Is this you Tek?

bowers wrote:

Asking to sign in to read it...

Bugger! 

I'll edit it with the right link, hang on!
 

Thats it now mate

Had a read mate.

Well put.

Thompson out

"But what does it matter if it’s £1.5 or £15 million when the money left over gets you Darko Bodul?"

Totally disagree with that section: Bodul is a very good footballer, a team player, who was misused by Jackie and ignored by Mixu. He plays regularly in the top league in Russia, but for whatever reason, our managers wouldn't use him in a team which was failing badly and heading for relegation.

Meanwhile Nadir Ciftci, who is talented but has only shown it consistently at Tannadice, is hardly getting a look in for the team at the bottom of the English third division.

But the general theme of the article is on target, apart from the plea at the end for Thompson to 'pass the club over' to someone who is up to the task. 

Of course, that would be great, but, like the appointment of a new manager, there's no guarantee that a new owner would be any more capable. Also, ST won't pass the club over unless it's for the price he thinks it is worth. Nor would anybody. 

Last edited by PatReilly (06/11/2017 12:52 am)

Cheers for the feedback lads.

Pat, that's a fair point. The wider issue I was trying to highlight was that when the club takes in good money for a player, a bigger percentage should be available to recruit a replacement than has been. And the reason it hasn't been is because it is needed to plug financial holes created by Thompson.

But granted, I probably could have chosen a better example than Ciftci/Bodul!

Shedtastic wrote:

How much debt did the club have before Eddie took over?
From what I remember it was losing money to the tune of around 6k a week!

But of course no one is allowed to criticise the chairmanship of Mr McLean because he is a club legend even though it was under his leadership that the club accumulated a huge debt which shocked Eddie when he found out the true state of the clubs finances.

 

The figure rose dramatically when eddie thompson took over from Jim McLean.

Was it not around £2m when eddie took over? Who then took it up to over £7 million.

Shedtastic wrote:

How much debt did the club have before Eddie took over?
From what I remember it was losing money to the tune of around 6k a week!

But of course no one is allowed to criticise the chairmanship of Mr McLean because he is a club legend even though it was under his leadership that the club accumulated a huge debt which shocked Eddie when he found out the true state of the clubs finances.

Jim as chairman deserved some criticism, of course he did. However the debt was no where near what the thompson family peaked it at. Eddie Thompson was naive and paid well over the odds for players wages.
 

annanarab wrote:

Shedtastic wrote:

How much debt did the club have before Eddie took over?
From what I remember it was losing money to the tune of around 6k a week!

But of course no one is allowed to criticise the chairmanship of Mr McLean because he is a club legend even though it was under his leadership that the club accumulated a huge debt which shocked Eddie when he found out the true state of the clubs finances.

Think the debt was suggested to be around £4M. Thats not bad when you consider the transformation of a dilapadated Tannadice into a modern all covered all seated stadia during his time and the transformation of a rather ordinary side into one full of internationalists with some of the finest players ever to grace Scottish football who not only won domestic honours against teams with bigger budgets but were a force to be reckoned with for many years in Europe. Jim actually managed the financial affairs very well and did so without ripping off United fans. United charged premium rates for the big games Barcelona, Man U but with the vouchers & other measures, the regular fans got to see the big teams at the same price as a league game against Morton or Motherwell.

United's debt at the end of the McLean era came partly from external factors rather than mismanagement or profligacy - having invested considerable sums on transfer fees (Pressly, McSwegan, Robertson) - players walked at the end of the contract without compensation and also from the loss of the Sky contract on which budgets and longer term player contracts had been prepared. 
 
The vast majority of my best days as a United fan (1963 onwards) belong in the Jim McLean era and they are not tarnished by the external factors that created United's debt at the time. Except for Levein/Houstie and the Cup win, most of my worst moments as a fan belong in the Thompson family era and try as I might its hard to think of anything good the Thompson family done for the club - rubbish football, lack of player development, facilities not improved, we're out of the top 6 and spending a 2nd season in the Championship, we've had about 7 numptie managers, there's a toxic atmosphere around the club etc, etc. Forgive me but I'll be saving all my criticism for the Thompson regime and all my warm thoughts for the McLean era 

 Excellent post

TannadiceStreet wrote:

Hi lads. 

Brand new United blog site now live.

First post is up and gives an assessment of the financial management of the club in the Thompson era.

https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/74873261/posts/1653574917

Have a read and feel free to give any feedback!

Cheers.

 
Although I didn't wholly agree with the blog (opinions after all) I did find the writing style agreeable - it was an easy read while many blogs are hard going.

Have bookmarked and will continue to look in on it.