Someone will only clear the debt if they own 100% or close to it of the club.
Club ownership | Senior management team talk
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
-
In the latest edition of the United Hour Podcast, we interview Duncan Drasdo of MUST - covering ticket prices, new stadium, INEOS and what fans should be demanding from our club.
Also, due to technical issues we couldn't put a notice up for the previous episode which was about the game against Bournemouth and other stuff. If you'd like to listen to it, click here.
One of my non United supporting mates is convinced that Sir Jim is a Chelsea double agent and actively working to tank the club. I've dismissed it as nonsense, but it becomes more and more plausible by the day.
When they knocked up the new designs of a stadium with a circus tent around it, it did feel like they were mocking us!
Rangnick gave a lot of truths and highlighted problematic players and a massive lack of professionalism.The article is silly.
Fletcher showing videos of our great players to children is cited as evidence we're living in the past
Believe it or not most clubs contingency plans will involve those closely associated with the club because who else will be most likely to muck in urgently and be flexible while also committed when you're figuring things out?
Rangnick had no associations with the club and was brought in in an emergency and look how that went ffs
I know, thats why I wanted a full sale over Ineos jumping in to bed with the Glazers. The only way we could get a full sale however is through being priced at a realistic value. The Glazers priced us out completely last time. Wanting up to 6 billion for us when we have 1b in debt, a new stadium required and massive investment in the team needed all the while we are floundering in mid table not being able to qualify for the cl with our rivals well ahead is insane
When you realise as well as Jim the Chelsea ST holder, Berrada ex city and Wilcox ex Leeds then it does make you wonder.
Disney land disney work, when will they learn. The lot of them need to go, no review just get out.
The article is silly.
Fletcher showing videos of our great players to children is cited as evidence we're living in the past
Believe it or not most clubs contingency plans will involve those closely associated with the club because who else will be most likely to muck in urgently and be flexible while also committed when you're figuring things out?
Rangnick had no associations with the club and was brought in in an emergency and look how that went ffs
Real brought in Arbeloa straight away and have repeatedly hired Capello, Del Bosque and Zidane.
Arsenal have Arteta in charge and had Edu as their DOF, Bayern have always had countless ex players very vocal or work for the club.
It is normal but because it feeds hysteria the media run dumb narratives. We constantly see narratives spun about United by media and fans that are not said about other clubs despite them operating that same way, whether it be hiring interim coaches, sacking coaches, having a DOF run the point on the style of play, backing managers in the transfer market, how much time a manager should get, clinging to the past, the list is endless where the narrative around us differs from the narrative about other clubs.
They are capitalising on a fanbase who are pretty clueless because we had the protective blanket of Sir Alex Ferguson.
How much did and do the glazers own?
They know the fanbase is pissed off and are just fanning the flames any way they can
The biggest redflag was chasing after Ashworth for months, paying millions for him, and then firing him the moment he said something Jimmy didnt like. Absolute clowns the bunch of themWhen you realise as well as Jim the Chelsea ST holder, Berrada ex city and Wilcox ex Leeds then it does make you wonder.
No to both.
So who would you want realistically that can afford it all?
Because perhaps their main target(s) are in contract for another 6 months or are involved in the World Cup. Only reason it makes sense
I am not yet INEOS out..
They have made many mistakes, Ten Hag, Ashworth but they have also come out and owned up to those mistakes.
People underestimate the amount of negligence that was at our club and mis management previously.
Fans will also point out failed signings such as Ugarte and Zirkzee but I dont think I have seen 1 football club that gets 100% signings success.
I would however like the debt removed, better infrastructure and long term planning.
It’s more likely to happen in Middle East or Asia where they can make a few million
I don’t think there’s a likely option that’s going to be comfortable for me to get on board with.
Which is a shame from my perspective, but not something I hadn’t been preparing for.
Yeah there's not really many good options when it comes to multi billionaires unfortunately.
