All change of ownership and Red Knights related posts here please

A1Dan said:
That's right. Which is why we've ended up in this situation with the Glazers - it was always a possibility, all the way back through the Edwards and the PLC.

This is precisely what MUST want to see changed going forwards, sot hat the long-term future of the club is secured, without the possibility of an unwelcome take-over being possible in future. Yes it's new, and yes it is very, very desirable.

No, we don't have details of how MUST, or the Red Knights propose to set this up yet, and it clearly isn't simple. But it isn't impossible either, both of those parties are working on it and that is to be applauded.
Click to expand...

What sort of power do MUST expect with the Red Knights?
They'll get exactly the same sort of power that companies afford unions.
A big mouthpiece to go blah blah blah all they like but when the people disagree with the owners, the owners will do what they want anyway.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
Like i said, i'd like to see how that'd go in court. Tell me, why are you clutching at straws, again?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't go to court. It would be settled out of court.

MUST hasn't thus far taken legal action for defamation, but personally I don't see why their volunteers should have to put up with the sort of lies that people like yourself spout. Especially as MUST have considerable legal backing and cases like this are so easy to settle these days.
 
I'm glad some fans are being critical thinkers and are talking about this from both sides. Facts are few on both sides of the argument, I do believe that parties are spreading disinformation ... dodgy or misled individuals (that's all it takes) from all camps (MUST, Glazers, etc...).

As far as I can tell, MUST is a good thing but that doesn't mean that everything they do should not be questioned. I wan't the Glazers out or at least I wan't them to pay of the debt and stop price increases but the thought of ending up in a worse situation scares me. The RK seems like a pipe dream at the moment (at best) and a recipe for disaster (at worst). I just don't see how 50+ owners can all be on the same page. Then there are disagreements, agendas, fallouts ... :eek:

I'm glad that Gill and Ferguson are still about because (call me naive) I trust them and at least they have the clubs interests at heart, like us.

Flame shields, ON!

The fans have an option now that on paper looks like an improvement to our situation, I think we should keep an open mind though as it's not perfect.
 
afrocentricity said:
The RK seems like a pipe dream at the moment (at best) and a recipe for disaster (at worst). I just don't see how 50+ owners can all be on the same page. Then there are disagreements, agendas, fallouts ... :eek:
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be 50 if MUST were involved. It would be around 150,000. And they'd manage the same way that we managed as a Plc. Or how Bayern, Barca and Madrid manage. The owners don't all have a say in the day-to-day running of the club. You elect a board who run the club. Don't let David Gill's little comment at Soccerex pull the wool over your eyes on that one.
 
I hadn't heard Gills comments so no wool being pulled. He seems to hold the same doubts as me then, reinforcing them. Let's hope we are wrong and you are right because as of now that's the only option....
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
What sort of power do MUST expect with the Red Knights?
They'll get exactly the same sort of power that companies afford unions.
A big mouthpiece to go blah blah blah all they like but when the people disagree with the owners, the owners will do what they want anyway.
Click to expand...

Well that would be a big step forwards from today's situation.

I don't know if the Unions analogy fully works, but various legistlation (though eroded over the last 30 years) means that they do have influence on the employers. Obviously there is no such legislation with MUST, but if they had a similar level of influence it would be one hell of a lot better than the current regime's total isolation and refusal to engage with fans.
 
ralphie88 said:
It wouldn't go to court. It would be settled out of court.

MUST hasn't thus far taken legal action for defamation, but personally I don't see why their volunteers should have to put up with the sort of lies that people like yourself spout. Especially as MUST have considerable legal backing and cases like this are so easy to settle these days.
Click to expand...

Your off your head if you think i can be sued for expressing my opinions. You think that everything you say about the Glazers is ok, because... well... well that's just ok because it's the Glazers and it's all true - but as soon as someone calls into question the motives of your precious MUST, you think they should be sued, because... well... well because it's MUST and it's all lies. Take the fecking blinkers off and listen to yourself.
 
ralphie88 said:
It wouldn't be 50 if MUST were involved. It would be around 150,000. And they'd manage the same way that we managed as a Plc. Or how Bayern, Barca and Madrid manage. The owners don't all have a say in the day-to-day running of the club. You elect a board who run the club. Don't let David Gill's little comment at Soccerex pull the wool over your eyes on that one.
Click to expand...

