Red Cafe in meltdown

[JASR]

Thick as pig shit mate. It’s one of the biggest myths in football that United’s success under Ferguson came about because they “lived within their means”. They finished mid-table in 1988/89 then in the summer of 1989 spent almost as much as their entire turnover the previous season on new players in what was, at the time, the most unprecedented spending spree in British football history. They managed to do this despite winning fuck-all the previous season, having an average attendance that was way down on the season before (back in the days when gate money accounted for a far bigger percentage of a club’s revenue), and at the time were millions in debt and losing money every week. Yet some fuckwits who support them say they’ve only ever achieved success by spending self-generated cash. If United was such a cash cow back then, it begs the question as to why Edwards was so desperate to offload the club onto Michael Knighton for a modest fee.

That unprecedented spending spree was the springboard for United’s subsequent success but even with that they needed boyhood City fan Mark Robins to save Ferguson’s bacon (pardon the pun) before he’d even won a single trophy for them. Without his intervention, the next 25 years for United may well have looked a lot different.

Let’s also not forget that without the investment of John Henry Davies and James Gibson, along with City coming to their rescue in getting Manchester Central booted out of the league and ultimately out of business, United may well have gone bust long before Busby rocked up there as manager, let alone Ferguson. The cunts who bang on about City’s spending while at the same time airbrushing these significant moments from United’s history deserve to have “We’ll buy your club and we’ll burn it down” sang to them every day for the rest of their sad, pathetic lives.

Just regarding Knighton bid.

I can’t remember the value of the offer off the top of my head, but the offer was for not just the players, but the rest of the staff, the ground, any other buildings, and the foreseeable value looking a few years ahead.

The value of their outlay on players, just over a year later came reasonably close to the Knighton offer value.

So , United spent , just a year after the valuation of the entire enterprise for sale, almost the same amount on (iirc) about 7-8 new players. (Not forgetting the wages of existing players , staff, buildings costs etc).

It was an unprecedented ratio of spend vs enterprise value. Organic my arse.

Edit: as per another post, Knighton bid was for just over 50%, so they spent on new players next year about 40% of the club entire valuation

 

[surrounded by idiots]

Thick as pig shit mate. It’s one of the biggest myths in football that United’s success under Ferguson came about because they “lived within their means”. They finished mid-table in 1988/89 then in the summer of 1989 spent almost as much as their entire turnover the previous season on new players in what was, at the time, the most unprecedented spending spree in British football history. They managed to do this despite winning fuck-all the previous season, having an average attendance that was way down on the season before (back in the days when gate money accounted for a far bigger percentage of a club’s revenue), and at the time were millions in debt and losing money every week. Yet some fuckwits who support them say they’ve only ever achieved success by spending self-generated cash. If United was such a cash cow back then, it begs the question as to why Edwards was so desperate to offload the club onto Michael Knighton for a modest fee.

That unprecedented spending spree was the springboard for United’s subsequent success but even with that they needed boyhood City fan Mark Robins to save Ferguson’s bacon (pardon the pun) before he’d even won a single trophy for them. Without his intervention, the next 25 years for United may well have looked a lot different.

Let’s also not forget that without the investment of John Henry Davies and James Gibson, along with City coming to their rescue in getting Manchester Central booted out of the league and ultimately out of business, United may well have gone bust long before Busby rocked up there as manager, let alone Ferguson. The cunts who bang on about City’s spending while at the same time airbrushing these significant moments from United’s history deserve to have “We’ll buy your club and we’ll burn it down” sang to them every day for the rest of their sad, pathetic lives.

There is a reason me and some of your other mates call you Statto

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Thick as pig shit mate. It’s one of the biggest myths in football that United’s success under Ferguson came about because they “lived within their means”. They finished mid-table in 1988/89 then in the summer of 1989 spent almost as much as their entire turnover the previous season on new players in what was, at the time, the most unprecedented spending spree in British football history. They managed to do this despite winning fuck-all the previous season, having an average attendance that was way down on the season before (back in the days when gate money accounted for a far bigger percentage of a club’s revenue), and at the time were millions in debt and losing money every week. Yet some fuckwits who support them say they’ve only ever achieved success by spending self-generated cash. If United was such a cash cow back then, it begs the question as to why Edwards was so desperate to offload the club onto Michael Knighton for a modest fee.

