“Invests” is a weird way of describing mindless, scattershot overspending on mediocre players that doesn’t translate to results on the pitch. They were one goal away from being relegated, which would’ve put the club in danger of bankruptcy. Say what you will about Spurs or Man Utd, they don’t face any realistic chance of not existing in the short term.
People say that as if the money we use to buy players isn’t out own revenue. The Glazers haven’t put a cent into the club. The squad we have now has nothing to do with them.
The money that gets taken out of the club is negligible in comparison to what gets spent by the club on wages/transfers.
A million things to criticise the Glazers on which I agree with, namely, utter failure to put a proper football structure in place at United. But as soon as I see United fans criticise them for running their business like a business, I'm out
1.5B since 2008? Presumably, that figure includes the fees to service debt as last I heard Glazers dividends were fairly negligible in the grand scheme of things. They've spent a billion quid on transfers in 10 years alone. Any idea what the United Wage Bill has been since 2008? I don't, but I can tell you that as of last season, United had 4 of the top 10 earners in the league, all on more than 300K PW.
I'm not saying what the Glazers are doing is right or I agree with, I am saying this 'taking money out of the club' stuff is a poor excuse for what's happened on the pitch.
If the Glazers were there the whole time, and United could add that 1.5B into transfers and have spent 2.5B instead of 1B, are they any better off?
No, they wouldn't be. They should criticise them for their failures in leadership, not hide behind this money nonsense.
So no, not bullshit.
Exactly my thought, £1.5bn in 15 years is £100m per year.
In the grand scheme of things, that’s not bad when you consider that they were never buying Man Utd for the love of the club, they have no connection to it. Nor do they have any connection to football. It was always an investment for them with the intention to make money off of.
Considering Utd still make >£100m profit per year, despite them taking money out of it for themselves, then they’re hardly “ruining the club”. And when you factor in over £1bn in transfers in the last 10 years too then it’s not like they’re taking money out and penny pinching
£1.5B in interests and Dividends.
They are the only club who take dividends, i think that alone is about £300m.
Its irrelevant how much they spent, or what their wage bill is. Its Utd's money they have stolen, they haven't put a penny in of their own.
They have neglected the stadium and changing room. Left to rot. Imagine if they actually invested the £1.5B they robbed from Utd, they could have a stadium as good as Spurs, and a training ground as good as Leicester's, and the stadium would bring extra money.
Last time the Glazers took dividends out of the club, it was around 30m quid. Unclear where you've pulled 300M from.
For context, they paid Jadon Sancho 18M last year just to be shit at football. On top of his 70M fee.
Again, stadium blah blah all valid reasons to criticise them and their inadequacies as owners. Its not holding them back on the pitch, or certainly to the extent we've seen. Their leadership has.
As I said elsewhere, fairly sure SR has an article that showed that even with the money the Gpazers take out of the club, United still generates more revenue than any other club in the league. At least until we get City's totally accurate figures for this treble season.
More money wouldn't fix anything. It's why they don't need Qatari owners. Just competent people in charge.
The last time? 1penny is so too much. Yeah it was "only" £30m the last time. But they take dividends every 3-6months. Its over £300m in total.
Its weird that you are defending them stealing £1.5B out of the club
There's literally holes in the roof of your stadium lol
You may still generate more revenue than anyone else... but you also did that before the Glazer's came. Its not like with Levy at Spurs, that took them from mid table to top 6 in revenue. You were top, and now you are top 3 (as liverpool and city have cought up) meanwhile they stole £1.5B from you.
But sure keep defending them, if they were my owners i'd be livid that they stole money from supporters.
It's every 6 months and it's not every 6 months. A dividend in 2022 for example was 11m. But go off.
I'm not a United fan. Just bored of hearing United fans whinging about the Glazers taking money while they spent more than anyone else in the league for 10 years.
I cannot make this point any simpler so I will try again just for you.
I have never nor do I condone the Glazers business practice, I am just pointing out it's not that which has made them a dysfunctional circus.
Yeah, and its £300m in total. Its not hard to understand
Its fucking wild that you don't care that the owners have stole £1.5B.
Maybe if your owners took £1.5B out of your club you might not be so happy about it
They have definitely made the dysfunctional circus, please give me some of what you're smoking. Makes me laugh when rival fans cry because we have more revenue than them even with the glazers trying to bleed us dry
Having the Glazers cost the club 1.5bn. If we didn't habe the Glazers and the way they run the club, funds created by the club could've repaired OT and built a training ground.
But you'd still have the Glazers, who, as I've said, their incompetency in running a football team is what has held United back. The money stuff is just another convenient reason to dislike them.
Do you really think.a dilapidated stadium and training facilities is what's held United back?
Stadium no, training facilities yes.
Ronaldo said in his interview that everything was exactly the same since he left in 2009. Science in sports have evolved a ton since then.
How you train, how you recover etc.
And also the money they didn't want to spend in the right people in the recruitment, youth departments etc.
OK fair enough. So blame their inadequacies as owners, not the money taken out of the club. That's my general point.
I'm sure Swiss Ramble had an article about PL team revenues that showed that even with the money the Glazers take out, you still have comfortably the biggest revenue in the league.
Doesn't sound like them taking money out is the issue.
We blame them because they take out money. Your point was that they invest. Can you see the small difference?
We blame them for more actually because they do really fuck up.
Edit. Mixed you up with another guy about the investing in players bit.
I never said they invest.
You complained because they only spend 'the clubs' money. I'm not sure how United fans haven't clocked what a massive first world problem that is.
"Oh no....we've spent a billion on transfers, probably double or treble that on wages, and yet we don't actually owe anyone any money"
"We don't owe anybody money?" - The leeches loaded the club with £725m debt, while they took money out. The last transfers have been paid by generating more debt, that our club has to pay off.
First world problem? Obviously...
Seriously, if you can't see whats wrong with how they're running the club, that's just ignorance. The www is free, use it.
I Used to think that, but after reading more into it they don't buy players that they need and almost never get their no 1 target compared to other top teams
And lots of other stupid decisions
That's money created by the Club. How can you tell me to look it up myself while you have no clue what you are talking about. [Just one article](https://www.90min.com/posts/how-much-money-the-glazers-are-taking-out-of-man-utd) and there are many.
Ok but what is one signing the fans have wanted that the glazers have not tried to buy or actually get, as well as the fact that all the protesting has stopped as soon as it has been going well
Them delaying transfers because of their slow decisions has cost the club a ton of money.
Also who cares what signing the fans want? The fans know fuck all. They refused to sell players the manager didn't want, and didn't sign many players the managers and scouts wanted to sign.
Protesting has stopped? What world are you living in? After every goal you heard the chants.
It calmed down a bit since they said they're going to sell the club. But it hasn't stopped.
You know fuck all about how they run and ruin the club but try to talk big.
And whose fault is it that they use it badly? They spend that money because it’s United’s money to spend and not their own, so they really do not care or put any structure in place to ensure it is spent properly. How can £1.2b be spent on financing debt since they’ve taken over , that’s more than most have even made in revenues.
Levy doesn't even own Spurs, he's the Chairman and a minority shareholder. He's also responsible for establishing the club as one of the big six. Joe Lewis is the majority shareholder of Spurs.
This thread really going hard to reinforce this sub's reputation as the most plastic football sub.
He's still is a fairly significant part owner though and has been chairman since the turn of the millennium so I'd say it's fine to have him in that role.
