Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: john e on June 09, 2010, 09:48:38 AM
-
dont know how one sided it was against Man Utd,
but they basically said that the Glaziers raised the part of the money to buy Utd by mortgaging there American property portfolio,
which is now in negative equity, and the rest they borrowed from the markets.
so the whole thing was bought with borrowed money.
-
dont know how one sided it was against Man Utd,
but they basically said that the Glaziers raised the part of the money to buy Utd by mortgaging there American property portfolio,
which is now in negative equity, and the rest they borrowed from the markets.
so the whole thing was bought with borrowed money.
Was that the one that was scheduled for Monday, but postponed as they did a programme on the Cumbria shootings instead?
I wanted to see that - BBC iplayer for me tonight!
-
dont know how one sided it was against Man Utd,
but they basically said that the Glaziers raised the part of the money to buy Utd by mortgaging there American property portfolio,
which is now in negative equity, and the rest they borrowed from the markets.
so the whole thing was bought with borrowed money.
Was that the one that was scheduled for Monday, but postponed as they did a programme on the Cumbria shootings instead?
I wanted to see that - BBC iplayer for me tonight!
i dont know mate, i just happened to be channel hopping and it came on,
if i'm honest i dont understand an awfull lot about the inner workings of the fianance markets,
but by the end you were nearly feeling sorry for the Utd fans, nearly
-
Sorry for them lot? Never!
-
Sorry for them lot? Never!
we are all brothers in arms, and part of the greater footballing family ?
-
For me the Glazers are just the 2010 version of Deadly Doug.
Not interested in the Football, not supporters of the club, just in it to make money, and couldn't really care less about what the supporters think.
They will milk it all the way, until they eventually walk away with a profit.
The Golds and Sullivan did the same, Shepherd at Newcastle, Gaydamak at Portsmouth, Gillette and Hicks at Liverpool, etc', etc'.
These businessmen have realised that the average football fan can be exploited time and again and will still come back for more, and if they don't there is a ready made supply of new supporters willing to part with their hard earned.
It is every business owners dream. Plus they get free advertising from Sky, which just makes the consumer pool larger and larger.
I know i am probably being exploited, but i pay my money and i take my choice, i love the Villa, it is part of me, and i believe we got lucky with Randy, but i'm not sure where it will all end.
As for sympathy for United fans, nah never!
-
For me the Glazers are just the 2010 version of Deadly Doug.
I'm no Ellis lover, but that is rather a harsh statement in my opinion. Self obsessed to the point of megalomania maybe, but he always seemed to have a genuine fondness for Aston Villa the football club, even if he didn't share that same fondness for the average fan............
-
Comparing the Glazers to Doug is just crazy talk.
-
if Doug wasnt interested in football, or Aston Villa, now he has cashed in,
why does he still attend most games, even in ill health ?
-
I tend to think that North American's such as the Glazers, Hicks & Gillette don't really appreciate the way that clubs/leagues in the rest of the world are run.
They're used to the security of not having to worry about relegation, having some form of salary cap or revenue sharing, having a draft system to even out competition etc.
Leagues such as the NFL, NBA and MLB are cash cows, where its virtually impossible not to make money (especially the NFL).
Randy seems to be one of the exceptions to this. Maybe due to the time that he spent in this country when he was younger.
-
I tend to think that North American's such as the Glazers, Hicks & Gillette don't really appreciate the way that clubs/leagues in the rest of the world are run.
They're used to the security of not having to worry about relegation, having some form of salary cap or revenue sharing, having a draft system to even out competition etc.
Leagues such as the NFL, NBA and MLB are cash cows, where its virtually impossible not to make money (especially the NFL).
Randy seems to be one of the exceptions to this. Maybe due to the time that he spent in this country when he was younger.
I can agree with that from a 'daft Yanks' point of view, but should that apply to expereinced businessmen such as them? Surely they do their home work before committing to deals worth hundreds of millions, so should know the differences between their sports and European football?
-
They're skint.
Guardian article on the Glazers
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jun/07/glazers-manchester-united-fortunes-wane)
and a blogpost. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2010/jun/07/glazer-banking-manchester-united)
-
if Doug wasnt interested in football, or Aston Villa, now he has cashed in,
why does he still attend most games, even in ill health ?
