Thread: Premier league clubs debt.(Man Utd)

There's been a fair bit in the news recently about the financial state of affairs of some of the clubs in the premier league. Arguably one of the biggest football clubs, Manchester United find themselves in a position that isn't looking good for their future operations. Decent in depth article below.
Sorry i can't provide a link, the article was forwarded to me in an email.

Apart from the snowfall which smothered the Carling Cup semi‑final between Manchester's two clubs, 2010 has dawned to wildly contrasting fortunes for City and United. Sunday's 1-0 FA Cup humbling by Leeds was accompanied by reports that United's owners, the Florida‑based Glazer family, are trying again to refinance the £700m debts which their 2005 takeover has imposed on the club. For City, Saturday's 1-0 Cup victory at Middlesbrough has been followed by the solid news that Sheikh Mansour, City's Abu Dhabi owner, has personally invested £395m in the club since he took over 17 months ago, converting all of it into shares, not loans.

In simple terms, the lottery of English football clubs being companies up for sale on the open market has delivered a winning ticket to the Blues, not the Reds. Mansour has made an enormous financial investment in City, while the Glazers, since they bought United in their bitterly contested takeover, have given the club not one penny to spend. Quite the opposite; their ownership has drained the club of huge sums of money. In only three years up to 30 June 2008, the closing date of their most recent published accounts, United became liable to pay a staggering £263m in interest alone. Despite that, the capital lump sum which United owe to banks and hedge funds has actually snowballed by £159m, from £540m in 2005, to £699m in 2008.

That increase is accounted for partly by the very high interest charged on the £275m the Glazers borrowed from three hedge funds to buy United. When the entire debt was refinanced only 15 months later in August 2006, the hedge fund debt had risen by £79.1m, which included £13.2m for "early redemption". The refinancing paid that off, leaving United with £525m owed to banks and £138m owed to hedge funds. An estimated £29m was paid in professional fees then, principally to bankers, lawyers and accountants. Reports that the Glazers have appointed two banks,JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank, to seek refinancing again with bank bonds should be understood in that context: huge fees will be charged, there are likely to be early repayment premiums again on the £175m hedge fund debt United now owe, and the refinancing is likely to increase the total debt owed.

The Glazer family's spokesman refused to comment this week on those reports, and both JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank issued no comments. However, City sources indicated the reports are correct, and the refinancing is thought to be concentrating on the hedge fund debt, which is accumulating interest at 14.25%. The interest is rolling up: £38m interest was payable to the hedge funds in 2006-07; £23m in the year to June 2008; £25m to June 2009. By the time the capital is due for repayment, in August 2017, if it has not been refinanced and already paid off, the accumulated capital will have risen from an initial £138m borrowed from hedge funds, when the Glazers refinanced in August 2006, to £580m. That is in addition to the £524m of bank and other borrowings which United owed at June 2008.

The club and the Glazer family's spokesman have insisted that despite the interest payable, £69m in the year to 30 June 2008, which helped push United from an operating profit of £80m to a £43m loss, Sir Alex Ferguson has money to spend. Ferguson has maintained since the summer that he has not done so because United-calibre players are not available, and there is not "value in the market". He argues that players are overpriced, partly because of Mansour's intervention.

After United lost the Champions League final in May, Ferguson might have been expected to substantially strengthen his squad, but instead, Cristiano Ronaldo was sold to Real Madrid for £81m, and the manager signed only Antonio Valencia, for £17.5m from Wigan, Michael Owen, on a free transfer, and Gabriel Obertan, for £3m from Bordeaux. Whatever their protestations that money remains available, United's weakening through injury, occasional underperformance and Ferguson's dismissive approach to buying players means United are simply not carrying themselves as proud, cash-rich, Premier League champions with the Ronaldo money still in the bank. Time is surely running out for the argument that the debts – now, with interest, certainly more than £700m, vastly more than any other English club – are not financially constraining.

The Glazers have overseen a period of sustained success at Old Trafford, winning three Premier League titles and the Champions League in 2008, and Ferguson has always spoken supportively of their regime, which he finds easier to deal with than the regulated stock market-listed entity United were before. United insiders credit the Glazers with bringing in some of the roster of sponsors whose lucrative deals reflect the club's global presence and popularity. However, by far the largest proportion of United's record £257m turnover was still earned in the UK in 2007-08, and the largest proportion, £101.5m, came from match days at Old Trafford.

