Bang on - I'm hoping that new owners do exactly that, in detail.
All change of ownership and Red Knights related posts here please
- Thread starter Gunnar
- Start date
Bang on - I'm hoping that new owners do exactly that, in detail.
My understanding is he's not actually a 'red knight'. He's just a broker.
The Red Knights have never said anything about boycotts, and neither have MUST.
Of course what would be interesting is if the Red Knights came out and asked for a boycott. Because MUST have always said they would not ask their members to boycott.
I got the impression that he would be investing himself too. But I certainly don't think he was acting in any official capacity for the RKs when he talked about boycotting.
All this bears a striking resemblance to the French Revolution.
the entire thing is Demand and Supply.
you cant just keep increse ticket prices and expect everyone can afford it.
There will come a time a time when the supporters will just decide it is too expensive.
Then they will have to either cut down on expenses or if that means actually selling players (God forbid) and therefore affecting the long term future of the team. or they decide they cannot maintan running the club in a profitable manner and decide to sell.
you cant just keep increse ticket prices and expect everyone can afford it.
There will come a time a time when the supporters will just decide it is too expensive.
Then they will have to either cut down on expenses or if that means actually selling players (God forbid) and therefore affecting the long term future of the team. or they decide they cannot maintan running the club in a profitable manner and decide to sell.
Funny how everyone is an expert in what rich men want?
Were not talking about dictators. The Red Knights are not going to be asking Kim Jong-Il, Hitler & Pol Pot to work together.
Im not sure of the Red Knights plans, but i would assume that they want like minded investors on board. People whos priority is not profits, but the desire to see United succeed on and off the pitch.
It's a pity then, given how involved in the RK process Keiuth Harris is, that he is quoted (and 'editorialised') in the Guardian thus:
As I say - I'm just treating it all with scepticism as 'nice sounding' soundbites with probably very little substance.
Thing is talk is cheap... H&G waxed lyrical about what they'd do for Liverpool, not comparing just making a point. Until hard details come out people will have doubts/reservations...
Except, as I said earlier, when it comes from an expensive public relations company.
Otherwise I fully agree as you can tell. The 'return of season ticket' stunt just increases my scepticism they are just saying what some want to hear.
The Guardian's struggled big time on getting its head around what's going wrong. Ever since it claimed that MUST had demanded Ferguson's resignation, they've been flapping. But it was nice to see MUST get a Guardian editorial all the same.
Scepticism's fine FS, we've yet to see anything concrete from the Red Knights. But there's a difference between scepticism and jumping to assumptions about how bad they would be, how they would run the club, or how much money they have.
MUST's agenda is purely to get a meaningful fan stake in the club. If the Red Knights can't deliver this, MUST won't support them. Simple as that.
The success or failure of a RK takeover bid doesn't rely on MUST backing though, that's why it's important that RK are what they say they are...
What is MUST's stance on the RK's encouraging boycotts? Given what has been said in the past, it seems alarming that we could now be supporting group with this in mind.
Well I've been to all the meetings since the Red Knights business started and whilst MUST have been put under pressure by certain elements of United's support to call a boycott, their position has always been (as it was in 2005) that they would not tell their members what to do.
As I said above, it would be interesting if the Red Knights (as opposed to just Kieth Harris) were to ask MUST to request a boycott. And by the way, I've heard nothing to suggest this is likely to happen.
MUST's backing is clearly important to RK. Otherwise they wouldn't have approached them. MUST can deliver fan support for their bid, which in turn puts pressure on the Glazers to sell.
Quite - a lot of people seem to discount the possibility that, having made millions of pounds, they may actually want to spend some of it on something that is important to them.
Many very rich people give a lot of money to charity -
How much does that earn them? Failing that, what about yachts, sports cars and lavish parties?
The fact that their investment may make them a modest profit is a bonus. I'm not rich myself, but still have a few hundred quid in the phoenix fund - it's not there to make me a profit (actually, when I had to sell my shares, I, along with everybody else in SU could have walked away with a small but not insignificant profit).
If I were a billionaire and factored up this investment to 7 or 8 figures I'd be just as happy to invest it. I can't be the only one!
Which elements of United's support are pushing for boycotts?
