Guardian: Manchester United lose £200m training kit deal over fans’ anti-Glazers campaign

[RUCK4444]

You would of gotten coverage if the match was delayed as per the Chelsea fans protest. That got coverage globally. Did not need to break into the stadium.

Also again, brands worried about boycotts has come after people have actually started threatening to actually boycott all the brands and smashing up reviews online.

Nah a few fans outside old Trafford being moved along by a former player like Chelski’s fans were would not have gotten the game cancelled for a start.

The chaos they caused that day made the threat to sponsors real, their now obligated to take it seriously as a result.

 

[Spoony]

Nah a few fans outside old Trafford being moved along by a former player the Chelski’s fans were would not have gotten the game cancelled for a start.

The chaos they caused that day made the threat to sponsors real, their now obligated to take it seriously as a result.

Yes, it created publicity... otherwise fans trying to boycott sponsors and sullying companies' names wouldn't have had anywhere the same effect.

 

[stw2022]

We’re all getting ahead of ourselves though, myself included.

I very much doubt the story is even true. I don’t think global brands are that affected by what are small scale protests. It isn’t as if it’s has a particularly noticeable impact. If it ever trended on social media it can’t have been for long as I’ve never seen it outside of specifically looking for it.

This is the biggest media footprint it has and looks suspiciously like propaganda fed to sympathetic journalists extolling its own success in a way that’s suspiciously unquantifiable

 

[Bilbo]

I think a season of this could have them doing a runner. They don't care about anything other than making monies.

Yes, and they would sell to the first bidder regardless of what their intentions for the club may be. Another heavily leveraged buyout is a very real possibility.

We are playing craps with the club here. We might roll a 12 and win big, but we are more likely to roll a 7. I'd be fine with all of this if everyone was more open about this being a gamble. What triggers me into posting here is those that are acting like the potential saviours of the club when in fact this whole thing is, at best, a leap into the unknown and at worst completely reckless.

 

[Zen86]

Yes, and they would sell to the first bidder regardless of what their intentions for the club may be. Another heavily leveraged buyout is a very real possibility.

We are playing craps with the club here. We might roll a 12 and win big, but we are more likely to roll a 7. I'd be fine with all of this if everyone was more open about this being a gamble. What triggers me into posting here is those that are acting like the potential saviours of the club when in fact this whole thing is, at best, a leap into the unknown and at worst completely reckless.

The likelihood is that new owners would be worse. Bigger valuation, bigger purchase, bigger dividends.

 

[Champ]

We’re all getting ahead of ourselves though, myself included.

I very much doubt the story is even true. I don’t think global brands are that affected by what are small scale protests. It isn’t as if it’s has a particularly noticeable impact. If it ever trended on social media it can’t have been for long as I’ve never seen it outside of specifically looking for it.

This is the biggest media footprint it has and looks suspiciously like propaganda fed to sympathetic journalists extolling its own success in a way that’s suspiciously unquantifiable

I haven't seen any other media outlets run with the story yet, I could be wrong.
But if so it looks like a non entity of a story.

 

[Spoony]

I haven't seen any other media outlets run with the story yet, I could be wrong.
But if so it looks like a non entity of a story.

The Guardian, Mail, Bloomberg and two others have covered it.

 

[Drawfull]

We’re all getting ahead of ourselves though, myself included.

I very much doubt the story is even true. I don’t think global brands are that affected by what are small scale protests. It isn’t as if it’s has a particularly noticeable impact. If it ever trended on social media it can’t have been for long as I’ve never seen it outside of specifically looking for it.

This is the biggest media footprint it has and looks suspiciously like propaganda fed to sympathetic journalists extolling its own success in a way that’s suspiciously unquantifiable

The issue with this sponsorship is that they're a Manchester company. I agree a global, non-UK brand would be less affected or less concerned, but they're in JJ's words, conscious of the local problems negative publicity could cause them.

 

[stw2022]

I haven't seen any other media outlets run with the story yet, I could be wrong.
But if so it looks like a non entity of a story.

Agreed, hours later no other outlet except one journalist happy to be MUSTs mouthpiece has even reported on it

Seems legit

 

[Spoony]

The issue with this sponsorship is that they're a Manchester company. I agree a global, non-UK brand would be less affected or less concerned, but they're in JJ's words, conscious of the local problems negative publicity could cause them.

We've got a few UK based sponsors.

 

[He'sRaldo]

I remember Arsenal fans a few years back were 100% convinced that anyone else was better than Wenger and that they'd rather risk top 4, get things toxic, and get Wenger out. At the end of the day they were wrong, there was a lot farther to fall, and now they're currently 10th in the league with a bunch of random youngsters and mercenaries, a clueless manager, and a swiftly fading relevance.