There, ticket prices have been increased significantly since the Glazers took over, a policy presented as a commercial virtue when they sought the refinancing in August 2006. Although United still boast awesome near-76,000 full houses for Premier League matches, and 74,526 witnessed the Leeds crash on Sunday, tickets do now remain on sale for most matches. United's spokesman, Phil Townsend, confirmed this week that bookings of corporate hospitality packages are down in the recession, and a third-round FA Cup exit will not have been in Ferguson's plan for the season or the Glazers' financial projections.

Stories have seeped out of United this season about rounds of quite meagre cuts, and Townsend acknowledged that the club has indeed been looking to cut costs. Twelve staff have been made redundant recently, he said, although he pointed out that this was from around 550 people employed in various departments.

"Like all other businesses in the current financial climate we have been looking to keep costs down," he said. "The demand for match-by-match corporate hospitality packages has gone down, depending on the fixture, but our 55,000 season tickets are sold out. We present a stable business model, the interest payments are serviced from the operating profit, and the club has said there is money for the manager to spend."

It is difficult to decipher how far the Glazers' own fortunes have been affected by the economic downturn, because they operate principally as private investors in the US. The family's charitable foundation says of Malcolm Glazer on its website that he "owns, has owned or has been the largest shareholder" of companies including Harley Davidson, Formica, Tonka, and Omega Protein, but some of those interests were sold off several years ago. The US property industry, in which the Glazers are significant investors, particularly in shopping malls, via their First Allied Corporation, is one of the sectors most pulverised by the economic typhoon.

The family's NFL franchise, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, enjoyed sustained success under the Glazers, winning the 2003 Super Bowl, yet have just concluded a miserable season, finishing bottom of their division with three wins from 16 games. Media reports, never denied, consistently said the Bucs were spending $30m (£19m) less than the permitted $100m under the NFL salary cap; the system allows franchise owners to take surplus money out for themselves. In January last year, the Glazers replaced the veteran, Super Bowl-winning coach Jon Gruden with Raheem Morris, who at 32 was the youngest coach in the NFL. The Glazers are still hailing that as a "bold decision", but the series of defeats have led to profound disillusionment among Bucs fans, who have also endured ticket price rises, and crowds at the Tampa Bay stadium have declined.

With a United squad looking suddenly threadbare, and a vintage manager due for retirement himself before too long, United supporters cannot help but see parallels between Stretford and Florida. Duncan Drasdo, chair of the Manchester United Supporters Trust, said this week: "We warned from the beginning that the Glazer takeover would saddle the club with huge debts and now we can see them biting. If it were a race, then United are dragging their owners behind them like a tractor, while City's owners are providing rocket fuel."

Before the Glazers arrived in 2005, nobody could have foreseen this bizarre reversal in Manchester. United, then the world's richest club, are lurching into the new decade with punishing debts, while City, of all clubs, are being roundly criticised after the sacking of their manager for being too ruthless, driven and improbably rich."

All very interesting and that but what about a 'big' club like PFC. Could be the first premier league club to go into administaration, and real soon too. Nice of 'Arry to win us the cup, but it was all done on credit.

Many top clubs in trouble now, a lot of which IMO is the exhorbitant wages the players get.

Originally Posted by pompeybloke

All very interesting and that but what about a 'big' club like PFC. Could be the first premier league club to go into administaration, and real soon too. Nice of 'Arry to win us the cup, but it was all done on credit.

Many top clubs in trouble now, a lot of which IMO is the exhorbitant wages the players get.

The situation with Man United can be likened to someone who takes an expensive mortgage to buy a house beyond their means. The reality is that the debt is not Man United, it's the Glazer's shell company. What isn't beyond question is the value of Man United. No other team in the UK can fill a 75,000 seater stadium week after week. I actually read recently that Man United have 64,000 season ticket holders, so of course there is guaranteed income from that, as well as a very well practised marketing department, who have global strategies.

Let's see how things pan out over the next few months, and what the final day of the season brings. One thing I have absolutely no doubt about, and that is should the Glazer's decide to sell, the number of ultra rich people will be in a very long queue to buy. The Abu Dhabi family with Man City are just playing at it, and ultimately they know there will never be any form of long term return.

Originally Posted by pompeybloke

Many top clubs in trouble now, a lot of which IMO is the exhorbitant wages the players get.

To think that 99.99% of the worlds population work hard for years to earn what some of these players earn in a week.

