Real Madrid are after Vidic..

[Black_Apalachi]

it's a lot of money k. we're basically giving dossena away for free ;l

[Browney]

Simple explanation for that. One rule for the bigger clubs another for the smaller.

Um... The bigger clubs (like United) are only allowed to go into debt if they can afford the repayments. I'd go as far to say Utd make 100 million every year.

75,000 (capacity at OT) x £35 (average ticket price) = 2,625,000
£2,625,000 x 19 (home games in a season, excl. FA Cup, CL, CC etc.) = £49,875,000

That alone repays the debt to stop United going under. "Yet Manchester United’s owners have never given any impression of being too concerned about the debt mountain itself, the payments for which were restructured two years ago and currently takes £45.5m annually out of United’s profits."

Then, add on jersey sales, TV revenue, Sponsorship from Hublot, Audi, never mind AIG, And THEN you have transfer sales.

Most recent I can find is this. This one's a bit out of date but hey-ho. And even before that they thought they were doing well.

[AgnesIO]

Um... The bigger clubs (like United) are only allowed to go into debt if they can afford the repayments. I'd go as far to say Utd make 100 million every year.

75,000 (capacity at OT) x £35 (average ticket price) = 2,625,000
£2,625,000 x 19 (home games in a season, excl. FA Cup, CL, CC etc.) = £49,875,000

That alone repays the debt to stop United going under. "Yet Manchester United’s owners have never given any impression of being too concerned about the debt mountain itself, the payments for which were restructured two years ago and currently takes £45.5m annually out of United’s profits."

Then, add on jersey sales, TV revenue, Sponsorship from Hublot, Audi, never mind AIG, And THEN you have transfer sales.

Most recent I can find is this. This one's a bit out of date but hey-ho. And even before that they thought they were doing well.

They might be making £100 million - before added costs. After that they lose millions. They should be told to pay half of it i a few years or they should be chucked out the football league. Or atleast be banned from getting players.

[Browney]

They might be making £100 million - before added costs. After that they lose millions. They should be told to pay half of it i a few years or they should be chucked out the football league. Or atleast be banned from getting players.

OK. 1. Have you read the links?

Regarding the costs argument... "Accounts to June 2008 reveal turnover at the club has risen an incredible 22% to £256.2m, underpinning a 7.5% increase in profits to £80.4m."

2. A loan is re payed in installments. I'll repeat.

"Yet Manchester United’s owners have never given any impression of being too concerned about the debt mountain itself, the payments for which were restructured two years ago and currently takes £45.5m annually out of United’s profits."

United won't go under, won't go bankrupt. They're repaying back enough on the loan to stay afloat. Think of it like a mortgage. The Glazer's took out a loan to buy a big red shiny shop. So they owe money to the bank. The shop makes money steadily and the Glazer's are paying enough back for them to keep their shop. There should be no reason for paying half of it back, that isn't in the terms of the loan.

[CHA!NGANG]

You seemed to have left out the biggest cost of them all, wages. Player wages must come to at least £50 Million a year, that's at least. Then the staff, manager, groundsmen e/t/c is another £5-10 Million and the running costs which are £5-10 million so it costs around £65 Million for that a year. The bulk of the ticket profit earned goes towards wages if not all of it. The money they make from sponsorship e/t/c goes towards the debts normally and the transfer fees are made up of money the owners pump in, along with the remaining sponsor money and that stuff. When you think of it, United must be getting £30-50 Million profit a year after wages and transfers which probably goes towards the debts so it will take at least 10 years to repay fully unless a big buyer comes in and sorts them out but the bottom line is that they can repay the debts over time. Smaller clubs have no guarantee of this, therefore they have to pay back the debts straight away as they have no way to prove they can pay it later. It's not favourtism it's just how things work.

[Browney]

You seemed to have left out the biggest cost of them all, wages. Player wages must come to at least £50 Million a year, that's at least. Then the staff, manager, groundsmen e/t/c is another £5-10 Million and the running costs which are £5-10 million so it costs around £65 Million for that a year. The bulk of the ticket profit earned goes towards wages if not all of it. The money they make from sponsorship e/t/c goes towards the debts normally and the transfer fees are made up of money the owners pump in, along with the remaining sponsor money and that stuff. When you think of it, United must be getting £30-50 Million profit a year after wages and transfers which probably goes towards the debts so it will take at least 10 years to repay fully unless a big buyer comes in and sorts them out but the bottom line is that they can repay the debts over time. Smaller clubs have no guarantee of this, therefore they have to pay back the debts straight away as they have no way to prove they can pay it later. It's not favourtism it's just how things work.

My "sums" were an estimate from a grade C Maths student. Check the links for more conclusive figures. And as such, it says in my first link the NET (after all the costs) profit is 80 million. Nevermind 30-50 million. And, United are in 650 million debt, they pay back 45 million a year. So you're right by the 10 years estimate, probably more.

[CHA!NGANG]

My "sums" were an estimate from a grade C Maths student. Check the links for more conclusive figures. And as such, it says in my first link the NET (after all the costs) profit is 80 million. Nevermind 30-50 million. And, United are in 650 million debt, they pay back 45 million a year. So you're right by the 10 years estimate, probably more.

£35-50 after transfers too. The 80 mill doesn't include transfers I don't think not sure.

[AgnesIO]

I think anyteam in debt should have a ban of buying players. Loaning should be allowed, but buying is outrageous when they don't have the money in the first place.

[CHA!NGANG]

Then no team will ever develop stadiums. You can't expect a team to afford a new stadium without a loan for example Arsenal. Saying that is like saying: No person should be able to buy anything if they have a morgage as they don't have the money to pay it off straight away, it's stupid..

If a team can't prove that they can't pay off there debt then a ban should be placed yes, but United can pay it off eventually, just like Arsenal can pay off the Emirates debt.

[AgnesIO]

Then no team will ever develop stadiums. You can't expect a team to afford a new stadium without a loan for example Arsenal. Saying that is like saying: No person should be able to buy anything if they have a morgage as they don't have the money to pay it off straight away, it's stupid..

If a team can't prove that they can't pay off there debt then a ban should be placed yes, but United can pay it off eventually, just like Arsenal can pay off the Emirates debt.

But the point is, if you got a huge loan your credit card providers would be tight.