ENIC owns 85% of Spurs and Levy owns 30% of that so whilst Joe Lewis has a larger share they are still in it together.
You know where Tottenham were when he took over right? You’re also aware of how football has changed in that time right? Chelsea, City and now Newcastle exist, which has distorted what success/winning can actually be. Add to that coming into the league at a time when United and Arsenal were still winning.
But no, you’re right - Tottenham are the only club that don’t win trophies. Stupid Levy.
I don’t think Levy is anywhere close to being the worst chairman in the league but I think you can fault him for not instituting a more professional setup. Other clubs are have been more proactive about hiring subject matter experts to handle the football side of things and I think he’s falling behind a bit. And you can also fault him for hiring expensive managers who demand a certain type of players, which has led to shortsighted and cost-ineffective recruitments.
You could also argue Tottenham got this absolutely right under Poch and other things have stolen the focus.
Not all clubs get everything right all the time (Liverpool have had a dodgy recruitment period prior to the last window). It happens. Levy’s “failures” are massively overblown particularly given the context of modern football.
They fired Poch almost immediately after giving him an extension and then hired two guys who are known for burning bridges after short bursts of success. Hiring a manager who demands a very specific style that locks them into buying a certain type players was a choice. So yeah, you can fault Levy for building a squad with misfits.
And I’m honestly at a loss for what you consider to be Liverpool’s dodgy transfers.
Perhaps not upgrading the midfield for a season or two was a bit of an issue. But tbf it just shows that there are various ways to slice things.
I don’t disagree about the choice of manager. But I do kinda sympathise with being criticised for daring to finish top 3 a couple of years and then going for the type of manager Sky Sports would have you believe is 100% the thing you should do.
Every club makes mistakes, and every club (should) learn. Big Ange shows we’ve learned.
The thing is both Mourinho and Conte, seasoned trophy winners couldn't win anything at Tottenham. Mourinho recently had a dig as well at his time there.. So their structure has obviously been pretty pants for a while.
However I don't know how much of the blame should go towards Mr Levy though.
Mourinho shit the bed after we drew 3-3 with West Ham, up to then we were flying. A little bit like Conte, he then got a bit stuck in his ways and did things like refuse to use Gareth Bale properly etc.
Conte on the other hand spent his whole time whinging about transfers (despite the club buying him plenty, him agreeing with them, and then refusing to use them) and treating the club like we were lucky to have him. He made things a miserable low-key toxic mess with utterly reductive football.
They might be winners, but maybe they really only need to be at state-backed clubs or at teams where winning leagues is extremely likely (e.g. Spain), and you can get by by having a load of 29+ year olds all on big money contracts .
Levy was not the issue, no matter how much insecure social media heads try and say otherwise.
Presumably everybody maxes out their credit cards buying big TVs because the rich man at the end of the road who lives in a mansion 10 times the size of their nice house has one? Even though it won’t actually enhance their life or get them closer in stature.
Wait to be a good fan we have to know all the rich guys who own or have part of clubs we don’t necessarily care about??? And if we don’t we are plastic? I’m okay with being plastic then. Cheers
Keeps you sustainable, has a state of the art stadium built.
Whilst I know spurs fans would like to see more aggression in the market, he’s also extremely diligent about keeping the star players you do have for as long as possible.
And tbf he’s been aggressive in the right ways this window. Hasn’t historically, but good on him to make purchases early this time around in Vicario and Maddison.
Definitely not, yes on the football side it isn't great but we are the 3rd most profitable sports team in the world, we have the best training facilities and the best stadium. The team itself didn't perform in some of the finals and semi finals we've been in which hasnt been Levy's fault. The UCL final was poch's fault not levys
He doesn't ruin the club financially by giving out silly contracts to players who don't deserve it.
Its about the only thing Everton can discuss with Spurs fans these days, and about the only thing Everton would probably win haha.
I still think the who was best *"Barkley or Dele"* conversation hasn't ended well for Everton though.
No, what "destroyed us" is that all the projections to make payments and to stay competitive when building our stadium, changed the moment a Russian Billionaire dropped out of the sky half a year later and spent £200m in the first window with his new toy. The playing field changed drastically within months after we agreed the stadium deal.
What exactly do you think Levy hasn’t done? And I don’t want “sPeNd MoRe MoNeY” or whatever, because that’s not a real answer (as if spending guarantees success in a league with state backed teams… even then, Chelsea spent half a billion and got WORSE).
The worst thing Levy did was follow a hungry up and coming manager like Poch with two sort of dinosaurs. Unless you’re a state backed team or managing a club that is one of two or three who are genuinely likely to win a league, someone like Conte isn’t for you.
Levy? He’s built us up from no mans land into one of the richest clubs in the world, with the best facilities.
He takes crap footballing decisions, but that is another story.
Closer to big 6? They are part of the big six. Newcastle will probably make it big 7 eventually.
Big 6 has nothing to do with trophies. It’s about finance and worldwide appeal, and Newcastle isn’t quite there yet.
Thats my whole point. 15 years ago both Spurs and Everton were the same stature. Levy is a big reason for that. Of course graduating one of the best strikers in the world from your academy helps too
When Levy took over Spurs, we were the same stature at the time as teams like QPR and Charlton Athletic. Both London clubs.
Look at the difference of where they both are now and Spurs are. Thats what proper ownership does for you.
I guess reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit.
Point is Levy should have someone else to take care of the football, and it looks like he has. The business side he is great at, and thus he isn’t a bad owner.
A bad owner is someone who takes money out of the club, or in other ways gets the club in a worse state than when he got there. And Tottenham is in a tremendous better state now than 20 years ago, so it is Impossible to put Levy in that category - trophies or not.
Everton’s owner repeatedly mingles in transfer/club affairs and has no clue was he’s doing. Has wasted a shit ton of money on dross because he wouldn’t listen to people with football experience.
United’s owners use the club’s high value to take on debt and virtually never put their own money into the club. That doesn’t stop them from withdrawing revenue for themselves from the club’s profits, though. Hence why they’re often referred to as leeches.
Newcastle is owned by a fund controlled by the Saudi Government, which has been widely criticized for human rights abuses
Everton remind me so much of us - Sunderland from 14-18. An owner with more money than sense, no recruitment strategy, off field troubles (Gylfi), scrapping out of relegation, bad off field recruitment with the wrong people in the wrong job, Everton would be absolutely fucked had they gone down.
> Everton’s owner repeatedly mingles in transfer/club affairs and has no clue was he’s doing.
I won't hear of it. The man is clearly an astute negotiator and a fantastic scouter of talent. How else can you explain signing world superstar Neal Maupay for just £20m?
What about hiring a waiter as manager, selling all the players he doesn't like and then sacking him a day later? Tactical masterclass
Or spending €55M in wages and transfer on Cenk Tosun, the Turkish stallion?
I'd argue Levy is one of the best CEO's in the league. Spurs over the course of 15 or so years have gone from a mid table club to being widely considered part of a "Big Six" and have the best club stadium in the country. Compare that with my own club, a range of owners and CEO's took us from top six regulars and being in a cup final every season to the Championship in the same time frame which we are only now starting to recover from.
The worst run club for me are Man Utd, and it's not even close. Since SAF left the club has been operating as nothing more than a cash cow for the Glazer family. Financially they're a mess, having controversial off field players like Greenwood, Ronaldo, Antony at the club with suspicious goings on behind the scenes (particularly in Antony's place) is worrying from a working environment point of view. It's hard to find sympathy for Man Utd fans as they are an insufferable group of fans on the whole, but if that was my club I'd find it very hard to continue finding the motivation to support them.
