Clubs should be run as businesses... businesses make money so they can invest in new businesses and provide a return to the owners. As fans, our return is trophies.irisheyes711 said:But my point is that with this increase spending comes an increase in expenditure for the fans. It's not Glazer who's paying for the transfers its the Man United supporters don't forget that. The increase in capacity from 56000 to 76000 has generated more cash yet still there is an annual inrease on season ticket prices. After having my season ticket for 22years I had to let it go this season because I simply couldn't afford it anymore. The average fan is being priced out of Old Trafford and end up supporting there team in front of the TV.
He bought the club with loaned money, not his own and he's paying for that debt with the fans money, not his own. Yes funds have been made available for transfers but funds were made available before they arrived, remember Veron, Rooney and Ferdinand to name a few. MISS
My heart says that pricing the average fan out of tickets is sad. My head says that if that extra $$$ is turned into intelligent signings, more trophies, more TV $$$, then that is a good thing, yes?
The problem that Chelsea has is that they have not begun to recoup the initial investment yet, and the cash flowing in does not cover the outflow. Roman is going to get sick of kicking in $70M every year.
The Glazers were smart businessmen in that they used OPM (other people's money) to fund a venture that has been pretty successful so far.
It's easy to see which approach has the highest level of sustainability....
I give them a hit. Because they will protect their investment.
As a side note, the Tampa Bay Bucs, from the 1970s to about 1995, were the worst team in the league. I mean, every year. Dismal. After the Glazers bought them, they invested in a coach/manager and players that turned the team around and won a championship. And with the coaching staff they have, they'll win more.
One more thing: most businessmen fund their ventures with a majority of debt. The Glazer takeover was so public that this was highlighted in the press. But that is no different from owners of most clubs.
I'm sure the Villa and Liverpool purchases were funded by debt as well.