United Thread | 2025/26

[TravisBickle]

Certainly looks dodgy.

Definitely dodgy. Only Premier League game on Boxing Day is these cnuts!!

 

[Shirley]

From now until 7 Feb (after which the tv schedules have not been decided) EVERY ONE OF RAG’S MATCHES IS ON TV (I make that the next 11 of their games)

There is definitely some brown envelopes being passed by scruffy Jim to the media to help him with their HUGE debt.

What other explanation is there!!

The country is infested with rags and the tv companies are cashing in on it….

 

[KS55]

The country is infested with rags and the tv companies are cashing in on it….

It is said that you are always within 5 yards of a rag. There is a distinct lack of culling taking place.

 

[surprisedbygrass]

Is there an actual headline saying they are 1bn in debt or is it the usual powderpuffed, sugarcoated fuckin bollocks saying how great they are and how well they have done cutting their cloth and sacking loads of staff?

Well.... No ... they are £1.29billion in debt according to this week's accounts . https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...m-but-revenues-dip?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

 

[pepguardiola'smoustache]

This might be a daft question, but who are they actually in debt to?
I mean, is there a specific bank or company that is clearly stated as being the lenders?

And furthermore, could it be possible that the glaziers themselves are the lenders, via some clever jiggery-pokery accounting through another business, so that in fact they are themselves receiving the interest on the debt?


@Prestwich_Blue you know about these sort things. Am i being fanciful?

 

[Vienna_70]

This might be a daft question, but who are they actually in debt to?
I mean, is there a specific bank or company that is clearly stated as being the lenders?

And furthermore, could it be possible that the glaziers themselves are the lenders, via some clever jiggery-pokery accounting through another business, so that in fact they are themselves receiving the interest on the debt?

That wouldn’t surprise me at all.

The debt was originally put on the club to pay for it, wasn’t it?

High-level economics is not my sphere of expertise, but it’s ludicrous to me that debt isn’t taken into account, when assessing à club’s viability under FFPR or PSR or whatever the latest idea is to try and screw the only team in Manchester.

Hopefully, if and when the regulator is in place, he or she will start taking steps in that direction.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

This might be a daft question, but who are they actually in debt to?
I mean, is there a specific bank or company that is clearly stated as being the lenders?

And furthermore, could it be possible that the glaziers themselves are the lenders, via some clever jiggery-pokery accounting through another business, so that in fact they are themselves receiving the interest on the debt?


@Prestwich_Blue you know about these sort things. Am i being fanciful?

It’s in two parts the debt the Glazers bought the club with and then their operating debt. The operating debt has gone up with their summer transfer activities, which is shocking considering all the lay offs they made to save money. Their policy of paying for players over an extremely long period of time means they are still paying for Sancho and Casemiro’s transfers as an example. They simply don’t have the cash reserves to pay up front to shorten the payment periods.

The piss funny thing is after all the noise the raggy fan base made about boycotting the Glazers and reducing their revenue streams. The merchandising and retail part of the business was one area of the business which showed growth from last years accounts. You can’t make this shit up.

 

[pepguardiola'smoustache]

It’s in two parts the debt the Glazers bought the club with and then their operating debt. The operating debt has gone up with their summer transfer activities, which is shocking considering all the lay offs they made to save money. Their policy of paying for players over an extremely long period of time means they are still paying for Sancho and Casemiro’s transfers as an example. They simply don’t have the cash reserves to pay up front to shorten the payment periods.

The piss funny thing is after all the noise the raggy fan base made about boycotting the Glazers and reducing their revenue streams. The merchandising and retail part of the business was one area of the business which showed growth from last years accounts. You can’t make this shit up.

Yes, but my question is who are the lenders, mate? Where has the borrowed money come from?

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

Yes, but my question is who are the lenders, mate? Where has the borrowed money come from?

There will be banks and financial institutions that know they can rinse them for interest so they repeatedly keep giving them credit facilities. It’s perfect for a bank as they know United will always look at improving their revenue streams so they are good for payment but will always be outliving their means trying to bring back the glory days. They are forever stuck in that debt cycle.

 

[CC1]

The country is infested with rags and the tv companies are cashing in on it….

Well that’s the drum rags keep beating but the country is also “infested” with millions more non rag fans who shouldn’t have to watch that rag crap every week.

 

[waspish]

They would have been in trouble if there mate at Chelsea didn’t buy Crapanute now they need to get champs league or sell a player! Now who do you thing they’ll sell there mates again!? Mainoo my bet pure profit some mug will pay 50m

 

[BlueRockape]

Not sure if true but don't they owe something like 40 mill for players they have bought on the drip ?
If so was this taken into account?

 

[Scaring Europe to Death]

The country is infested with rags and the tv companies are cashing in on it….

Yet strangely their last home FA Cup Tie (Fulham) wasn't anywhere near a sellout attendance, albeit initially they tried to claim a laughable 74,000, before revising the figure to a dubious 67,000.

It might be different this time, but only because it's literally their only chance of success.

 

[Paladin]

And the best part of this is they haven't paid a penny off the debt and the costs of servicing it keeps going up, they've no staff left to sack, the scum have nowhere left to turn. Happy Days

We've heard a version of this each of the last ten years or so, yet here they still are.

 

[moomey]

We've heard a version of this each of the last ten years or so, yet herethey still are.

….as a shadow of their former selves. They are unrecognisable versus fifteen years ago - some people have a short memory.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

And the best part of this is they haven't paid a penny off the debt and the costs of servicing it keeps going up, they've no staff left to sack, the scum have nowhere left to turn. Happy Days

And they want to spend north of £2.5 billion on a new stadium. Even with the £300 million from the council to move a freight yard. Where will they get the rest of it to build it?

 

[BertTrautmann'sParachute]

Definitely dodgy. Only Premier League game on Boxing Day is these cnuts!!

That's an absolute disgrace. Boxing day is traditionally a Match day and only these cunts are playing in the PL.

 

[give it to gordon]

View attachment 177406

And it has no effect on them regarding the financial rules. Seems odd that financial rules aims at stopping clubs going out of business allow this much debt

 

[mcfc64]

From now until 7 Feb (after which the tv schedules have not been decided) EVERY ONE OF RAG’S MATCHES IS ON TV (I make that the next 11 of their games)

There is definitely some brown envelopes being passed by scruffy Jim to the media to help him with their HUGE debt.

What other explanation is there!!

You would think us and the rest of the clubs would be asking some questions about this !

 

[heslops barnet]

That's an absolute disgrace. Boxing day is traditionally a Match day and only these cunts are playing in the PL.

make sure you don’t choke on your turkey laughing at the cunts