Jump to content

dockers_strike

Members
  • Posts

    16,515
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by dockers_strike

  1. On 28/01/2023 at 12:46, Bobby Hundreds said:

    Why does Ratcliffe need publicity though. He's a prick like and made a point of saying there's no value in LFC all the while being a Chelsea season ticket holder who supports United, I'm sure being the richest man in Britain means he could travel to watch his beloved devil's in quite the comfort.

     

    Cos he's an attention seeking nob?

  2. 37 minutes ago, Rotpeter said:

    Liverpool: Alisson, Alexander-Arnold, Konate, Gomez, Robertson, Bajcetic, Thiago, Keita, Elliott, Salah, Gakpo.

    Subs: Kelleher, Fabinho, Milner, Henderson, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Jones, Tsimikas, Nunez, Matip.

     

    Maybe Jurgen is losing patience with Nunez' finishing or he's still not fully fit? Would be a bit strange considering he played the last 15 minutes or so against chelsea.

     

    Looks like very few goals in the starting 11 so, maybe the game is ripe for Nunez to come on and score!

  3. On 27/01/2023 at 07:59, AngryOfTuebrook said:

     

    The club cannot insist the loan players play every game at the other club nor have a penalty clause if the club doesnt play them enough to aid their development. But, we have a recall clause inserted so if the club thinks they arent being used and get the playing time, they can recall them.

     

    I dont see the point in loaning players out if they dont get played or even make matchday squads so think the club is doing the right thing. It's the other clubs that are shambolic in my opinion, making a big play to get the players in then not playing them.

     

    I gather Williams was recalled from Blackpool because we're looking to sell Nat and want him as cover if we do.

  4. 2 hours ago, an tha said:

    It makes no sense in isolation - but i feel there has to be a plan to it and we won't see it revealed properly until summer.

     

    It is like we have a jigsaw but have done the middle pieces before the edge, but there is a reason we have chosen to work like that.

     

    I am also of the view Salah won't be here at the start of next season.

     

    I reckon Mo will leave at the end of next season. He's on a 3 year deal and we wont give him improved terms in 2 years nor let him leave on a free at the end of his deal.

  5. 25 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

    2661421E-BEE9-4E7B-B29B-872243A81AA9.png

     

    Meanwhile, the Daily Wail is running a story the Glazers are hacked off with Ratcliffe, believing him to be a timewaster who wont pay the £6bn they want and using his bid as a publicity stunt.

     

    Time will tell which is right I suppose.

     

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11685357/Manchester-United-chiefs-not-convinced-Sir-Jim-Ratcliffes-plans-buy-club.html

  6. 4 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

     

     

    considering the money they have spent on transfers over the last few years (over 500m net in the last 5 years), i don't think it is servicing debt is the reason they could only get weghorst (and we're not servicing their level of debt and could only get fucking arthur!). it's part of the story, but the reality is they've spent loads of money, spent astronomical amounts on the likes of ronaldo and paid out loads of dividends. 

     

    Yes, the bit about Weghorst was just a dig really. But the point I was trying to make and didnt, was \ is, if united didnt have to service Glazers debt, they're probably the only PL club that could virtually match city's (and newcastle if they are allowed to go down that route) spending within the laughably lax PL FFP.

  7. To be fair, anyone they would have got in to replace the hapless Fwank would have a chance of keeping them up. But, the constant in my opinion is the players. It's not often just a clueless manager that sends a team down. It's often that the players simply arent good enough for the league. This mob still look like they simply arent good enough.

     

    They're 25 points off safety with 18 games to play. It's doable but first any manager needs to stop the rot and turn defeats into draws then some wins.

     

    Gordon wanting to fuck off to chelsea or newcastle wont do team moral any good if he has to stay either so Id say all bets are currently off on them staying up.

    • Upvote 1
  8. 4 hours ago, Scott_M said:


    No, didn’t think you were being smart, I had genuinely never heard of it. 
     

    I was just reading in The Echo that AXA pay us £30m a year for the Kirkby and training gear sponsorship. So that money would count towards the increased revenue (as we’ve seen), it reality all the AXA money has done so far is paid for Kirkby. 
     

    I get the off pitch redevelopment costs are exempt from FFP, is the money we’re paying for the ARE taking away from on pitch redevelopments we need?