The bubble has to burst along with the ridiculous salaries these players earn and if Man United continue to show poor form sales will drop and decreased of MU shirts will never cover the operating costs let alone the debt.

Originally Posted by pompeybloke

All very interesting and that but what about a 'big' club like PFC. Could be the first premier league club to go into administaration, and real soon too. Nice of 'Arry to win us the cup, but it was all done on credit. Many top clubs in trouble now, a lot of which IMO is the exhorbitant wages the players get.

Can you give us the lowdown on what the real situation is at Portsmouth? Any stuff from experience, knowledge, internet etc?

Originally Posted by PAG

The situation with Man United can be likened to someone who takes an expensive mortgage to buy a house beyond their means.

It can be, but it seems to go a bit further. The person who takes the mortgage(the club in this case), borrows money. But the people or institution they borrow the money from hasn't got it either. So they borrow more money from someone who will lend it to them, and at this point nobody knows whether the new lenders are capable of providing the actual cash in the place of a promisary note.
Isn't it exactly this sort of bollocks that saw the very recent near global monetary collapse?

I can't see the FA being transparent with their penalties that according to their rules they have to impose on clubs going into administration. Luton basically got thrown out of the football league for coming clean and helping the FA investigate their financial mess. I bet Scum Utd or one of the other non-English teams that litter the EPL get a meagre fine.

One has to look increasingly lower down the leagues to find proper English football nowadays. I hope all those clubs who whored themselves and allowed themselves to be sold to the highest bidder are no longer with us in a few years time.

Slight bitterness Marmite?

Would be funny though I agree.....

It's the real fans i feel sorry for. The EPL is big business now and has manged to defy the recession so far.
pompey bloke makes a good point. Too much secrecy and back handers flying around, with foreign owners trying to cash in on land and stadium projects, while paying wages that have to be borrowed just to keep the club afloat. Any team coming up from below will struggle to pay wages at EPL levels.
Burnley refused to buy a championship defender recently because he wanted more money than their self imposed salary cap.
It's time the football authorities forced clubs to pay their way without spending more on wages than they have in income.
Didn't Man U just raise 500 million by promising to pay investors back at some time in the future? Mort financial chicanery.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/manutd/7055830/Successful-500m-Manchester-United-bond-issue-gives-Glazer-family-breathing-space.html
Man Utd 500m Bond

Originally Posted by PAG

No other team in the UK can fill a 75,000 seater stadium week after week. I actually read recently that Man United have 64,000 season ticket holders, so of course there is guaranteed income from that

The guaranteed income from season tickets works out at around 40 - 50 million quid (TICKETS AND HOSPITALITY - Ticket Prices - Manchester United Official Web Site), which might sound a winner, but the wage bill for the players is about treble that amount (Manchester United players enjoy rich pickings amid financial turmoil | Digger | Football | The Guardian).
What is the crack with this re-financing of the debt? Seems like money has been borrowed, at a higher rate, to repay a debt that wasn't due to be paid for another 3 years. Surely this is financial suicide, unless the current owners intend to fuck off at some point in the not to distant future, and pass the debt onto the next owners. If this is the business model for success, then i hope the fuckers go to the wall, but it certainly lays down an uneven playing field for the other clubs who haven't got the thieving bastards mentallity, or ability, to pull this sort of scam off. It is amazing that clubs like Portsmouth, West Ham, Luton etc are hammered by the FA, whilst the FA does sweet fa about the red shirts of Manchester or Liverpool.

Originally Posted by withnallstoke

Originally Posted by pompeybloke

All very interesting and that but what about a 'big' club like PFC. Could be the first premier league club to go into administaration, and real soon too. Nice of 'Arry to win us the cup, but it was all done on credit. Many top clubs in trouble now, a lot of which IMO is the exhorbitant wages the players get.

Can you give us the lowdown on what the real situation is at Portsmouth? Any stuff from experience, knowledge, internet etc?

Really lost touch with it all to be honest. Grew out of it before we reached the EPL' When I go back each year I take in the odd game, but watching a bunch of mercenaries from East Europe, Africa and wherever saddens me. We used to be really crap on the pitch, and the players might not have all been from the area but they were all Brits. Last time I was there we had a pair, Gary O'Neill and Mat Taylor who I liked, 'Arry didn't and sold them.

The financial problems today can be traced back 2or 3 years when 'Arry was given an open cheque book (just before the economic meltdown) to buy the best: Muntari, Diarra, Crouch, Defoe, Campbell, Kaboul, Krancjar, Johnson. They even asked me, but I'd tweeked my knee at the time
A simple case of spending beyond ones means, rather like the Leeds debacle a few years earlier with O'leary. A case of punching above ones weight.