No, don't be silly Ralphie - nobody at MUST or the RKs has given any thought to how 50 / 150,000 owners would run the club. Once they are in they are just going to play it by ear and whoever shouts loudest wins - there are no plans for any kind of structure.

Or that's what you'd think from the number of people who post on here claiming that there's no possible way for many people to own a company and run it succesfully.
 
A1Dan said:
Well that would be a big step forwards from today's situation.

I don't know if the Unions analogy fully works, but various legistlation (though eroded over the last 30 years) means that they do have influence on the employers. Obviously there is no such legislation with MUST, but if they had a similar level of influence it would be one hell of a lot better than the current regime's total isolation and refusal to engage with fans.
Click to expand...

My point is that the workers have no real power to drive strategy, it's the management. In our case, instead of workers and management, you've got supporters and owners.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
but as soon as someone calls into question the motives of your precious MUST, you think they should be sued, because... well... well because it's MUST and it's all lies. Take the fecking blinkers off and listen to yourself.
Click to expand...

I think this whole libel thing's become a tedious red herring that just allows you to spout off more, so I'd advise Ralphie to leave it. But on the specifics of the above post, what vague shred of evidence do you have that MUST have some kind of hidden agenda, financial or otherwise?

If you'd been paying the slightest bit of attention over the last decade or so, you'd have seen how Shareholders United grew in response to a direct percieved threat to the club, and you'd understand that those involved in setting it up and running it have one sole interest - the good of the club they love. The fact that it is a voluntary NFP organisation is indesputable (probably why Ralphie gets so worked up by your lies and starts talking about libel).

You may disagree with how they go about things, you may even think that the Glazers offer the perfect future for the club, and MUSt are totally mislead, btu please either offer one shred of evidence that they are on the make and deliberately decieving fans, or stop claiming this to be so.
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
My point is that the workers have no real power to drive strategy, it's the management. In our case, instead of workers and management, you've got supporters and owners.
Click to expand...

Yes, but their views can be taken into account, and in more progressive companies they are.

In the specific case of our situation, there is also the fact that, regardless of short-term influence, a major point of giving fans a degree of ownership is to make it legally impossible for the club to again be sold against their will.
 
Did anyone hear Duncan Drasdos interview on the RedCafe podcast the other week.

He comes across really well, covers all the points the he can be expected to cover and clearly has the best interest of the club at heart.
 
gaffs said:
Did anyone hear Duncan Drasdos interview on the RedCafe podcast the other week.
Click to expand...

We should put together some kind of list of questions to ask him and email them off or email to see if that would be ok, I'm sure he'd be willing to answer to help get their message across...and would allow doubters like ciderman an opportunity to ask questions regarding their doubts
 
A1Dan said:
I think this whole libel thing's become a tedious red herring that just allows you to spout off more, so I'd advise Ralphie to leave it.
Click to expand...

The libel's not against me Aidan, so it's not up to me whether to leave it or not. But I don't intend on posting anymore about it on here.
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
What sort of power do MUST expect with the Red Knights? They'll get exactly the same sort of power that companies afford unions. A big mouthpiece to go blah blah blah all they like but when the people disagree with the owners, the owners will do what they want anyway.
Click to expand...

I assume you have been privy to the negotiations between MUST and the Red Knights UnitedRoadRed. Care to give us any more tit-bits of information on how the ownership structure would work? Cheers. :rolleyes:
 
Instead if getting on ciders back, why not help him address some of his queries? I would if I could....

For instance , what's this 'Reds in Business' link?
 
afrocentricity said:
For instance , what's this 'Reds in Business' link?
Click to expand...

It's an organisation set up through MUST about a year ago to get wealthy (and not-so-wealthy) businessmen who support United together. Because the more of these we can get together, the better our chances of getting a decent stake in the club. How many (if indeed any) of the Red Knights are members of Reds in Business we don't know because they've not yet revealed who they are. To suggest this makes Reds in Business some kind of sinister shadowy organisation is ridiculous.
 