Deadly used to be on the Board of directors at Wolves and the Blose, before he landed at Villa. That doesn't strike me as someone particularly interested in Aston Villa. OK i admit he has probably nurtured an interest in football over the years, but only in the same way that we all have about the job we do.
He only attends most games because he gets in for free, and he loves looking at his own name in big letters.
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? About the same as the Glazers have done.
-
if Doug wasnt interested in football, or Aston Villa, now he has cashed in,
why does he still attend most games, even in ill health ?
Deadly used to be on the Board of directors at Wolves and the Blose, before he landed at Villa. That doesn't strike me as someone particularly interested in Aston Villa. OK i admit he has probably nurtured an interest in football over the years, but only in the same way that we all have about the job we do.
He only attends most games because he gets in for free, and he loves looking at his own name in big letters.
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? About the same as the Glazers have done.
I could name a few but i think the greatest legacy of old Dougie was that he could have sold for more money to the likes of Gillete / Hicks and the Glaziers - but he sold to someone who he thought was honest and had integrity
And for that i will be forever grateful
-
Deadly used to be on the Board of directors at Wolves and the Blose, before he landed at Villa. That doesn't strike me as someone particularly interested in Aston Villa. OK i admit he has probably nurtured an interest in football over the years, but only in the same way that we all have about the job we do.
He only attends most games because he gets in for free, and he loves looking at his own name in big letters.
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? About the same as the Glazers have done.
You won't catch me saying anything nice about Doug, but do you seriously think that??
-
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? .
Read your Villa history c 1968 to 1970 then you can probably answer that question.
he also hired Ron Saunders.
-
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? .
Read your Villa history c 1968 to 1970 then you can probably answer that question.
he also hired Ron Saunders.
er, i didnt write that quote
-
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? .
Read your Villa history c 1968 to 1970 then you can probably answer that question.
he also hired Ron Saunders.
I have lived my Villa history i don't need to read about it.
But i will answer my question then, Deadly did no great deeds for Aston Villa, but did everything for himself.
Hiring Ron Saunders was no great deed, but Ron Saunders building and managing a team that won trophies and a league title was the great deed.
-
The prgramme was pretty interesting. Whilst making a big deal that some of the Glazers shopping mall business is "on watch" with the banks I think the biggest point was the amount of money the owners are taking out of the club to service the interest payments. Apparently the holding company has PIK notes with interest which may have interest rising to over 16%!
As a club they benefitted from listing on the stock exchange and have been on the CL gravy chain for years. they were taken private in a completely above board transaction as their greedy shareholders were able to cash in. Live by the sword die by the sword.
At the back of my mind is a concern that this can happen to anyone. We ourselves are trading entirely on Randy's goodwill. Anyone who thinks Doug has anything but Villa's best interests at heart just hasn't thought about it carefully enough.
-
Deadly used to be on the Board of directors at Wolves and the Blose, before he landed at Villa. That doesn't strike me as someone particularly interested in Aston Villa. OK i admit he has probably nurtured an interest in football over the years, but only in the same way that we all have about the job we do.
He only attends most games because he gets in for free, and he loves looking at his own name in big letters.
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? About the same as the Glazers have done.
You won't catch me saying anything nice about Doug, but do you seriously think that??
OK i was joking about that, it's still true though.
-
Didn't Doug turn down a higher bid from Gillette/Hicks than was offered by Randy?
-
Sorry for them lot? Never!
we are all brothers in arms, and part of the greater footballing family ?
We could use a political model here by helping ease Man Utd's debts by taking money from Conference sides.
-
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? .
Read your Villa history c 1968 to 1970 then you can probably answer that question.
he also hired Ron Saunders.
I have lived my Villa history i don't need to read about it.
But i will answer my question then, Deadly did no great deeds for Aston Villa, but did everything for himself.
You could say that about every club chairman and owner.
-
As much as I'm no great lover of Man U they were big before the glazers takeover and had success also. The modern day Man U may be a product of the Sky years but they were always the biggest club in the UK and I think that it is more of a coincodence than a consequence.
But as has been said they are still part of the footballing family and I want to laugh at them on the football field not off it. I won't laugh at all if the biggest club in the Uk, and one of the biggest in the world were to implode.
If anything it would make me worry about Villa more than want to mock Man U.
