Go fuck yourselves FSG

[3 Stacks]

Is Daisy really a woman? The last account was Mark Coulter. 

[VERBAL DIARRHEA]

16 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

I find speculation about accountancy difficult to masterbate to.

My Mrs is an accountant I love it when she talks numbers but then I’ve always been a wanker!

[dockers_strike]

21 minutes ago, VERBAL DIARRHEA said:

My Mrs is an accountant I love it when she talks numbers but then I’ve always been a wanker!

 

[Jimmy Hills Chin]

6 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

 

Fucking quality series

[Scott_M]

If anybody can paste from behind the pay walls, I’d greatly like to read these 2 stories please. Cheers.

 

[dockers_strike]

1 hour ago, Scott_M said:

If anybody can paste from behind the pay walls, I’d greatly like to read these 2 stories please. Cheers.

 

Not certain my hack works on the Times site, I'll give it a try. Here's Carragher's torygraph article.

 

Over the past six years, Liverpool have been among the best-run clubs in world football. But I have a nagging fear. How long can they keep beating the system to challenge for the Premier League and Champions League?

Another transfer window has passed with Liverpool the 14th-biggest spenders in the country. A year ago they were 10th on that list, having spent less on new players than Sheffield United and Newcastle United.

Since 2015, Jurgen Klopp’s net spend is £96.8 million - an average of £16.1m per season in charge - and the lowest of the traditional ‘big six’. It defies conventional wisdom that you can repeatedly win the biggest titles when your recruitment budget is dwarfed by your nearest rivals.

With sporting director Michael Edwards delaying extending his contract beyond this season, and Klopp unlikely to stay beyond 2024, many supporters are wondering if Liverpool’s success is despite their business model rather than because of it; the product of amazing individuals rather than an amazing plan. 

It is worth checking out this week’s social media thread by the respected financial analyst Swiss Ramble, who articulates how Liverpool have managed their budget but cannot afford to spend £100 million a year net on new players when they are dishing out £100,000-a-week salary increases while rebuilding the stadium and constructing a new training facility. The £9.5m Liverpool just recouped for Xherdan Shaqiri will barely cover the additional cost of the first year's contract extension for two of their biggest stars. 

Virgil van Dijk and Alisson Becker, two of the best players in the world in their position, just committed the peak of their careers to Anfield. It is imperative that Mohamed Salah does so next. World-class players deserve world-class wages.

It is key that Mohamed Salah commits his future to Liverpool Credit: GETTY IMAGES

Trent Alexander-Arnold, Andy Robertson, Fabinho and Jordan Henderson have also just extended their contracts. These are symbolic deals, the club having evolved from being a stepping stone for world-renowned players like Xabi Alonso, Javier Mascherano, Fernando Torres and Luis Suarez to the ultimate destination for the current generation. 

Owners Fenway Sports Group have been rightly lauded for restoring Liverpool’s status while prioritising self-sustainability and ending the era of waste. 

That is the financial reality FSG are operating in, even though it disappoints supporters who can see the strength in depth of rivals and identify Liverpool’s vulnerabilities. Last year they were short of a central defender and paid the price when injuries struck. It effectively cost any chance of defending the Premier League title.

That Klopp still navigated the team into third was extraordinary given how far behind they were with 10 games to go. 

There are more concerns about squad depth this season. With a couple of injuries to strikers Liverpool will be in trouble, especially as Salah and Sadio Mane will be on African Nations Cup duty in January. Centre-back Ibrahima Konate was signed, but the squad needed another attacker. Instead, the resources were directed to retaining and rewarding the existing stars. Despite a modest spend on new arrivals, Liverpool's wage bill is the second highest in the Premier League. Critics of their recruitment policy must recognise that.

Because of Klopp’s coaching skill, I still expect Liverpool to challenge and comfortably finish in the top four. Longer-term, FSG’s unwavering belief their approach can bring regular silverware is continuously questioned. The club lost an estimated £150m due to the pandemic, which seems to have impacted the transfer budget far more than its top six rivals. Supporters still hoped that after 11 years their club would have been generating enough profit from its success and commercial activity to ensure a generous, annual transfer kitty.

