Rags Debt - Daily Mail & Panorama [Merged]

i would really like to know where, you get the figures from as you say the rags have always, had the top attendances, i remember many attendance well below the 25,ooo mark the season the scum went down, where was the rags support then
 
Bluemoonbaldboy said:
bumbles said:
I agree tick tock...I am counting the days until those vultures leave OT...:)
Thing is they paid £800 million what £500 million was the original debt meaning they paid £300 million of their "own" money I say "own" as Panorama did indicate they took out huge loans in the USA and only bought you that year. Looking at it to give them a small profit clear off the debt etc anyone is looking at £1.2-£1.3 Billion as a realistic offer. However with the fact they have increased some revenue streams they would want more. Issue is the Glazers have already raided the piggy bank at Old Trafford they had some of the new shirt sponsorship deal upfront. It's no wonder the Knights £1.1 billion offer was always doomed to fail it would take over the £1.5 billion they "turned down" from elsewhere before they are going to consider talking.

Question most Utd fans dodge though when asked whats your honest feelings about the whole Rock of Gibraltar incident Fergies spat there with John Magnier. They were red hot tip to buy you out till Fergie dug his feet in over his share of the stud rights.


I will answer it ..it was a complete dogs dinner...however the irish guys NEVER wanted to own united...if you were watching the situation closely at the time ..they continualy put out press release stating that it was an investment and they had no interest in owenership...
 
poyntonblueboy said:
i would really like to know where, you get the figures from as you say the rags have always, had the top attendances, i remember many attendance well below the 25,ooo mark the season the scum went down, where was the rags support then

Hate to admit this but I`ve been using one of Uniteds websites,to look at the info you need.
Must admit that it is a very good website and very informative,going back over years and years,giving seasons,teams,scorers and attendances.
Go on "The Website of Dreams" under Google MUFC.
I proved conclusively to a load of Rags in my Local that indeed United had some piss poor crowds even going back before redevelopment.
Check it out but make sure "YOU WASH YOUR BLOODY HANDS AFTERWARDS"
lol
 
bumbles said:
non renewal ..well the facts re that in 2 years ST renewals have declined ...and the FACT that the wating list has disapppeared since 2005 illustrates perfectly the disdain in which MOST united fans view the owners...
Well you could say that but like most other fans, they have been affected by the recession and the fact that prices have been pushed up relentlessly. I don't doubt some are genuinely not renewing because MUST has asked people not to but I suspect a large number are using that as a convenient excuse.

bumbles said:
now your second point glory hunters.. I woudl say that glory hunters would be those fans who showed up when success was occuring or imminent, or a team was playing a more succesful one in one off games...

well the season we went down , the attendances were still the highest of ANY division , the seasons when chelsea won the league and all looked bleak..attendances remained the highest...when Liverpool were winning everything and we had the occassional cup run...we still had the higehst attendaces....Its a common slur that other teams try and have a dig ..the fact is when united come to town ...its is invariably the highest attednace for the home team ..funny that .
No one can argue they have been the most glamorous and successful team of the last 20 years and that's why they attract crowds but you're talking about the 70's and that's not relevant to what's happening today. Now, united fans travel further to home games on average than any other fans and there are less local fans (though Liverpool are a close second). It costs a lot more in real terms to watch football these days and a lot of those people will decide it's not worth the time, cost or effort to watch a team that doesn't win things as consistently. But they will delude themselves and others with the statement that they're doing it for the good of the club.

bumbles said:
third point..value in the market..well thats a fiar commnet...we have very limited funds...why pay 47M for Tevez , when you could pick up the next ronaldo for 12m , the new vidic for 7m , the new evra for 5m etc...
you were doing well up to this. Tevez cost £25m, whcih was the buyout clause in his contract. The rest was wages but no doubt he's have played for nothing for you. So why pay £25m when you can have the sublime skills and workrate of Berbatov for a paltry £5m more. So Smalling is the new Vidic? You got lucky with Ronaldo but most of the "value" players you've bought still have an awful lot to prove. You've been reduced to gambling in the market on young talent coming good when previously you could buy the best. £90m free cash flow the last two years but ALL of that will have to go to pay off debt and you only made a profit by selling Ronaldo for £80m last financial year. you have to be nervous about the future.

bumbles said:
are you honeslty sayi ng Rio and Rooney arent worth the combined £58M
Yes they are but how long ago did you buy them for that? In an era where transfer price inflation has been rampant if they're still only worth £58m then then they've lost a lot of value in real terms.

bumbles said:
fourth point ...any season that ends in silverware is a success, surely you can grasp that ...and with a fair wind and less ref/lonesman mistake ( no excuses) we would have won the league.. as for your comments about the derby ..well I think a little retrospective glossing over form you I think..the fact is you had 33% of possesion in the last game and 2 shots oin target.
I'll be honest - we'd have been delighted with a Carling Cup win but we've had nothing for so many years whereas you have had trophy after trophy. It's all relative. If I drive a Rolls for years then have to downsize to a Ford Mondeo I won't be happy about it whereas a new Ford Mondeo after a clapped out Mini Metro would be a vast improvement.