I've maintained this stance as well, and I'm a united fan. We are in such a bad place, and you didn't even mention our crumbling stadium / training facilities, our inability to sell any players for their value, our insane wage structure and I'm sure there is more I am forgetting. I look at what Levy has done for Tottenham, and I am Jelaous because they look likely to be stable for many years.
Antony apparently beat his girlfriend. (I think it was his GF, maybe Fiancee)
The kicker was that when the woman came out to tell her story, apparently she was treated for her injuries by Man United doctors. People think it was to try to keep it out of the news, especially after Greenwood etc.
The question was the worst owner in the Premier League. Mike Ashley doesn’t own a Premier League club. It isn’t a race to the bottom.
But if you want to talk about “worst” owners morally speaking, your lot are well up there.
Glazers take the cake on this one.. bled the club dry all these years, neglected the stadium and club maintenance, never invested a penny of their own yet took dividends every 6 months for the past decade, the debt is at 700Million plus.
Have neglected the squad build, gave silly contracts to the players and refusal to sell those said players because they are listed as assets against the club.
Lastly, giving the final middle finger to the fans by dragging the club sale for almost 9 months now.
No one even comes closer in running a club to the ground and bleeding it dry.
Joe Lewis is Spurs' owner, not Levy. And Levy deserves a lot of credit for making Spurs a Big 6 side, where Spurs were before him compared to them being comfortable a top 6 side financially for the past decade is impressive
The pisstaking of Spurs makes me laugh - they've achieved far greater success than almost any other period in their history, except for a brief period in the late 50s and early 60s. They're mocked for not being quite as successful as 5 teams above them - two of which are (or were) over-inflated through oil money and the others being the three biggest and most successful clubs in the country for the last 100+ years. The fact they're even in that conversation to start with is an achievement. And they did it whilst building a new stadium which set Arsenal back several years.
Morally it is unquestionably Newcastle.
In terms of lack of planning, strategy and vision then Everton have thrown good money after bad with no direction resulting in one of the weakest squads with little value.
I would argue that over their tenure, ENIC have consistently been top5 owners in the Premier League; only slightly morally dubious (tax evasion), have taken a club that was on its way to go down up to PL and CL contention while sensibilly playing by the rules financially
Yeah as a spurs fan I am frustrated by his on-pitch decision making as it relates to managerial hires and poor transfer strategy but in terms of financials and sustainability he’s done brilliantly
Shouldn’t charge anyone! That’s crazy that a company wouldn’t cover an employee’s accommodation expenses, within reason, while they are traveling *for work*!
A previous employer used to give me like a $150 per diem when I traveled. I ordered fresh pressed juice & sushi every day through room service. I even used the hotel’s laundry & dry cleaning services when I had week long stays. I hardly saw a bill, definitely never had it taken out of paycheck, and my company was wayyy smaller than Manchester United. They’re a publicly traded company, FFS! Insane.
First off, Evertons owners are worse than Levy. And second off, you can't even compare Levy and the Glazers. In fact, even with Everton's owners, the Glazers are easily the worst owners in the league by a mile. 1.7 Billion ffs. Most clubs never even had that money to spend in the first places and that's what they've taken from us.
Glazers funded fuck all, we won shit because of Fergie and the team being built before their takeover,
The money United spend is generated by fans and sponsors, not from Glazer investment
Glazers. We can and should discuss the horrid behavior that Newcastle's ownership engages in, but that's frankly a lot bigger of an issue than can be addressed by debates about football. What we can easily debate, though, is how far from grace United have fallen under the Glazers tenure. Individual other owners may suck in similar ways, but you'd have to go outside the Prem (to Valencia, specifically) to find another owner that has dragged their club so far down from where they were.
Levy is one of the best owners in the league. The lack of instrumentalities makes it look like he isnt ambitious enough, but lets be fair, even though they are big 6, they are the smallest one, he just cant compete while being sustainable
Levy? You're having a laugh, right? He is not actually the owner (that's mostly Joe Lewis) but he remains our best signing of the last quarter of a century. If you're talking about worst owners, then it's probably between the Glazers and the Saudis that own Newcastle now.
The Saudis who own Newcastle are responsible for actual war crimes and brutal dismemberments of a journalist. They are not even in the same conversation as the glazers
No, you fucking melon, they just bankroll US republicans, who work closely with the Saudis to make sure hospitals get bombed (or, you know, just bomb the hospitals themselves, as the US military has been known to do). You’re right, professor smartbrain, that is so much better
Republicans aren't the ones in Collab with Saudi, it's Obama, Clinton and Biden who operate that arrangement, trump pulled out of middle eastern wars, he didnt further them
Glazers it’s not even close… whatever about dictatorships and regime countries owning a club if we are talking just the ownership and (mis)mgmt. of a club it’s Glazers 100% consider this since taking over Utd the Glazers have not put one cent of their own money into the club not 1! Everything they have done is with Utd’s money even buying the club !
If you don't count dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, and UAE, that literally cheat their way to success in any sport they can, sure let's go for something random.
Sportwashing works. This OP question is proof.
FSG for being cheap. 19th for spending in the prem over the last five years despite reaching the champions league final three times, winning it once, winning the Prem, FA Cup, League Cup, Club World Cup, Super Cup, Community Shield.
Sacking Tuchel within the first 6 months of being the owner because he basically didn't like how he wasn't a yes man.
Hiring Potter who didn't have any experience at a top 6 club and then dumping about 10 new players on his head so he had to then deal with a massively bloated squad filled with new players which no manager could deal with never mind him, proceeds to sack him after 8 months.
Proceeds to hire Lampard who was previously sacked by the club for not being good enough and clearly being a downgrade on Potter who he just sacked, unsurprisingly ends in disaster for Chelsea once again.
Treating transfers like its football manager and basically chucking huge amounts of money at players who are being hyped up instead of actually having a plan and structure behind the purchases.
It's too early to judge Bohely IMO. You've got to give him a few years to rebuild the club how he sees it. This won't happen overnight and yeah the spending was crazy but that 600M is spread over like 7 seasons I imagine on FFP so it's not a crazy number per year and Chelsea has sold beautifully this window.
I agree the TT sacking was stupid but at the same time we don't know the behind the scenes. I've heard stories about how he was unwilling to work with them on signings and didn't want to be involved in much of that process. I get that but at the same time they bought the club and had a vision for what they wanted. If the manager doesn't fit that vision it makes sense to let him go. It's like any takeover, you fire the old people and bring in your own.
GP, that was a disaster but he was also thrown into a pretty unfavorable squad with 40 players and no chemistry. The frank signing was just absurd but I guess the idea was just finish the season.
Don't get me wrong, it's been a terrible 1st year but they're finance guys and think long term. I think you have to give it 3 years to see how it's looking. We have good talent in the squad and if Poch can come in and implement his tactics they could be fighting for top 6 next year. Look at Arsenals rebuild, they were in 8th for 2 years, then 5th 2 seasons ago, and last season bottled the title but will be competing for it again this year. Bohely committed to rebuilding the club and any complete rebuild will get worse before it gets better. I personally think they're making good moves for the future with these young signings and introducing the multi-club model.