Jurgen Klopp has worked wonders at Liverpool Credit: GETTY IMAGES

My belief is that the single biggest influence on Liverpool’s success since 2015 is Klopp. There is excellence around him and naturally the principal owner, John W. Henry, assumes credit for appointing great people to execute his plan, but there is no other manager who could have done what Klopp has at Anfield, ensuring the club consistently punches above its financial weight.

In the three years preceding Klopp, Brendan Rodgers did a good rebuilding job with Edwards and FSG President Michael Gordon in post. He was close to the Premier League title, but Liverpool were not at the level of today and had become a club where the realistic aspiration every season was to finish top four, not winning the Champions League and the Premier League.

Should Edwards not renew his deal, does FSG have so much faith in their model that replacements can slot into place and keep the engine running? You can understand why supporters fear Klopp and to some extent Edwards are irreplaceable.

We must stress, of course, it was FSG who headhunted and recruited Klopp and Edwards. It was they who sanctioned the record signings of Van Dijk and Alisson, and revolutionised their scouting systems which led to bargains like Salah, Mane, Fabinho and Robertson, ending the 30-year title wait. It was they who solved a stadium crisis which had almost led the club into bankruptcy. 

The club also deserves credit for what it refuses to spend. As someone who stood on the pitch and saw a series of expensive, mediocre purchases throughout the 2000s - all bought because of the clamour to buy, buy, buy - it is commendable that Liverpool no longer make panic signings. They are renowned for making good deals.

Pointing this out invites criticism from those suggesting I am an ‘apologist for FSG’. No ex-Liverpool player has been more critical of the owners when they get it badly wrong, as was the case when trying to increase ticket prices to £70, furloughing staff and leading the Super League proposals.

Equally, having endured the years of Tom Hicks and George Gillett Jr gambling the club’s future by taking on high-interest loans they could not repay, it is impossible not to appreciate the stable financial situation at Anfield, even if fans look enviously at the commercial or state-owned powerhouses in Manchester. Henry said on day one that Liverpool would have to go about it in a different way, and he has still proven a winner. 

Henry can justifiably argue the club’s track record with regards football operations since 2015 ought to have earned more trust, that they alway have an eye on the future, and they have been decisive with player trading when necessary.

When assessing Liverpool’s spending under Klopp, the spree of 2018/19 was game-changing, albeit partially funded by Phillipe Coutinho’s sale to Barcelona. Those pivotal purchases will serve the club into a fourth season, and will thrive for longer.

However, you cannot help look at the age of Klopp’s squad without arguing another big transfer window is due soon. With so many key players tied down for the long-term, there should be more funds available to buy new players in a year’s time.

The owners’ commitment over the last decade has rebuilt Liverpool’s structure. But amid the future of key personnel becoming a source of speculation, the FSG era is on the threshold of entering its next key phase. Over the course of the next few years, those foundations will be thoroughly tested.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2021/09/10/liverpool-have-gaming-system-years-fear-happens-jurgen-klopp/

[Scott_M]

This is an interesting listen. 
 

https://twitter.com/theathleticuk/status/1435219046014898176?s=21

[Reckoner]

https://app.independent.co.uk/2021/09/12/why-liverpools-lack-of-signings-is-no-cause-for-concern-3/content.html

 

 

For some fans, the most exciting part of the season is over. The transfer window is shut and there can be no more delusional fantasies about big money signings for a while. This is where reality bites.

Most Liverpool supporters are, like Jurgen Klopp, relatively happy with the state of the squad going into the next phase of the campaign, which starts at Elland Road against Leeds United on Sunday. Nevertheless, there have been rumblings of dissatisfaction about the club’s spending in the summer. The only significant signing was Ibrahima Konate, who cost £36 million from RB Leipzig. The 22-year-old centre half bolsters the ranks at last season’s problem position but some expected Georginio Wijnaldum, who departed for Paris Saint-Germain on a free transfer, to be replaced. 

Fenway Sports Group (FSG) have been criticised by a small but vocal group on social media who are angry at the Americans’ reluctance to spend money on a midfielder and a forward. Barely a year after the owners oversaw Liverpool’s first title in 30 years and two years after winning the Champions League, there have been attempts to galvanise an ‘FSG out’ movement. It takes the ‘what-have-you-done-for-me-lately’ ethos to a new level.