As for the derby, we were poor in the home game and showed no ambition or inclination to attack what many of us saw as a relatively weak opponent. Quite of few of us were incensed with Mancini about that. But your well-documented practice of playing for a win until the end of the game gave you 4 extra points from those games. If we'd surrendered both games to Chelsea in the same way, the gap would have been a lot bigger. You also lost 7 games, 3 more than you lost the previous season. A lot will depend on your reaction this season.
 
bumbles said:
oh we are back to that again are we...tell me what is the figure today ..
500m,700m, 1.1b, 1.5n ...

there isnt one united fan who would defend the glazers ( not glaziers) ...so your point is?

Eh !
You should try reading your own forum. There are plenty of guys over at Red Cafe defending the Glazers. Try looking up the posts of Roodboy and GCHQ for starters but there are plenty of others (all claim to be matchgoing Mancs btw !)

I'm sure some will think I'm a bit wierd but I really enjoy reading their arguments over their ownership/financial position. I guess it's the same morbid curiousity that makes people slow down on the motorway to look and the carnage by the side of the road.
 
which period of time would you like to question me on ?...as for the comment on the attandances for the relegation season ..it wasnt belwo 25,000 thats one of your wet dreams..the average attandance for that season was 42712

some interesting facts for you ..

United have had a higher average attendance than City EVERY SINGLE SEASON since 1947.
- When City won the league in the 1968, they had the 6th highest attendance in the country. United had the highest average attendance of 57,552, more than 10,000 higher than any club that season.
- When United were playing in Division 2 during the 1974-1975 season, they still had the highest average attendance of any club in the country, including Division 1.
- City have had a higher average attendance ranking than they have average league position every decade.
- Between 1946 and 1949 United played at Maine Road whilst reconstruction work was being done on Old Trafford after the bombings in the war. In the first season, when City won the league, United had an average attendance of 4,662 more than City at their own stadium. In the second season, United had an average attendance of 12,165 more than City at their own stadium. In the third season, United had an average attendance of 10,109 more than City at their own stadium.
- United have a higher average attendance than City for every decade since the 1940’s.
- Between 1947 and the year before the Munich Air Disaster, there was an average of almost 7,000 more United fans attending games than City.
- City were a more successful club on the pitch than United in the 1970s, yet there was a difference of over 13,000 in our average attendances, with United the best supported club of the decade.

In the 1950s…
City’s average league position: 15th
City’s average attendance position: 10th (1 year in Div 2 – position not included)
City’s average attendance: 30,028

United’s average league position: 3rd
United’s average attendance position: 4th
United’s average attendance: 35,667

In the 1960s…
City’s average league position: 18th
City’s average attendance position: 13th (3 years in Div 2 – positions not included)
City’s average attendance: 27,823

United’s average league position: 7th
United’s average attendance position: 2nd
United’s average attendance: 45,199

In the 1970s…
City’s average league position: 9th
City’s average attendance position: 6th
City’s average attendance: 35,178

United’s average league position: 11th
United’s average attendance position: 1st (1 year in Div 2 – position not included)
United’s average attendance: 48,328
 
Question most Utd fans dodge though when asked whats your honest feelings about the whole Rock of Gibraltar incident
Ha ha! The majority of rag fans around here have never even heard of Rock of Gibraltar.

But they're not plastic, fair-weather fans though. One of them I spoke to told me his brother nearly went to the swamp years ago.
 
bumbles said:
Bluemoonbaldboy said:
Question most Utd fans dodge though when asked whats your honest feelings about the whole Rock of Gibraltar incident Fergies spat there with John Magnier. They were red hot tip to buy you out till Fergie dug his feet in over his share of the stud rights.


I will answer it ..it was a complete dogs dinner...however the irish guys NEVER wanted to own united...if you were watching the situation closely at the time ..they continualy put out press release stating that it was an investment and they had no interest in owenership...
Fair play for answering normally get told to "f*$k off"
 
Just in case any of you were wondering. The track they kept playing on the Panorama programme the other night was Blow Up - By the James Taylor Quartet. 1987 on Acid Jazz records.

Even more brilliant now now it's associated to their troubles.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtZefq51Y7I[/youtube]
 

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.