alexthelion
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2019
- Messages
- 3,835
Don't agree with trying to destroy the club just to be rid of the owners. Very short-sighted.They've got to choose their bedfellows well. No pity on my part here.
Don't agree with trying to destroy the club just to be rid of the owners. Very short-sighted.They've got to choose their bedfellows well. No pity on my part here.
What, ruin the prospects of us getting a decent sponsor?
Another brilliant idea from the Glazers out at any cost.
Like any new owner wouldn't do that anyway.The way I see it, with the Glazers around, the club is dead anyway. Within the next 10-20 years, if they still own United, I'd be willing to bet the club will be in some version of an ESL style competition and I'll just be some old man watching old clips of "legacy" football on Youtube.
Don't agree with trying to destroy the club just to be rid of the owners. Very short-sighted.
Trying to get sponsors to pull out, thereby reducing our income massively, and possibly reducing any chance of getting future sponsors sounds suspiciously like trying to ruin the club to me.Don't think it's a "trying to destroy" the club thing. You can speculate that no one will touch us after this, as I can speculate that there's no chance of that.
It could ruin not just the club but the league the champions league, if sponsors think us fans are to volatil to deal with, which could work in our favour with the other clubs pressuring them to sell up before they feck the whole thing for everyone.Trying to get sponsors to pull out, thereby reducing our income massively, and possibly reducing any chance of getting future sponsors sounds suspiciously like trying to ruin the club to me.
Why?Personally, I think those targeting innocent sponsors are the scum, imo.
As long as none of them moan about Ole out, new players, money for transfers etc when the club is going down the drain.Why?
The entire football industry is built on the fans. No fans = no revenue. The fans have every right to express their views, especially when companies are doing business with dodgy owners just to get exposure to the fanbase.
Like any new owner wouldn't do that anyway.
The club has been going down the drain regardless, world record sponsorships or not. The key is getting the Glazers out rather than worrying about transfers. I'll take United in League 2 without the Glazers over what we are seeing now.As long as none of them moan about Ole out, new players, money for transfers etc when the club is going down the drain.
Personally, I think those targeting innocent sponsors are the scum, imo.
Jesus wept.Personally, I think those targeting innocent sponsors are the scum, imo.
Unbelievable. It’s okay for the club you ‘support’ to be pillaged for 16 years though. Weird logic.won't somebody please think of thechildrensponsors.
So if it doesn't work short term you aren't willing to consider it?
Seems like long term you are destined to fail with that attitude. You are naive if you think they will just up and leave after a few protests.
We have had these owners for 16 years since 2005. I think we need to start thinking 4 years ahead if required. So yes, boycotting or influencing sponsors is a perfectly viable strategy.
The club has stated looking up the last couple or so years.The club has been going down the drain regardless, world record sponsorships or not. The key is getting the Glazers out rather than worrying about transfers. I'll take United in League 2 without the Glazers over what we are seeing now.
Pillaged?Unbelievable. It’s okay for the club you ‘support’ to be pillaged for 16 years though. Weird logic.
Which is fecking stupid, it's cutting your nose off to spite your face.Brilliant idea.
Those of you saying this will cripple us financially - that's the point! The Glazers clearly won't engage with the fans, nor do they seem to care about the outrage they've caused, the only way to scare these parasites is to affect their bottom line. Strive towards making the ownership for them completely untenable.
And to those saying this will permanently cripple us even in a post-Glazer climate - we're a huge global footballing name with reportedly a billion fans, you really think we won't have sponsors come back in a remedied atmosphere?
And to those saying this will permanently cripple us even in a post-Glazer climate - we're a huge global footballing name with reportedly a billion fans, you really think we won't have sponsors come back in a remedied atmosphere?
What do you think they’ve done? How much money was taken out in dividends and how much money was paid out in interest to the debt they saddled us with?Pillaged?
Good, because you and others who want to seriously damage the club I've supported for over 50 years can stick your stupid ideas where the sun don't shine.What do you think they’ve done? How much money was taken out in dividends and how much money was paid out in interest to the debt they saddled us with?
You’re on ignore before I get banned. I actually find you reprehensible.
The global fanbase couldn't fecking care less
We've improved, yes, but we're still a million miles off winning the big trophies. What tends to happen after we finish 2nd is a very underwhelming transfer window, where the Glazers tighten the purse and all progress is lost. It will be interesting this summer to see how ambitious the club wants to be. What is pretty certain is that the Glazers will continue to find creative ways to take money out of the club.The club has stated looking up the last couple or so years.
Seeing us in League 2 just to be rid of the Glazers is pathetic.