     

    If it is, then I wouldn’t complain about it. I would question why it’s been financed like this (FSG could have loaned us it or a bank interest rate would have been low in Q4’19, although getting an £80m loan in 2020 might have been difficult…) but ultimately it’s a completely understandable reason. 
     

    I do think it’s a question that needs asking and answering because what has been reported so far doesn’t add up. 

     

     

    I dont know if money for the ARE means team rebuilding has been impacted. But, at the same time loads of people have said they couldnt get tickets etc. So the ground is being increased by 7000 new seats.

     

    Some people will say they still cant get tickets and I understand members saying they now dont qualify etc. But it's one of those things, do you say we arent expanding the ground because there's still people who cannot get in the ground and keep the capacity at 54000?

     

    4 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

    interest rates won't have been very high at all when those projects started, so I doubt that played too much of a part. but the fact FSG want to expand their empire and perhaps don't have the liquidity to do so, probably means they need their assets to be as debt free and looking good to repay anything they may borrow to buy that baseball or NFL side they covet. 

     

    I agree about rates and the time the AXA was started. The ARE, Im not so sure.

     

    Interest rates might not have been high but like lots of things, commercial loans interest rates have gone up substantially in the last 12-18 months. People say they could have got fixed rates at the start but lenders etc knew rates were going to start climbing and may have withdraw fixed rate deals and replaced those with variable rate.  I dont know, Im just summising.

     

    The club does carry debt especially regarding their 'draw down' facility with bankers. End of the day, the more debt you have, the more you have to pay back. Even if the Glazers didnt take another penny out of united, they still have to service and pay interest on £500m(?) debt. If united didnt have to service that debt, they wouldnt need to get shit like Weghorst in on loan.

  9. 3 minutes ago, Scott_M said:


    I never heard about the club self financing Kirkby / ARE. 
     

    Has the club taken a loan out from a bank or is it paying it directly from its own coffers?

     

    If it’s directly from its own coffers, then I have no problem with it, it would be handy to know. 

     

    Im not trying to be smart after the event but it was said at the time of building the AXA and ARE that the club would be self financing the deals and not like they did with the MS.

     

    As far as I know, the club is using working capital that's FFP exempt to finance both projects. They may even be using some of the overdraft facility they have. I dont know whether financing on AXA has ended and the ARE financing taken over.

  10. 4 minutes ago, Scott_M said:


    My issue us that we’re not trying to compete to the best of our ability.
     

    I agree with your comments on FFP not restricting others, as above, it shouldn’t be restricting us.
     

    If we wanted Caicedo & Enzo Fernandez this month, we seemingly have the money (or wriggle room) to pull it off.
     

    Take the ARE / Kirkby costs away and there is significantly more again. 
     

    Given no details on the financing of the ARE / Kirkby to go on, I was surprised to read this week it hadn’t been done the same as the Main Stand with a preferable FSG loan.

     

    I’m not throwing in another conspiracy theory and passing it off a fact that any loan / debt from us would hinder them buying an NBA or NFL team, although I do think it’s a question worth asking. 
     

    If we are still paying them back money from the Main Stand (which I assume we are) and now have these other redevelopments to pay for, letting supporters know we’re paying £XXm per year. It would make the current situation of just writing this season off easier to swallow. 

     

    It was known from day 1 that the club was self financing the AXA and ARE unlike the Main Stand. These are all infrastructure projects that dont count towards FFP spending limits.

     

    I guess the reason they didnt use a loan for the ARE is interest rates have shot up which would make the project more expensive and the club having higher repayments.

  11. Unless Jurgen was going to be really ruthless and I mean really ruthless, it seems a stretch to me that he would dump his captain, vice captain, fabinho and anyone else all in the summer especially as they contributed to winning 2 trophies and within a whisker of the 2 biggest.

     

    Ox would be an easy pick from the midfielders with many to jib off but that still leaves the aforementioned trio untouched. Curtis Jones has never filled me with confidence he can kick on to be the class of player we need.

     

    Jib Joe and Joel? We'd be in a difficult position right now with Virgil's injury if we had. Who'd be a football manager, eh? I know I wouldnt.

     

     

     

  12. Id rather we jibbed this and still went eyeballs out to try and get 4th or better which is a much, much bigger priority. But, another defeat would just encourage the naysayers and narrative against the club right now.