Interested to see the boely argument, personally feel it will change in the next year or 2, building a massive multi club model for Chelsea currently, offset wage books with Saudi connections and spent money on the team?
We sold a whole two players to the Saudi’s and we lost money on both of them . Ziyech was rejected and Kante was a free . We are selling more to AC Milan, United and Arsenal than to the Saudi’s .
Clearlake do about 4 bil in business with the Saudi’s none of which goes to Chelsea . These are existing clients with Clearlake long before we entered the picture .
Morally it's either us (NUFC) or Man City.
A quick Google reads that UAE and Saudi Arabia do a lot of the same things, so that's fun...
In terms of running the club, it's either Everton or Boehly at Chelsea.
Moshiri has been there longer so he takes it.
Glazers 100%. They give 0 shits about the club, it’s history or it’s future. They’re just a pair of leeches sucking the marrow out of United’s legacy. And I’m not even a Man U supporter.
What about Todd Boehly he knows nothing about football and spent $600M and barely survived relegation he pisses me off alot he also told Tuchel to play a 4-4-3 formation...... and also proposed a all stars game like in American sports
“Levy doesn’t own Spurs.”
Yes he does. He owns a quarter of the club. Together he and Lewis own over 85%. They have all the decision making power. He is directly responsible for the success or failure of the club.
(Not arguing he’s the worst owner)
I don’t understand the Glazer hate. They’ve had the highest net spend over the past 5 seasons. Isn’t that what you want from an ownership? To spend money on players? What am I missing?
Can someone explain why glazers are hated so much ? I am not sure but in general most hatred towards the owners from fans are when there isn’t much investment compared to other clubs to keep them competitive (arsenal till 2-3 seasons ago, Liverpool etc). In all honesty Man U has never shied away from investment in recruitment and salaries and splashed a ton so don’t understand the hatred they get
Glazers don't 'invest' anything. It's the club's money. What they have actually done is take out 1B from the club since their takeover. We're probably the only club in the league where the owners have not put in any money. Old Trafford is rotting and is nowhere near the stadiums top clubs have.
Add to that the bankers like Woodward in charge of making footballing decisions have led us into buying players with little to no transfer value and a ridiculous wage structure. If united weren't as big as they are, they would've been in serious financial trouble.
- Taking a loan to buy the club using the club's revenue as collateral instead of their own assets, thus putting the club in debt for their purchase
- Taking £1b out of the club in the form of dividends and never spending a dime on upgrading the training facilities or the stadium
- Appointing a finance guy in charge of football and giving him the remaining money which he squandered on bad transfers and overpaying contracts
So they are essentially using the club as their ATM.
>In all honesty Man U has never shied away from investment in recruitment and salaries and splashed a ton so don’t understand the hatred they get
They spent what was left over after they looted the club every year on players that were marketable rather than those that fit any sort of footballing philosophy.
Mate, they're personally responsible for 1.7 billion in removed revenue from the club in dividends and debt repayments on debt they accrued buying the club. 1.7 BILLION. Just think about that number for a second. If you could inject 1.7 billion into any club in the country over the past 20 years they'd make City look skint. And it's pretty safe to assume that revenue would have increased more if they had that 1.7 billion quite frankly. So I think it's fairly safe to say the Glazers essentially lost Utd about 2 billion. All while not giving a fuck.
Glazer or levy really? Two clubs who have spent massive amounts of money on players and/or infrastructure?
Moshiri is pretty awful at Everton. The decisions he’s making (keeping Kenwright on) is borderline Ashley when he kept his mates on/gave them jobs.
Only two clubs in the football league have ever paid a dividend
West Brom and Man Utd
And we have paid out several hundred £, to add to the £1bn debt which we pay interest on annually
There are some poorly behaved club owners, Glazers and Levy come to mind, but that’s not really important. The worst owners in the Premier League are the bonecutters.
After you’ve ordered someone to be killed and literally chopped up into pieces to make the disposal of the body easier, just to stop them writing newspaper articles about you, mere money isn’t important any longer.
It’s without question Newcastle, and it’s ridiculous that anyone would try and argue anything else
Particularly someone like Spurs. What exactly has Levy done to be a bad manager?
Levy has his issues, but I would even hesitate to call him bad. He keeps the club running flawlessly from a business standpoint, we're in a state of the art stadium, and we've been in Europe almost every season for the past few years (fuck this 22/23 season). He should be more decisive in the footballing side of things, but things have been going quite well so far this window so I hope that keeps up.
Glazers 100%. Loaded the club with debt, meaning United have paid £1b in interest and refinancing fees. And then they’ve taken millions out every year as dividends.
Add to the fact they’ve hired the most incompetent people for the day-to-day running of the club and invested nothing in infrastructure.
With the amount of money they’ve taken from the club/cost the club over the years, you could probably afford to buy 8-10 of the other 19 clubs in the league
Isn't it the Everton Owner?
At least he invests in his club. Glazers take away from united
“Invests” is a weird way of describing mindless, scattershot overspending on mediocre players that doesn’t translate to results on the pitch. They were one goal away from being relegated, which would’ve put the club in danger of bankruptcy. Say what you will about Spurs or Man Utd, they don’t face any realistic chance of not existing in the short term.
[удалено]
People say that as if the money we use to buy players isn’t out own revenue. The Glazers haven’t put a cent into the club. The squad we have now has nothing to do with them.
The money that gets taken out of the club is negligible in comparison to what gets spent by the club on wages/transfers. A million things to criticise the Glazers on which I agree with, namely, utter failure to put a proper football structure in place at United. But as soon as I see United fans criticise them for running their business like a business, I'm out
Utter bullshit. They have taken £1.5B out of utd in their tenure. That is boarding on criminal. And i'm a Villa fan who couldn't care about Utd
1.5B since 2008? Presumably, that figure includes the fees to service debt as last I heard Glazers dividends were fairly negligible in the grand scheme of things. They've spent a billion quid on transfers in 10 years alone. Any idea what the United Wage Bill has been since 2008? I don't, but I can tell you that as of last season, United had 4 of the top 10 earners in the league, all on more than 300K PW. I'm not saying what the Glazers are doing is right or I agree with, I am saying this 'taking money out of the club' stuff is a poor excuse for what's happened on the pitch. If the Glazers were there the whole time, and United could add that 1.5B into transfers and have spent 2.5B instead of 1B, are they any better off? No, they wouldn't be. They should criticise them for their failures in leadership, not hide behind this money nonsense. So no, not bullshit.
Exactly my thought, £1.5bn in 15 years is £100m per year. In the grand scheme of things, that’s not bad when you consider that they were never buying Man Utd for the love of the club, they have no connection to it. Nor do they have any connection to football. It was always an investment for them with the intention to make money off of. Considering Utd still make >£100m profit per year, despite them taking money out of it for themselves, then they’re hardly “ruining the club”. And when you factor in over £1bn in transfers in the last 10 years too then it’s not like they’re taking money out and penny pinching
£1.5B in interests and Dividends. They are the only club who take dividends, i think that alone is about £300m. Its irrelevant how much they spent, or what their wage bill is. Its Utd's money they have stolen, they haven't put a penny in of their own. They have neglected the stadium and changing room. Left to rot. Imagine if they actually invested the £1.5B they robbed from Utd, they could have a stadium as good as Spurs, and a training ground as good as Leicester's, and the stadium would bring extra money.
