codders78

Something the Guardian wrote thats accurate? I must go see

Agree with all those who say we dont need a centre back. Striker and a wide left player. With Distin and Heitinga, Yobo waiting in the wings another CB could stifle the development of Duffy or Mustafi. Duffy was tweeting about a loan move for 1st team experience but we could build in the option to recall if we had an injury crisis.

Rodwell could even revert back to CB in the event of injuries.

If we could start a season the way we tend to finish then a top 4 spot is a distinct possibility. Playing catch up all the time is a nightmare. All of our hopes and aspirations fall on the physios table. With a threadbare squad, albeit with some youngsters with potential any injuries tend to hit us hard.

I dont think it could happen could it? Insofar as Man City most likely need him to comply with squad rules, he is English and homegrown.Hence why Mancini said he is going nowhere

 

Lol that might not be strictly true, I dont think it was the likes of Paul Dickov, Darius Vassell and Did Hamann that attracted the Arabs to Man City Im pretty sure it was more likely to be their shiny new stadium

This is true, I wrote as much a few pages back. However building a stadium we can ill afford in the hope it attracts a rich Arab investor is not the answer to our problems.

My point is that if we invested in players rather than a stadium it could push into the CL spots in the league and generate additional revenue streams. To my mind the other way around is putting the cart before the horse.

Maybe we do have a better side now but since our CL qualification our investment has been outstripped by Spurs and Man City, both of which have qualified for the CL since us.

Players are the only route to success though, you dont get champions league because you have shiny new stadium.

 

Agreed.

Interesting though it was

Anyhoo, I don't want to get bogged down in a economics discussion, particularly one about Man Utd finances as I couldn't give a flying fuck about them. I care about one club's finances and that is ours.

2017 would appear to be the D-Day for Man Utd. That is when they must repay the bonds that purchased Man Utd.

The whole deal is highly complex, Red Football Ltd is a company set up by Glazer to buy Utd.

It has 2 parent companies in the UK and above those companies is Red Football LLC (based in Delaware), its is believed this company is owned by the Nevada based Red Football Limited Partnership which is owned by a variety of Glazer family trusts

The current debt is somewhere in the region of £550million. £250 million in outstanding bonds and £300million of bonds secured against the clubs assets. Whilst the debt remains manageable it does negatively affect the business. Without the debt they may never have sold Ronaldo, they would have more money for new players. Yeah they keep buying but they could buy more if not saddled with debt.

For sure the experts now nothing, if they did we wouldnt be in a global financial whirlwind. However where Utd are concerned the facts are the facts and the debt is having a detrimental affect. There is the issue late last year of of the clubs PIK (payment in kind) loans being cleared to the tune of £250million with not a word as to where this money came from.

 

No, i said not all debt is bad. Nearly every single company in the world has been run and built up using debt. The mortgage (debt) i took out on my house was not working to something as i was paying an interest only mortgage. I was relying on my judgement and research into the value of the house then and in the future. I got it right and had it not been for interest rates currently being on the floor, i'd have paid the mortgage off in full by now, but there is no point with my mortgage payments being so low. I put the cash into shares during the crash instead. So all the way through the process, i'm servicing the debt and using what cash i have to maximise my returns. When interest rates significantly rise and my mortgage becomes expensive, i'll get rid of the mortgage.

 

It might be a simplistic model, but for me it's not that different from the way Glazer has bought and services his ownership of Man Utd. Glazer can sell that club for a very decent profit at any time. In fact i think there would be a bidding war between several parties for the club. It's tv revenue money, it's commercial activities around the world, Champions League money etc make sure that Man Utd is financially very strong and easily able to service the debt and continue spending the money it needs to to stay at the top.

 

Ok, so there are some threats now. AF retiring and the emergence of Man City as a new competitor are quite big threats. But as far as i can see, Glazer is in a strong position unless there are things that we don't know about that changes that.

The point is that money is spent on servicing debt. Goldman Sachs believe United are over leveraged, Glazer financed the purchase through hedge funds, funds that bear no relation to Bank of England base rate. So if Man U operating profits are £250million but interest payments are £200million then thats only £50million left for players etc, granted still more than we have but leaves them trailing in the wake of their oil rich neighbours

The bond sales they have had have been over subscribed but there is the suspicion this money is taken by the Glazers and not used to alleviate the debt burden they utilised to purchase the club.

