking money from their other investments and put into United. Also, they should sell the club to association of united fans for 200m because football is for the fans.

kokaneprodigy:

I want to buy a property or business, what’s the seller’s business how I got my money and what I do with the business after change of ownership?

You really need to drop emotions and think this thing rationally.

It’s a govt entity na, the Glazers are just administrators and operators. Naive people want the operators to resign so the govt can appoint another operator.

Smh for UK, sorry man utd football fans.

nitrogen:




No now. The Glazers should be taking money from their other investments and put into United. Also, they should sell the club to association of united fans for 200m because football is for the fans.

people dey ment

Abramovich restructured everything by moving the debt to a holding company. The fact is, the narrative that Chelsea was owing Abramovich is wrong. It’s an indirect debt owed to lenders.

Glazers has spent £1bn over the past decade on players. LVG & mou the great were successful.

Ole, your own DNA has spent 300m and has won nothing in 3yrs.

It should be Glazers and Oleout!! Una nor get sense.

Was it Glazers fault that ole bottled 4 semi finals? How is it their fault that the fraud lost to Istanbul Basakshehir? After today's protest,I hope this " yes man manager " goes. Remember he was against the Glazer's when they took over. Suddenly he is not.

They got him on the cheap knowing the fans won't turn on him.

These man utd fans believe they're the gatekeeper of football. The Glazers have spent lots of money for you lot. Moyes, LVG, Mou gave you trophies. DNA has given you zero. Direct your anger at Ole too...

Agbero fans.

Joezinho:
Glazers has spent £1bn over the past decade on players. LVG & mou the great were successful.

Ole, your own DNA has spent 300m and has won nothing in 3yrs.

It should be Glazers and Oleout!! Una nor get sense.

Was it Glazers fault that ole bottled 4 semi finals? How is it their fault that the fraud lost to Istanbul Basakshehir? After today's protest,I hope this " yes man manager " goes. Remember he was against the Glazer's when they took over. Suddenly he is not.

They got him on the cheap knowing the fans won't turn on him.

None of the managers post Ferguson have been successful, NONE!!!!!

This one probably sees Ole in his sleep.

KingAlabi:

None of the managers post Ferguson have been successful, NONE!!!!!

Go and take your drugs alabi..

Lana1:
This one probably sees Ole in his sleep.

Not probably, definitely!

KingAlabi:

None of the managers post Ferguson have been successful, NONE!!!!!

Community Shield and a 6th place finish is success.

But na we dey drop awa standards

Joezinho:


Go and take your drugs alabi..

Oga SUCCESSFUL for a club like united is the LEAGUE and the UCL, not baby cups, if ole goes on to win the Yoruba league I will celebrate it, but that doesn't mean he was SUCCESSFUL as a UNITED Manager.

In my books, NONE of the managers post Ferguson have been SUCCESSFUL.

Yorupa that your lord and saviour wants to win isn't european success?

Adelana get sense

Lana1:
Community Shield and a 6th place finish is success.

But na we dey drop awa standards

Make I no just enter that one Sha.

Imagine if Barcelona misses out on the league and koeman gets sacked, someone will now tell me koeman was successful at Barca because of Copa de rey, O wrong nau.