UK Gov debt =~ 1000 x Manchester United's debt

[swamp]

Great Britain is £800bn in the red, but the Reds themselves are a staggering £700m overdrawn.

Of course Man U can win a trophy (ie Premier League) and... er.. only go a bit more in debt.

[minestrone]

Is it not that they put the cost of buying the club onto the debt? If Atw was to walk in when SKA makes the bizzilions we all expect *cough* and paid 700 million for man u, which it would probably cost now, then the debt is cleared, another Ruskie owns an English club without the debt, the Glazers get nowt becasue they borrowed the money anyway and the bank have the 'overdraft' cleared.

Simples.

[minestrone]

And is the Arsenal debt not over 300 million and that is pure debt?

[AtW]

Great Britain is £800bn in the red, but the Reds themselves are a staggering £700m overdrawn.

Of course Man U can win a trophy (ie Premier League) and... er.. only go a bit more in debt.

Think about this way - in order for Govt debt to be backed by the same quality asset as ManU, they'd need to own 1000 ManUs...

[swamp]

Is it not that they put the cost of buying the club onto the debt? If Atw was to walk in when SKA makes the bizzilions we all expect *cough* and paid 700 million for man u, which it would probably cost now, then the debt is cleared, another Ruskie owns an English club without the debt, the Glazers get nowt becasue they borrowed the money anyway and the bank have the 'overdraft' cleared.

Simples.

Yes he bought the club on its future earnings. Clever! It's irrelevant though how the debt came to be; the players could have gone on a £700m bender on the company credit card. Debt is debt and Man U don't look like they can pay theirs off.

Arsenal OTOH are in a somewhat more different and complex position. They do have £300m of debt but they also get 22,000 extra supporters each game to their home games as a result of this debt, assuming they sell each game out (which they do). They also have Arsenal Holdings Ltd dealing with the property side of things, which if the property market doesn't crash may actually return some money to the club.

To sum up:

Arsenal: £300m debt, shiny new stadium, more paying supporters, lots of London property.

Man U: £700m debt, man with a beard.

[AtW]

To sum up:

Arsenal: £300m debt, shiny new stadium, more paying supporters, lots of London property.

Man U: £700m debt, man with a beard.

Arsenal - no trophies, Man U - plenty every year...

[minestrone]

Yes he bought the club on its future earnings. Clever! It's irrelevant though how the debt came to be; the players could have gone on a £700m bender on the company credit card. Debt is debt and Man U don't look like they can pay theirs off.

Arsenal OTOH are in a somewhat more different and complex position. They do have £300m of debt but they also get 22,000 extra supporters each game to their home games as a result of this debt, assuming they sell each game out (which they do). They also have Arsenal Holdings Ltd dealing with the property side of things, which if the property market doesn't crash may actually return some money to the club.

To sum up:

Arsenal: £300m debt, shiny new stadium, more paying supporters, lots of London property.

Man U: £700m debt, man with a beard.

Dear God, I hope you have a good accountant.

Man U essentially bought themselves, they paid out the shareholders and put that on their debt. The club is worth 700 million, they have a debt of 700 million, that is even.

Arsenal are owned by shareholders and yet have a debt of 300 -400 million. That is what I called 'pure debt'.

I fully expect some half arsed "I do not understand" reply I have come to expect from yourself. We can go down to "If Mr Baker buys the bakers" if you really want.

[fckvwls]

Dear God, I hope you have a good accountant.

Man U essentially bought themselves, they paid out the shareholders and put that on their debt. The club is worth 700 million, they have a debt of 700 million, that is even.

Arsenal are owned by shareholders and yet have a debt of 300 -400 million. That is what I called 'pure debt'.

I fully expect some half arsed "I do not understand" reply I have come to expect from yourself. We can go down to "If Mr Baker buys the bakers" if you really want.

Do you drink most evenings when posting here? I am not criticising your reasoning but your general level of obnoxiousness appears raised.

[minestrone]

Do you drink most evenings when posting here? I am not criticising your reasoning but your general level of obnoxiousness appears raised.

I tried to explain to the OP in simple terms that he was wrong, he came back defending his erroneous position with absolutely no understanding of what I said to him.

I seem to remember being called a twat the other day, I never got upset or wittered on about "general level of obnoxiousness".

[fckvwls]

I tried to explain to the OP in simple terms that he was wrong, he came back defending his erroneous position with absolutely no understanding of what I said to him.

I seem to remember being called a twat the other day, I never got upset or wittered on about "general level of obnoxiousness".

U Twat!