He's so money and doesn't even know it. /wait, is that Ibra?
After talk of Pompey being dissolved this week due to debt and administration issues, Liverpool settling in to new ownership after a buy-out of their massive debts, and the £133 million payroll of Man Citeh not delivering a win this past weekend, the other Mancs are still promising to spend, spend, spend on talent – whether they have the money or not.
In case you’ve forgotten, they convinced Rooney to sign a new contract after assuring him of the club’s ability to win trophies by promising to recruit top talent. “Ferguson maintains that funds will be available if he needs to make any key additions to his squad…”
Ironically, only recently Ferguson pooh-poohed City’s spending behaviour – now he’s ready to undertake his own shopping spree for the sake of Shrek’s happiness.
Assurances by the Glazers offer Sir Alex £50m to spend in the January transfer window and speculation is starting to run amuck: “The Sunday Express reckon he will splash £100m on players in the next 12 months, with a world-class goalkeeper, driving midfielder, winger and striker topping the list.”
Interestingly, if United don’t acquire the talent promised, reports state Rooney has a £30m ‘break clause‘ so he can still leave the team at his discretion. The club deny those reports, but it would be uncharacteristically shrewd of Rooney to utilize the clause.
Other notable United transfer news and wage gossip includes:
- Someone believes Patrice Evra is worth keeping – AND signed him to a new £100,000 per week deal.
- Someone else thinks ‘arry will sell Gareth Bale and they will be able to sign Bale and Bayern’s Franck Ribery for £50m. (Those people obviously haven’t heard Spurs are only two signings away from winning the league and would doubtfully give up their talented Welshman).
- United are targeting Wesley Sneijder and Wolfsburg striker Edin Dzeko (although United will have to hurry as City are apparently also eyeing Dzeko).
Looking into United’s debt figures, I get out of my league (WAG’s are notorious spenders, not savers), but with the UEFA financial fair play regulations coming into effect during the 2011-12 season, at this rate, both sides of Manchester could be in serious trouble.
I don’t see Spurs selling Bale. But then again, I didn’t see them selling Carrick.
No way we sell Bale. No way.
@Anonsters – I imagine you shouting that as you pound your fist on the table. Of course, I also imagine you as a dog.
@DDM: Indeed. Although this is more my reaction to the idea of selling Bale.
Ahh, Wag, with your United-come-hither-posts … I will take the bait.
-
Operationally, United are tremendously well run. Wages are 46% of turnover (ever since the plc days), one of the lowest ratios around and I believe a strong case can be made to meet fin fair play on that front. The tragic (for MUFC fans only, obviously) part of the debt is that it doesn’t contribute to the football. The debt does not give an advantage in the transfer market; it does not boost spending capabilities. It is simply a drain, the 100′s of millions that will go to debt service could have been invested in players. And all that money would have been derived from operations. The Glazers are simply bleeding the club. (right, shutting about the Glazers).
-
Short answer is the debt hurts, not helps. Footy ops good. United should be ok for financial fair play.
When was the last time Ribery played a entire season or close to it?
@Wedel – yay! man took the bait./all part of my evil plot to increase estrogen levels around here.
@Anon/Phil – I agree. I just think of all the speculation, it’s hysterical that the media throws out Bale’s name on that list of possible transfers.
@Hernangeles – if you subtract his injuries, suspensions, S.T.D. treatments, and court time for possible criminal actions, he hasn’t played a full season since 1999.
@MW: It was the first thing they talked about after his San Siro performance. How much will Spurs get for him? Eff yoo, media.