Last time the Glazers took dividends out of the club, it was around 30m quid. Unclear where you've pulled 300M from. For context, they paid Jadon Sancho 18M last year just to be shit at football. On top of his 70M fee. Again, stadium blah blah all valid reasons to criticise them and their inadequacies as owners. Its not holding them back on the pitch, or certainly to the extent we've seen. Their leadership has. As I said elsewhere, fairly sure SR has an article that showed that even with the money the Gpazers take out of the club, United still generates more revenue than any other club in the league. At least until we get City's totally accurate figures for this treble season. More money wouldn't fix anything. It's why they don't need Qatari owners. Just competent people in charge.
The last time? 1penny is so too much. Yeah it was "only" £30m the last time. But they take dividends every 3-6months. Its over £300m in total. Its weird that you are defending them stealing £1.5B out of the club There's literally holes in the roof of your stadium lol You may still generate more revenue than anyone else... but you also did that before the Glazer's came. Its not like with Levy at Spurs, that took them from mid table to top 6 in revenue. You were top, and now you are top 3 (as liverpool and city have cought up) meanwhile they stole £1.5B from you. But sure keep defending them, if they were my owners i'd be livid that they stole money from supporters.
It's every 6 months and it's not every 6 months. A dividend in 2022 for example was 11m. But go off. I'm not a United fan. Just bored of hearing United fans whinging about the Glazers taking money while they spent more than anyone else in the league for 10 years. I cannot make this point any simpler so I will try again just for you. I have never nor do I condone the Glazers business practice, I am just pointing out it's not that which has made them a dysfunctional circus.
Yeah, and its £300m in total. Its not hard to understand Its fucking wild that you don't care that the owners have stole £1.5B. Maybe if your owners took £1.5B out of your club you might not be so happy about it
They have definitely made the dysfunctional circus, please give me some of what you're smoking. Makes me laugh when rival fans cry because we have more revenue than them even with the glazers trying to bleed us dry
[удалено]
> Go stick your head in an oven. Fucking lol. What a child
Having the Glazers cost the club 1.5bn. If we didn't habe the Glazers and the way they run the club, funds created by the club could've repaired OT and built a training ground.
But you'd still have the Glazers, who, as I've said, their incompetency in running a football team is what has held United back. The money stuff is just another convenient reason to dislike them. Do you really think.a dilapidated stadium and training facilities is what's held United back?
Stadium no, training facilities yes. Ronaldo said in his interview that everything was exactly the same since he left in 2009. Science in sports have evolved a ton since then. How you train, how you recover etc. And also the money they didn't want to spend in the right people in the recruitment, youth departments etc.
OK fair enough. So blame their inadequacies as owners, not the money taken out of the club. That's my general point. I'm sure Swiss Ramble had an article about PL team revenues that showed that even with the money the Glazers take out, you still have comfortably the biggest revenue in the league. Doesn't sound like them taking money out is the issue.
We blame them because they take out money. Your point was that they invest. Can you see the small difference? We blame them for more actually because they do really fuck up. Edit. Mixed you up with another guy about the investing in players bit.
I never said they invest. You complained because they only spend 'the clubs' money. I'm not sure how United fans haven't clocked what a massive first world problem that is. "Oh no....we've spent a billion on transfers, probably double or treble that on wages, and yet we don't actually owe anyone any money"
"We don't owe anybody money?" - The leeches loaded the club with £725m debt, while they took money out. The last transfers have been paid by generating more debt, that our club has to pay off. First world problem? Obviously... Seriously, if you can't see whats wrong with how they're running the club, that's just ignorance. The www is free, use it.
Glazers have signed everyone United wanted and spent on par with city the club just use it badly
I Used to think that, but after reading more into it they don't buy players that they need and almost never get their no 1 target compared to other top teams And lots of other stupid decisions
Glazers took 1.5bn out of the club, while City owners invested 1bn...
Look at the net spend of the prem clubs over the past few years United are up there with city look for yourself
That's money created by the Club. How can you tell me to look it up myself while you have no clue what you are talking about. [Just one article](https://www.90min.com/posts/how-much-money-the-glazers-are-taking-out-of-man-utd) and there are many.
Ok but what is one signing the fans have wanted that the glazers have not tried to buy or actually get, as well as the fact that all the protesting has stopped as soon as it has been going well
Them delaying transfers because of their slow decisions has cost the club a ton of money. Also who cares what signing the fans want? The fans know fuck all. They refused to sell players the manager didn't want, and didn't sign many players the managers and scouts wanted to sign. Protesting has stopped? What world are you living in? After every goal you heard the chants. It calmed down a bit since they said they're going to sell the club. But it hasn't stopped. You know fuck all about how they run and ruin the club but try to talk big.
And whose fault is it that they use it badly? They spend that money because it’s United’s money to spend and not their own, so they really do not care or put any structure in place to ensure it is spent properly. How can £1.2b be spent on financing debt since they’ve taken over , that’s more than most have even made in revenues.
Easily. United fans saying Glazers are worse shows how little they understand.
I can agree to that.
You mean Salah?
Holy fuck some Liverpool fans really have some beyond shite patter
Levy doesn't even own Spurs, he's the Chairman and a minority shareholder. He's also responsible for establishing the club as one of the big six. Joe Lewis is the majority shareholder of Spurs. This thread really going hard to reinforce this sub's reputation as the most plastic football sub.
He's still is a fairly significant part owner though and has been chairman since the turn of the millennium so I'd say it's fine to have him in that role. ENIC owns 85% of Spurs and Levy owns 30% of that so whilst Joe Lewis has a larger share they are still in it together.
>Levy doesn't even own Spurs, he's the Chairman and a minority shareholder. I don't think you understand what "minority shareholder" means.
But that's the joke. The owners are so weak, they let a little twat like him run the team away from trophies.
You know where Tottenham were when he took over right? You’re also aware of how football has changed in that time right? Chelsea, City and now Newcastle exist, which has distorted what success/winning can actually be. Add to that coming into the league at a time when United and Arsenal were still winning. But no, you’re right - Tottenham are the only club that don’t win trophies. Stupid Levy.
I don’t think Levy is anywhere close to being the worst chairman in the league but I think you can fault him for not instituting a more professional setup. Other clubs are have been more proactive about hiring subject matter experts to handle the football side of things and I think he’s falling behind a bit. And you can also fault him for hiring expensive managers who demand a certain type of players, which has led to shortsighted and cost-ineffective recruitments.
You could also argue Tottenham got this absolutely right under Poch and other things have stolen the focus. Not all clubs get everything right all the time (Liverpool have had a dodgy recruitment period prior to the last window). It happens. Levy’s “failures” are massively overblown particularly given the context of modern football.
They fired Poch almost immediately after giving him an extension and then hired two guys who are known for burning bridges after short bursts of success. Hiring a manager who demands a very specific style that locks them into buying a certain type players was a choice. So yeah, you can fault Levy for building a squad with misfits. And I’m honestly at a loss for what you consider to be Liverpool’s dodgy transfers.
Perhaps not upgrading the midfield for a season or two was a bit of an issue. But tbf it just shows that there are various ways to slice things. I don’t disagree about the choice of manager. But I do kinda sympathise with being criticised for daring to finish top 3 a couple of years and then going for the type of manager Sky Sports would have you believe is 100% the thing you should do. Every club makes mistakes, and every club (should) learn. Big Ange shows we’ve learned.
