Well...

Regarding expenditure, I was looking at the whole Glazer period in comparison to other clubs, and found:

Manchester City £1.90bn 420 £589.06m 411 £-1,314.06m
2 Chelsea FC Chelsea FC £1.85bn 468 £1.05bn 457 £-798.59m
3 Manchester United Manchester United £1.50bn 328 £549.68m 337 £-952.61m
4 Liverpool FC Liverpool FC £1.31bn 373 £874.58m 373 £-432.95m
5 Tottenham Hotspur Tottenham Hotspur £1.11bn 409 £758.20m 410 £-356.35m
6 Arsenal FC Arsenal FC £978.50m 311 £553.76m 315 £-424.74m

(first £ figure is expenditure / second is player sales / last is balance)

This picture shows a lot of things. One is that City and Chelsea have spent more than us on players, and Liverpool only slightly less, since 2004.

Another is that we've been terrible at the 'Moneyball' side of the football business. Liverpool's net spend is substantially lower because they keep bringing in a lot of income by selling players. Whatever we disagree on in in terms of financial outlay, we can all agree that we've been terrible at making the most of our investments and moving them on at the right time.

Oh absolutely only decent bit of business was the Ronaldo sale in terms of player sales.

The only other thing it shows is that I can’t read 😂 but what’s £300m between friends eh?

Isn't the fact the Glazers are selling some shares a good thing? Perhaps a first step to replacing them from the ownership of the club?

Also Sat Nav I can't agree with the Ronaldo sale being good business. With their desperation for him we should have held out for £80m and one or two of their excellent players at the time. Robben and Sneijder (I know!) should have been asked for IMO.

Isn't the fact the Glazers are selling some shares a good thing? Perhaps a first step to replacing them from the ownership of the club?


—

Depends it may be better the devil you know

comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Isn't the fact the Glazers are selling some shares a good thing? Perhaps a first step to replacing them from the ownership of the club?

Also Sat Nav I can't agree with the Ronaldo sale being good business. With their desperation for him we should have held out for £80m and one or two of their excellent players at the time. Robben and Sneijder (I know!) should have been asked for IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said ‘decent’ deliberately mate. I doubt if we could have got that much plus Robben or Snejjder that would have equated to roughly £120m which is just insanity in 2009.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Isn't the fact the Glazers are selling some shares a good thing? Perhaps a first step to replacing them from the ownership of the club?

Also Sat Nav I can't agree with the Ronaldo sale being good business. With their desperation for him we should have held out for £80m and one or two of their excellent players at the time. Robben and Sneijder (I know!) should have been asked for IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said ‘decent’ deliberately mate. I doubt if we could have got that much plus Robben or Snejjder that would have equated to roughly £120m which is just insanity in 2009.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know.

I just think, even though it was a massive transfer, that we let them off lightly and that we should have asked for more. I do appreciate it was a world record fee at the time though.

When fans are allowed back get a ticket in the stretty and tell everyone how much you admire what they've done. See how long you last before someone knocks you flat on your backside.

The Glazer regime has been the death of this football club. Without Fergie they are totally exposed.

The takeover should have never been allowed to go through. If they had bought us outright then fair play. They used loans off the back of the club to help pay for it. Disagree all you want. You're wrong.

***********************************************************

Not the "match going fans" response.

The only problem with the glazers is in decisions in terms of the management of the club. They've spent more than enough to win.

comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by Diafol Coch 77 (U2462)
posted 1 minute ago
Isn't the fact the Glazers are selling some shares a good thing? Perhaps a first step to replacing them from the ownership of the club?

Also Sat Nav I can't agree with the Ronaldo sale being good business. With their desperation for him we should have held out for £80m and one or two of their excellent players at the time. Robben and Sneijder (I know!) should have been asked for IMO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I said ‘decent’ deliberately mate. I doubt if we could have got that much plus Robben or Snejjder that would have equated to roughly £120m which is just insanity in 2009.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I know.

I just think, even though it was a massive transfer, that we let them off lightly and that we should have asked for more. I do appreciate it was a world record fee at the time though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greedy caaaant 😂😂

The only problem with the glazers is in decisions in terms of the management of the club. They've spent more than enough to win.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually they have spent more than enough to win, but badly. And that isn't solely their fault.

comment by RB&W (U21434)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago


The only problem with the glazers is in decisions in terms of the management of the club. They've spent more than enough to win.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually they have spent more than enough to win, but badly. And that isn't solely their fault.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That is my point.