There seems to be little rational discourse about Liverpool’s owners. They are either wildly overpraised or their weaknesses magnified. The truth is in the middle. The same men that brought the Premier League trophy to Anfield also tried to bring the latest, risible version of the Super League to the table. FSG’s mistakes – and there have been many – are counterbalanced by considerable success, especially in the past five years.

Right from the moment they took control of the club 11 years ago, FSG said they would be fiscally cautious. The same concern that John W Henry, the principal owner, expressed in his first weeks on Merseyside remains at the forefront of his mind and, if anything, the issue had grown more pressing. The spending power of the Petrostate-owned clubs is a nightmare for Henry and his solutions – Project Big Picture and the Super League – were those of a man clutching at straws. Financial fair play has failed and the impact of the pandemic has made the situation even more difficult.

Yet the question for those who would like to see FSG replaced is simple: with whom? The market for marquee clubs is even smaller than the market for superstar players. There were no buyers out there before coronavirus began to spread and there are none now. Liverpool’s valuation is in excess of £2.5bn, almost ten times what the Americans paid for the club. There is no prospect of anyone investing that amount in Anfield and splurging another pile of cash on transfers. None.

In his first half-decade in charge, Henry spoke vaguely about his legacy. At one point he even suggested that some kind of fan ownership might be possible for Liverpool. In retrospect, he was probably telling his audience what they wanted to hear. By 2015 he was talking about listening to offers. This was far from a hard sell. He made it clear to potential suitors that FSG did not need to offload the business and any deal would have to really suit the owners. Some of the individuals and groups that sniffed around the club were unpalatable. Their ethical, political and commercial principles were way further from the Kop’s than FSG’s. And none had the sort of money the transfer ultras would demand.

For all their faults FSG have underpromised and overdelivered. They made it clear that they would not get into an unwinnable financial arms race with City or Chelsea. Sales paid for incoming players and they have generally been conservative when it came to spending on recruitment. Even so, had the right players become available this summer at the right price they probably would have released funds. It is ludicrous to say the owners are not ambitious but they temper that ambition with caution. That is a gamble in itself.

Do Liverpool lack depth in the squad? A little in midfield and up front but it is more about quality than bodies. Should they have spent more after winning the Champions League and the title? Perhaps. Traditional Anfield logic says buy from a position of strength but FSG have been anything but conventional. Klopp’s first choice XI is beginning to age but both manager and owners believe they are a fair distance from a full rebuild.

The only way some fans will be satisfied is if they see mega spending on an annual basis. That is no guarantee of success. The landscape is changing and City and PSG will undoubtedly win the Champions League in the next few years but so far Abu Dhabi and Qatar have been unable to buy the trophy they want most.

FSG have been capable owners who have struggled to comprehend the football culture at Anfield and beyond. Most of their mistakes have been a result of this lack of knowledge or thinking that they are cleverer than their rivals. Things could be far worse, as those who lived through the Gillett and Hicks era can attest.

The ‘FSG out’ contingent are spoilt brats. As flawed as Liverpool’s owners have been, the transfer fantasists do not know how lucky they are.

 

[dockers_strike]

12 minutes ago, Reckoner said:

https://app.independent.co.uk/2021/09/12/why-liverpools-lack-of-signings-is-no-cause-for-concern-3/content.html

 

 

For some fans, the most exciting part of the season is over. The transfer window is shut and there can be no more delusional fantasies about big money signings for a while. This is where reality bites.

Most Liverpool supporters are, like Jurgen Klopp, relatively happy with the state of the squad going into the next phase of the campaign, which starts at Elland Road against Leeds United on Sunday. Nevertheless, there have been rumblings of dissatisfaction about the club’s spending in the summer. The only significant signing was Ibrahima Konate, who cost £36 million from RB Leipzig. The 22-year-old centre half bolsters the ranks at last season’s problem position but some expected Georginio Wijnaldum, who departed for Paris Saint-Germain on a free transfer, to be replaced. 

Fenway Sports Group (FSG) have been criticised by a small but vocal group on social media who are angry at the Americans’ reluctance to spend money on a midfielder and a forward. Barely a year after the owners oversaw Liverpool’s first title in 30 years and two years after winning the Champions League, there have been attempts to galvanise an ‘FSG out’ movement. It takes the ‘what-have-you-done-for-me-lately’ ethos to a new level.

