[ENG] Premiership 2009/2010 (2 Viewers)

Fred

Senior Member
Oct 2, 2003
41,113
I don't know about the budget, it's just a suspicion.

He has done okay with his budget, not brilliantly.

That is very unfair.

Look how much Ferguson has paid to assemble the squad he has right now and look how much Arsene spent and tell me how we are so close to United in the table if Arsene isn't doing "brilliantly" with his budget.

Even teams like Tottenham and Everton have more expensive squads than Arsenal.





That doesn't really mean anything. I've learnt a long time ago to take what Wenger says with a pinch of salt. Sometimes he says that he doesn't want to pay in order not to harm the development of his youngsters and in other times he says that he doesn't spend because he wants to be financially responsible due to the debt constraints of building the new stadium.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
That is very unfair.

Look how much Ferguson has paid to assemble the squad he has right now and look how much Arsene spent and tell me how we are so close to United in the table if Arsene isn't doing "brilliantly" with his budget.

Even teams like Tottenham and Everton have more expensive squads than Arsenal.
Show me the net transfer spend of these teams over the last five years or so, and we'll be able to make a proper judgement.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
116,410
Is debt-ridden Manchester United in decline?
By JOHN LEICESTER, AP Sports Columnist

PARIS (AP)—Snow, as Pulitzer Prize-winning American poet Richard Wilbur noted, has a remarkable ability to mask ugliness. In Wilbur’s poem “First Snow in Alsace,” it covered the scars of war. In English soccer, it is throwing a temporary shroud over the depth of problems at Manchester United.

Because of wintry conditions, United was spared the test of playing crosstown rival City in a League Cup semifinal on Wednesday, as Britain dug itself out from its heaviest snowfall in three decades. The postponement means a wait until Saturday, when United faces a tough Premier League trip to overachievers Birmingham, to see whether Alex Ferguson’s side can rebound from its painful start to 2010.

But even snow can’t hide the fact that United is a troubled team, on the field and off. The fast-approaching business end of Europe’s soccer season, when league titles will be won and lost, will show whether United’s recent shakiness is nothing more than an uncharacteristic dip in form or, as some are starting to suspect, the beginning of a longer-term and potentially corrosive decline that the club may be ill-equipped to arrest.

The biggest cause for alarm is the state of United’s finances. Newspaper reports last weekend that the club’s American owners, the Glazer family, are considering raising funds with a $963 million bond issue were a stark reminder of the giant and growing debt that United is laboring under.

United insists, and outside experts agree, that the club makes enough money to keep its creditors at bay, at least for the moment. But it hasn’t escaped anyone’s attention that Ferguson is still sitting on the bulk of the $128 million United received from selling star winger Cristiano Ronaldo to Real Madrid this summer. The question is why?

Ferguson clearly needs more talent. Forward Dimitar Berbatov hasn’t fulfilled the promise he showed when United paid a bundle for him in 2008. Winger Nani is another disappointment and striker Michael Owen is no longer a sure goal scorer. That veterans Ryan Giggs, Paul Scholes and Gary Neville are still getting so many games is due not just to their amazing longevity but also because not enough skillful youngsters have risen through United’s ranks—as those players once did—to permanently unseat them.

While still just two points behind leader Chelsea, United has lost five of its 20 league games. That’s not a crisis but it is one loss more than in all of last season and a sure indication of how Ferguson’s team has struggled and looked ordinary at times. After the humiliation of losing to Leeds in the FA Cup on Sunday, the first time that a Ferguson side has fallen to such lowly opposition in that competition, some United fans called for an end to his 24-year reign.

Ferguson says the Glazers are not stopping him from spending. They don’t have to—Ferguson is doing that himself, being thrifty in a market which he says is over-inflated.

“Maybe it is the Scotsman in me but I believe in value, even when I am spending someone else’s money, and the asking price for players we were looking at just wasn’t realistic,” the Manchester Evening News quoted him as saying at the start of this season. “We don’t suddenly have to splash out to try and compete at the top.”

Perhaps. Coming months will prove whether Ferguson is right or being priced out of renewed success. Either way, United’s tightly held wallet—be it because of debts or because asking prices for players make no sense—is raising questions. Compared to big-spenders Real Madrid and Manchester City, United is starting to look like a threadbare cousin.

Thanks largely to its 76,000-seat Old Trafford stadium, United is a moneymaking machine, with annual turnover of $412 million, according to the most recent accounts available. But interest repayments from the debts the Glazers took on to buy United in 2005 more than swallow any profits. Those debts swelled to $1.12 billion in the last accounts.