That unprecedented spending spree was the springboard for United’s subsequent success but even with that they needed boyhood City fan Mark Robins to save Ferguson’s bacon (pardon the pun) before he’d even won a single trophy for them. Without his intervention, the next 25 years for United may well have looked a lot different.

Let’s also not forget that without the investment of John Henry Davies and James Gibson, along with City coming to their rescue in getting Manchester Central booted out of the league and ultimately out of business, United may well have gone bust long before Busby rocked up there as manager, let alone Ferguson. The cunts who bang on about City’s spending while at the same time airbrushing these significant moments from United’s history deserve to have “We’ll buy your club and we’ll burn it down” sang to them every day for the rest of their sad, pathetic lives.

Superb post. Might try and paste it into Facebook next time rags on there start about 115.
Worth putting in in BBC have your say too (for the 5 seconds it would last)

 

[KentBlue]

Worth putting in in BBC have your say too (for the 5 seconds it would last)

The BBC would lynch you if you posted anything anti-rag.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

The BBC would lynch you if you posted anything anti-rag.

Yes, it would never be posted, but the rag loving cunts would have to read it and take offence before deleting

 

[Vienna_70]

Just regarding Knighton bid.

I can’t remember the value of the offer off the top of my head, but the offer was for not just the players, but the rest of the staff, the ground, any other buildings, and the foreseeable value looking a few years ahead.

The value of their outlay on players, just over a year later came reasonably close to the Knighton offer value.

So , United spent , just a year after the valuation of the entire enterprise for sale, almost the same amount on (iirc) about 7-8 new players. (Not forgetting the wages of existing players , staff, buildings costs etc).

It was an unprecedented ratio of spend vs enterprise value. Organic my arse.

Google came up with this:

In August 1989, businessman Michael Knighton had a £20 million takeover bid for Manchester United accepted by chairman Martin Edwards. The deal, which would have been a record for a British football club, involved purchasing a 50.06% controlling stake. While initially accepted, the takeover collapsed shortly after.

The team that lost the Maine Road Massacre cost £13 million, so. 65% of Knighton's bid. Or near enough 2/3rds.

 

[JASR]

Natural United fan idiot from anywhere but Manchester, uk, writes about financial shenanigans without realising the columbo moment:


Just one thing I don’t quite understand Mr Dansk, you allege that City’s owners went through an elaborate charade to disguise money from their owner?
But why would he need to do that, when he could have just given City legitimate owner investment loan like the multi hundreds of millions by Arsenal owners, that was allowed for all the time of your City allegations, until City legally challenged the PL APT rules and comprehensively won, eliminating that loophole from Arsenal (and others)?
Can you tell me Mr Dansk, why you believe your charade of allegations, because I can’t quite understand it myself?

 

[KentBlue]

Can you tell me Mr Dansk, why you believe your charade of allegations, because I can’t quite understand it myself?

He probably doesn't know himself. I reckon all he's done is cut and paste somebody else's post in the hope someone somewhere reads it and thinks he's a knowledgeable chap.

They're a very 'low-on-self-esteem' type, these people.

 

[Blueboy73]

Thick as pig shit mate. It’s one of the biggest myths in football that United’s success under Ferguson came about because they “lived within their means”. They finished mid-table in 1988/89 then in the summer of 1989 spent almost as much as their entire turnover the previous season on new players in what was, at the time, the most unprecedented spending spree in British football history. They managed to do this despite winning fuck-all the previous season, having an average attendance that was way down on the season before (back in the days when gate money accounted for a far bigger percentage of a club’s revenue), and at the time were millions in debt and losing money every week. Yet some fuckwits who support them say they’ve only ever achieved success by spending self-generated cash. If United was such a cash cow back then, it begs the question as to why Edwards was so desperate to offload the club onto Michael Knighton for a modest fee.

