Liverpool FC Forum

by **metalhead** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:51 pm

Maybe for fans in smaller clubs with smaller stadiums?

I think it will affect because of our small stadium size, but it wouldnt matter to Arsenal or Mancs, even though they have debts, they get covered with the revenues they get from their match days at the Old Trafford and Emarites, respectively.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:53 pm

bavlondon wrote:Only clubs selling players to City will sell for inflated prices. Otherwise it will be BAU more orless for the rest of us.

I don't think so mate, what will Milan do with their £110million? They will buy players, and other clubs knowing they have £110million will ask for more..... vicious circle mate.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:56 pm

metalhead wrote:Maybe for fans in smaller clubs with smaller stadiums?

I think it will affect because of our small stadium size, but it wouldnt matter to Arsenal or Mancs, even though they have debts, they get covered with the revenues they get from their match days at the Old Trafford and Emarites, respectively.

Where did you hear that one? The mancs haven't paid anything off their debt, and couldn't even meet the interest payments this season. Arsenal I am not so sure about, but I heard they are in trouble because they cant sell their old ground for flats for some reason or other.

Man Utd downplays financial worries
By Agency Reporter
Published: Thursday, 15 Jan 2009
Manchester United chief executive David Gill on Wednesday said the club remained in a robust financial position despite worries over its huge debt and sponsorship deal with troubled insurance giant AIG.

Gill insisted the ongoing economic crisis had so far had little impact on the club’s finances, and that its revenue streams remained consistent in the face of the global slowdown.

“We are not complacent and we understand the issues in the world are such that we cannot expect to be immune from them,” Gill said during a trip to Macau to unveil details of this year’s Asian tour.

“At the same time, we have a robust business plan,” he said, adding “football is only going to get bigger.”

Gill said United was paying around 43 million pounds a year to service its huge debt of 660 million pounds, which was created when US owner Malcolm Glazer moved to buy up the club in a controversial swoop in 2005.

Some analysts have warned that United could struggle to service its heavy debts as global credit markets contracted, but Gill said the annual payments were expected to remain consistent for the next few years as the financing was organised relatively recently, in 2006.

He added sales of season tickets and executive boxes had also stood up to the downturn, and that he was expecting improvements in the television income from the UEFA Champions’ League which is currently being renegotiated.

Gill added there had been no moves from shirt sponsor American International Group to pull its 56.5 million pound deal early, despite the US government having to rescue the ailing firm last year.

He conceded it was “more than likely” AIG would not renew the deal when it expires in 18 months’ time, but said there were plenty of potential suitors.

“We think, given there is only one piece of real estate on the shirt, we think it is a very attractive proposition,” he said.

“There are many companies around the world who would like to have that association.”

by **justyna** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 10:57 pm

Kaka won't leave Milan...not for ManCity

by **metalhead** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:04 pm

s@int wrote:
metalhead wrote:Maybe for fans in smaller clubs with smaller stadiums?

I think it will affect because of our small stadium size, but it wouldnt matter to Arsenal or Mancs, even though they have debts, they get covered with the revenues they get from their match days at the Old Trafford and Emarites, respectively.

Where did you hear that one? The mancs haven't paid anything off their debt, and couldn't even meet the interest payments this season. Arsenal I am not so sure about, but I heard they are in trouble because they cant sell their old ground for flats for some reason or other.

Man Utd downplays financial worries
By Agency Reporter
Published: Thursday, 15 Jan 2009
Manchester United chief executive David Gill on Wednesday said the club remained in a robust financial position despite worries over its huge debt and sponsorship deal with troubled insurance giant AIG.

Gill insisted the ongoing economic crisis had so far had little impact on the club’s finances, and that its revenue streams remained consistent in the face of the global slowdown.

“We are not complacent and we understand the issues in the world are such that we cannot expect to be immune from them,” Gill said during a trip to Macau to unveil details of this year’s Asian tour.

“At the same time, we have a robust business plan,” he said, adding “football is only going to get bigger.”