-
As much as I'm no great lover of Man U they were big before the glazers takeover and had success also. The modern day Man U may be a product of the Sky years but they were always the biggest club in the UK and I think that it is more of a coincodence than a consequence.
But as has been said they are still part of the footballing family and I want to laugh at them on the football field not off it. I won't laugh at all if the biggest club in the Uk, and one of the biggest in the world were to implode.
If anything it would make me worry about Villa more than want to mock Man U.
They weren't 'always the biggest club in the UK' it was Munich and George Best that turned them into that.
-
i have no sympathy for manure fans...
having had devon reds attempt to laud it over me because i support my hometown club, who are not as successful as the club they chose to support from the opposite end of the country that they have no affiliation with other than the happy coincidence of them being one of the most successful in the country, i take great pleasure in seeing them squirm over the glazer debt and would love nothing more than seeing them disappear down the divisions like leeds or portsmouth...
we had a shit owner who held us back for years, and allowed others to move away from us, and now its nice to see manure and bin dipper fans suffering the "indignity" of having to deal with real footballing issues...
-
As much as I'm no great lover of Man U they were big before the glazers takeover and had success also. The modern day Man U may be a product of the Sky years but they were always the biggest club in the UK and I think that it is more of a coincodence than a consequence.
But as has been said they are still part of the footballing family and I want to laugh at them on the football field not off it. I won't laugh at all if the biggest club in the Uk, and one of the biggest in the world were to implode.
If anything it would make me worry about Villa more than want to mock Man U.
Very well put and you raise some solid arguments.
But I'd still laugh my tits off.
-
As much as I'm no great lover of Man U they were big before the glazers takeover and had success also. The modern day Man U may be a product of the Sky years but they were always the biggest club in the UK and I think that it is more of a coincodence than a consequence.
But as has been said they are still part of the footballing family and I want to laugh at them on the football field not off it. I won't laugh at all if the biggest club in the Uk, and one of the biggest in the world were to implode.
If anything it would make me worry about Villa more than want to mock Man U.
They weren't 'always the biggest club in the UK' it was Munich and George Best that turned them into that.
well it depends how far you want to go back - It was us and Sunderland at the turn of the century 18th to 20th century, then Newcastle, Huddersfield, Arsenal, Wolves, Tottenham and so on. But you get my point.
-
Let them rot, it's payback for the times they taunted us with "there's only one Dougie Ellis".
-
Let them rot, it's payback for the times they taunted us with "there's only one Dougie Ellis".
yep
I'm reminded of the phrase "be nice to people on your way up because you might meet them on your way down"
or something like that
-
Let them rot, it's payback for the times they taunted us with "there's only one Dougie Ellis".
yep
I'm reminded of the phrase "be nice to people on your way up because you might meet them on your way down"
or something like that
I feel thatw ay about Chelsea fans and I'm sure those of you in the london area will no doubt know chelsea fans who are completely oblivious to the club they were to the fact that it is largely money that has got them where they are now. Even those who supported them before Roman.
Now that lot I'd laugh at doing a Leeds.
-
Let them rot, it's payback for the times they taunted us with "there's only one Dougie Ellis".
yep
I'm reminded of the phrase "be nice to people on your way up because you might meet them on your way down"
or something like that
Good point.
ManU sold their soul long ago in the search for untold success. The Devil is just calling in his debt.
-
yep
I'm reminded of the phrase "be nice to people on your way up because you might meet them on your way down"
or something like that[/quote]
Or in Manchester United`s case ( a provincial mediocrity for most of its existence) 'The farther up a tree the monkey climbs, the more you can see of its arse'
Norm.
-
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? .
Read your Villa history c 1968 to 1970 then you can probably answer that question.
he also hired Ron Saunders.
I have lived my Villa history i don't need to read about it.
But i will answer my question then, Deadly did no great deeds for Aston Villa, but did everything for himself.
You could say that about every club chairman and owner.
I disagree, i wouldn't say it about Randy, he has done many things for the good of the club, (and i wouldn't say it about William McGregor either).
-
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? .
Read your Villa history c 1968 to 1970 then you can probably answer that question.
he also hired Ron Saunders.
I have lived my Villa history i don't need to read about it.
But i will answer my question then, Deadly did no great deeds for Aston Villa, but did everything for himself.
You could say that about every club chairman and owner.
