Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

stuwilky

Members
  • Posts

    4330
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by stuwilky

  1. Capital repayment of 70 - 80mill a year? I wish I paid my mortgage off that quickly - the bloody thing never goes down!!

    Im not all that worried about this situation as some people are. And I might be wrong to be feeling this way, only time will tell.

    I suspect that we will see Glazer making very few changes (and I have a feeling that the ones he does make the fans will actually like - he needs to keep them on board).

    What was United profot last year? about ?53m (and yes I know the interims fell to what ?12m ish?

    That profit cover the interest, and that is even with the circa ?40m they parted with in transfer fees last time round. Obviously he needs to start to repay the capital....naming rights to the stadium is surely high on the agenda, not sure what else, but I cant see him alienting all the fans. In fact, as I say, Ive got a feeling hes going to make all the huff and puff SU come out with look very very stupid.

  2. Whilst this appears to be rather amusing at the moment, there is one potential issue that would affect rovers.

    How will he pay back the loans ??

    Well, the most marketable thing they have are the TV rights, currently the collective bargaining system ensures all premier league clubs get a decent deal. If this was to be scrapped, then its potentially devastating for clubs with Rovers appeal outside Lancashire.

    The profit the company makes already would service the debt.

  3. Is there any possible way that this could turn out to be a good thing for Manchester United?

    The thing that needs to be remembered is that Manchester United are only profitable because they are good on the pitch. If they arent performaing on the pitch, they have serious worries financially.

    I certainly cant see Glazer slashing the transfer budget for example.

  4. Its 1995 you fool! we dont all have the internet at home. I make do with a wizzy new machine at the Library every so often.

    Apparently its got 128kb of RAM (sounds unbelievable I know!)

    Anyway the Newcastle game! ~The atmosphere was great, Flowes was on amazing form, cant believe we didnt concede. Now we just need to beat Liverpool and its ours!

  5. Well after months of discussion it has finally been decided that my collection of programmes is to be disposed of.

    Does anyone want it?

    There is in the region of 80-85 programmes, mainly from the 80's, 90's and the last few years, but with a dozen or so from the 60's and 70's.

    Make me an offer, it isnt worth a fortune (far from it), if you live local we can arrange a handover somewhere (Im in Leyland), or I can post it at cost price if not (probably cost a bit).

    PM me if you are interested.

  6. the transfer fund will already be sorted,regardless off position we finish in

    Familiar with the budget for next season are we waggy?

    I would imagine that if by a stroke of luck we can finish in 11th, our transfer budget will be increased by the necessary amount - about 1 million quid!

  7. We are safe so why not start with two up front and give Gally or Jemel a run with Stead. This just seems pointless to me. ENTERTAIN US FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF GAMES PLEASE.

    Hmmm, offset against potentially losing millions....

    we cant keep them out playing defensive what hope have got going all out to score?

    We aint gonna out score the opposition!

  8. Well, highlights from my webfeed

    WBA Lucky not to have a penalty early on for a Neill handbook

    Not convinced the freekick which resulted in the goal was a freekick, however

    Richardsoin struck it oh so sweetly.

    Stead, the unluckiest football player alive, he controleld it beautifully, hit it on the half volley, beat the keeper, and CRASH - into the post.

    Other than that not a huge amount of note.

  9. This article says that UEFA will tell the FA to select Liverpool. There is another thread elsewhere on this MB which found a UEFA rule which is definitive on the subject. Use the search engine and no doubt you will find it.

    Tis the other way round

    It is rule 1.03

    "at the request of the national association concerned the UEFA Champions League title holders may be entered for this competition as an additional representative if they do not qualify"

    Then goes on to say that it would be as a replacement for the fourth placed club. http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/19071.pdf

  10. That's not true at all. The official line is that if Liverpool win, no matter what league position they finish, they will be in the Champions League next season. No country can have more than four participants so Everton would not qualify.

    No Eddie,

    the official line is that it is up to the home nation's FA to decide. It is unwritten that it would be the Champions League winners, but it doesnt have to be.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.