Gill said United was paying around 43 million pounds a year to service its huge debt of 660 million pounds, which was created when US owner Malcolm Glazer moved to buy up the club in a controversial swoop in 2005.

Some analysts have warned that United could struggle to service its heavy debts as global credit markets contracted, but Gill said the annual payments were expected to remain consistent for the next few years as the financing was organised relatively recently, in 2006.

He added sales of season tickets and executive boxes had also stood up to the downturn, and that he was expecting improvements in the television income from the UEFA Champions’ League which is currently being renegotiated.

Gill added there had been no moves from shirt sponsor American International Group to pull its 56.5 million pound deal early, despite the US government having to rescue the ailing firm last year.

He conceded it was “more than likely” AIG would not renew the deal when it expires in 18 months’ time, but said there were plenty of potential suitors.

“We think, given there is only one piece of real estate on the shirt, we think it is a very attractive proposition,” he said.

“There are many companies around the world who would like to have that association.”

They pay over 50m of transfers every year mate, so they can't be that skint, as much as us though.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:10 pm

metalhead wrote:
s@int wrote:
metalhead wrote:Maybe for fans in smaller clubs with smaller stadiums?

I think it will affect because of our small stadium size, but it wouldnt matter to Arsenal or Mancs, even though they have debts, they get covered with the revenues they get from their match days at the Old Trafford and Emarites, respectively.

Where did you hear that one? The mancs haven't paid anything off their debt, and couldn't even meet the interest payments this season. Arsenal I am not so sure about, but I heard they are in trouble because they cant sell their old ground for flats for some reason or other.

Man Utd downplays financial worries
By Agency Reporter
Published: Thursday, 15 Jan 2009
Manchester United chief executive David Gill on Wednesday said the club remained in a robust financial position despite worries over its huge debt and sponsorship deal with troubled insurance giant AIG.

Gill insisted the ongoing economic crisis had so far had little impact on the club’s finances, and that its revenue streams remained consistent in the face of the global slowdown.

“We are not complacent and we understand the issues in the world are such that we cannot expect to be immune from them,” Gill said during a trip to Macau to unveil details of this year’s Asian tour.

“At the same time, we have a robust business plan,” he said, adding “football is only going to get bigger.”

Gill said United was paying around 43 million pounds a year to service its huge debt of 660 million pounds, which was created when US owner Malcolm Glazer moved to buy up the club in a controversial swoop in 2005.

Some analysts have warned that United could struggle to service its heavy debts as global credit markets contracted, but Gill said the annual payments were expected to remain consistent for the next few years as the financing was organised relatively recently, in 2006.

He added sales of season tickets and executive boxes had also stood up to the downturn, and that he was expecting improvements in the television income from the UEFA Champions’ League which is currently being renegotiated.

Gill added there had been no moves from shirt sponsor American International Group to pull its 56.5 million pound deal early, despite the US government having to rescue the ailing firm last year.

He conceded it was “more than likely” AIG would not renew the deal when it expires in 18 months’ time, but said there were plenty of potential suitors.

“We think, given there is only one piece of real estate on the shirt, we think it is a very attractive proposition,” he said.

“There are many companies around the world who would like to have that association.”

They pay over 50m of transfers every year mate, so they can't be that skint, as much as us though.

I think the point I was making was they haven't paid the £50+ million in interest they owed in the last financial year mate. Their debt has increased not decreased.

They owe more than us, but are making much more than us.(more successful and a big stadium) They had a very good year last year and no doubt all things being equal they will have no real problems. However when the most successful club in the world at the moment (both on and off the pitch) are struggling to keep their heads above water ...... what chance for the rest ?

United fans have been hit with up to a 14% rise in ticket prices this season and season ticket holders have had to join the club's compulsory automatic cup scheme, which ups the overall cost and increased financial strain of continuing to follow the Red Devils in all competitions.

The report states that since last year's refinancing, United and the Glazers have been faced with "a series of interest rate rises which have increased the annual debt service bill from £62m a year on the total debt of £660m.