I disagree, i wouldn't say it about Randy, he has done many things for the good of the club, (and i wouldn't say it about William McGregor either).
McGregor was neither a chairman nor owner. In fact, it has been said that his contribution to Villa wasn't as great as is generally reckoned, but that's a side issue. It can also be said that what Randy is doing is ultimately for his own good, and that Doug's earlier contributions were even greater.
-
if Doug wasnt interested in football, or Aston Villa, now he has cashed in,
why does he still attend most games, even in ill health ?
Deadly used to be on the Board of directors at Wolves and the Blose, before he landed at Villa. That doesn't strike me as someone particularly interested in Aston Villa. OK i admit he has probably nurtured an interest in football over the years, but only in the same way that we all have about the job we do.
He only attends most games because he gets in for free, and he loves looking at his own name in big letters.
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? About the same as the Glazers have done.
What he said. I can't be sure but always felt that Herbert sold to Randy because he was going to get cash with no strings-unlike most of the tricky dicky offers around from the rest.
-
I've just watched this. Bloody hell. The Glazer's really are in the shit, fantastic. How is it allowed that they can get away with this? Actually I don't care but tossers like these should stay well away from football.
-
if Doug wasnt interested in football, or Aston Villa, now he has cashed in,
why does he still attend most games, even in ill health ?
Deadly used to be on the Board of directors at Wolves and the Blose, before he landed at Villa. That doesn't strike me as someone particularly interested in Aston Villa. OK i admit he has probably nurtured an interest in football over the years, but only in the same way that we all have about the job we do.
He only attends most games because he gets in for free, and he loves looking at his own name in big letters.
What great deeds did HDE do for Aston Villa? About the same as the Glazers have done.
I could name a few but i think the greatest legacy of old Dougie was that he could have sold for more money to the likes of Gillete / Hicks and the Glaziers - but he sold to someone who he thought was honest and had integrity
And for that i will be forever grateful
Actually he sold to Lerner for a nominally smaller fee because he managed to wangle a life Presidency and free office for himself at VP. His greatest legacy will be the years we spent in the wilderness, and the missed chance in 1982 to dominate the game.And for that I will forever be disappointed.
-
Watched the programme today. Big thing that concerned me was the level of cash (via profit and loss and the recent bond issue) that the Glazers are pulling out of ManU to service their debt.
With debt at 1.1bn, and their property assets in neg equity, and the Tampa Bucanners also with debt of 100m (and their form crashed after Glazers bought ManU), the Glazers will keep selling assets and pulling cash out of ManU to survive their debt crisis (including servicing the PIKs that they took out). You can get the jist from the Financial Analyst / MUST member who did the digging into the US property on his blog (http://andersred.blogspot.com)
ManU's Supporters Trust was shown imo in a good light as well as Dave Boyle from Supporters Direct (the Trust movement's governing body). As Dave W has mentioned to me many a time, Man U fans are more politically motivated.
-
...His greatest legacy will be the years we spent in the wilderness, and the missed chance in 1982 to dominate the game.And for that I will forever be disappointed.
I started nodding in agreement with this. Then I thought about it a bit more.
Should any one team dominate the game? I don't think so. We've seen Man Utd do it for years and, as result, football is far worse off for it. Sure I'd like the Villa to more a lot more successful but I think I'd rather enter every season thinking that there are maybe ten teams that could win rather than it being one of two.
-
It can also be said that what Randy is doing is ultimately for his own good, and that Doug's earlier contributions were even greater.
Are there any owners/chairmen/major shareholders that do it for the good of others.
What earlier contributions by Doug, getting other people to put their money into the club. He took on the club in our hour of need but who is to say somebody else wouldn't have come along.
-
Are there any owners/chairmen/major shareholders that do it for the good of others.
What earlier contributions by Doug, getting other people to put their money into the club. He took on the club in our hour of need but who is to say somebody else wouldn't have come along.
None at all, or at least very few.
Downcry Doug mk I all you like, but remember what Villa were like before he took over, and what they were like afterwards. Whether anyone else would have come along is immaterial - the Pat Matthews-financed, Doug Ellis-headed consortium of 1968 set in motion the club we support now.
-
Are there any owners/chairmen/major shareholders that do it for the good of others.
What earlier contributions by Doug, getting other people to put their money into the club. He took on the club in our hour of need but who is to say somebody else wouldn't have come along.