Well put Ciderman, it certainly looks like MUST have hitched their trailer to
the "Red knights " .....

it is interesting that they were purportedly worried about the debt of the club initially - now that the "Rk's" are talking about maintaining a £500m debt......

what's that all about ???

and surely, a one-off "benefactor" purchaser, who gets rid of the debt is a far better proposition for the Club ownership than the Glazer's or any Rk / Fan ownership but still well upto the eyeballs in debt scheme.......
 
misterredmist said:
Well put Ciderman, it certainly looks like MUST have hitched their trailer to
the "Red knights " .....


it is interesting that they were purportedly worried about the debt of the club initially - now that the "Rk's" are talking about maintaining a £500m debt......

what's that all about ???

and surely, a one-off "benefactor" purchaser, who gets rid of the debt is a far better proposition for the Club ownership than the Glazer's or any Rk / Fan ownership but still well upto the eyeballs in debt scheme.......
Click to expand...

When have the Red Knights said they were talking about "maintaining a £500m debt"?
 
ralphie88 said:
It's an organisation set up through MUST about a year ago to get wealthy (and not-so-wealthy) businessmen who support United together. Because the more of these we can get together, the better our chances of getting a decent stake in the club. How many (if indeed any) of the Red Knights are members of Reds in Business we don't know because they've not yet revealed who they are. To suggest this makes Reds in Business some kind of sinister shadowy organisation is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

True...
 
misterredmist said:
Well put Ciderman, it certainly looks like MUST have hitched their trailer to
the "Red knights " .....
Click to expand...

Well yes, when a proposition which fulfills much of what they want and offers a vastly superior option to the Glazers comes along, they bloody well should get behind it.

What do you want them to do, oppose anybody and everybody who wants to run the club? That's not very constructive really is it?


misterredmist said:
and surely, a one-off "benefactor" purchaser, who gets rid of the debt is a far better proposition for the Club ownership than the Glazer's or any Rk / Fan ownership but still well upto the eyeballs in debt scheme.......
Click to expand...

Debatable, but possibly. So where is this one-off "benefactor" purchaser you want MUST to back? I've not heard of him.
He'd have to have the club's interest at heart, not his own desire to play real life football manager, show off to all his Oligarch mates who have bought yachts just as big as him, or publicise his country because its oil reserves are running out and he wants to turn it into a tourist destination.
 
ralphie88 said:
I assume you have been privy to the negotiations between MUST and the Red Knights UnitedRoadRed. Care to give us any more tit-bits of information on how the ownership structure would work? Cheers. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm sure you're being flippant as ever while being completely naive in thinking that multi-millionaire backers truly give a toss what the plebs think. :rolleyes:
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
I'm sure you're being flippant as ever while being completely naive in thinking that multi-millionaire backers truly give a toss what the plebs think. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

All we can go on so far is that Keith Harris has suggested a committment to giving the fans a 25.1% shareholding to act as a block to future takeovers
 
misterredmist said:
...and surely, a one-off "benefactor" purchaser, who gets rid of the debt is a far better proposition for the Club ownership than the Glazer's or any Rk / Fan ownership but still well upto the eyeballs in debt scheme.......
Click to expand...

I just want the huge debt gone and I want competitive but reasonable ticket prices...

Whether that be with the fans/RK or another owner I don't know...

I/we don't know the entirety of the RK's plan because they haven't made a plan yet. (Is that right?)
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
I'm sure you're being flippant as ever while being completely naive in thinking that multi-millionaire backers truly give a toss what the plebs think. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't see this incompatibility between being a fan and being rich.

If you yourself were to find yourself in a position to be able to buy the club, or a major part of it, would you do so? If so, would you immediately start treating the fans like shit, disregard their views and try and milk it for evey penny with no regard for its heritage and values? Or would you grasp the opportunity to try and run united the right way, making sure that the fans are at the heart of the club?
 
afrocentricity said:
I/we don't know the entirety of the RK's plan because they haven't made a plan yet. (Is that right?)
Click to expand...