I see us in a similar situation not necessarily in terms of outcome, but in terms of risk where no one truly knows what will happen, but regardless many are convinced it will be a more positive scenario than our current one. And I guess there is also a segment of people willing to accept a similar or even worse fall from grace (relegation) as long as we get rid of the Glazers in the process.

 

[vanrooney]

Would be terrible if true. What’s the gain for us fans? That there is less money for the team? The glazers won’t sell because of such things and even if they would sell who guarantees a better owner.

 

[Lappen]

If this is a true story it could be a start. If one start to question the profit with sponsoring, others will follow.... agents will use this in the negotiations and player starts to question if they want to be a part of the turbulence...
Stop buying the merchandise if you wants some change.
Looking forward to chapter two...

Non-violence protests please.

 

[Withnail]

Agreed, hours later no other outlet except one journalist happy to be MUSTs mouthpiece has even reported on it

Seems legit

Google it. It's all over the place.

 

[stw2022]

The issue with this sponsorship is that they're a Manchester company. I agree a global, non-UK brand would be less affected or less concerned, but they're in JJ's words, conscious of the local problems negative publicity could cause them.

Assuming United didn’t leak this then it must have been the company. If so why not provide a source or a quote or an anonymous inside view.

The ONLY thing we have in the article is confirmation that there are no talks ongoing. I’m not currently in negotiations with Apple so you could claim you’ve prevented me getting a £200m sponsorship from them?

That last paragraph in the article is buried for a reason as it exposes it for being nonsense

“Both THG and United declined to comment, with those familiar with the deal at Old Trafford confirming there are no ongoing talks”

 

[Highfather_24]

Just wait and watch. They are gonna put out a hitpiece about how this has caused them not spending in transfers this season, effectively blaming the fans.

That will create a further divide between the fans, seperating them into the moderates and the extremists. As they keep bickering among each other about what is the correct course of action and who's to blame...

The glazers happily keep leeching off our club and our rivals jump ahead of us and secure important signings like Haaland, Rice and Sancho.

 

[Lappen]

Would be terrible if true. What’s the gain for us fans? That there is less money for the team? The glazers won’t sell because of such things and even if they would sell who guarantees a better owner.

Short term loss for a long term profit...

 

[stw2022]

Google it. It's all over the place.

They’re reporting it’s being reported there’s a difference. There’s no other reporting than the report.

 

[justsomebloke]

I haven't seen any other media outlets run with the story yet, I could be wrong.
But if so it looks like a non entity of a story.

Well, it's The Guardian. It's not like it's some rumour on a shit website.

They’re reporting it’s being reported there’s a difference. There’s no other reporting than the report.

That's pretty much how it always works.

 

[Spoony]

Google it. It's all over the place.

Foreign sites as well.

 

[Withnail]

They’re reporting it’s being reported there’s a difference. There’s no other reporting than the report.

Ok mate, and journalists who write for papers like the Guardian write bullshit pieces that aren't sourced.

 

[stw2022]

Just wait and watch. They are gonna put out a hitpiece about how this has caused them not spending in transfers this season, effectively blaming the fans.

That will create a further divide between the fans, seperating them into the moderates and the extremists. As they keep bickering among each other about what is the correct course of action and who's to blame...

The glazers happily keep leeching off our club and our rivals jump ahead of us and secure important signings like Haaland, Rice and Sancho.

Maybe but demanding millions are spent whilst at the same time campaigning to restrict income isn’t the most logical of positions

 

[stw2022]

Ok mate, and journalists who write for papers like the Guardian write bullshit pieces that aren't sourced.

It’s sourced but MUST is the source

The whole article is a fluff piece about how effective the campaign is. It’s a great piece of propaganda that’s not that well disguised

 

[vanrooney]

Short term loss for a long term profit...

really hope so but it would only be a profit imo if we would get a fan with money as owner in the end

 

[passing-wind]

Sponsorships are made to sell products to club fans and to develop the brand awareness

A targeted attack like this is the most effective. Each big sponsor will run away from the club as soon as possible

This is a key point it's nothing more than commercial consumer marketing through brand influence. I've said for years that fans cannot be passive going to games, purchasing merchandise, supporting club initiatives and still moaning about the Glazers despite lining their pockets.

The fans have to take a hard stand and causing financial constraints will raise the recognition of issue to any owner of a sporting establishment. Look how the pandemic has effected the damaging of the footballing economy through restriction of simply attending games. The fans will always have the most influence to a clubs success.