All in all its an exercise in futility to compare personal mortgages with finance raised upon global markets. Its apples and oranges. Whilst your own personal experience is one of sound investment and making finance work for you, businesses work in different ways. Macroeconomics and household budgets are 2 different things

Playing a bit fast and loose with the word interesting

7th I reckon. I dont think anyone is likely to finish above us who finished below us last year. And what with all the strengthening of the squad, no, oh wait hang on

Still 7th though

stubbing a cigar in a young lads face is nothing to do with silly money..that just means you're an absolute major league cunt

It isnt pretty granted. I did a lot of things when I was younger, thinking I was a big shot. Times change, people change when given the chance and a few years to grow. If he is a reformed character and I believe he is then he would be an asset to any side.

If Moyes feels the same then I wouldn't throw away my ticket because he wears the shirt, provided he respects it and understands what is expected of him

 

Whilst I agree that we will eventually need a new stadium, it isnt realistically goin to happen in the next 5 years, and the likelihood is that it will be close to 10years before we could move in if the ball started rolling today. We cant afford to stand still for another 10 years, and we have to start thinking of developing what we have now incase in never happens. Put it this way, if you ran a restaurant that had the potential to expand and the kitchen was old, out dated and needed replacement, you wouldnt go out and try and find a plot of land to build a new restaurant unless you had the finances to do it. Instead you would gut it out, maybe extend if possible and focus on the design to increase capacity and improve efficiency. If this was Everton we would still be rubbing sticks together for fire...

For me, rather than splashing cash on a stadium I would rather see players coming in. To use your restaurant analogy would I build premises before I knew I had some recipes the customers would like?

The stadium as you say is a long way away, in fact a mere pipe dream so players to advance our current cause and create additional revenue streams, european football, cup runs, commercial ops around new players etc etc is a more realistic and worthwhile cause to work to

 

So? Debt is not always a bad thing. For example i have a 50% mortgage on my house i bought in 2003. My house has doubled in value so the debt i took out to finance the purchase of my house was not bad debt, it was easily serviceable and always had potential to generate good profit for me.

 

The debt Man Utd have looks to me to be serviceable and they look to be able to continue the spending needed to stay at the top. If both those things continue, who cares how much debt they have?

From your point of view debt isn't a bad thing. Thing is you are working to something - owning your own home, which should increase in value. Debt within an established Football club is different, all it does is take money to service that debt, money that must come from operating profits. This of course then cuts into bottom line and as such something must give..........

Im a forgive and forget kind of a bloke and wouldnt hold his past against him. There are few footballers that are angels, and at 21 with the world at his feet and earning silly money he made some mistakes, knocked about with the wrong people and it did take him a long time to grow up after a succession of misdemeanours

It does seem as if he has grown up and has started focusing on his football. I have always thought he was a big talent but a knobhead, seems he is trying to stop being a knobhead and the talent remains.

If DM reckons he can make it work then good for him, go for him. If we dont get him I would suggest DM doesnt want him

 

You and i seem to think along the same lines. When a club is solely reliant upon one man's pocket, that club is in danger. Chelsea and Man City are both where they are today because of their owners pocket. Chelsea have built revenue streams but nowhere near the level needed to break even and continue the project in it's current form. Man City will soon realise that the Sheik will have to write off a huge amount of money before they suddenly become a break even project, and that's including the new stadium sponsor deal (which is completely unique and i'm betting if you looked into the fine print of the finances, all its not what it seems). If The Russian and the Sheik pulled out of these two clubs and stopped funding them, they would either need to find new owners with similar bank account and willingness to pour money down the drain (so to speak) or they will go bust and fall down the leagues.

 

Man Utd and Arsenal are not in this category. They are extremely well run and create the money they spend. I would personally prefer to support Arsenal, have not won anything for a while and have the club as solid as it is, then be a Chelsea / Man City club where one man defines your club and operate under the risks that brings.

 

Everton need to look at Arsenal and Man Utd as a blueprint of how to operate and absolutely reject the Chelsea / Man City strategies.

 

New Stadium, well Munich's new stadium was;

 

The cost of the construction itself ran to €286 million but financing costs raised that figure to a total of €340 million. In addition, the city and State incurred approximately €210 million for area development and infrastructure improvements.

 

The Emirates (which i went to for the first time on Sat and it's fantastic) cost £470 million

 

So you have to say a new stadium for Everton is a minimum of £300 million (with land costs and material costs in this country), that's a lot of money.

 

As far as i am concerned, Goodison Park cannot be re-developed. It's ludicrous to even suggest this as an option. It sadden's me to say that.

I think Man U are in a sticky situation, the majority of their operating profit goes in paying down interest on the loans Glazer took out to purchase the club. Unlikely as it may seem if they were to miss out on Champions League it could expose it for the house of cards I reckon it is. Arsenal are a different kettle of fish, and are a well run club, the money is there for Wenger but he wont spend it due to his obsession with creating a team of greats from kids - or at least thats what my gooner mates say.

