The good: Sheik Mo
The Bad: Abramowich
The ugly: Glazier.
The good: Sheik Mo has been the head of several companies and the leader of the UEA and has a high standing in the world of business as a leader and a business man.
The bad: Abramowich made his money on the back of the disentigration of the USSR and it partly in a dubious manner. His flight to England was also said to be because of fear of crossing Putin.
The Ugly: Glazier is a typical rich American business man. Invest money to make money. I dont think he has broken many rules, but he isnt as rich as Sheik Mo, and his buying of the mancs has not been seen as a financial wonder, more a very high risk considering he borrowed so much money to do it and left two Irishmen laughing all the way to the bank.
Interest in Football?
The Ugly: Glazier doesnt even know the shape of a real football ! He had probably never heard of the mancs before someone offered him shares. His only interest can be in making money. It has nothing to do with the sport, nor image, nor anything personal, just making money. And that means regular back payments on debts comes first.
The bad: Abramowich is not interested in promoting any business, he has made his money and now is seeing what he can do with it in his free time. He is using Chelsea as a personal play thing. He is interfereing in player politic just the same as happened at Madrid with the galacticos and we all know what happened there….. Anyone who is just in football for personal gain will get bored in the end…
The good: Sheik Mo has allow his company DIC to invest in Liverpool because they were looking around for a historical company that matched their own standards of excellence. Liverpool fitted this image, and buying shares in Liverpool represents a chance to associate DIC with another similar brand. There aims will then be to help Liverpool maintain a high footballing standard, but with a high set of morals. He has no personal vendetta and it is not for direct monetary gain. He want the advertisment of the association. In fact, he wont even be involved in the club too much. The chairman of DIC, who is an avid Liverpool fan, is the one who will liase with the club and such is there understanding of the club that they will probably allow Parry and Moores to still play a part in helping them direct and run the club.
The Good: Sheik Mo will cover our debt making us probably the only debt free club in the league. Dont be fooled by all of these minor 70m takeovers. Most of that cash goes to the Seller and whether it covers the debt of the club and whether there is enough left to buy players is debatable. Liverpool will be at zero, freeing up money otherwise planned as back payments on the debt. We will also get a new stadium which will bring in higher revenues in the next years. NO debt and extra cash to buy players. If The sheik ever got bored with it,he would probably sell it back to Moores and that would be the end of the matter.
The Bad: Chelski have no debt? Well, technically, no. Okay, Abramowich covers everything, but, the point is, they are operating at the biggest loss in world footballing history. There income is about the level of Bolton and their outgoings is the combination of the whole of the G14. That means if Abramowich gets bored, it is bye bye Chelsea. It has happened to teams before and will happen again. The sponsor pulls the plug, the team cant support itself and implodes Leeds style.
The Ugly. Weather the mancs have a debt is unknown to me, but fact is, Glazier (and therefore the mancs) have a 250 m debt, made specifically in buying the club. As he is US business man, if the mancs fail to get in the champions league, or keep having more trophyless years, Galzier will find it harder and harder to pay back the money without damaging the club, and alrthough he is too clever to stay to the bitter end where the both go into recievership, he will cut and dash to cut his losses and lick his wounds. The mancs will be damaged, maybe like Juventus this year, and will be in turmoil, looking for another buyer to dig them out of the hole Glazier made for them. After all, when he sells it, he will get the money, NOT the club, they will just be left with the debt.
The good: Thank goodness we havbe waited and made a great choice and dont have the potentialproblems of the other two.
The bad: How long will Abramowich play ball?
The Ugly: Can the mancs keep up the back payments AND buy players? A jjuggling act that isnt that secure.