I don't think that's true.
I've lived in the middle east, Africa and Singapore (as well as England and obviously Ireland), and I've met fans in each of those places who love the club and care deeply about it's issues.
One of the most fanatical Glazer Out fans I've ever met is a Singaporean.
Based on what exactly? If we do end up forcing the Glazers out then it would set a precedent that would hopefully deter any future owner who means to run the club as the Glazers have - a cash cow for which they shamelessly riddle it with debt as they take billions out of it. You don't see PSG, City and Chelsea fans wanting to force their owners out and for good reason too, United fans won't take similar drastic action if the club is at the very at least allowed to use its own revenue to invest in the club instead of siphoning it off for huge interest payments to pay off huge loans, all the while paying off the same owners in dividends.Which is fecking stupid, it's cutting your nose off to spite your face.
There's no guarantee new owners will be better, they'll probably be worse and any potential sponsors will think twice in case some "supporters" decide to kick off again.
I get that you're prepared to damage the club to get what you want, I'm not.
sorry and i am no fan of the glazers but they took over in 2005 and in fact we were the best team in the world afterwards in 2008. and we are not too far away now. also its a myth that there is not enough money made avalable for the team. we invested enough in the last years but only since ole the money is well spent. so in fact i can see us geting to the top again under the glazers also.
of course i would be glad if we had owners who cared more for the club and not the business but thats a naive wish. there are only two types of owners left nowadays - business men and rich people that use their club as their toys.
As I've said in my previous reply - I think any prospective owner wouldn't be as naive as to think they'd be able to run the club as the Glazers have and expect a smooth ride of it. If we had ownership similar to that of PSG and City then I'd almost guarantee there'd be little to no outrage from the fanbase (assuming they don't do something like rename Old Trafford after a middle eastern airline or something similar). I'd wager all fans really want is an ownership that at at the very least allows what's already a very lucrative club to invest in itself, not cripple it with debts, interest repayments and push it towards a US style franchise approach to sports.Why would they?
They will need to have some guarantee that we actually like the new owners... . So that will take years.
Also whose is going to buy a club for couple billion where fans want to plummet the value if they don't like you. Especially since we are second in the league, in a European final and finally have a good young squad that can challenge for a couple years. I mean if fans under those conditions want you gone, you are probably going to think twice to buy that club.
Oh come on, be realistic. Who in their right mind is going to fork out £4bn, probably with loans that make the Glazers' one look like pocket change and not expect a healthy return on their investment.Based on what exactly? If we do end up forcing the Glazers out then it would set a precedent that would hopefully deter any future owner who means to run the club as the Glazers have - a cash cow for which they shamelessly riddle it with debt as they take billions out of it. You don't see PSG, City and Chelsea fans wanting to force their owners out and for good reason too, United fans won't take similar drastic action if the club is at the very at least allowed to use its own revenue to invest in the club instead of siphoning it off for huge interest payments to pay off huge loans, all the while paying off the same owners in dividends.
The club is already damaged. We've gone from being debt free to still being half a billion in debt, even 16 years after the take over. Old Trafford is an ailing relic devoid of investment, our facilities and club infrastructure is a joke compared to what's happening at the East side of Manchester, and that's not even going into how these scumbags even had the audacity to try and kill our game with their disgraceful spearheading of the ESL initiative.
If you're willing to passively sit by and put up with the status quo then its you who's willing to damage the club going forward.
Personally, I think those targeting innocent sponsors are the scum, imo.
Don't agree with trying to destroy the club just to be rid of the owners. Very short-sighted.
Oh come on, be realistic. Who in their right mind is going to fork out £4bn, probably with loans that make the Glazers' one look like pocket change and not expect a healthy return on their investment.
Of course City/Chelsea/PSG don't want their oil murderers kicked out, why would they? They've turned them from non-entities to top[ teams with the £billions of blood money they've poured in. Is that what we want, to be a plaything of a murderous arab regime? Because it's likely to be that or someone that will make the Glazers look benevolent by comparison.
The irony of this bloke commenting "short sighted" isn't lost on anyone hopefullyDon't agree with trying to destroy the club just to be rid of the owners. Very short-sighted.
Indeed nothing more long sighted than risking the clubs long term financial success based on an assumption we’ll be bought by a generous billionaire that we presumably plan to pull from someone’s assThe irony of this bloke commenting "short sighted" isn't lost on anyone hopefully
£4B -- what sort of returns would an owner expect? Its not exactly US T-bonds so the risk /reward has to be much higher -- say 5-10% per annum? How much of that will be stripped off our expenses incl transfer budget?