egafd.com

I'm not trying to compare 'like for like'. Robches said anybody that bought Man Utd would be a 'fool' or 'muppet'. Given any prospective buyer of Man Utd wouldn't have to part with as much money as an owner of Chelsea or Man City, why would they be 'muppets'?

I'm waiting for Robches to explain.

[quote]Sam Slater wrote:


[SNIP]

> In a long, drawn out affair you said silly things about
> Ferguson planning all along to let the squad deteriorate and
> when his wife might get ill just so he could retire at the
> right time. Utter poppycock. (As if Ferguson would destroy
> what he'd built up on purpose). It's laughable and something a
> 14 year old would make up.

[SNIP]


Really????

Where have I said Ferguson PLANNED to let the squad deteriorate?[/quote]

Here>

You said: "Nobody in this forum will change my mind that Man Utd have been in need of two or three top defenders, two or three top central midfielders and at least one top wide man for several seasons; that SAF was more than aware of the deficiencies in his squad (but knowing he was retiring, did nothing so as to ensure his status as a demi-god whilst those following him failed)"

There you go. You said Alex knowingly let the squad deteriorate to ensure his status as a demi-god'. THAT is planning, my poor, bullied friend. Now go sit down and have a cry.

[quote]And where is this quote I'm supposed to have written about his wife getting ill... I seriously don't recall ever writing anything about his wife anywhere.[/quote]

I didn't say you said that. I said that to point out that if he was planning to retire and let the squad deteriorate on purpose, he must have known when his wife was going to get ill. After all, to ensure his 'demi-god' status he'd have to get the timing right. Either that or it was damn lucky timing for him.

[quote]You just can't help making stuff up to try and prove your point.[/quote]

As I've shown above, I didn't make it up. It's there for all to see. It's either you making stuff up to cover your own arse or you have a very selective memory.

I do hope it's ok to quote and underline the bits to show you said what you're now saying you didn't. I wouldn't want to come across as bullying you, Bob.

Sam Slater wrote:

> I'm not trying to compare 'like for like'. Robches said anybody
> that bought Man Utd would be a 'fool' or 'muppet'. Given any
> prospective buyer of Man Utd wouldn't have to part with as much
> money as an owner of Chelsea or Man City, why would they be
> 'muppets'?
>
> I'm waiting for Robches to explain.
>

I am referring to the stock market saying about buying a share in the hope that a greater fool would buy it off you for more money. I think that the people who subscribed for non voting shares in a company controlled by people like the Glazers are indeed fools.

I also said that the debt would not be repaid out of cash flow. Well, the interest due is paid out of cash flow, but actually paying down some of the debt seems to have been done with the proceeds of the share sale to the greater fools in New York, that well known centre of "soccer".

As I said, if a greater fool offers the Glazers a big profit to buy Utd off them, they will sell. If they can sell tranches of shares to investors whilst keeping control, then they will happily sell to such fools. If they can continue to service the interest on the debt out of cash flow whilst paying themselves big dividends, then they will. The only outcome which matters to them is that they get the money. Manchester United is the means to the end for the Glazers to enrich themselves.

The one thing they do not seem to have factored in is that Utd would turn to shit in the absence of Alex Ferguson. Van Gaal may be able to turn it round, but can the Glazers give him two years and ?200 million? If they don't and Utd are out of the CL for a couple of years, what happens to all these juicy endorsements? The Glazers leveraged Utd up to the hilt, and they were very lucky for ten years, but maybe this is where their luck runs out.

[quote]I am referring to the stock market saying about buying a share in the hope that a greater fool would buy it off you for more money.[/quote]

Again.......why would they be more 'foolish' than someone like an Abramovich who has to put in nearly a billion of his own money over 10 years?

And you say the next owners would be 'greater fools' implying the Glazers are fools. The Glazers have one of the biggest clubs in the world and it hasn't cost them a penny. How's that make them fools when other club owners usually have to delve into their own pockets to keep the clubs going?

If you want to call the owners greedy, I'm with you. If you want to have a go at the FA for letting foreign owners buy British institutions by taking out credit and loading it on the clubs, or just buying clubs like their own playthings, I'm with you, but I don't get this 'fools' business. They're far from being foolish.

Scholes is putting pressure on the owners to spend money because he knows they need it after 4 experienced players leaving at then end of last season.

Moyes had those players.

And, again, I'm not saying Moyes is 100% to blame, just that he has to take the majority of the blame given he inherited the Premier League Champions and spent nearly ?70m on two players you and I think weren't needed.

And thanks for trying to deflect attention from me showing you did indeed accuse Ferguson of purposely letting the squad deteriorate.

Were you just lying or did you conveniently forget you said it?

Robches wrote:

> I think that the people who subscribed for non voting
> shares in a company controlled by people like the Glazers are
> indeed fools.


A big investors in the IPO was American billionaire George Soros, who spent $40.7 million on Man Utd shares.

I suggest that it's possible that billionaire Soros isn't a fool and perhaps knows more than you do Robches?

1-1 against the "might" of Sunderland. On current form 6th could be a real struggle. PMSL.

Sam Slater wrote:

> [quote]I am referring to the stock market saying about buying a
> share in the hope that a greater fool would buy it off you for
> more money.[/quote]
>
> Again.......why would they be more 'foolish' than someone like
> an Abramovich who has to put in nearly a billion of his own
> money over 10 years?
>

Abramovich did not buy Chelsea to make money, it was a trophy acquisition. The term "greater fool" is a well understood one in the stock market, so I do not propose to flog this particular dead horse any further.

JamesW wrote:

> Robches wrote:
>
> > I think that the people who subscribed for non voting
> > shares in a company controlled by people like the Glazers are
> > indeed fools.
>
>
> A big investors in the IPO was American billionaire George
> Soros, who spent $40.7 million on Man Utd shares.
>
> I suggest that it's possible that billionaire Soros isn't a
> fool and perhaps knows more than you do Robches?
>

So Soros bought some shares. So what? $40 million is small change to him, it sounds like a punt. If it doesn't come off he won't care much.

Silence from some Manure fans. Utter bewilderment from others. Bloody marvellous!!