     

    Jurgen obviously wants and needs to win every game to build the confidence up and Im no different. Think he has to go for the win with a strongish team here.

  13. 1 hour ago, TD_LFC said:

     

    All the twitter 'ITK's' have spent months stoking up take over rumours and getting supporters riled with tweets consisting of hour glasses and eye emoji's or retweets from blag accounts in Arabic and are now saying the club needs to put an end to the speculation they have had no part in generating because it's harming the club.

     

    They've got no fucking shame.

     

    100% this.

  14. 48 minutes ago, TD_LFC said:

    Don't think it has to be a controlling share, there were issues when Chelsea were set to play Schalke years back because of investment in Gazprom which was majority owned by Russian Gov but Abramovich had a share holding as well.

     

    Bit harsh on Spurs though if they think they'll never get into europe so it won't be an issue. 

     

    Do you know what the percentage someone like PSG's owners could invest in another club and still be within both the PL and UEFA's limits? Ive read the Qatari's were talking of a 25% stake but that seems massive to me especially when you think back to the Football League days before the PL, I think the limit was 5%. John Moores was limited to that because he had a controlling stake in the shite. Kind of makes Cundy and his chelsea cohorts that the Moores family made Liverpool the richest club during the 70's a load of bullshit.

  15. 2 hours ago, navbasi said:

    Jurgen Klopp since October 2015:

     

    51 Players Bought: £661,250,000

    49 Players Sold: £478,200,000

     

    Net Spend: £183,050,000

     

    Arsenal owner, Kronke, loaded a commercial £150m loan onto the club to enable arteta to spend on the squad 12 months ago.

     

    Some people would be losing their shit on here if FSG put a similar commercial loan on the club to buy.

  16. 3 hours ago, Megadrive Person said:

    It seems like we’re heading in to Hicks and Gillette territory now with these owners. I remember when they tried to find investment for the team but surprisingly not many people want to pay huge amounts of money to have a minority share in a football club.  Why would you pay 600 to 900 million to have a small share in this club when you could buy another team for less than that amount and have full ownership?


    FSG are tying to have their cake and eat it. Chelsea was sold less than a year ago, United seem to be edging closer to a full sale too despite having a much higher price than we do and needing around 1 to 2 billion to be spent on either refurbing or replacing their stadium. 

     

    FSG need to realise that they’ve gone as far as they can with us now. The team needs huge investment, yet they are already rolling out excuses about missing out on top four and relying on the sale of fringe players to fund a rebuild! It won’t even get close!  The struggles we’ve seen this year will only get worse if Arsenal and Newcastle push further ahead by actually building on success rather than standing still. 

     

    If FSG are still here in the summer then it’s back to the years of mediocrity, 4th place being the very best we can hope for but more likely we’ll be in the Europa League. 
     

     

    I dont understand why some people says 'Why would someone pay for part ownership of the club?'

     

    Turn the question back is, why do you think all investors want to fully own a football club as opposed to 'part ownership'?

     

    Some investors  do not want to take on full ownership but they want to be onboard as investors in the club. A part ownership could be anyone who might advance the club in a digital market or just want the part ownership and using that as a door opening into other markets etc.

     

    There are more ways to skin a cat.

  17. Spot on report, Dave. Echo are saying 2 fans were arrested outside the ground for singing CRBs after being warned by bixxies, continued so were arrested. I was pissed off in the ground with the chelsea chants and said why isnt George reading out something about that after his broadcast about chants heard in 'your area' (SKD Upper ARE)?

     

    The Echo says about 19 chelsea fans were ejected from Anfield during the game after being warned by stewards about singing Hillsbrough songs.

  18. 2 hours ago, an tha said:

    Why pay 4bn for us when you can pay 300m for Everton or Fulham or somebody and spend 1bn on players to win league etc.

     

    The shite would cost almost a billion not £300m though. They have £350m of debt and the stadium build was quoted as £760m by Moshiri recently. Allowing for some of the shite's £350m debt already includes say £150m for the stadium, clubs like Leeds in the PL or Sunderland in the Championship would be a better bet. Both one club cities and Sunderland with a huge catchment area and relatively new 50,000 seater stadium capable of expansion..

     

    Personally, I dont see us being sold while the price tag is 3 billion quid or more.

×
×
  • Create New...