 

[stw2022]

What triggers me into posting here is those that are acting like the potential saviours of the club when in fact this whole thing is, at best, a leap into the unknown and at worst completely reckless.

Quote of the thread

 

[justsomebloke]

Assuming United didn’t leak this then it must have been the company. If so why not provide a source or a quote or an anonymous inside view.

The ONLY thing we have in the article is confirmation that there are no talks ongoing. I’m not currently in negotiations with Apple so you could claim you’ve prevented me getting a £200m sponsorship from them?

That last paragraph in the article is buried for a reason as it exposes it for being nonsense

“Both THG and United declined to comment, with those familiar with the deal at Old Trafford confirming there are no ongoing talks”

Sorry, but that's nonsense. This is just normal journalism. If you have a good source giving you information that checks out, you print. You don't have to post hard evidence, or attributable quotes. What carries it is your credibility as a news source, which is why you never print something unless you feel confident it's accurate.

For the same reason, no one would be remotely interested in any claim by you that you're being prevented from signing a sponsorship deal with Apple.

 

[Withnail]

It’s sourced but MUST is the source

Where does it say that?

Besides, they don't write stories without strong proof or corroboration from multiple sources.

 

[crossy1686]

Short term loss for a long term profit...

What's the long term profit? Losing £200m to make back £20m a season, even though the Glazers have no intention of selling? I don't believe they pulled out over the protest, more likely pandemic hitting their business and them seeing an opportunity to renege on an agreement. I don't see how the club losing £200m is a good thing for anyone involved.

 

[Spoony]

It’s sourced but MUST is the source

The whole article is a fluff piece about how effective the campaign is. It’s a great piece of propaganda that’s not that well disguised

Whether it is or isn't, the campaign has gathered publicity/steam. We'll just have to wait and see how it ends. Anyway, I suspect the story is true The Hut group are from Manchester...so they'd hate the negative publicity.

 

[stw2022]

Where does it say that?

Besides, they don't write stories without strong proof or corroboration from multiple sources.

In the article please identify these multiple sources for me.

 

[crossy1686]

The likelihood is that new owners would be worse. Bigger valuation, bigger purchase, bigger dividends.

Finally, someone that understands how big business works.

There's not a billionaire in the world that made a billion dollars by giving it away to a football club and expecting absolutely nothing back in return. People need to wake the feck up.

 

[Drifter]

And Ed Woodward was so looking forward to that. Pesky fans.

 

[Relevated]

Some people in this thread are so naive that their wife could be fecking another dude right in front of them, but she'd assure she wasn't cheating whilst continuing, and they'd believe her.

 

[Roboc7]

The Glazers want fans to sit back, shut up and keep spending. Doing the minimum to keep that happening is the balancing act. Top four as often as possible and next year will be better is what they hope everyone will accept. Winning titles, investing in stadium etc aren’t on the agenda.

Much like when we fail to qualify for Champions League all this pressure is more likely to make them spend to try and put this to bed.

 

[justsomebloke]

In the article please identify these multiple sources for me.

You often don't identify your sources in the article. The reason being that if you did, they wouldn't consent to being sources, and you'd only be able to write about stuff companies or people chose to go public with themselves. Again, this is perfectly normal journalism.

 

[Falcow]

Great news. Hopefully that means we cant afford Harry Kane in the summer and then relegation the next step....fantastic.

 

[Tallis]

Nobody is assuming that.

"Better the devil you know" becomes a little bit meaningless when your owners conspired to setup a super league which could well have decimated the English football pyramid, though.

We're already on course for everything the club stands for being obliterated. Is that just passing you by or what?

So what exactly is the plan here if you’re not taking for granted that we will find a Kosher owner ?

The saudis or Peter Lim will restore everything that the club stands for ?

 

[Stuoxford]

Like a few fans on this site, I don’t see the positives of this announcement. Unless your lucky, most owners will want a return on an investment. So unless the new owners are a Middle Eastern country or a Russian oligarch, obviously we will ignore possible human right’s abuses, you will end up with something similar.
So sponsors drop out, we have less money and can’t compete for top players. Therefore any advancements made by Ole will disappear as players do what they’ve always done-follow the money.

 

[Spoony]

The saudis or Peter Lim will restore everything that the club stands for ?

Its easy to feel outraged.

No...but City's owners for example have spent millions in East Manchester. Who knows? if we do end getting bought by an oil state they may start investing in the local area as well. Surely a good thing for Manchester?