Manchester United debt hits £716m

mr_fishbulb

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

Debts at the parent company of Manchester United have increased to £716.5m ($1.17bn), according to its latest accounts.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8470595.stm

I wonder if they got enough suckers to buy their bond before releasing these figures.

lemonjelly

chucky wrote: »

the White Horse is an Albion fan - he loved big Cyril, young Laurie and Brenda Batson! :money::D

Not a suprise - explains the fundamentally challenged in the brain dept problem!;)

Thrugelmir

chucky wrote: »

not sure how you come to that conclusion - most if not all premiership matches are close to being sold out

My work colleague Manure season ticket holder for over 25 years says that there empty seats at most games this season. The touts are no longer outside. As tickets are available on match days.

As supporters they feel ripped off. Continual upward pricing of tickets. If you want cup game tickets as a season ticket holder , you either opt in or out. Which means if you opt in you are automatically charged for tickets whether you attend or not.

Apparently there was the start of a protest against the Glazers last Saturday but the stewards quickly quelled it. not the end of the story. As there's high resentment amongst the regulars.

inspector_monkfish

Ahem...

Say I am top'o'the league, Say I am top'o'the league........

http://fantasyfootball.skysports.com/

chucky

Thrugelmir wrote: »

As supporters they feel ripped off. Continual upward pricing of tickets. If you want cup game tickets as a season ticket holder , you either opt in or out. Which means if you opt in you are automatically charged for tickets whether you attend or not.

Apparently there was the start of a protest against the Glazers last Saturday but the stewards quickly quelled it. not the end of the story. As there's high resentment amongst the regulars.

this is true but it doesn't mean it's less popular - here's a list of attendances.
during a recession it's still very high
http://itv.stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.html

lemonjelly

Generali wrote: »

FWIW, Liverpool are I believe about GBP350,000,000 in debt. Arsenal were GBP297,000,000 in debt when they produced their last accounts (link) although they still have a load of flats yet to be sold which they value at GBP167,000,000.

Man City and Chelsea basically have no debt as they have converted it (I believe) to equity.

Tottenham have net debt of GBP45,900,000, the Villa GBP37,000,000. My guess is that the owners of both clubs could make them debt free if needs be.

Generali wrote: »

Yup, I was right. Man City have converted their debt to equity:

link

My guess is that Man Utd and Liverpool need to be in the 'Champions' League pretty much every season. Woolwich Wanderers (Ars**al) could probably cope with a season of not having CL money as they have the flats to sell. After that things would get problematic.

FWIW, I think what has happened to football over the past 20 years is terrible. Having said that, it's pretty much always been the teams with big money that have won - from 1889 to 2009, Man Utd, Liverpool and Ars**al won the league 49 times between them!

IIRC Gen, there was a report published very recently, which highlighted that the debt burden on the clubs in the premiership is very worrying. IIRC there were only 3 clubs which were, according to the report, sustainable.

chucky wrote: »

not sure how you come to that conclusion - most if not all premiership matches are close to being sold out

You're way off here I'm afraid chucky. You seen the crowds/attendances at Blackburn? Bolton? Wigan? Hull? Frequently having half the stadium sold out. http://itv.stats.football365.com/dom/ENG/PR/attend.html

Generali

lemonjelly wrote: »

IIRC Gen, there was a report published very recently, which highlighted that the debt burden on the clubs in the premiership is very worrying. IIRC there were only 3 clubs which were, according to the report, sustainable.

I can't comment on the report but the positon at Spurs looks reasonable to me. They have net debt of about £45,000,000 and made a net profit of £27,580,000 last year. They paid out a little shy of £4,000,000 in interest and I think much of the debt has been incurred as a result of buying property around the ground so there are real assets that go with the debt.

lemonjelly

inspector_monkfish wrote: »

Ahem...

Say I am top'o'the league, Say I am top'o'the league........

http://fantasyfootball.skysports.com/

<grumbles> I'm sure there's summat wrong with how they do their scoring. & to disregard the FA Cup (when I had 7 scorers) is just plain wrong!<grumbles>

warehouse

Sooner or later a big club will have to go into Admin, (Portsmouth don't count). Then the house of cards will be in trouble.

lemonjelly

Generali wrote: »

I can't comment on the report but the positon at Spurs looks reasonable to me. They have net debt of about £45,000,000 and made a net profit of £27,580,000 last year. They paid out a little shy of £4,000,000 in interest and I think much of the debt has been incurred as a result of buying property around the ground so there are real assets that go with the debt.

Think spurs were in the "ok, no immediate panic" category.

If I were a spurs fan, I'd be praying 'arry is being very closely monitored!

He managed bournmouth - administration.
he managed west ham - look at them now.
he went to portsmouth - left under a cloud....
he went to southampton - administration & repeated relegation
he managed portsmouth again - perhaps he hadn't quite finished them off first time & wanted to make sure?

He may be a jolly cockney geezer, however the common theme for the above clubs is clear.

I hope the Levy's are watching his every blinking move.