That unprecedented spending spree was the springboard for United’s subsequent success but even with that they needed boyhood City fan Mark Robins to save Ferguson’s bacon (pardon the pun) before he’d even won a single trophy for them. Without his intervention, the next 25 years for United may well have looked a lot different.

Let’s also not forget that without the investment of John Henry Davies and James Gibson, along with City coming to their rescue in getting Manchester Central booted out of the league and ultimately out of business, United may well have gone bust long before Busby rocked up there as manager, let alone Ferguson. The cunts who bang on about City’s spending while at the same time airbrushing these significant moments from United’s history deserve to have “We’ll buy your club and we’ll burn it down” sang to them every day for the rest of their sad, pathetic lives.

Makes me laugh when Rags refer to The Etihad as "The Council House".
The vast majority of their fuckwit followers aren't aware that their antquated shit hole was given to them free of charge by John Henry Davies amd that the taxpayer has funded various renovations and upgrades to that dump over the years.
No wonder they've got the begging bowl out again asking for another handout to fund a new stadium.

 

[Blueboy73]

Natural United fan idiot from anywhere but Manchester, uk, writes about financial shenanigans without realising the columbo moment:
View attachment 190805

Just one thing I don’t quite understand Mr Dansk, you allege that City’s owners went through an elaborate charade to disguise money from their owner?
But why would he need to do that, when he could have just given City legitimate owner investment loan like the multi hundreds of millions by Arsenal owners, that was allowed for all the time of your City allegations, until City legally challenged the PL APT rules and comprehensively won, eliminating that loophole from Arsenal (and others)?
Can you tell me Mr Dansk, why you believe your charade of allegations, because I can’t quite understand it myself?

Stop making sense.
You must know by know that confronting the average Rag with logic and cold hard facts won't work.
If Mr Dansk sees this, his solitary braincell's response will be either be 115, cheats or we must be guilty because he heard some fuckwit say so during a phone in on Talkshite.

 

[levets]

Their album was called Facades, an anagram of Sad Cafe.

Their first and best album was ‘Fanx Ta-Ra’. Contained Black Rose, Hungry Eyes & Love will survive. Three fantastic tracks.

 

[Dave Ewing's Back 'eader]

Omg. Another longterm City hater, oh and bonus of Darklord, again.
View attachment 190515

We have our Save our Solsjiar etc threads, perhaps they need to start a ‘free the Catalan one’ thread…

<still shaking head in disbelief at the absolute whoppers spouted>

Surely these dastardly owners wouldn't have allowed Txiki to walk away and retire to a cycing existence in the Basque Country!

 

[Oggie]

On a thread asking if anyone ever met or knew George Best:



Thick as fucking pigshit.

 

[ArniArason]

Not city related this mate

 

[Stoned Rose]

Oi Oi Oi.

 

[Oggie]

Same thread about George Best:



God yeah must have been really awful him not turning up to open the fan store however did you cope?

 

[VOOMER]

There is a reason me and some of your other mates call you Statto

Is he by chance called Mr Stattos Stattatovic?

 

[surrounded by idiots]

Is he by chance called Mr Stattos Stattatovic?

Not to my knowledge, but to be fair I've probably called him all sorts over the years

 

[Ban-jani]

Natural United fan idiot from anywhere but Manchester, uk, writes about financial shenanigans without realising the columbo moment:
View attachment 190805

Just one thing I don’t quite understand Mr Dansk, you allege that City’s owners went through an elaborate charade to disguise money from their owner?
But why would he need to do that, when he could have just given City legitimate owner investment loan like the multi hundreds of millions by Arsenal owners, that was allowed for all the time of your City allegations, until City legally challenged the PL APT rules and comprehensively won, eliminating that loophole from Arsenal (and others)?
Can you tell me Mr Dansk, why you believe your charade of allegations, because I can’t quite understand it myself?

At least he knows what we’re accused of. 99% of those shouting cheats don’t.

 

[pepguardiola'smoustache]

Oi Oi Oi.