Adisa
likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
They're a lot of rich people who don't know their left from right.People don't get that rich by being dummies.
They're a lot of rich people who don't know their left from right.People don't get that rich by being dummies.
How does signing Fred fit this narrative? Or Dalot? Or Martial? It’s just a hairbrained approach. To me it comes down to Woodward and getting new owners in who have no football background won’t necessarily change that. Getting in a DOF seems to most obvious solution so hopefully we can get that rightI believe it points to the model of ownership. You maximise profits by signing certain kinds of player and prioritising results over performance. So you end up with Jose and a weird unbalanced squad.
The playboy/public relations ownership model is prestige based, so you get a different set of priorities.
I haven’t been overdrawn for a few years.
I have a few bob tucked away for a rainy day and I also lent a tenner to a mate once who still owes it me so I think that may qualify me. How much did you say they want?
That much oh well.
It's not a case of me having loose moral values as you put it, it's more about who can realistically buy us. Like it or not United don't have many options to get rid of the Glazers. I would never defend the regime that is going on by the Prince. I'm all about the long term regarding United. I don't think the money that is involved in the game is sustainable going forward. I think United will need to have an owner that needs to be debt free and pump money in properly in to the club. The Glazers had a head start when they came in and managed to fck it up over time, they have created a mess with the worst planning I've ever seen. I want the best for United on the pitch, I think we will properly invest with new owners. The likes of long term contracts for Jones and Smalling is where we have. We are rewarding average players that will likely not get better to save money. The scrimping is serious for such a big club. I want owners who go head to head with City, we should be dominating the league with the financial power we have, instead our big summer investment is Fred and Dalot. Playing a 2011 defense in 2019, it's a joke.Mate you started with all that false morality, calling out everyone who doesn't share your loose moral values and when I pointed out as to why so many are against saudi ownership, you just assume everyone's the same. I will never support THEM as you said, but I'll always support UTD albeit if saudis do takeover, it'll be a bitter pill to swallow and will have some internal conflict with myself over that.
I've said it many times that the Glaziers are bunch of money hungry cnuts but those for everything those cnuts have done do you understand no one in their right mind would try to compare them with that saudi prince?
You want what's the best for the club? Did you ever read what I've written in my previous comment regarding the negative implications of having a murderous saudi prince as UTD's owner?
How does signing Fred fit this narrative? Or Dalot? Or Martial? It’s just a hairbrained approach. To me it comes down to Woodward and getting new owners in who have no football background won’t necessarily change that. Getting in a DOF seems to most obvious solution so hopefully we can get that right
Your posts seem so negative (and in many cases understanding re are they good owners etc) but this one makes no sense. They are supposedly worth $£850b so they are not investing for growth at all. They are investing because they want publicity etc like City's owners did. It was a splash in the ocean for them as it would be with the Saudi owners. They are not here to make money if they buy usFrom where I stand, we are a terrible investment. Our revenues are not going to grow much more that it is at the moment.
But the kids who will inherit the money are dummies at times.People don't get that rich by being dummies.
Your posts seem so negative (and in many cases understanding re are they good owners etc) but this one makes no sense. They are supposedly worth $£850b so they are not investing for growth at all. They are investing because they want publicity etc like City's owners did. It was a splash in the ocean for them as it would be with the Saudi owners. They are not here to make money if they buy us
That is a ridiculous analogy. In that situation the bank is making a profit from the loan they provide - interest. We are not making a profit from the Glazers, we have provided them a loan and they are using our profits to service that loan.
It's like getting a loan from the bank, then walking to the the vaults, taking out some money, and using that to pay off the loan.
The idea that the Glazers have 'invested' in the club is just wrong. Can't believe how many people still believe this. Not sucking ALL of the money out the club, does not mean they are 'investing'. You people need to stop watching The Apprentice and wake up. Anyone who treats a football club the same way they treat a supermarket or dishwasher manufacturer doesn't deserve to be in charge.
There should be a cap on how much money an owner can take out of a club. If you can't afford to buy a club without sucking it dry to pay for it, don't buy it!
You really should read more about business 101.
It's called investment. It's not my club and it's not your club. You dont owe 1 cent of it. All of the assest are glazer's and not fans.
Have the Glazers actually invested any of their own money in the team or just allocated the funds the club makes anyway?He's right though in that as an investment it seems like there is little to be made from the club in its current state. These aren't really investors like the glazers were though. We would just be a plaything to help legitimise a murderous regime.
Have the Glazers actually invested any of their own money in the team or just allocated the funds the club makes anyway?
Have the Glazers actually invested any of their own money in the team or just allocated the funds the club makes anyway?
So the only investing they are doing is taking money from the club after saddling us with debt?They allocated the funds, they are not rich enough to actually spend on it.
Have the Glazers actually invested any of their own money in the team or just allocated the funds the club makes anyway?
So the only investing they are doing is taking money from the club after saddling us with debt?
I agree with all you’ve said there tbf. Although I’m not sure about the resale part as we don’t seem to be a selling club right now. Although if we received a huge bid for Martial for example, that theory could be put to the testAll those players are young, especially the latter two. So they have resale value. Sanchez has no resale value but came on a free. The kind of player you tend not to buy (and Matic is an exception) is the older player with a transfer fee.