The then owner, Nameescapesmealotovic,was supposed to have had deeper pockets than he actually did. All pear shaped now, but the Championship is alright as a spectacle. Less poseurs too, and at least I'll get a ticket next year.

Originally Posted by withnallstoke

It is amazing that clubs like Portsmouth, West Ham, Luton etc are hammered by the FA, whilst the FA does sweet fa about the red shirts of Manchester or Liverpool.

Add Crystal Palace to that list.

Originally Posted by PAG

The Abu Dhabi family with Man City are just playing at it, and ultimately they know there will never be any form of long term return.

Don't see any reason why not, Chelsea seem to have done it. Teams can sink quickly,Wolves, Leeds, Forest etc. Liverpool are fading fast, Man U next?

Originally Posted by BigRed

Liverpool are fading fast, Man U next?

Let's hope so.

An update on Manchester United from BBC
BBC News - Manchester United owner's debts hit £1.1bn
Manchester United owner's debts hit £1.1bn

Page last updated at 6:43 GMT, Monday, 7 June 2010 7:43 UK

• E-mail this to a friend
• Printable version

By John Sweeney and Andrew Head BBC Panorama John Sweeney followed the debt trail of the Glazer family Manchester United's owners are £1.1bn in debt - £400m more than previously known - after borrowing extensively against their shopping mall business.
BBC Panorama has found evidence that the Glazer family's debt levels may threaten their hold on the club.
A spokesman for the American family has said it holds more than £2bn in assets.
But the extent of the debt owed by the Glazers is likely to fuel a continuing revolt by some supporters, who oppose their ownership of the club.
Green and gold Details of the financial arrangements of the owners also come at a time when the sport's governing bodies are facing questions about Premier League debts that have reached a combined total of £3.4bn and the growing popularity of leveraged buyouts in English clubs.
Continue reading the main story

These are people who tell us not to worry about Manchester United debt because they are great businessmen. In their core business in the US they got it absolutely wrong

Andy Green City Analyst and Man U supporter
Mortgage documents seen by the BBC show that the Glazers have borrowed £388m ($570m) against shopping malls and £66m ($95m) against their American National Football League team, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
In addition to their mortgages in the US, a portion of the Glazer family's £700m Manchester United debt will soon see them charged interest at a rate of 16.25%.
Fans fear that, despite the club's record of success on the pitch, the Glazers' leveraged buy-out of United has saddled the club with debt and that may mean that there is no spare money in the future to buy a new generation of star players.
Disappointed fans have launched the "green and gold" campaign that resurrects the original team colours in protest over the Glazers' ownership.
Their numbers have reached 158,000 and former United star David Beckham has signalled his support.
They point to the £80m sale of star striker Cristiano Ronaldo last year and note that he has not been replaced by a player of similar quality. Yet ticket prices have gone up by more than a third.
The club's management denies any lack of commitment to buying new talent and says that cash is available for Sir Alex Ferguson to buy players.
Negative equity City analyst Andy Green, 37, is the disgruntled Manchester United supporter who first uncovered the extent of the Glazers' debts.
Mr Green said: "They borrowed more money at inflated valuations right at the top of the cycle.
"These are people who tell us not to worry about Manchester United debt because they are great businessmen. In their core business in the US they got it absolutely wrong."
The Glazers have defended their ownership of the team The debt levels at the club are also drawing the attention of other prominent football figures.
Dave Whelan, Chairman of Wigan Athletic, told Panorama: "I don't think anybody can be satisfied with how Manchester United are being run... they have got somewhere in the order of three-quarters of a billion pounds worth of debt. That has got to be eliminated and eliminated quickly."
The Glazer family's main assets are the shopping centre business in America, First Allied Corporation, along with Manchester United and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
First Allied is a private business and its accounts are not publicly available. But Mr Green discovered that the Glazers' shopping mall mortgages had been bundled with other loans as Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities.
Those bundles are publicly traded and therefore require the Glazers to provide detailed information on all the mortgages, which are then publicly available in the US.
Mr Green found mortgages - confirmed by the BBC - on 63 of 64 First Allied shopping centres, totalling £388m ($570m).
Most of those were taken out with Lehman Brothers before the US investment banking giant went bankrupt, triggering the global banking crisis in 2008.
'Watch list' While Lehmans collapsed, the Glazers' mortgage debt lived on and many of those shopping centres are not generating enough income to keep up with interest payments.
With falling commercial property values, many are also now in negative equity.
Banks have put 28 of the shopping centres on a watch list, meaning they are worried about the loans.
Four shopping centres - one each in Ohio, New Mexico, Texas and Georgia - have already gone bankrupt.
When they bought Manchester United in 2005, the Glazer family borrowed £500m and paid the remaining £272 million in cash.
Mr Green found that the Glazers had remortgaged 25 of their shopping centres in the six months before the takeover.
He believes the family borrowed against their US properties to pay for United: "At the time when they had to present a huge amount of cash over here in the UK they borrowed a huge amount of extra money in the US and publicly they didn't buy anything else that year."
A spokesman for the family did not respond to questions about the mortgages taken out by First Allied.
But with properties now worth about £380m ($550m) but mortgages valued at £395m ($570m), the shopping mall company now appears to be worth next to nothing.
'Commercial expertise' That financial picture has analyst Mr Green questioning how the Glazers will service their £1.1bn debt.
Fans are wearing green and gold in protest over the Glazers' ownership United chief executive, David Gill, has said: "We're very confident the business model we have in place will ensure the club can continue to compete at the top of football for many years to come.
"The owners have been true to their word since they took over the club in 2005. They've brought commercial expertise and commercial benefit to us in a numbers of areas, and we've seen our revenues grow significantly."
The Glazers' most troublesome debts are held by Red Football, the parent company that owns Manchester United.
They are payment in kind loans, or PIKs, worth £200m and the interest owing on them will soon rise to 16.25%.
Mr Gill told the BBC in January: "We don't worry about the PIK repayment. That's nothing to with the club."
A spokesman for Manchester United told the BBC last week that the club stands behind Mr Gill's assertion that the debts will be repaid without involving the club.
But sources close to the Glazers have confirmed that Red Football may use cash from Manchester United to pay off the PIKs in the future. The Glazers are said to be "comfortable" with the PIKs.
The situation at Manchester United reflects the wider issue within the Premier League, where clubs like Liverpool and West Ham are struggling with huge debts and FA Cup finalists Portsmouth barely staved off bankruptcy.
Both the Premier League and the FA declined requests for interviews on the subject of debt in football.

