Oh dear!

Oh dear!

>ole's at the wheel

Attached: The city of united.jpg (670x651, 132K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes'_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs
bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48145285
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Hi r.eddit!

Not even close

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbes'_list_of_the_most_valuable_football_clubs

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-05-03 at 5.43.20 AM.png (804x1350, 230K)

How does it feel being mentally challenged?

>tf
>tp

>buy club
>want to pump shitloads of money in
>FFP says no
>pay shitloads of money to family members
>their businesses 'sponsor' you for a shitload of money
>spend shitloads of money
>FFP not broken

Probably the best owner ever.

Attached: aguero time.jpg (362x440, 85K)

except he's right, you mentally retarded shitheads
whatever dogshit metric this "new study" is using is objectively wrong

bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48145285

>To calculate their data, the university took into account revenue, profits, non-recurring costs, average profits on player sales over a three-year period, net assets, wage control and proportion of seats sold.

>The research says City are top due to a combination of "higher revenue and lower wages". They made £39m in profit from player sales at the beginning of last season, "removing some high earners from the wage bill".

>"The ownership model of Sheikh Mansour, which effectively means that the club is debt free, means that there are no loan interest costs and no dividends are paid to shareholders either," the study added.

>United came third, behind Real Madrid and Barcelona, in Deloitte's list of the world's richest clubs published in January - but that is just based on revenue.

Attached: fuck me.png (888x595, 61K)

>over a three-year period

instantly discredited as intentional skewing of margins and numbers, thus making the American right and the study wrong
thanks for proving my point, retard

Attached: ERDATICATENIGGERS.gif (300x225, 3.8M)

wasn't even attempting to argue with you, daft cunt

just providing the metrics used

yeah the metrics that are an intentional misrepresentation of the facts, to smear Man Utd, because the press can no longer attack Sterling

thanks for proving my point, retard

>schalke

>provide source because you're a lazy cunt who won't look it up himself
>apparently this is a sign I'm getting involved in the argument

>Showing the massive turn around of the club since Pep's arrival is misrepresentation
kys paki

Attached: average_english_manchester_united_supporter.png (1334x750, 2.58M)

you didnt provide any source
you copy and pasted some lines from a BBC article

the fact that the article says "United had the highest revenue in the league at £590m, with City second on £500m" is literally counter to the entire articles point
City are not more valuable than United, and never will be
Maybe Mansour is worth than the Glazers, but the club is hollow and so are its """finances"""

>Showing the massive turn..since Pep's
>club has been in arab hands for 10 years now

Attached: squint.gif (245x200, 752K)

>the club is hollow and so are its """finances"""
They were initially, but city could find genuine big sponsorship deals now.

>green text three years
>implies the club isn't a well run oiled machine now instead of a club overpaying for arsenal shitters
You pakis are the ones overpaying for arsenal shitters now lmao
>Still, given he earns a £75,000 bonus for every first-team start, Sanchez has earned £2.25million just for being named in 30 XIs in all competitions.
>In addition to his bonuses, Sanchez is said to rake in £391,000 a week as a basic salary. That means the Chilean has earned £25,806,000 before bonuses.
>With Sanchez’s basic salary (£391,000 per week) plus his starting bonus (£2.25million for 30 starts), the attacker has cost United: £10,288 per minute on the pitch, or £171 per second.
>Football Leaks says Sanchez stands to make £2m for reaching a combination of 40 goals and assists. Almost a season and half into his United career, in all competitions, he has only five goals and nine assists.
>Factoring in Sanchez’s basic wage and his starting bonus, the 30-year-old has cost United over £5.6million per goal.

W...W...W...We're still relevant.

>Forbes
>Trusting kike media

>city could find genuine big sponsorship deals


not arguing that
arguing that Cities finances are fake
bar Mansour from the UK and the club is gone, just like Chelsea
You really think Aguero is on less a year than Suarez?

Attached: file.png (255x75, 29K)

United needed one of Jones or Smalling to develop into world class defenders to remain relevant. United have not had a good defence since Ferdinand and Vidic retired. They took a gamble on promising english youth and it failed to pay off for them, unlike Stones at City.

>to develop into
mate, theyre 27 and 29
theyre not developing anything

They weren't when they signed them, retard.