Nice bit of perspective.
Why is it a conflict of interest? He was at a private meeting and was being asked questions about all sorts of subjects. He was very entertaining and open about lots of things. It was actually me who asked him about City and the impact our takeover had on them. He was quite complimentary about the way we were being run and the impact we'd had on football and the community and he also made it clear we're going to be around for the long-term. I wouldn't have expected him to reply with "Sorry, I can't talk about other clubs because I'm on the UEFA & FIFA Executive".http://www.newindianexpress.com/spo...-United-in-Asia/2015/09/17/article3033018.ece
Conflict of interest from the Vice-chairman, The Football Association (2012-present)
UK Vice-President of FIFA (2015-present)
A completely superficial argument without financial merit.
I'll help him by referring to their latest accounts including a £38m drop in revenue. Whoops! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-34278364
Why is it a conflict of interest? He was at a private meeting and was being asked questions about all sorts of subjects. He was very entertaining and open about lots of things. It was actually me who asked him about City and the impact our takeover had on them. He was quite complimentary about the way we were being run and the impact we'd had on football and the community and he also made it clear we're going to be around for the long-term. I wouldn't have expected him to reply with "Sorry, I can't talk about other clubs because I'm on the UEFA & FIFA Executive".
I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.Horrible club but a seriously effective money making machine !
Latest Financials
http://ir.manutd.com/~/media/Files/M/Manutd-IR/Governance Document/manchester-united-plc-4q14-earnings-release.pdf
But that's only dividends. Then you've got to add on the "Management Fees" that will be going across the pond.http://www.theguardian.com/football...ed-malcolm-glazer-children-15m-year?CMP=fb_gu
Manchester United to pay Malcolm Glazer’s six children £15m every year
Maybe that's because he was their CEO on September 1st 2008 and had been talking about the signing of Berbatov on that day.Funny how you still associate him with the rags asking him that question
I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.
5) Servicing their debts is still costing them around £50m a year.
I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.
1) They made a small loss of just under £1.2m, even on that level of turnover.
2) That loss was after a player trading profit of £23.6m and a reduction in staff costs of over £11m.
3) They've reduced staff numbers by over 100 from last year to achieve that reduction in staff costs. That's 1 in 8 staff.
4) They had a refinancing (sale of shares I assume) that raised £272.5m but only used £228m of that to repay debt. So they kept back nearly £45m which I assume was to help their cashflow and pay for players or service their debt.
5) Servicing their debts is still costing them around £50m a year.
6) Player amortisation is up to nearly £100m a year from £55m last year.
It's clear that the year outside the CL hurt them badly, whatever spin they want to put on the figures. Cash appears to have been tight, which is supported by the stories of them paying for players on instalments. Had they not scraped in this season, they'd have really started to feel the pinch. Let's hope Italy take our fourth CL spot and they miss out on a regular basis.
If you can service your debts out of profits then there should be no problem. The scandal is that the Glazers were allowed to buy the club in a leveraged transaction and load the debt onto the club. Why that sort of thing wasn't outlawed by FFP is a complete mystery to me as that's the main cause of clubs failing. So if FFP was really about protecting clubs, that's the first thing that should have been tackled. The Glazers would certainly not have been allowed to do that with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. NFL rules only allow franchises to secure £130m of debt on their assets. Any more that that and it has to be unsecured (usually via a securitisation of future revenue).And yet they're still immune from FFPR sanctions.
It doesn't seem right, does it?
http://www.theguardian.com/football...ed-malcolm-glazer-children-15m-year?CMP=fb_gu
Manchester United to pay Malcolm Glazer’s six children £15m every year
Clearly the failure to qualify for the CL hit them hard reducing both match day and broadcast revenue but with their Adidas and GM sponsorship deals kicking in they are surely set for a big revenue jump in the next set of figs.
I looked at those financial statements quickly and there are some interesting things in there.
1) They made a small loss of just under £1.2m, even on that level of turnover.
2) That loss was after a player trading profit of £23.6m and a reduction in staff costs of over £11m.
3) They've reduced staff numbers by over 100 from last year to achieve that reduction in staff costs. That's 1 in 8 staff.
4) They had a refinancing (sale of shares I assume) that raised £272.5m but only used £228m of that to repay debt. So they kept back nearly £45m which I assume was to help their cashflow and pay for players or service their debt.
5) Servicing their debts is still costing them around £50m a year.
6) Player amortisation is up to nearly £100m a year from £55m last year.
It's clear that the year outside the CL hurt them badly, whatever spin they want to put on the figures. Cash appears to have been tight, which is supported by the stories of them paying for players on instalments. Had they not scraped in this season, they'd have really started to feel the pinch. Let's hope Italy take our fourth CL spot and they miss out on a regular basis.
Just looking at the UEFA coefficients and unless they do something spectacular in the CL this season, they could easily be in Pot 3 next season.
Assuming that one of Barca or Real wins La Liga, Bayern win the Bundesliga, PSG win La Ligue and one of us, Arsenal or Chelsea wins the PL. That means one of Barca or Real will be in Pot 2 along with two English clubs, plus probably Atletico Madrid, Dortmund & Valencia and one of Benfica or Porto. If Juve don't win Serie A then that's 8 teams with higher coefficients than them as things stand. If Zenit don't win the Russian league then they have a higher co-efficient as do Napoli & Sevilla.
No easy pickings from that lot.
That's assuming the STCs qualify, of course.
Personally, I think they will, as none of the potential candidates to replace them seems strong enough.
Though Everton have started well and could give them a run for their money.