None at all, or at least very few.
Downcry Doug mk I all you like, but remember what Villa were like before he took over, and what they were like afterwards. Whether anyone else would have come along is immaterial - the Pat Matthews-financed, Doug Ellis-headed consortium of 1968 set in motion the club we support now.
I am not putting him down. As you say, he headed a consortium that started us on our way back. What I will say though, is that it wasn't just Doug Ellis, as he made it out to be in later years.
-
I am not putting him down. As you say, he headed a consortium that started us on our way back. What I will say though, is that it wasn't just Doug Ellis, as he made it out to be in later years.
Doug taking the credit for other people's achievements? Surely not.
-
Ellis was a middle of the road travel agent before he wangled ownership of Villa something he promised never to do. Villa made his millions but so what it's business. We sometimes cloud the issue by wanting to believe that owners put the club before their own interests that will never happen.
It will take a big club to implode before the regulators get serious.
-
I've just watched this. Bloody hell. The Glazer's really are in the shit, fantastic. How is it allowed that they can get away with this? Actually I don't care but tossers like these should stay well away from football.
This!
I can't say I know much about business and how it all works but they has to be something they can do to stop the Glazers acting like this?? How do they get away with it?
And how were they allowed to take charge of United and overnight pile £700 million debt onto them??!
This isn't me feeling sorry for them of course! Bu still something has to change so leveraged buy out don't happen again.
-
Wouldn't it be fantastic to go out and buy a Ferrari, put the debt on the car and then just continually refinance and hope that one day some rich dickhead will come along and buy it off you for much more than you paid for it in the first place.
Meanwhile, you're driving about, acting a cock and getting gobbles from sexy blondes who think you're stinking rich.
-
Wouldn't it be fantastic to go out and buy a Ferrari, put the debt on the car and then just continually refinance and hope that one day some rich dickhead will come along and buy it off you for much more than you paid for it in the first place.
Meanwhile, you're driving about, acting a cock and getting gobbles from sexy blondes who think you're stinking rich.
appart from the fact that a Ferrari on its own does not have any turnover where as Man Utd do
-
I know if I had a Ferrari, I'd get a lot more birds to 'turnover' than I have in the past.
Anyhow, to the most insecure bunch of pricks in football supporterdom:
(http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh65/mungchamp/simpsons_nelson_haha2.jpg)
-
ManU's Supporters Trust was shown imo in a good light as well as Dave Boyle from Supporters Direct (the Trust movement's governing body). As Dave W has mentioned to me many a time, Man U fans are more politically motivated.
I think ultimately the 'Red Knight' bid will come to nothing. If the basics of the circumstance are as painted in the documentary and other reports (Glazer family's only source of income is the cash cow of Manchester United which pays for the failures of all their other interests) then why on earth would the Glazers sell? Football is the biggest sport in the world and United has one of the highest levels of income in that sport. Until that situation changes (which, given the unsustainability of the current levels of finance seen by British clubs, will surely happen at some point) the Glazers will continue to milk, and no number of £1bn plus offers will make a difference to them.
However, if they take United down the route experienced by the Tamp Bay team (lesser players on lesser wages) then not only will success dry up but also the income. Indeed when Ferguson leaves there will also be a severe test of the club's ability to sustain the current level of cash coming in and going out again.
From a moralistic point of view it is disgraceful and I do feel for the supporters of United, but on a pragmatic level I can't see anything changing any time soon.
-
I am not putting him down. As you say, he headed a consortium that started us on our way back. What I will say though, is that it wasn't just Doug Ellis, as he made it out to be in later years.
Doug taking the credit for other people's achievements? Surely not.
Or even, not letting others take the credit for their achievements!
-
I am not putting him down. As you say, he headed a consortium that started us on our way back. What I will say though, is that it wasn't just Doug Ellis, as he made it out to be in later years.
Doug taking the credit for other people's achievements? Surely not.
Or even, not letting others take the credit for their achievements!
Some people seem to give Randy credit for something Doug did.
Like appoint O'Neill.
-
I am not putting him down. As you say, he headed a consortium that started us on our way back. What I will say though, is that it wasn't just Doug Ellis, as he made it out to be in later years.
Doug taking the credit for other people's achievements? Surely not.
Or even, not letting others take the credit for their achievements!
Some people seem to give Randy credit for something Doug did.
