Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
One journo in an Irish weekend paper said recently they hadn't a pot to piss in and that the money from the show boat had gone off some interest on their massive loans.It the only paper I've seen it mentioned in though but you never know.IMO The Journo's are the same as the Refs and the FA,don't want to piss Fergie off too much so the truth rarely gets out too often.Irish papers are maybe more likely to be closer to the truth for that reason.
There's no way, with £700m of debts and huge interest payments, coupled with the worldwide financial climate, that they'd allow him to spend £80m in the market. IMO of course. But i'm convinced of that.
Just a quick question... not aimed at you Craig but at anyone..
Didn't Mr. Ferguson recently (in one of his rants about crazy market forces) complain about Aguero for 50? Million and Villa for 55? Million or vice versa? Was he just referring to their buy out clauses (although I thought Villa's was something crazy like 100) or did he actually enquire about them? If so then maybe he has SOME money but not crazy money so won't pay inflated prices?
I think that's likely. I doubt he'd have been given none of the Ronaldo fee. But i'd equally be surprised if he got more than half of it.
In which case, if he'd been given £40m to spend, it would explain why he'd be fuming that Aguero at £50m and Villa at £55m would've been frustratingly outside of his price range.
It'd also explain why he went for Valencia over someone much better.
Comment