There seems to be little rational discourse about Liverpool’s owners. They are either wildly overpraised or their weaknesses magnified. The truth is in the middle. The same men that brought the Premier League trophy to Anfield also tried to bring the latest, risible version of the Super League to the table. FSG’s mistakes – and there have been many – are counterbalanced by considerable success, especially in the past five years.

Right from the moment they took control of the club 11 years ago, FSG said they would be fiscally cautious. The same concern that John W Henry, the principal owner, expressed in his first weeks on Merseyside remains at the forefront of his mind and, if anything, the issue had grown more pressing. The spending power of the Petrostate-owned clubs is a nightmare for Henry and his solutions – Project Big Picture and the Super League – were those of a man clutching at straws. Financial fair play has failed and the impact of the pandemic has made the situation even more difficult.

Yet the question for those who would like to see FSG replaced is simple: with whom? The market for marquee clubs is even smaller than the market for superstar players. There were no buyers out there before coronavirus began to spread and there are none now. Liverpool’s valuation is in excess of £2.5bn, almost ten times what the Americans paid for the club. There is no prospect of anyone investing that amount in Anfield and splurging another pile of cash on transfers. None.

In his first half-decade in charge, Henry spoke vaguely about his legacy. At one point he even suggested that some kind of fan ownership might be possible for Liverpool. In retrospect, he was probably telling his audience what they wanted to hear. By 2015 he was talking about listening to offers. This was far from a hard sell. He made it clear to potential suitors that FSG did not need to offload the business and any deal would have to really suit the owners. Some of the individuals and groups that sniffed around the club were unpalatable. Their ethical, political and commercial principles were way further from the Kop’s than FSG’s. And none had the sort of money the transfer ultras would demand.

For all their faults FSG have underpromised and overdelivered. They made it clear that they would not get into an unwinnable financial arms race with City or Chelsea. Sales paid for incoming players and they have generally been conservative when it came to spending on recruitment. Even so, had the right players become available this summer at the right price they probably would have released funds. It is ludicrous to say the owners are not ambitious but they temper that ambition with caution. That is a gamble in itself.

Do Liverpool lack depth in the squad? A little in midfield and up front but it is more about quality than bodies. Should they have spent more after winning the Champions League and the title? Perhaps. Traditional Anfield logic says buy from a position of strength but FSG have been anything but conventional. Klopp’s first choice XI is beginning to age but both manager and owners believe they are a fair distance from a full rebuild.

The only way some fans will be satisfied is if they see mega spending on an annual basis. That is no guarantee of success. The landscape is changing and City and PSG will undoubtedly win the Champions League in the next few years but so far Abu Dhabi and Qatar have been unable to buy the trophy they want most.

FSG have been capable owners who have struggled to comprehend the football culture at Anfield and beyond. Most of their mistakes have been a result of this lack of knowledge or thinking that they are cleverer than their rivals. Things could be far worse, as those who lived through the Gillett and Hicks era can attest.

The ‘FSG out’ contingent are spoilt brats. As flawed as Liverpool’s owners have been, the transfer fantasists do not know how lucky they are.

 

It's sickening that a large section of Newcastle fans are desparate for a muderous, butchering mob to become their new owners so they can, potentially, compete for the PL title and get rid of the equally despised Ashley.

 

When you are wanting a mob like that to own your club, it's time to finish with football and look at devouting your energy elsewhere, in my opinion.

[Reckoner]

9 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

It's sickening that a large section of Newcastle fans are desparate for a muderous, butchering mob to become their new owners so they can, potentially, compete for the PL title and get rid of the equally despised Ashley.

 

When you are wanting a mob like that to own your club, it's time to finish with football and look at devouting your energy elsewhere, in my opinion.

Very true. And with the de classification of files on 9/11 about to happen I think the image of Saudi Arabia might take a further battering over the next few weeks.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

29 minutes ago, Reckoner said:

https://app.independent.co.uk/2021/09/12/why-liverpools-lack-of-signings-is-no-cause-for-concern-3/content.html

 

 

For some fans, the most exciting part of the season is over. The transfer window is shut and there can be no more delusional fantasies about big money signings for a while. This is where reality bites.