I think it's fair to say they haven't finalised a plan, but to say they haven't made a plan yet makes it sounds a bit like they've not got a clue what they're doing.
Being very experienced and astute business men, I'm pretty sure they've got some pretty detailed plans, but at this stage they probably still have a few options open, and the nitty-gritty will still need to be decided.
I'm speculating to a degree of course, but I find it odd that some people on here expect to know every detail of their plan at this stage, and get suspicious of the RKs motives or competence if this is not forth-coming.
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
I'm sure you're being flippant as ever while being completely naive in thinking that multi-millionaire backers truly give a toss what the plebs think. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I doubt anyone gives a shit about what plebs think.

But some owners do give a shit about what fans think - take Randy Lerner for example.

We dont know the in's and out's of the Red Knights plans - they said in the statment that they are at early stages.

MUST are behind the Red Knights plans becasue they will involve some kind of fan ownership or fan representation. Why are people making out like that is such a bad thing?
 
ralphie88 said:
It wouldn't be 50 if MUST were involved. It would be around 150,000. And they'd manage the same way that we managed as a Plc. Or how Bayern, Barca and Madrid manage. The owners don't all have a say in the day-to-day running of the club. You elect a board who run the club. Don't let David Gill's little comment at Soccerex pull the wool over your eyes on that one.
Click to expand...

Barca and Madrid have had horrible regimes running them and once they are elected there's no way they can be removed until their term is up. Barca have recovered considerably since Laporta has taken over but the previous regime had put the club on a road to ruin. The build up to presidential elections become a farce more often than not. Once someone gets into power, players will be signed because the president had promised them before being elected and wants to deliver so they'd be elected once more. They will go after big name players regardless of the manager's wishes and this will only end in disaster (just look at real and the previous barca regime). The whole idea of running the club in a democratic way is all well and good but sooner or later you'll get a president who makes decisions that will anger the fans or even worse make decisions that will cost the club big time.

The best thing that can happen to United is get a single man like Lerner owning us but in reality this won't happen.
A1Dan said:
I don't see this incompatibility between being a fan and being rich.

If you yourself were to find yourself in a position to be able to buy the club, or a major part of it, would you do so? If so, would you immediately start treating the fans like shit, disregard their views and try and milk it for evey penny with no regard for its heritage and values? Or would you grasp the opportunity to try and run united the right way, making sure that the fans are at the heart of the club?
Click to expand...

You're being very naive if you think that the RK can get a handful of owners with that kind of mentality, let alone 50. The thing about rich men, is that they like to get even richer and a fair few of the RKs will see the financial gains from owning a club like united. How can you filter out genuine fans? Maybe that kind of mentality is instilled into the rich/business minded people but the harsh truth is, is that it's one that definitely exists. The fact is, a handful of the RKs will want United run as a business, optimising profits, which will lead to major backroom unrest if there are a few genuine fans there as well.
 
UnitedRoadRed said:
I'm sure you're being flippant as ever while being completely naive in thinking that multi-millionaire backers truly give a toss what the plebs think. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Do you seriously think that MUST would be in talks with them if they weren't looking to provide its members with a significant stake in the club? If they aren't willing to do this, they won't get MUST's support. Simples.
 
EdWeatherall said:
All we can go on so far is that Keith Harris has suggested a committment to giving the fans a 25.1% shareholding to act as a block to future takeovers
Click to expand...

Wasn't he also the RK spokesman quoted as saying they would give back season tickets to anyone who had relinquished them in a 'boycott'? - something that would be highly problematic given that they would probably now be owned by other supporters.
 
Devil_forever said:
Barca and Madrid have had horrible regimes running them
Click to expand...

True - I'm not convinced their model is ideal. We could do with something enshrined in the consitution to avoid short-termism such as presidential candidates promising big-name signings etc.
That shouldn't be too hard to do, I don't think anybody's even floated the idea of a presidential system.
Even given these short-comings, it's worth noting tht, if unhappy, the fans do get the chance to give the people running the club the boot, no questions asked, every few years, which is a lot more effective than wearing green and gold scarves!