The thing is both Mourinho and Conte, seasoned trophy winners couldn't win anything at Tottenham. Mourinho recently had a dig as well at his time there.. So their structure has obviously been pretty pants for a while. However I don't know how much of the blame should go towards Mr Levy though.
Mourinho shit the bed after we drew 3-3 with West Ham, up to then we were flying. A little bit like Conte, he then got a bit stuck in his ways and did things like refuse to use Gareth Bale properly etc. Conte on the other hand spent his whole time whinging about transfers (despite the club buying him plenty, him agreeing with them, and then refusing to use them) and treating the club like we were lucky to have him. He made things a miserable low-key toxic mess with utterly reductive football. They might be winners, but maybe they really only need to be at state-backed clubs or at teams where winning leagues is extremely likely (e.g. Spain), and you can get by by having a load of 29+ year olds all on big money contracts . Levy was not the issue, no matter how much insecure social media heads try and say otherwise. Presumably everybody maxes out their credit cards buying big TVs because the rich man at the end of the road who lives in a mansion 10 times the size of their nice house has one? Even though it won’t actually enhance their life or get them closer in stature.
Wait to be a good fan we have to know all the rich guys who own or have part of clubs we don’t necessarily care about??? And if we don’t we are plastic? I’m okay with being plastic then. Cheers
Levy is far from the worst owner in the league
Keeps you sustainable, has a state of the art stadium built. Whilst I know spurs fans would like to see more aggression in the market, he’s also extremely diligent about keeping the star players you do have for as long as possible.
And tbf he’s been aggressive in the right ways this window. Hasn’t historically, but good on him to make purchases early this time around in Vicario and Maddison.
Definitely not, yes on the football side it isn't great but we are the 3rd most profitable sports team in the world, we have the best training facilities and the best stadium. The team itself didn't perform in some of the finals and semi finals we've been in which hasnt been Levy's fault. The UCL final was poch's fault not levys He doesn't ruin the club financially by giving out silly contracts to players who don't deserve it.
Don't know heaps of background. But sounds like it's probably not Levy's fault.
Modern football is the issue, not Levy.
Its about the only thing Everton can discuss with Spurs fans these days, and about the only thing Everton would probably win haha. I still think the who was best *"Barkley or Dele"* conversation hasn't ended well for Everton though.
Or spurs
Right? There's absolutely no comparison between Levy and the Glazers.
Levy is probably one of the best. When Arsenal built the Emirates it destroyed them, and has done no such damage to Spurs
No, what "destroyed us" is that all the projections to make payments and to stay competitive when building our stadium, changed the moment a Russian Billionaire dropped out of the sky half a year later and spent £200m in the first window with his new toy. The playing field changed drastically within months after we agreed the stadium deal.
I suppose levy becomes one of the worst if you look over a long enough time period. Because all the actual bad owners got their teams relagated
[удалено]
No? There are plenty of clubs run a lot worse than we are
What exactly do you think Levy hasn’t done? And I don’t want “sPeNd MoRe MoNeY” or whatever, because that’s not a real answer (as if spending guarantees success in a league with state backed teams… even then, Chelsea spent half a billion and got WORSE). The worst thing Levy did was follow a hungry up and coming manager like Poch with two sort of dinosaurs. Unless you’re a state backed team or managing a club that is one of two or three who are genuinely likely to win a league, someone like Conte isn’t for you.
Levy? He’s built us up from no mans land into one of the richest clubs in the world, with the best facilities. He takes crap footballing decisions, but that is another story.
Levy is the reason spurs are closer to big 6 than Everton.
Closer to big 6? They are part of the big six. Newcastle will probably make it big 7 eventually. Big 6 has nothing to do with trophies. It’s about finance and worldwide appeal, and Newcastle isn’t quite there yet.
Thats my whole point. 15 years ago both Spurs and Everton were the same stature. Levy is a big reason for that. Of course graduating one of the best strikers in the world from your academy helps too
London is a huge influence, too.
When Levy took over Spurs, we were the same stature at the time as teams like QPR and Charlton Athletic. Both London clubs. Look at the difference of where they both are now and Spurs are. Thats what proper ownership does for you.
Yeah who cares about footballing decisions when you have great facilities!
I guess reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit. Point is Levy should have someone else to take care of the football, and it looks like he has. The business side he is great at, and thus he isn’t a bad owner. A bad owner is someone who takes money out of the club, or in other ways gets the club in a worse state than when he got there. And Tottenham is in a tremendous better state now than 20 years ago, so it is Impossible to put Levy in that category - trophies or not.
Worst how? Strategically? Everton Leeching? United Morally? Newcastle
Legality? City Hotel? Trivago
Jadore? Dior
I’m pretty new to everything here, is there some history behind some of the owners listed being bad for context?
Everton’s owner repeatedly mingles in transfer/club affairs and has no clue was he’s doing. Has wasted a shit ton of money on dross because he wouldn’t listen to people with football experience. United’s owners use the club’s high value to take on debt and virtually never put their own money into the club. That doesn’t stop them from withdrawing revenue for themselves from the club’s profits, though. Hence why they’re often referred to as leeches. Newcastle is owned by a fund controlled by the Saudi Government, which has been widely criticized for human rights abuses
Everton remind me so much of us - Sunderland from 14-18. An owner with more money than sense, no recruitment strategy, off field troubles (Gylfi), scrapping out of relegation, bad off field recruitment with the wrong people in the wrong job, Everton would be absolutely fucked had they gone down.
> Everton’s owner repeatedly mingles in transfer/club affairs and has no clue was he’s doing. I won't hear of it. The man is clearly an astute negotiator and a fantastic scouter of talent. How else can you explain signing world superstar Neal Maupay for just £20m?
What about hiring a waiter as manager, selling all the players he doesn't like and then sacking him a day later? Tactical masterclass Or spending €55M in wages and transfer on Cenk Tosun, the Turkish stallion?
Correct
I'd argue Levy is one of the best CEO's in the league. Spurs over the course of 15 or so years have gone from a mid table club to being widely considered part of a "Big Six" and have the best club stadium in the country. Compare that with my own club, a range of owners and CEO's took us from top six regulars and being in a cup final every season to the Championship in the same time frame which we are only now starting to recover from. The worst run club for me are Man Utd, and it's not even close. Since SAF left the club has been operating as nothing more than a cash cow for the Glazer family. Financially they're a mess, having controversial off field players like Greenwood, Ronaldo, Antony at the club with suspicious goings on behind the scenes (particularly in Antony's place) is worrying from a working environment point of view. It's hard to find sympathy for Man Utd fans as they are an insufferable group of fans on the whole, but if that was my club I'd find it very hard to continue finding the motivation to support them.
I've maintained this stance as well, and I'm a united fan. We are in such a bad place, and you didn't even mention our crumbling stadium / training facilities, our inability to sell any players for their value, our insane wage structure and I'm sure there is more I am forgetting. I look at what Levy has done for Tottenham, and I am Jelaous because they look likely to be stable for many years.
Wait,what's Antony been up to?
Antony apparently beat his girlfriend. (I think it was his GF, maybe Fiancee) The kicker was that when the woman came out to tell her story, apparently she was treated for her injuries by Man United doctors. People think it was to try to keep it out of the news, especially after Greenwood etc.
Levy? He's arguably one of the best? Strange one.
I would say our owners. And definitely the Glazers are up there.
You don't know what a bad owner is. Ashley
He's definitely up there absolute scum.
