Formation

comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 14 seconds ago
I know it’s a lot, I didn’t say it was. I said the dividends isn’t a lot when you look at the ridiculous revenues of the club, even without the match day revenue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
numpty donny sat on a wall

Eh?

comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 25 seconds ago
Eh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
it's a (somewhat laboured) humpty dumpty reference.

I got that, was just wondering if there’s something you were questioning with my post.

comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 17 seconds ago
I got that, was just wondering if there’s something you were questioning with my post.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
oh, nothing at all, it's just that numpty rhymes with humpty, and donny sounds ever so slightly like dumpty. there was, alas, no more logic to it than that.

by the way i had not realised dividends alone were as high as £23m, i had a figure of £20mish in mind, made up of dividends and directors' fees.

which doesn't sound like too much, but in the context of our annual net spend of c. £60-80m, it's enough. to put it another way, it pays for diallo, making him a punt on the future, rather than 1/3 of our transfer budget.

It’s usually around the £20m figure. But as we discussed the other day net spend is ballacks. £20m is a lot but it’s not having much of an impact on our ability to spend money. It’s something that’s claimed by many despite the evidence to the contrary.

Not that I’m a fan or the Glazers, they’re leaches and the leveraged buyout is clearly a massive issue, even now. But the talk of the dividends really impacting our spending has always been nonsense.

comment by Donny The King van de Beek (U10026)
posted 6 seconds ago
It’s usually around the £20m figure. But as we discussed the other day net spend is ballacks.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
That debate was going well, until Mamba claimed that net spend was revenues minus costs, and it all went to sh!t.

As far as I can tell there was genuine hope at board level that this summer we were going to raise £50m+ from player sales, so if one good thing were to come out of this summer it would be a realisation that our wage structure works well enough for good performers, and terribly for bad ones (which is sadly far too high a % of the team).

One tiny example I learned is that AWB was on £16k a week at palace, but we decided to put him onto £90k a week, instantly meaning that if he flopped he would be near-unsellable, because the type of clubs who would want a United flop couldn't afford £90k a week for a RB (I am told that TAA is on £50k a week, though I suspect not for long).

So whether the shift should be to lower base + higher bonuses, or simply lower base period, I don't know, but at some point we have to get better at this stuff, surely?

comment by Don Draper's dandruff (U20155)
posted 1 hour, 34 minutes ago
Rosso? Shiiiiiit poster. Get rid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

That debate was going well, until Mamba claimed
———
A sentence that won’t be be said for the first or last time.

Yep the wage bill is absurd. And just another example of how badly we’re run. Our transfer spending and wage bill is up there with, or higher, than all the best clubs in Europe. And has been for years. And yet we’ve been nowhere them on the pitch.

That’s the thing the piiiiisses me off the most about the owners, a lot more so than all the money they’ve taken out of the club.

That’s the thing the piiiiisses me off the most about the owners, a lot more so than all the money they’ve taken out of the club.
++

TBF to Glazers. ( I know)

Of all the current football club owners in the World they have probably overseen the most genuine success on the pitch during their tenure.

And (until the last 2 years anyway) they have also provided copius amounts of financial clout for player recruitment and wages.

Which leads us to the reason why we are where we are.

The Glazers have always left recruitment and contract detail with their CEO and his team. As they did with Fergie & Gill. They just supply their money to fund it. (Sorry RDD)

I don't need to tell you that since 2013 the CEO at United has been an absolute fecking disaster in this department. Under all the last 4 manager's tenure.

To the extent that they have almost given up allowing him to pi55 it up the wall anymore. And so would I.