Devil_forever said:
You're being very naive if you think that the RK can get a handful of owners with that kind of mentality, let alone 50.
Click to expand...

I get the point - ultimately your argument comes down to not if the "rich genuine fans" set-up is theoretically possible, but whether there are enough of them out there, and whether those leading the RKs have the nouse to sort them from pretenders who may actually just be in it for the cash.

I think the answer to the first question is yes - I don't believe O'Niel and Harris are the only two high-powered individuals in the city with office walls covered in United memorabilia (before you say it, not I'm not suggesting that shoudl be the defining test!).
For teh 2nd part I'd admit that we would have to rely on their skill in selecting partners. Note that they have already turned some very wealthy people away, so they are at least trying to do this.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
something that would be highly problematic given that they would probably now be owned by other supporters.
Click to expand...

Not really - the club have never been under any obligation to renew season tickets.

Any new-comers who pick up the boycotted tickets would have to understand that were it not for the boycott they wouldn't ahve had the ticket, and will have to be prepared to go on a waiting list as they would have done otherwise. The boycott will actually have helped them by giving them one season they wouldn't have got otherwise.
They won't all like this, but that's their problem.

IMO this won't acutally be a major issue, as sadly I don't think there are large numbers who will actually boycott, meaning the RKs will have to try and push their plan home without that. But we'll see.
 
Devil_forever said:
Barca and Madrid have had horrible regimes running them and once they are elected there's no way they can be removed until their term is up. Barca have recovered considerably since Laporta has taken over but the previous regime had put the club on a road to ruin.
Click to expand...

Neither regime to my knowledge increased ticket prices by 60% in three years, introduced a compulsory automatic cup scheme, wiped out a 14,000+ season ticket waiting list, reduced net transfer spending to nothing, and plunged what was previously the richest club in the world into £700m+ of debt. That truly is the road to ruin.

And that's not to say that either Madrid or Barca are particularly well-run. There are far better ways to do it - just take a look at the likes of Bayern Munich.

Devil_forever said:
You're being very naive if you think that the RK can get a handful of owners with that kind of mentality, let alone 50. The thing about rich men, is that they like to get even richer and a fair few of the RKs will see the financial gains from owning a club like united. How can you filter out genuine fans? Maybe that kind of mentality is instilled into the rich/business minded people but the harsh truth is, is that it's one that definitely exists. The fact is, a handful of the RKs will want United run as a business, optimising profits, which will lead to major backroom unrest if there are a few genuine fans there as well.
Click to expand...

A bit of a wild generalisation that. However at the end of the day, if you want to become rich, you don't invest in football. There are a lot better, quicker and more reliable ways to make money.However, even if you did have a few Glazer-esque sharks in the consortium, it should be easy enough to create the rules of association to prevent them taking significant (if any) money out of the club above and beyond their original stake.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Wasn't he also the RK spokesman quoted as saying they would give back season tickets to anyone who had relinquished them in a 'boycott'? - something that would be highly problematic given that they would probably now be owned by other supporters.
Click to expand...

First - fecking hell, it's Feedingseagulls! Welcome back. :D

Second, Kieth Harris isn't to my knowledge a spokesman for the Red Knights.
 
A1Dan said:
Not really - the club have never been under any obligation to renew season tickets.
Click to expand...

So it'd be fine to snatch away the season ticket from a fan because of the 'say so' (or 'evaluation using a std procedure') of another fan who was happy to potentially jeopardise the well-being of the club in pursuit of an uncertain future?
A1Dan said:
Any new-comers who pick up the boycotted tickets would have to understand that were it not for the boycott they wouldn't ahve had the ticket, and will have to be prepared to go on a waiting list as they would have done otherwise. The boycott will actually have helped them by giving them one season they wouldn't have got otherwise.
They won't all like this, but that's their problem.
Click to expand...
Why should anyone getting a season ticket in the future be forced into this though?

My main worry is that it's just an easy fan-pleasing soundbite - which may have about as much chance of becoming reality as many other fine-sounding promises - even if the RKs do get in. (Remember Hicks & Gillett)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.