"The interest bill is currently an annualised £100m-plus, of which £73m is payable this year and the other £27m in the future - a ticking debt time-bomb."

Speculation has emerged over recent weeks of potential buyers for United based in China and Dubai, but the Glazers have stressed that they have no interest in selling and are completely committed to the club.

by **tubby** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:15 pm

And they won the league and CL last season plus they get more from sponsorships than us

by **Number 9** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:18 pm

s@int wrote:
metalhead wrote:because of Kaka s@int?

I disagree, I didn't see Chelsea doing that when they did it the first time.

Because most clubs are running at a loss Metalhead. Chelsea had Abramovitch so they didn't need to worry, Citeh have your cousins so they will probably be ok, but for the rest of the league that have to compete with them its going to lead to more and more clubs raising prices or having to sell out to foreign owners and hope for the best (like we had to).

Players want bigger and better contracts, and who pays for them in the end?

Very good point I guess!
City can afford it..... most cant.
If transfers go up (which they will if this ridiculous deal goes through) other clubs will be forced to borrow.If they dont they won't be able to compete!

Some sort of salary cap and transfer limit needs to be brought in.Maybe if this Kaka deal goes through though,it will be the breaking point and the powers that be will decide something needs done to control the sports finances and keep the money floating about realistic!

Over £100m for 1 player...shocking!
:no

by **metalhead** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:18 pm

I don't think they owe much more than us to be honest S@int, the press exaggerate alot! They do have debt, but from what I heard from a couple of mancs they do meet their interest payments (not every year) because of the revenues they generate from having a huge stadium and as Bav said their sponsor deals.

by **account deleted by request** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:24 pm

We owe £350million the mancs owe £660million..... it may not be a lot where you come from mate but its almost as much as my wife owes on her access account.

by **metalhead** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:28 pm

s@int wrote:We owe £350million the mancs owe £660million..... it may not be a lot where you come from mate but its almost as much as my wife owes on her access account.

pfft!! only? Ill give 1b to cover our losses

by **NANNY RED** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:31 pm

Do you know what ive just been reading that Man city have upped there bid for Kaka. 120 MILLION .An Milan are concidering.
Its a joke i find it disgusting that any player no matter how good he is can be worth that amount of money. Surely something has to be done. Can you imagine how we would feel if they came up with that amount of money an came in for Stevie or Torres . We wouldnt have a chance in hell of keeping them our owners would see pound signs an off theyd go. Milan fans must be gutted at the mo thinking they could lose there best player ,
Ok some might say that money could buy you a whole lot of top players ,but it wont buy you a new Kaka. Im really getting fed up at the amount of money being offered for players some who are way over priced (Keane) and the amount of wages being put under there noses. Its no wonder Pennant doesnt want to go anywhere he can sit on his a.rse and get paid a big fat wedge every week for doing all , it makes me sick.

by **metalhead** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:34 pm

From SSN nanny

Kaka allowed to speak to City
Milan authorise talks

By Graeme Bailey Last updated: 15th January 2009

Kaka's spokesman has confirmed that AC Milan have given permission to the player to negotiate with Manchester City.

Milan stated on Thursday for the first time that they were indeed considering City's offer - which was confirmed at €120million (£107million).

Whilst the Italian giants consider their position they have allowed the Kaka camp to open talk over a possible move to Eastlands.

Kaka's spokesman Diogo Kotscho admitted that although a deal was not close - the Rossoneri had given them the green light to open talks.

"Milan has authorised the negotiation with Manchester City," he told Associated Press.

"The next step now is that Kaka's father will eventually talk to Manchester City.

"It's an exaggeration what they are saying in England that it's almost a done deal and it's an exaggeration that Kaka has rejected the offer."

SSN

------------

They already accepted the bid

by **metalhead** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:36 pm

Muhahaha, fear the arab riches :laugh:

by **NANNY RED** » Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:39 pm

If he goes to city every :censored:

manager with a world class player in there team will be quaking in there boots. How can anyone compete with that. its disgusting

Liverpool FC Forum

Kaka

Who is online