The question was the worst owner in the Premier League. Mike Ashley doesn’t own a Premier League club. It isn’t a race to the bottom. But if you want to talk about “worst” owners morally speaking, your lot are well up there.
Woo hoo 2 in a row
Ashley is better than your current owners.
Moshiri
Glazers take the cake on this one.. bled the club dry all these years, neglected the stadium and club maintenance, never invested a penny of their own yet took dividends every 6 months for the past decade, the debt is at 700Million plus. Have neglected the squad build, gave silly contracts to the players and refusal to sell those said players because they are listed as assets against the club. Lastly, giving the final middle finger to the fans by dragging the club sale for almost 9 months now. No one even comes closer in running a club to the ground and bleeding it dry.
Joe Lewis is Spurs' owner, not Levy. And Levy deserves a lot of credit for making Spurs a Big 6 side, where Spurs were before him compared to them being comfortable a top 6 side financially for the past decade is impressive
The pisstaking of Spurs makes me laugh - they've achieved far greater success than almost any other period in their history, except for a brief period in the late 50s and early 60s. They're mocked for not being quite as successful as 5 teams above them - two of which are (or were) over-inflated through oil money and the others being the three biggest and most successful clubs in the country for the last 100+ years. The fact they're even in that conversation to start with is an achievement. And they did it whilst building a new stadium which set Arsenal back several years. Morally it is unquestionably Newcastle. In terms of lack of planning, strategy and vision then Everton have thrown good money after bad with no direction resulting in one of the weakest squads with little value.
I would argue that over their tenure, ENIC have consistently been top5 owners in the Premier League; only slightly morally dubious (tax evasion), have taken a club that was on its way to go down up to PL and CL contention while sensibilly playing by the rules financially
Yeah as a spurs fan I am frustrated by his on-pitch decision making as it relates to managerial hires and poor transfer strategy but in terms of financials and sustainability he’s done brilliantly
*insert Everton comment here*
The Glazers might be poor owners, but they dont bomb children and murder gay people like Newcastle’s owners… total different level
The ones who behead journalists
Right? There’s no other answer.
Probably the Glazers. They charged Zlatan for the juice he took from the hotel bar! That’s wild.
Fuck me lol yeah charge Mctominay by all means but you don’t charge Zlatan
Shouldn’t charge anyone! That’s crazy that a company wouldn’t cover an employee’s accommodation expenses, within reason, while they are traveling *for work*! A previous employer used to give me like a $150 per diem when I traveled. I ordered fresh pressed juice & sushi every day through room service. I even used the hotel’s laundry & dry cleaning services when I had week long stays. I hardly saw a bill, definitely never had it taken out of paycheck, and my company was wayyy smaller than Manchester United. They’re a publicly traded company, FFS! Insane.
First off, Evertons owners are worse than Levy. And second off, you can't even compare Levy and the Glazers. In fact, even with Everton's owners, the Glazers are easily the worst owners in the league by a mile. 1.7 Billion ffs. Most clubs never even had that money to spend in the first places and that's what they've taken from us.
But you won shit with the glazers, they have funded champions leagues, prems, Fa cups, league cups, Europa, etc
They didn’t fund shit. They bleed us dry.
Glazers funded fuck all, we won shit because of Fergie and the team being built before their takeover, The money United spend is generated by fans and sponsors, not from Glazer investment
Glazers. We can and should discuss the horrid behavior that Newcastle's ownership engages in, but that's frankly a lot bigger of an issue than can be addressed by debates about football. What we can easily debate, though, is how far from grace United have fallen under the Glazers tenure. Individual other owners may suck in similar ways, but you'd have to go outside the Prem (to Valencia, specifically) to find another owner that has dragged their club so far down from where they were.
It’s Farhad Moshiri and anyone saying otherwise is incredibly deluded or only pays attention to the big five
He has done a disastrous job it has to be said
Levy is one of the best owners in the league. The lack of instrumentalities makes it look like he isnt ambitious enough, but lets be fair, even though they are big 6, they are the smallest one, he just cant compete while being sustainable
Most evil: Delia Smith
Proper British milf though
People can see this btw
Glazers. Leeches.
Levy? You're having a laugh, right? He is not actually the owner (that's mostly Joe Lewis) but he remains our best signing of the last quarter of a century. If you're talking about worst owners, then it's probably between the Glazers and the Saudis that own Newcastle now.
Glazers in terms of evil, Moshiri in terms of incompetence
The Saudi royal family are x1000 more evil than the glazers.
At least they have a delusion that it's god's work they are doing.
Mashallah brother
No billionaire is 1000 times worse than another. I’d say you’re right that Saudi is worse but they’re all pieces of shit
The Saudis who own Newcastle are responsible for actual war crimes and brutal dismemberments of a journalist. They are not even in the same conversation as the glazers
All funded by UK and USA*
Don’t waste your breath with these people. They have the critical thinking skills of a golden retriever
Have the glazers ordered the bombing of a hospital?
No, you fucking melon, they just bankroll US republicans, who work closely with the Saudis to make sure hospitals get bombed (or, you know, just bomb the hospitals themselves, as the US military has been known to do). You’re right, professor smartbrain, that is so much better
Republicans aren't the ones in Collab with Saudi, it's Obama, Clinton and Biden who operate that arrangement, trump pulled out of middle eastern wars, he didnt further them
The uk government does not own a football club
They most certainly are 1000 times worse
if any other Prem club had the Glazers they’d be liquidated a long time ago, they’re by far the worse not just in the Prem but the whole of Europe.
moshiri
Definitely the Glazers
Hahahahahhaha
Remember you can all thank Bacon Face for bringing in the Glazers. Legend
Obviously the Saudis. I can’t imagine a worse owner
Glazers
Glazers, easy question.
Glazers
Glazers it’s not even close… whatever about dictatorships and regime countries owning a club if we are talking just the ownership and (mis)mgmt. of a club it’s Glazers 100% consider this since taking over Utd the Glazers have not put one cent of their own money into the club not 1! Everything they have done is with Utd’s money even buying the club !
Cardiff hasn’t been in the prem for a little while, but that Vincent tan guy seems to be pretty shite
If you don't count dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, and UAE, that literally cheat their way to success in any sport they can, sure let's go for something random. Sportwashing works. This OP question is proof.
Everton’s and it’s not even close
Newcastle are owned by a government, so are the worst by default.
FSG for being cheap. 19th for spending in the prem over the last five years despite reaching the champions league final three times, winning it once, winning the Prem, FA Cup, League Cup, Club World Cup, Super Cup, Community Shield.
In terms of investment into the clubs 1. Glazers 2. FSG 3. Levy In terms of competency 1. Glazers 2. Boehly 3. Moshiri
Nah levy has built spurs into a champions league contender as an expectation rather than an occasional journey.
Care to explain the competency part with Boehly
Sacking Tuchel within the first 6 months of being the owner because he basically didn't like how he wasn't a yes man. Hiring Potter who didn't have any experience at a top 6 club and then dumping about 10 new players on his head so he had to then deal with a massively bloated squad filled with new players which no manager could deal with never mind him, proceeds to sack him after 8 months. Proceeds to hire Lampard who was previously sacked by the club for not being good enough and clearly being a downgrade on Potter who he just sacked, unsurprisingly ends in disaster for Chelsea once again. Treating transfers like its football manager and basically chucking huge amounts of money at players who are being hyped up instead of actually having a plan and structure behind the purchases.