Most Liverpool supporters are, like Jurgen Klopp, relatively happy with the state of the squad going into the next phase of the campaign, which starts at Elland Road against Leeds United on Sunday. Nevertheless, there have been rumblings of dissatisfaction about the club’s spending in the summer. The only significant signing was Ibrahima Konate, who cost £36 million from RB Leipzig. The 22-year-old centre half bolsters the ranks at last season’s problem position but some expected Georginio Wijnaldum, who departed for Paris Saint-Germain on a free transfer, to be replaced. 

Fenway Sports Group (FSG) have been criticised by a small but vocal group on social media who are angry at the Americans’ reluctance to spend money on a midfielder and a forward. Barely a year after the owners oversaw Liverpool’s first title in 30 years and two years after winning the Champions League, there have been attempts to galvanise an ‘FSG out’ movement. It takes the ‘what-have-you-done-for-me-lately’ ethos to a new level.

There seems to be little rational discourse about Liverpool’s owners. They are either wildly overpraised or their weaknesses magnified. The truth is in the middle. The same men that brought the Premier League trophy to Anfield also tried to bring the latest, risible version of the Super League to the table. FSG’s mistakes – and there have been many – are counterbalanced by considerable success, especially in the past five years.

Right from the moment they took control of the club 11 years ago, FSG said they would be fiscally cautious. The same concern that John W Henry, the principal owner, expressed in his first weeks on Merseyside remains at the forefront of his mind and, if anything, the issue had grown more pressing. The spending power of the Petrostate-owned clubs is a nightmare for Henry and his solutions – Project Big Picture and the Super League – were those of a man clutching at straws. Financial fair play has failed and the impact of the pandemic has made the situation even more difficult.

Yet the question for those who would like to see FSG replaced is simple: with whom? The market for marquee clubs is even smaller than the market for superstar players. There were no buyers out there before coronavirus began to spread and there are none now. Liverpool’s valuation is in excess of £2.5bn, almost ten times what the Americans paid for the club. There is no prospect of anyone investing that amount in Anfield and splurging another pile of cash on transfers. None.

In his first half-decade in charge, Henry spoke vaguely about his legacy. At one point he even suggested that some kind of fan ownership might be possible for Liverpool. In retrospect, he was probably telling his audience what they wanted to hear. By 2015 he was talking about listening to offers. This was far from a hard sell. He made it clear to potential suitors that FSG did not need to offload the business and any deal would have to really suit the owners. Some of the individuals and groups that sniffed around the club were unpalatable. Their ethical, political and commercial principles were way further from the Kop’s than FSG’s. And none had the sort of money the transfer ultras would demand.

For all their faults FSG have underpromised and overdelivered. They made it clear that they would not get into an unwinnable financial arms race with City or Chelsea. Sales paid for incoming players and they have generally been conservative when it came to spending on recruitment. Even so, had the right players become available this summer at the right price they probably would have released funds. It is ludicrous to say the owners are not ambitious but they temper that ambition with caution. That is a gamble in itself.

Do Liverpool lack depth in the squad? A little in midfield and up front but it is more about quality than bodies. Should they have spent more after winning the Champions League and the title? Perhaps. Traditional Anfield logic says buy from a position of strength but FSG have been anything but conventional. Klopp’s first choice XI is beginning to age but both manager and owners believe they are a fair distance from a full rebuild.

The only way some fans will be satisfied is if they see mega spending on an annual basis. That is no guarantee of success. The landscape is changing and City and PSG will undoubtedly win the Champions League in the next few years but so far Abu Dhabi and Qatar have been unable to buy the trophy they want most.

FSG have been capable owners who have struggled to comprehend the football culture at Anfield and beyond. Most of their mistakes have been a result of this lack of knowledge or thinking that they are cleverer than their rivals. Things could be far worse, as those who lived through the Gillett and Hicks era can attest.

The ‘FSG out’ contingent are spoilt brats. As flawed as Liverpool’s owners have been, the transfer fantasists do not know how lucky they are.

 

Boo! Shill!