Which is why I'd rather upcoming protests focused on things like ticket prices. If every alternative ownership group/model is basically terrible, fans groups should be campaigning for things that might actually make our experience of watching the club better.
The article is silly.
Fletcher showing videos of our great players to children is cited as evidence we're living in the past
Believe it or not most clubs contingency plans will involve those closely associated with the club because who else will be most likely to muck in urgently and be flexible while also committed when you're figuring things out?
Rangnick had no associations with the club and was brought in in an emergency and look how that went ffs
Really? The thesis of the article was that United is stuck in the past or nostalgia and the only example he gave was Fletcher showing old videos? If so that’s absolutely ridiculous not just silly.
However, if he gave other examples eg how United don’t have a Barcelona's La Masia or Ajax's De Toekomst style training academy, and that SAF and Sir M Busby were outsiders who came in and implemented their own unique styles on the club to achieve success and that many of the clubs ex players effectively talk rubbish with their recommendations etc then I think it’s a great article and the fletcher part was just the cherry on the cake.
Not that I'm aware, they just gave the Glazers £1.3 billion for 27 % of the club, the only caveat's as far as I know is Ineos wanted football control, and the Glazers wanted the drag along clause.
The stadium wasn't part of the deal they signed, just something Ineos seemingly want to do, and it makes no sense doing it with he Glazers still sat there as majority owners.
I've seen the term "drag along clause". What is it?
If someone else buys the Glazers out, Ineos have to accept the same price for their shares as well.
When does all the debt need to be refinanced before?
I don't think a reduction in prices is a realistic hope under the current owners. Maybe if we're bought out by someone but definitely not under these cnuts!
Or maybe because they have no clue yet who their main target is and they bought themselves some time
Thanks…. Not nearly as exciting as what it sounded like….
It's better than nothing. If someone has appetite to buy all shares and Glazers would accept INEOS at least cannot block that. Just have to hope someone will come
There is no sign of any interest yet
I'm a believer
I can’t think all the LUHG stuff makes Utd particularly exciting to investors.
So are we meant to say nothing about shite owners
With the way Carrick was announced by the club as well as the hiring of Steve Holland as an assistant coach with no real relation to Carrick and Woodgate, Wilcox might be open to keeping Carrick and co. if they impress. This also suggests that the head coaches will no longer have the power to bring in their own backroom staff with Wilcox having a major say in who can assist the head coach.
Given Maresca's and Xabi Alonso's recent availability, this seems more like the club viewing Carrick as the best choice for the role this season than as a mere interim who'll ease the transition over the summer.
Hmm I’m not sure if the DoF suggesting coaches is the best thing, but I might be nitpicking a bit. You’d expect most head coaches have guys they’ve worked well with in the past and they all understand their roles. I suppose if there’s a gap in the setup then it needs a discussion, but I wouldn’t expect, say Xavi or Enrique for example, to come here and have Jason Wilcox dictate who their coaches are. It seems a very counter productive move.
Regarding the second paragraph, are you suggesting we’re hiring him with a view for him staying long term? What makes you think this?
So are you saying we will ignore available opportunities like those two that you mentioned then
Couldn't have done worse even if it was a sabotage job.
Not much to disagree with here.
Last edited:
I think they'll let Carrick have the full-time job if they think he's the right man to take the team forward in the long run whether he gets the team into the Champions League or not. If he was an interim appointment, then no matter his performance for the rest of the season, he would have moved on. Whilst keeping him as a full-time head coach until the summer gives the club more flexibillity in getting a more desirable head coach, if Carrick does well enough and impresses the leadership, then he can stay on even if Maresca, Xabi Alonso, and other better head coaching possilbilities are not just available but open to working for United.
Financially, it would make more sense for Berrada and Wilcox to use existing coaches to form the backroom staff instead of hiring new coaches in Woodgate, Holland, and Evans. Even if the existing staff wouldn't have been fully compatible with Carrick, they'd allow Carrick to implement his system and facilitate his coaching.
THAT bouncy castle?
That would be a dick move.