Like appoint O'Neill.
At the time of DOL going, everybody and his dog knew that Doug was looking to get out. Would MON have come if he didn't know who was taking over. You don't give him much credit but he is not that stupid.
Doug got him to sign on the dotted line but MON didn't come to work for Ellis, whatever some would like us to believe.
-
Back to the point.
The issue for us is one day Randy will sell Villa. What are the FA doing to stop whoever buys Villa from doing what the Glazers, Hicks and Gillett have done to Manure and Liverpool?
Sweet FA.
-
Back to the point.
The issue for us is one day Randy will sell Villa. What are the FA doing to stop whoever buys Villa from doing what the Glazers, Hicks and Gillett have done to Manure and Liverpool?
Sweet FA.
It only works if the club has a good revenue stream to pay back the interest. I cannot see Villa being in that position in the short to medium term so I do not think we are at too much of a risk from that scenario
With clubs needing investment to compete at the top end, drawing money out of a club to pay back intetest on loans reduces that investment in new players. Before long the club starts going backwards as Man Utd and Liverpool are at the moment.
I think from Glaziers and Hicks/Gillett point of view, as long as they can keep the ship afloat while they are paying off interest and wait for the asset to grow in value, they can get a return when they sell. The big problem they have though is that their asset in $ terms has fallen since they invested as the £ was at a high then. Not too sure what the exchange rate was when they invested but if it was anywhere near 1:1.80, then 1:1.40 must be hurting them badly.
-
I read somewhere that the glaziers and hick's do not want to sell up (at the moment) because they think there is untapped revenue from TV/media deals.
Now I can only imagine that this would mean that they break away from the shared TV deals. Does anyone know how the premier league is structured? Would clubs be able to break away?
If they were (and you can bet man u and Liverpool will be pushing for it) then it'd be the end of English football. The league would become even less competitive.
What is the danger of this happening?
-
Dante, i may be on my own here, but I think its getting to a point that the UK market is saturated, and would be hard pressed to get more for games on home turf. I do however think that overseas revenues could continue to rise. The value of United and Liverpool will also continue, particularly as we come out of a world slump, which will give better returns for those guys if they sell. I do wonder though if teams like Liverpool become also rans for a substained period whether there will be a loss in value to the "brand". The next legion of overseas glory hunters that buy shirts and pay for view will roost with the top teams, and if thats Spurs, City and Villa, so be it
-
I think Hicks, Gillette, the Glazers, et al are hoping that sooner rather than later each club will be able to sell its TV rights to the highest bidder. And/or stream its games on the net.
I also think that they are looking towards a European league. Or perhaps even a franchise system whereby EPL clubs could be moved around the world.
Of course none of this could happen unless carried by vote of the various chairmen involved.
So that's alright then.
-
That is what they are all hoping for, the break up of the all for one television deal. Then they will be able to do their own deals, if not at home, most certainly abroad plus showing matches live on Pay TV feeds via computers. How much will that be worth to them in the far east??
-
That is what they are all hoping for, the break up of the all for one television deal. Then they will be able to do their own deals, if not at home, most certainly abroad plus showing matches live on Pay TV feeds via computers. How much will that be worth to them in the far east??
Any change in Premier League rules and regulations, which presumably includes the way they negotiate a collective TV deal, has to be ratified by 14 out of 20 clubs. At the moment the money from overseas rights are split equally, and hopefully that will continue. The bigger clubs need to be far-sighted enough to realise that the TV rights are attractive because Wigan can beat Arsenal and Chelsea occasionally.
BTW, hello fred, give my regards to the lovely Elaine will you?
-
I think everyone is missing the point here.
These are not businessmen who have invested their own money in a business which they intend to grow.
These are businessmen who have used the clubs own assets to borrow money, so they can buy the club and hope the club can grow and service enormous debt so they can then sell on at a profit.
There is absolutely nothing in it for the clubs, supporters or football in general.
They are by any other name asset strippers. Liverpool and Man U cannot possibly in the long term service the debt and so Liverpool first and then Man u are at serious risk of eventually going the way of Portsmouth.
What are the FA doing to stop the same happening to say Arsenal when Kronke takes control and then one day the Villa?
-
Don't sweat it. We're completely protected by the FA's "Fit & Proper" test. It's the best safety net there is! :)