And the German Bundesliga is now the most profitable league in Europe

Originally Posted by panama hat

And the German Bundesliga is now the most profitable league in Europe

Seems to be down to the wage structure in the premier league, as the generated revenue is higher in the prem. than the Bundesliga.
Decent article here England 0 Germany 1: Bundesliga overtakes Premier League as profits slump | Mail Online

Originally Posted by BigRed

Originally Posted by PAG

The Abu Dhabi family with Man City are just playing at it, and ultimately they know there will never be any form of long term return.

Don't see any reason why not, Chelsea seem to have done it. Teams can sink quickly,Wolves, Leeds, Forest etc. Liverpool are fading fast, Man U next?

Chelsea have done what? Got a long term return?

The Russian has been sinking his stolen roubles into Chelski since he got there, no way does it make a profit. All he's after is that British passport, so he can official avoid extradition if at some stage in the future Putin and his cronies are removed from office and Russia want their money back.

Man Citeh are no different, you can't pay the wages of that motley crew on the money they would have coming in without the camel shaggers.

Leeds attempt at conquering Europe was their downfall. Once they lost the revenue from that, they had to start selling; then they lost the Premiership money, and they had to start paying people to take players off their hands.

It's called gambling. Liverpool have just lost the annual gamble that they would be in the Champions League the following season.

Somehow, the only club that seem to be able to manage it without buying hoards of players every year is Arsenal, and they've still got a wage bill up their with their biggest rivals, despite having a team of 12 year olds.

This was from the MEN




Old Trafford

The Glazers determination to keep hold of United will be strengthened by Deloitte’s Annual Review of Football Finance.

The in-depth analysis on European football comes on the day a further Old Trafford debt shock will be aired on TV.

A BBC Panorama programme will tonight lift the lid on the fact that the Reds’ controversial owners are battling with debts of around £1.1billion.

The United debt of £700m, plus £70m owed against their NFL side the Tampa Bay Buccaneers plus newly unearthed debts of £400m on their core business of shopping malls in the United States adds up to a colossal £1bn-plus.

The Glazers have mortgages on 63 of their 64 shopping malls but the TV programme’s findings reveal that the malls fail to generate enough income to cover the mortgages.