The concern, however slight it may appear at the moment, is that the debts could eventually undermine United’s ability to continue financing winning soccer. Losing, in turn, could hit revenue, potentially starting a downward spiral. The retirement of 68-year-old Ferguson, when it comes, could also be a delicate financial time for United if his replacement proves unable to quickly match his success, especially in Europe’s lucrative Champions League.

“They can comfortably service the debt at the moment,” says sports industry financing adviser Harry Philp. “But there is a ticking time bomb ahead for them.”

John Leicester is an international sports columnist for The Associated Press. Write to him at jleicester(at)ap.org

____________

I wish them the worst. :tup:
 

only-juve

Senior Member
Jan 5, 2008
7,451
The thing about premier league "top clubs" is that they will never suffer financially IMO atleast in the near future (10 years or so). If clubs like United or liverpool owners have financial difficulties to the point that they can't continue anymore there will be dozen of billionaires waiting to buy these clubs at any given time.

The market for premier league clubs is pretty Lucrative Everyone wants a piece of that pie. Personaly i think that the last thing that premier clubs would worry about is the financial side of the game.

One thing that i've noticed about the english media is that they're just too pessimistic specially when it comes to money or finances. They always anticipate the bad thing before the good. Probably its just their nature don't know really.
 

chester

Too busy to bother
May 20, 2006
15,055
Maxi Rodriguez set to join Liverpool
January 7th, 2010

(GSM) – Maxi Rodriguez’s move to Liverpool will be finished in the course of the day. Spanish press agency EFE reports that Atletico Madrid are nearing an agreement with the Reds about the transfer of the attacking midfielder.

Rodriguez, who has an expiring contract at Atletico, would join Liverpool for a fee of €1.5 million.

Rodriguez’s agent, Jose Segui, has confirmed a deal is close and also ruled out speculation in Italy that Juventus were also after the 29-year-old Argentina international.

Segui told the Italian website calciomercato.it: “Juventus? We have spoken with Liverpool and other sides, but never with Juventus.

“As for Liverpool, I don’t know when the negotiation could be closed. It’s up to the two clubs and to their decision.

“It would be a permanent transfer.”
http://www.soccernews.com/maxi-rodriguez-set-to-join-liverpool/29716/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Only 1.5 MEuro, what a bargain.
 

chester

Too busy to bother
May 20, 2006
15,055
Chelsea could be slapped with £8m bill by Manchester City for signing of Daniel Sturridge
By Sportsmail Reporter
Last updated at 11:47 AM on 07th January 2010
Comments (1) Add to My Stories Centre of the storm: Chelsea's Daniel Sturridge

Chelsea could face a £8m bill for their signing of striker Daniel Sturridge from Manchester City at a Premier League tribunal next week.
The 20-year-old was Blues boss Carlo Ancelotti's first signing after taking over as manager last summer.
But City are entitled to claim 'development costs' for Sturridge who came through their academy despite the fact he was out of contract after he rejected an offer of a new deal worth £45,000-a-week at Eastlands.

City value Sturridge at £8m - four times more than the figure Chelsea are prepared to offer, reports The Daily Express.
City's case is strengthened by the fact Sturridge, who signed a four-year deal worth £75,000-a-week at Chelsea when he was still 19, has broken into Ancelotti's first team.
He recently scored two goals in the Blues' 5-0 win over Watford in the FA Cup and Ancelotti is prepared to use him while Didier Drogba is on Africa Cup of Nations duty this month.

The two clubs will put their cases to a Premier League tribunal next Thursday.

Chelsea could be ordered to pay £5m with another £3m based on appearances.

Ironically, City had to pay around £250,000 in compensation themselves after they 'poached' Sturridge from Coventry City's academy when he was just 13.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...y-signing-Daniel-Sturridge.html#ixzz0bwnbLIP2
 

Red

-------
Moderator
Nov 26, 2006
47,024
I didn't know he wasn't playing for them.

Should we try to get Babel from them, or shouldn't we take that risk, maybe a loan with option to buy or something like that?
Birmingham are trying to sign him.

Supposedly they bid £8m, but Liverpool want nearer £12m.

No way he's worth that.
 

cimenk

Senior Member
Jul 23, 2008
3,147
I heard that Cristian Ansaldi - Rubin Kazan LB - will be join Man City for just 4.5 mill Euro.. What a sign for them, look that we pay 3 mill Euros for the old Grosso..
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)