I'd like to agree but at the start of their recruitment drive they took away the option of reading the site without registering, I'd be surprised if any of the new members were informed enough to make a decision to join based on the MUST principles before they'd actually joined and when most joined they were advised not to read the site for bandwidth reasons so many will still have no idea what they signed up for.
The old Arsenal guys haven't ever taken a dividend, they have seen their shares soar in value mind you. Kroenke hasn't got dividends and has paid top whack (though he'll make money in the next few years as the share price goes up). Usmanov wanted a divi but they told him to feck off.
wtf?! Is that true?! That's got to be bollocks, surely?
I'm fairly sure it is, all I can say for certain is that I tried to check the site out on the day that the 100,000 campaign started and I couldn't work out how to get in without registering. I can get in simply now and could do before.
That's what I've been thinking about all this.
You can have as many fans on board as you want but at the end of the day it is what it is, a business transaction.
I'm struggling to understand how we can get the city of London and an investment bank in something that seems largely philanthropic.
They are not daft though are they.
They know there is a big profit at the end of it for them.
That doesn't sound right at all. I've been accessing that site on both Explorer and Firefox throughout the campaign and I've been a member since 2005. Just looked at it now and it's quite clear how to skip joining and go straight to the main front page.
i'd give up my ticket if they could guarantee i'd get it back post glazer...
To be fair, there were a few days when it was tricky to get anywhere other than the sign-up splash page. But it's much better now.
Lets assume you would give it up and someone would buy it from the Glazers... what do you think will happen with that ticket once the RK would take over?
It is now and it was before, just not that day I tried to get in and couldn't without registering
if they could guarantee i could get it back then anyone who bought it would not be able to renew it at the end of the season which they bought it for. It would then be available. I would then buy it.
Yeah, Dein bought his wedge for about £250K and sold out for £80M. Fiszmann is sitting on a profit of about £120M. The one who lost out is dear old Peter Hill-Wood who flogged £200M worth for a couple of quid.
I have to say I didn't notice any teething problems. But then I suspect I'm part of the evil MUST conspiracy that ciderboy is so obsessed with, so I would say that wouldnt I? In fact I'm typing this from my secret lair in an extinct volcano at this very moment. And I'm not really called Ralph. Mwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!
Why your nick then? Because of Ralph Milne?
I'll take your word for it, so can you shed some light on the MUST statement that requested a need for ST holders and those with executive facilities to be signing up
What was the reason for that
You take the piss, but that's exactly how i imagine Malcolm Glazer appears in your head!I'm fairly sure that if a boycott was called by MUST, and there was a system in place that could guarantee you got your season ticket, then the boycott would be successful and enough would do it. I don't know a single person that sits around me that is renewing.
It would simply be a case of not renewing, making a successful bid, then freezing renewals after 1 season. They could then deal with the boycotters tickets and then the people that have bought one since. If their bid was not successful, the boycott would continue.
Of course people like Ciderman put doubt in peoples minds and Charleysurf accuses you of supporting Chelsea.
It would simply be a case of not renewing, making a successful bid, then freezing renewals after 1 season. They could then deal with the boycotters tickets and then the people that have bought one since. If their bid was not successful, the boycott would continue.
Of course people like Ciderman put doubt in peoples minds and Charleysurf accuses you of supporting Chelsea.
Well there are two problems aren't there? One, Glazer doesn't sell out so you've lost your seat. Two, Glazer does sell up but your seat has been sold to someone else.
Well problem 1: Glazer doesn't sell so he isn't getting any more of my pennies anyway.
Problem 2: Well boycott 2010/11 season, at the end of the season at renewal time for 2011/12, freeze renewals, and hand STs back to original holders. Anyone that buys a season ticket this season would be informed that it is a 1 year ST, just like the ones the club used to give out
Well 1 is the most likely outcome, most people do want to keep going, that's where the feckers have us over a barrel - it's not like saying I'm going to boycott Microsoft and buy an Apple, TINA.
This is correct: and ironically enough, why people's arguments about ticket price comparisons fall flat on their face.
1 is the most likely outcome, yes, but people should be prepared to boycott for as long as it takes. 2 seasons of boycotts would absolutely have them out. Anyone that wears G&G next season after renewing their ST should be shot as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, that suggests a lack of unity. But we need the unity for a reason - to take action as one unit. I think that people that don't take the next step of action are the ones that lack unity. It's my personal opinion (amongst many others) that a boycott is that action.
What would you shoot them with?
