United Thread | 2024/25

Status
Not open for further replies.
A small part of me almost would like to see them taken over by someone equivalent to our owners... it would be wonderful to see the mental gymnastics and back tracking that takes place from their fans after all the years of "oil money" and "state owned" etc etc
Sod that!
 
A small part of me almost would like to see them taken over by someone equivalent to our owners... it would be wonderful to see the mental gymnastics and back tracking that takes place from their fans after all the years of "oil money" and "state owned" etc etc
Having outside investment in the club would benefit them enormously and see them return to how they once were. Why would you want that, just so you can point the finger and say "ha! hypocrites!" to them, when there are so many other reasons to do so?

I want them bleeding, hurting, observing their demise knowing there is nothing they can do to stop it. I want them selling off their assets, becoming forgotten and disregarded as a new generation of football fans, who have never heard of the "Busby Babes", and terms like "The United Way" and "Fergie" never even enters into their lexicon. I want their future to be bouncing up and down the divisions, watching their 'fanbase' dwindle, becoming nothing more than what Leeds are now. A fitting end to a horrible club.
 
A small part of me almost would like to see them taken over by someone equivalent to our owners... it would be wonderful to see the mental gymnastics and back tracking that takes place from their fans after all the years of "oil money" and "state owned" etc etc
I’m sure some of their more politically charged fan base would even consider forming their own breakaway fan owned club and try and give that a go……..


What’s that you say?
 
I want them in administration, along with the goodness Spuds and dippers. Each given. Luton Town level punishment.
All start on minus 30 and the fallout .
 
I think net debt plus share capital is used to calculate the ROCE.
Can @Prestwich_Blue confirm?
I think Forbes uses a measure called 'Enterprise Value', which is simply market capitalisation plus net debt. It's a measure of how the business is funded but the weakness is that it doesn't separate leveraged debt, which doesn't produce a return on investment, from debt taken on to finance things that should generate a return, such as plant & machinery, property, other companies you buy, etc.

If you make widgets and your production is close to capacity, meaning you're turning orders away, or are in danger of having to do that, it probably makes sense to buy another widget-making machine or set up a new plant altogether. You'll probably borrow money to do that but if you've done your sums right it'll produce additional revenue that'll at least cover the cost.

Debt like the Glazer's loaded onto united, which is a dead-weight and costs them money, doesn't itself produce a return. It does for the Glazers but not for united. It hasn't been invested in the team or any other revenue-generating asset. But using EV means that their debt increases their value. It doesn't make sense.
 
I have just watched a programme on Netflix about bin Laden and one of the top CIA people said that she was sorry, in a way, that he was killed. She wanted him to grow old in obscurity knowing that nobody cared about him, a lonely old man. This is what I want for the rags. Down in the third division of the football knowing that they are no longer relevant.
 
I think Forbes uses a measure called 'Enterprise Value', which is simply market capitalisation plus net debt. It's a measure of how the business is funded but the weakness is that it doesn't separate leveraged debt, which doesn't produce a return on investment, from debt taken on to finance things that should generate a return, such as plant & machinery, property, other companies you buy, etc.

If you make widgets and your production is close to capacity, meaning you're turning orders away, or are in danger of having to do that, it probably makes sense to buy another widget-making machine or set up a new plant altogether. You'll probably borrow money to do that but if you've done your sums right it'll produce additional revenue that'll at least cover the cost.

Debt like the Glazer's loaded onto united, which is a dead-weight and costs them money, doesn't itself produce a return. It does for the Glazers but not for united. It hasn't been invested in the team or any other revenue-generating asset. But using EV means that their debt increases their value. It doesn't make sense.
It would appear to make sense to the Glazers, their original calculation when they bought Untied was that the revenue was more than enough to service the debt so the borrowing made sense. Maybe that's coming unstuck but who knows the real figures, I suspect that the next year is going to be very very difficult for Untied.
 
I have just watched a programme on Netflix about bin Laden and one of the top CIA people said that she was sorry, in a way, that he was killed. She wanted him to grow old in obscurity knowing that nobody cared about him, a lonely old man. This is what I want for the rags. Down in the third division of the football knowing that they are no longer relevant.
The same reason I'm not quite ready for jelly and ice cream yet.
 
I was listening to the radio today. Jamie Jackson was comparing United to Spinal Tap now playing to selective audiences with Ratface playing the Derek Smalls role!
 
I have just watched a programme on Netflix about bin Laden and one of the top CIA people said that she was sorry, in a way, that he was killed. She wanted him to grow old in obscurity knowing that nobody cared about him, a lonely old man. This is what I want for the rags. Down in the third division of the football knowing that they are no longer relevant.
They are still in the premier league but for me they aren’t relevant..
 
Debt like the Glazer's loaded onto united, which is a dead-weight and costs them money, doesn't itself produce a return. It does for the Glazers but not for united.
is it known who actually provided the money that is the debt?

it'd be piss funny if,
through caman jiggery-pokery,
the glaziers had somehow lent themselves the money
in order to personally collect the interest.
 
is it known who actually provided the money that is the debt?

it'd be piss funny if,
through caman jiggery-pokery,
the glaziers had somehow lent themselves the money
in order to personally collect the interest.
If they've done that, they get a statue.
 
The problem they have is the club is completely rotten. The stadium is absolutely fucked and the squad needs about £600/700 million invested into it to get it near a title challenge. Bleeding money and could very easily have a billion quid of debt in two seasons. Why would anybody outlay 5/6 billion or something with no infrastructure and no money. The rags name just isn't worth that much or carries that much weight anymore. Not when you could very easily buy a ready made team in the Premier League for far less. The worst thing that happened to them was City. I just don't think anybody else would want to come into the same city (technically not but you know what I mean) and compete or that kind of scale with us. They know if it happened, our owners would just go one better.

Plus the Glazers don't sell, they drain and run their business into the ground.
They'll suck the corpse dry of every last drop of blood, then discard it amongst trash in a back alley and walk away , like the vampires they are.

....I think I'm in LOVE !
 
A small part of me almost would like to see them taken over by someone equivalent to our owners... it would be wonderful to see the mental gymnastics and back tracking that takes place from their fans after all the years of "oil money" and "state owned" etc etc
Watching them get relegated and go bankrupt would be much more fun
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top