Chelsea inch closer to being a going concern, whilst Abramovich has poured vast amounts into the club he has also brought in the right people to manage the commercial side of the business and increase revenue streams, despite the rumours of his dodgy deals and palm greasing he undoubtedly has business savvy. Man City are however a basket case and the new sponsorship deal needs the fine tooth comb treatment

I take your figures for Stadiums on trust (I have no reason to dispute them and they seem perfectly plausible) which merely adds weight to our theory about our commercial viability. Like you I also believe there is little value or even possibility of redeveloping Goodison, times move on and sadly to prosper we will have to look at other places.

 

I agree with your comments entirely. However i don't believe the bit in bold. I don't believe he was interested in buying our club due to the fact several hundred million pounds would be needed for a new stadium, which would immediately rule us out. They would have been given a list of clubs that were available for purchase and they would have had a detailed account of the pro's and con's of each club. Most would have been rejected immediately based on size of fan base, brand name, investment needed off the pitch etc etc.

 

But you are right, Man City were for a few reasons, the main one being the brand spaning new stadium the council had delivered them.

 

When you asses Everton in it's current state as an investment, it's incredibly easy to see why we have not found a buyer.

That is what put him off buying us (apparently/allegedly) as it wouldn't just be players he would have to fork out for, and as such was why he went for City. He was looking for a club with history and pedigree which we certainly have but as you rightly point out, how commercially viable are we at present.

Mansour has invested what £400-500 million thus far? How much does a new state of the art stadium cost these days? Im guessing you could add another £100mill+

All of this amounts to us being an unattractive proposition to any potential buyers and there just arent lots of Mansours out there looking to invest. Invest is the wrong word to an extent as invest would suggest you are seeking a return and there are no returns in football these days given the wages, transfer and agents fees.

I would rather be where we are and accept mediocrity than massively over leveraged and staring into the financial abyss. Football cannot continue in its current format forever, the vast majority of football clubs (not us though) are technically insolvent.

To harp back to Mansour, what happens of he pulls out tomorrow and lets the club go for £1? They dont have the commecial activity to cover half their wage bill and would be in administration before the end of the season, relegation, asset fire sale and a long way back to the big time - look at Leeds

Knowing the price of the club should make no difference really. If not privy to the inner workings of the clubs finances. What would it tell us, nothing I would suggest. The club is crying out for a new stadium - As an aside I was told Sheikh Mansour was toying with buying us or Man City, plumped for Man City as they had the stadium already and only needed investment in players.

What Im getting at is that anybody wanting to buy the club would need serious investment if they want to break into the top 4. The fair play rules will undermine investment given the relatively poor commercial deals we are involved in. Any potential owner will have to be in it for the long haul.

Bottom line - We are a fantastic club, with a great tradition and proud history. No bias at all but the best fans in the world.

Im not happy with the status quo but I would rather that than have our finances splashed all over the tabloids whether they are good or most likely piss poor

for me

Howard

Coleman Jagielka Distin Baines

Fellaini

Arteta Rodwell

Osman Bily

Saha

Sadly never going to happen. It would be fantastic for us and also for the national side. Johnson and Baines could be exceptional together and would give Capello something to ponder

 

If Jags is sold we've got Heitinga and Yobo who are more than capable and proven replacements - it'd be stupid to prioritise CB when we don't have an out and out winger in the squad! - I think this is crap journo jarg without really knowing the situation/squad at EFC.

Totally agree. He is no better than Yobo, given both their games are about physicality not finnesse. Nobody seems interested in Yobo so we may as well keep him and use the money to strengthen where we are weak. A winger and striker are surely the priority

I think it relates more to the players status as an international footballer and is not specific to individual countries. Some countries more than others I would suggest as its tougher to break into the Spanish side than the Welsh side, insofar as the Spanish side will be full of players from the top flight clubs across europe, the welsh side will have prem, championship and even league 1 players

Absolutely derisory. If Manure are paying 16.5million for Phil Jones then Jags is worth at least that

How would we replace him with 10 mill?

Jog on Wenger

However, you would never be able to sell anything if you didn't disclose the price. Let us know the price? What is the problem?

 

A prime example is a house over the road. Was up for sale at the price we looked and thought £30k too much. What happened? Was still up for sale nearly 3 years later, only then to knock it down 50k for a quick sale and it was snapped up immediately. The owners couldn't afford to have it, it needed work doing to it, but they priced it the same as better conditioned ones in the same road.

 

If we are for sale then how much?

Point taken.

However I was more talking about transfer activity. We announce we have say £20million (lol) suddenly Shane Long is worth £12million, N'Zog £20million