 

*insert picture of yacht*

[sir roger]

I would not consider myself anti-FSG , but while agreeing with some of the points in the article , I don't like the tone at all. Does suggesting a young forward prospect for around 10m to 15m might be a good idea make me a transfer ultra or a spoilt brat ?

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, sir roger said:

I would not consider myself anti-FSG , but while agreeing with some of the points in the article , I don't like the tone at all. Does suggesting a young forward prospect for around 10m to 15m might be a good idea make me a transfer ultra or a spoilt brat ?

Ssn at around midday ran a full interview with the same topics (maybe the same interview) with that Sally whatever her name is - they're still showing clips. All I took from that interview was klopp knew the rules when he joined, he knew they were tight, he signed up to it and won't complain. For sure he would spend more, he even joked he moaned to Zorc they spent more after he left Dortmund and it might be the same at Liverpool before rapidly making sure there's not a headline "klopp wants more money". The reality is, klopp was allowed to spend after we lost coutiniho. He spent. If they stuck 200m in front of him next summer if anyone thinks he wouldn't spend it, they're kidding themselves. But he's not Rafa and won't cry about it. He won't make excuses for his players before a ball is kicked. He's said countless times he sees himself as the public leader of the club - and he understands the power of his positive message. That'll continue, but it becomes harder and harder for him to articulate that, when we run a positive net spend since he won his 1st trophy. 

[Vincent Vega]

The interview can be seen here. 

 

[dockers_strike]

Should end the bullshit claims by some that their wage bill is less than ours.

 

The huge costs involved in signing Cristiano Ronaldo, Raphael Varane and Jadon Sancho have been laid bare with the trio expected to add another £65 million to Manchester United’s wage bill this season, according to the club’s chief financial officer.

 

United’s wage bill for last season increased by almost 14 per cent to £322.6m as a result of an uplift in player salaries following the club’s return to the Champions League.

 

It means wages now account for a record-high 65 per cent of turnover after revenues dropped to £494.1m, their lowest level for six years, for the 12 months to June 30, 2021 as a result of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

 

United have traditionally worked towards a wage/turnover ratio of 50 per cent but, even if revenues soar this season following the return of fans to Old Trafford, that ratio is expected to stay around the 65 per cent mark for the 2021/22 campaign given the impact of Ronaldo, Varane and Sancho’s salaries.

 

Cliff Baty, United’s chief financial officer, said the club were forecasting a wage increase of “around 20 per cent” for this season, the equivalent of £64.52m.

 

Ronaldo’s projected £19.7m move from Juventus made the five-time World Player of the Year the highest paid footballer in Premier League history, with his overall package understood to be worth more than the £560,000 a week Alexis Sanchez stood to earn during his ill-fated spell at Old Trafford.

 

France defender Varane - who signed from Real Madrid for an initial £34.2m - has a four-year contract worth around £400,000 a week and England winger Sancho joined from Borussia Dortmund in a £72.9m deal. United also signed veteran goalkeeper Tom Heaton as back-up to David De Gea and Dean Henderson. 

 

“In terms of costs, we’d expect wages to increase by around 20 per cent which reflects the increased investment in the squad following the summer transfer window,” Baty told an investor call in the wake of the release of United’s accounts for 2020/21.

 

United’s £322.6m wage bill for last season was still below Manchester City, whose last published accounts for 2019/20 revealed a wage bill of £351.4m, the highest in the Premier League. 

 

Although United’s summer investment was a reflection of the club’s determination to win a first Premier League title since 2013 and left Ed Woodward to declare that they are “more confident than ever that we are on the right track”, the executive vice-chairman also sounded a warning over wage inflation.

 

“It is not an accident that we have been able to invest this summer at a time when many clubs have been retrenching,” Woodward said. “This reflects the strong commercial model we have built over many years, ensuring that our spending is always underpinned by revenues that we generate ourselves.

 

“However, while we are confident in our relative strength, it remains clear that football as a whole faces major financial challenges caused by years of material inflation in wages and transfer fees, exacerbated by the impact of the pandemic. We are committed to working within the Premier League, the ECA and Uefa to promote greater financial sustainability at all levels of the game.”