That has plunged the Glazers into a massive cash flow problem.

The Panorama programme, based on findings by City analyst Andy Green, a United fan who has joined MUST’s Green and Gold anti-Glazer campaign, also poses a question over the 2005 Old Trafford takeover.

The Glazers borrowed £500m to buy the Reds but Green has discovered that they remortgaged 25 of their shopping centres in the six months before the takeover. and he said: “One has to ask: was the cash they put into Manchester United just debt, but from somewhere else?”

But while their malls are failing United continue to make money and that is likely to see the Glazers continue to insist the club is not for sale.

Deloitte’s Annual Review reveals that Premier League clubs’ revenue reached a record £1,981m in 2008/09 with United generating £100m in match day revenues.

More importantly for the Glazers as they look for some respite, Sports Business Group Deloittes predict Premier League revenues will have exceeded £2bn in the 2009/10 season.

The new broadcast contracts which come into operation in the new 2010/11 season in August will drive a further increase in revenues to £2.2 billion.

Dan Jones, partner in the Sports Business Group at Deloitte, commented: “Despite the sharp economic contraction, Premier League clubs were able to increase revenues by three per cent in 2008/09.

“Whilst commercial income fell marginally (one per cent), both matchday and broadcasting revenues increased.

“For the 2009/10 season just ended, combined attendances for the Premier League and Football League exceeded 30 million – a level not seen since well before the introduction of all seated stadia.

“When you factor in the recently negotiated Premier League overseas broadcast deals, which come into effect from 2010/11, football has shown remarkable recession resistance during these difficult economictimes.

“However, Premier League clubs’ operating profits more than halved from £185m in 2007/08 to £79m in 2008/09.

“The challenge for clubs continues to be converting their impressive year on year revenue growth into sustainable levels of profits that allow for continuedinvestment in infrastructure and talent. This is particularly the case as credit is likely to remain less available to football clubs than it was two or three years ago.”
Costs

But there is a warning to United and the other big wage-payers in England.

The £49m increase in Premier League clubs’ revenue was less than half the £132m increase in wage costs, driving total wages up to more than £1.3bn resulting in a record wages/revenue ratio of 67 per cent.

Gross transfer spending by Premier League clubs also increased from £664m in 2007/08 to a record £713m in 2008/09.

Alan Switzer, director in the Sports Business Group at Deloitte, commented: “The record wages to revenue ratio of 67 per cent in the Premier League in 2008/09 is a concern, and we expect wages growth to outstrip revenue increases again in 2009/10. This will further reduce operating profitability, a decline that cannot continue indefinitely.

“However, clubs have the opportunity, via the revenue uplift from the new broadcast deals from 2010/11, to get wage levels down to a more sustainable share of revenue.

“It’s not the first such opportunity. It remains to be seen whether they grasp it.”

The group of wealthy United fan investors known as the Red Knights are refusing to meet a £1.5bn valuation of the club but insist they remain committed to putting a bid to the Glazers.

Last week the Red Knights said there was no timescale but were prepared to play a waiting game.

The Manchester United Supporters Trust (MUST) has continued to ask Reds fans to stall on season ticket renewal to put pressure on the Glazers.

The Panorama findings, of course, won’t be news to the Glazers. In fact, the increase in cash generated at Old Trafford seems to have made them more determined to stay in charge especially with their other main business in the US facing a massive struggle.

The Glazers’ debts continue to arouse much suspicion among United fans over the budget manager Sir Alex Ferguson has to spend in the transfer market. Chief executive David Gill insists he has a substantial pot to spend.

But whatever the amount in the Old Trafford kitty it will be dwarfed by that available to neighbour Roberto Mancini at City.

In the Deloitte Review it is revealed that the Blues spent a record single year’s gross outlay of £138m in the transfer market in the 2009/10 period.

There is some interesting post on the MEN I'll put some up later

Originally Posted by withnallstoke

Seems to be down to the wage structure in the premier league, as the generated revenue is higher in the prem. than the Bundesliga.

Fiscal responsibility, yes. But also:

The German first division also recorded the highest attendances in Europe for the seventh successive season – attracting 8,000 more people per game than the Premier League.

And:

English top flight clubs spent in excess of £1.32billion on employee salaries – more than Italy’s Serie A (£0.93bn), Spain’s La Liga (£800m), the Bundesliga (£684m) and France’s Lique 1 (£615m).