Panarama last Night, Premier League Debt, especially Man Utd

[villaross]

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.

[BannedUserIAT]

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.

[john e]

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

[LeeB]

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:

[Mr Diggles]

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.

[old man villa fan]

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!

[PaulTheVillan]

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.

[old man villa fan]

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.

[Lowendbehold]

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.

[old man villa fan]

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.

[Dante Lavelli]

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?

[MoetVillan]

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

[ronshirt]

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.

[fredm]

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??

[Percy McCarthy]

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?