SA Footy

As reported here today, Manchester United are officially the second biggest club in world football after Real Madrid.

Published accounts today revealed that Old Trafford turned over a whopping £245m ($539m), and profits soared 93% to £59m ($132m).

However, whilst the Glaziers might be smiling at this, the interest on the loans they took out to buy the club in the first place amounts to £67m ($149m), this year alone, netting the club an £8m loss ($17.8m).

Now I ask you........ Is big really that beautiful?

johntheclaret wrote:Now I ask you........ Is big really that beautiful?

Great point there JTC.

Just like the thousands who buy a rental property for soooooo much that their monthly rental income doesn't cover their monthly interest costs.

Negative gearing or negative sense?

In response to the rental income comment, you would never expect to earn a higher yield from rental income than your interest expense (assuming you have a loan matching the value of the home). However, it's with capital gains that you will earn a return in the end, particularly with the Australian (home) property market rising so quickly as it is (although listed property trusts have done terribly).

So it doesn't really come into play here considering Glazer seems to want to own Man U for some time yet. I think he believes he'll be able to up revenue enough to cover his interest repayments (eventually).

But all in all, Man U are a bunch of....

speaking of liverpool apprently therir owners are need to refinace to pay the remainder they owe to the club

Sorry scouser, don't agree. We have a second house that we rent for £650 per month and have a mortgage of £312 per month. Dunno about Oz, but Buy to Let is big business up here.

capitalist...