 

Richard Arnold, United’s group managing director, said: “While every signing we make - and some are better know than others - has a positive impact on fan engagement and a positive effect on the activity that we do, that’s putting fuel into a well-run engine and we’re renowned in the sports industry for doing a good job of maximising the commercial opportunities that come to us. But our focus is on signing players who can deliver on the pitch and then to maximise that opportunity afterwards.”

 

United secured new commercial deals with Ecolab and the Renewable Energy Group as well as renewing a partnership with DHL. But they have still to announce a replacement partner for Aon, whose £180m, eight-year deal to sponsor the club’s training ground and training kit ended this summer and was United’s third biggest commercial contract after the Adidas kit and TeamViewer shirt deals.

 

United posted net losses of £92.2m last season, although this was largely attributable to the accounting impact of a £66.6m non-cash write off caused by the UK corporation tax rate rising above the US rate. Operating losses for the year were £36.9m and the club’s net debt stood at £419.5m. Sponsorship income fell £42.5m, primarily due to there being no summer tour.

 

But those losses and the hit to matchday income were largely offset by an 81.7 per cent jump in broadcast revenues to £254.8m owing to the return of Champions League football and 10 matches being carried over from the delayed 2019/20 campaign into the first fiscal quarter of last season. Despite the impact of the pandemic, shareholders - made up predominantly of the Glazers - were paid dividends totalling £10.7m for the year.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2021/09/17/cristiano-ronaldo-raphael-varane-jadon-sancho-push-manchester/

[Razoray]

Its been reported that Sancho is on a 5 year deal worth £350 pw. Including  amortisation, that's an extra £100m on the Utd books for the next 2 years - with probably no resale value on Ronaldo. Massive outlay at a time even they are making a loss

[Scott_M]

Any photos of the protest today?

 

I walked past The Arkles around 1.30pm and didn’t see anything - Can only assume i missed it?

[Ronnie Whelan]

14 hours ago, Razoray said:

Its been reported that Sancho is on a 5 year deal worth £350 pw. Including  amortisation, that's an extra £100m on the Utd books for the next 2 years - with probably no resale value on Ronaldo. Massive outlay at a time even they are making a loss

I could be wrong, but I'd sat there's a decent chance that they will recoup a lot of the Ronaldo outlay if not make a profit, from all the jerseys and merchandise they will sell.

[Daisy]

15 minutes ago, Ronnie Whelan said:

I could be wrong, but I'd sat there's a decent chance that they will recoup a lot of the Ronaldo outlay if not make a profit, from all the jerseys and merchandise they will sell.

Seems really stupid we cut a deal with Nike thats highly geared towards shirt sales and haven't bothered to buy any big name players to sell the shirts. 

[Daisy]

That broadcasting increase for man United is just insane. Surely can't all be down to 10 games and champions league 

[Harry Squatter]

8 minutes ago, Daisy said:

That broadcasting increase for man United is just insane. Surely can't all be down to 10 games and champions league 

Think the year we won the CL and were the most viewed team in the PL we ended up with £251m. 

[Red74]

 

21 hours ago, dockers_strike said:

Should end the bullshit claims by some that their wage bill is less than ours.

 

you mean the wage bill FSG declare each year in the books?
 

UTD’s playing squads wage bill is more than double ours, which no ones ever disputed yet we blow their players out the water with what we pay our admin team.

 

 

[Razoray]

4 hours ago, Ronnie Whelan said:

I could be wrong, but I'd sat there's a decent chance that they will recoup a lot of the Ronaldo outlay if not make a profit, from all the jerseys and merchandise they will sell.

They get 7.5% of jersey sales. They'd have to sell over 250 million of them, over and above normal sales to get that back. 

[Anubis]

On 10/09/2021 at 14:12, Scott_M said:

This is an interesting listen. 
 

https://twitter.com/theathleticuk/status/1435219046014898176?s=21

“Good morning, Mr M. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to infiltrate any anti-FSG protest near Anfield, take names and photographs, and report back to daddy. As always, should you or any of your M Force be caught or killed, Mr Henry will disavow any knowledge of your actions. This MP3 will self destruct 5…4…3…2…1…”

 

 

[deiseach]

This got repeated airing at the ground yesterday:

 

 

I'm surprised it hasn't triggered the usual suspects about how anyone singing it is one of FSG's useful idiots, making light of them robbing the fans yadda yadda yadda.