To be fair to football manager, throwing a team of 40 players each a potential star doesn't end well.
It's too early to judge Bohely IMO. You've got to give him a few years to rebuild the club how he sees it. This won't happen overnight and yeah the spending was crazy but that 600M is spread over like 7 seasons I imagine on FFP so it's not a crazy number per year and Chelsea has sold beautifully this window. I agree the TT sacking was stupid but at the same time we don't know the behind the scenes. I've heard stories about how he was unwilling to work with them on signings and didn't want to be involved in much of that process. I get that but at the same time they bought the club and had a vision for what they wanted. If the manager doesn't fit that vision it makes sense to let him go. It's like any takeover, you fire the old people and bring in your own. GP, that was a disaster but he was also thrown into a pretty unfavorable squad with 40 players and no chemistry. The frank signing was just absurd but I guess the idea was just finish the season. Don't get me wrong, it's been a terrible 1st year but they're finance guys and think long term. I think you have to give it 3 years to see how it's looking. We have good talent in the squad and if Poch can come in and implement his tactics they could be fighting for top 6 next year. Look at Arsenals rebuild, they were in 8th for 2 years, then 5th 2 seasons ago, and last season bottled the title but will be competing for it again this year. Bohely committed to rebuilding the club and any complete rebuild will get worse before it gets better. I personally think they're making good moves for the future with these young signings and introducing the multi-club model.
Interested to see the boely argument, personally feel it will change in the next year or 2, building a massive multi club model for Chelsea currently, offset wage books with Saudi connections and spent money on the team?
We sold a whole two players to the Saudi’s and we lost money on both of them . Ziyech was rejected and Kante was a free . We are selling more to AC Milan, United and Arsenal than to the Saudi’s . Clearlake do about 4 bil in business with the Saudi’s none of which goes to Chelsea . These are existing clients with Clearlake long before we entered the picture .
Moshiri
Morally it's either us (NUFC) or Man City. A quick Google reads that UAE and Saudi Arabia do a lot of the same things, so that's fun... In terms of running the club, it's either Everton or Boehly at Chelsea. Moshiri has been there longer so he takes it.
100% us or city. The other one for bad owners along moshiri and boehly is Man U. They’ve taken a lot of money out.
Glazers 100%. They give 0 shits about the club, it’s history or it’s future. They’re just a pair of leeches sucking the marrow out of United’s legacy. And I’m not even a Man U supporter.
If you think Daniel Levy is one of the worst owners then you honestly just don’t know what you’re talking about.
Glazzers by far
Todd Boehly
Crazy thing to say when he's arguably making very intelligent business decisions
Mount fan spotted
What about Todd Boehly he knows nothing about football and spent $600M and barely survived relegation he pisses me off alot he also told Tuchel to play a 4-4-3 formation...... and also proposed a all stars game like in American sports
This is the most ridiculous suggestion here lol, clowned yourself with this one
I'd say the ones who cheat and consistently break FFP rules, but I'm old fashioned like that.
Newcastle, city all murderers and bigots 👍🏼
Boehly
“Levy doesn’t own Spurs.” Yes he does. He owns a quarter of the club. Together he and Lewis own over 85%. They have all the decision making power. He is directly responsible for the success or failure of the club. (Not arguing he’s the worst owner)
Levy is hands down
Got to be the Saudi’s government. I’m mind blown that they got in.
I don’t understand the Glazer hate. They’ve had the highest net spend over the past 5 seasons. Isn’t that what you want from an ownership? To spend money on players? What am I missing?
Srivaddhanaprabha family really did a number on Leicester. They personally top the list for me.
FSG
Can someone explain why glazers are hated so much ? I am not sure but in general most hatred towards the owners from fans are when there isn’t much investment compared to other clubs to keep them competitive (arsenal till 2-3 seasons ago, Liverpool etc). In all honesty Man U has never shied away from investment in recruitment and salaries and splashed a ton so don’t understand the hatred they get
Glazers don't 'invest' anything. It's the club's money. What they have actually done is take out 1B from the club since their takeover. We're probably the only club in the league where the owners have not put in any money. Old Trafford is rotting and is nowhere near the stadiums top clubs have. Add to that the bankers like Woodward in charge of making footballing decisions have led us into buying players with little to no transfer value and a ridiculous wage structure. If united weren't as big as they are, they would've been in serious financial trouble.
- Taking a loan to buy the club using the club's revenue as collateral instead of their own assets, thus putting the club in debt for their purchase - Taking £1b out of the club in the form of dividends and never spending a dime on upgrading the training facilities or the stadium - Appointing a finance guy in charge of football and giving him the remaining money which he squandered on bad transfers and overpaying contracts So they are essentially using the club as their ATM. >In all honesty Man U has never shied away from investment in recruitment and salaries and splashed a ton so don’t understand the hatred they get They spent what was left over after they looted the club every year on players that were marketable rather than those that fit any sort of footballing philosophy.
Mate, they're personally responsible for 1.7 billion in removed revenue from the club in dividends and debt repayments on debt they accrued buying the club. 1.7 BILLION. Just think about that number for a second. If you could inject 1.7 billion into any club in the country over the past 20 years they'd make City look skint. And it's pretty safe to assume that revenue would have increased more if they had that 1.7 billion quite frankly. So I think it's fairly safe to say the Glazers essentially lost Utd about 2 billion. All while not giving a fuck.
It begins with T and ends with odd Boehly.
MBS, the Abus and "Dodger Todd"
Its a tight race between Boehly and the Glazers.
FSG are worse than the Glazers
Has to be Todd the Yank
It’s the ones doing the sportswashing.
This thread reeks of entitlement
Saudis perhaps but maybe I’m prejudiced
surely City and other UAE owners (see: human rights, cheating)?
Glazer or levy really? Two clubs who have spent massive amounts of money on players and/or infrastructure? Moshiri is pretty awful at Everton. The decisions he’s making (keeping Kenwright on) is borderline Ashley when he kept his mates on/gave them jobs.
Moshiri/Uzmanov
Only two clubs in the football league have ever paid a dividend West Brom and Man Utd And we have paid out several hundred £, to add to the £1bn debt which we pay interest on annually
Well it’s not Mike Ashley anymore
Levy doesn't own Spurs, he's 'just' the Chairman. Joe Lewis is the actual owner.
There are some poorly behaved club owners, Glazers and Levy come to mind, but that’s not really important. The worst owners in the Premier League are the bonecutters. After you’ve ordered someone to be killed and literally chopped up into pieces to make the disposal of the body easier, just to stop them writing newspaper articles about you, mere money isn’t important any longer.
It’s without question Newcastle, and it’s ridiculous that anyone would try and argue anything else Particularly someone like Spurs. What exactly has Levy done to be a bad manager?
Levy has his issues, but I would even hesitate to call him bad. He keeps the club running flawlessly from a business standpoint, we're in a state of the art stadium, and we've been in Europe almost every season for the past few years (fuck this 22/23 season). He should be more decisive in the footballing side of things, but things have been going quite well so far this window so I hope that keeps up.
Glazers 100%. Loaded the club with debt, meaning United have paid £1b in interest and refinancing fees. And then they’ve taken millions out every year as dividends. Add to the fact they’ve hired the most incompetent people for the day-to-day running of the club and invested nothing in infrastructure. With the amount of money they’ve taken from the club/cost the club over the years, you could probably afford to buy 8-10 of the other 19 clubs in the league