Jose obviously became frustrated with this policy, because younger players tend to respond less well to his bullying, and good defenders tend to be older.
I agree that a DoF might be the answer, depending on who they are and how much of a free hand they get.
It's kind of too early to judge Fred. He may yet come good.
So why are you angry that the club being sold to the Saudis. Its not your club anyway, you dont own one cent in it.You really should read more about business 101.
It's called investment. It's not my club and it's not your club. You dont owe 1 cent of it. All of the assest are glazer's and not fans.
yesSo the only investing they are doing is taking money from the club after saddling us with debt?
Well, it's a business. You don't exactly expect them to spend more than they get from the club. For a club like United the best option was the socios model but it's something that should have happened in the 80s-early 90s at the latest, today the club is too expensive.
So why are you angry that the club being sold to the Saudis. Its not your club anyway, you dont own one cent in it.
OMG...you do know you've just said in a way you'd rather have an owner who uses us as a milk cow (eg. take money from the club, get rich from it and place a club in debt by buying it through a loop hole) rather than owners who wants to invest billions in the club? Glaziers were investors who used us, just as the Saudi's are but instead they'll invest and not take money from the club FFSHe's right though in that as an investment it seems like there is little to be made from the club in its current state. These aren't really investors like the glazers were though. We would just be a plaything to help legitimise a murderous regime.
It's not what they put in out of their own pockets that's the issue.
The problem most have with the glazers is that they took out loans to buy the club and then burned it with the debt that we still haven't paid off 14 years later.
The players we could have purchased on on what we've spent on serving that debt is what get people backs up about them.
I like to add to that. The club makes money mostly from its big fan base using it to get commercial deals and money from TV rating bought by fans, money from matchday revenue.OMG...you do know you've just said in a way you'd rather have an owner who uses us as a milk cow (eg. take money from the club, get rich from it and place a club in debt by buying it through a loop hole) rather than owners who wants to invest billions in the club? Glaziers were investors who used us, just as the Saudi's are but instead they'll invest and not take money from the club FFS
And that's wrong because the debt reduced massively the taxes paid by the club and it still does.
So why are you angry that the club being sold to the Saudis. Its not your club anyway, you dont own one cent in it.
Because we’re not all as callous and lacking in morals as you? To plenty of us it’s not just a football club and it’s not all about being the best. There’s pride involved, history and reputation to consider, and that will take a huge hit if this was to ever happen. It would leave many of us feeling a bit sick and empty.
You could probably look at most companies sponsoring us and find something negative about them. Adidas are more than likely paying their employees peanuts to produce the jersey we wear.
All hail the glazers then.
But we won't win tha PL or CL untill they are gone.
Because we’re not all as callous and lacking in morals as you? To plenty of us it’s not just a football club and it’s not all about being the best. There’s pride involved, history and reputation to consider, and that will take a huge hit if this was to ever happen. It would leave many of us feeling a bit sick and empty.
We can do that without Saudi blood money.Dying? No
Need big investments YES. Look around us, can we invest in the squad and be challenging City? Do the Glazers spend enough? They make crazy money from our club though. I think it's time for them to feck off.
I was asking a question to the person who said the club is not ours. Cut the crap.Because we’re not all as callous and lacking in morals as you? To plenty of us it’s not just a football club and it’s not all about being the best. There’s pride involved, history and reputation to consider, and that will take a huge hit if this was to ever happen. It would leave many of us feeling a bit sick and empty.
I was asking a question to the person who said the club is not ours. Cut the crap.
And you accuses me of lack of morals. You don't know me. Dont you think that you are overreacting? I dont want to make it personal. But I said it earlier, There are people here in this Forum from the USA, UK and some other western countries including Italy, Poland payed Taxes to their government that used that money to kill innocent people in Iraq 2003. Why all of a sudden now finding moral high ground? I bet no one of them left their country because they were disgusted with their government.
People should not be selective in their morals. otherwise you should stop using your mobile phone, stop wearing your clothes and many other things you use on daily basis is done on the back of human rights abuse.
You might not be supporting the regime directly but you supporting a Saudi owned business means you are affiliated morally with their conduct. Personally I couldn't do that and stopping to care for United but probably end up in some kind of grieving process emotionally, however I think that principally that would happen.Yeah I mean my line is below all that too, as I think and hope it is for all of us. If I keep supporting United after SA buys us does that mean I'm advocating or facilitating that regime, though? I'm not sure it does, which is what I meant when I said what does the line mean exactly. It's not black and white for me.
The idea of them buying United makes my heart sink. But if they buy us will anything get worse there? Probably not. As they strive to move the GDP away from oil and more towards global investments, you'd hope the world collectively voting as consumers, as you put it, might have an impact eventually. So dare I say it, as much as it'd make us feel horrible about them owning United, it might not end up being a bad thing for SA.
Then you wouldn't be able to stomach the change of ownership.Torture and murder to start with.
All hail the glazers then.
But we won't win tha PL or CL untill they are gone.