UncleBob
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2014
- Messages
- 6,330
Link ?Yeah it was banned. You can't put a loan on the club, you need the cash in your bank account if you want to buy now.
Link ?Yeah it was banned. You can't put a loan on the club, you need the cash in your bank account if you want to buy now.
A leveraged takeover is what we are discussing. It was banned when and by who? And how?Yeah it was banned. You can't put a loan on the club, you need the cash in your bank account if you want to buy now.
Pretty sure it’s the FA as part of their fit and proper testA leveraged takeover is what we are discussing. It was banned when and by who? And how?
Then I am pretty sure you have no idea what you are talking about.Pretty sure it’s the FA as part of their fit and proper test
Why are you so adamant on defending Woodward? Do you work for him? I'm certain he has people on here to defend him and spread his BS.You've been asked this already, but I'll chime in...where is your evidence for this?
It's not true at all as far as I'm aware. A leveraged buyout is common place in business.
It is has not anything to do with defending Woodward to question an inaccurate factual statement, which there are plenty of in this thread. The latest now being that we should not be afraid of another leveraged takeover because somehow the PL-clubs have been banned" from securing loans against their assets. Spurs and their new stadium says hi."And all the other clubs in the PL carrying debt as well.Why are you so adamant on defending Woodward? Do you work for him? I'm certain he has people on here to defend him and spread his BS.
Woodward has to take a large chunk of the blame for our struggles on the pitch. Do you agree with that?
Maybe. But then what? They are in full control. Woodward had been loyal to the Glazers for many many years so I don’t think they will fire him.It provides my soul relief to see a headline like this on Sky: "Woodward has zero understanding of football."
Thanks Louis.
Surely it is a matter of time before they all start rounding up on him and then the Glazers.
Well that was anticlimactic. Bit hard debating when you only have five daily posts.But it's part of his job, so he's been interfering with himself ?
This is confusing
I was behind van Gaal and I really digged that he stuck by his methods. They weren't executed very well however. His philosophy takes time to implement. In hindsight it would've probably be better giving him a third season to execute. The transfers under van Gaal wasn't really too successful either.It's his job to appoint the managers?
LVG was the best qualified available manager in 2014.
Jose likewise in 2016.
So he's appointed the best two available options when hiring.
Can't find anything to suggest the practise is illegal here. Interesting read here which mentions in passing that it is something sports administrators will not allow......in AmericaLink ?
That highlights just how smart Woody is, he has been able to retain Rojo, Smalling, Jones , Young and the like on silly wages while unfortunates like Citeh, Pool and others have actually changed their roster.Not really sure where to put this (don't want to spam the transfer tweets thread)
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Is this true?
I was thinking about this the other day, Its probably true.Not really sure where to put this (don't want to spam the transfer tweets thread)
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Is this true?
Shocking really. Most of these players have been shit for so many years, yet we award them with new contracts. This club seriously needs to change, and it needs to start at the top. Shame it wont happenI was thinking about this the other day, Its probably true.
Young
Smalling
Jones
Mata
Darmien
Rojo
Valencia*
Herrera*
Rashford
Lingard
De gea
Romero
Shaw
Plus a few academy players I'm assuming.
Woeful squad management.
Is anyone else offended by this? It's a gold etched sink to celebrate an achievement from two decades ago while we languish closer to midtable than the top of the league ...
So you can't call it a fecking interference thenWell that was anticlimactic. Bit hard debating when you only have five daily posts.
How is it confusing? I don't want footballing decisions to be part of his job and just stick to marketing. Please read my post again then. I'm well aware that those decisions are part of his job at the moment and has been for the last seven years. That's what I want changed.
Not sure why 2015 is being used, the problem isn't players that have been here for 4 years, but players that have been here twice as long. That we're in 2019 and the likes of Young, Smalling, Jones, Valencia have survived this long in the club, under 3 different managers..Not really sure where to put this (don't want to spam the transfer tweets thread)
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Is this true?
Makes me sick.Maybe. But then what? They are in full control. Woodward had been loyal to the Glazers for many many years so I don’t think they will fire him.
Tuanzebe, TFM, Henderson. Did Martial join in 2015?I was thinking about this the other day, Its probably true.
Young
Smalling
Jones
Mata
Darmien
Rojo
Valencia*
Herrera*
Rashford
Lingard
De gea
Romero
Shaw
Plus a few academy players I'm assuming.
Woeful squad management.
I'm sure he appreciates itI have backed Woody all this time
Now de gea going probably.How can we get rid of the deadwood if we keep giving them new contracts. Ridiculous decision making of this great club, and Herrera let go for free. What the feck is going on here.
If there isn't as much as 5/6 players brought in this summer I won't be travelling over as much.
I remember that it was discussed after the Glazer takeover, and that some figures apparently wanted to outlaw leveraged takeovers of football clubs, specifically - but nothing happened.Can't find anything to suggest the practise is illegal here.
Can hardly blame them, they are just doing what sponsors do. Real blame should be directed towards the board.Is anyone else offended by this? It's a gold etched sink to celebrate an achievement from two decades ago while we languish closer to midtable than the top of the league ...
Fair enough, bad wording, I stand corrected. Point still stands though.So you can't call it a fecking interference then
I put this question to Duncan Drasdo a while ago and was told that they had been given assurances by the relevant football authorities that a leveraged buyout of the type we saw in 2005 would absolutely not be allowed to happen again. I have never subsequently seen any evidence to support this claim, however.A leveraged takeover is what we are discussing. It was banned when and by who? And how?
Doubt it.I put this question to Duncan Drasdo a while ago and was told that they had been given assurances by the relevant football authorities that a leveraged buyout of the type we saw in 2005 would absolutely not be allowed to happen again. I have never subsequently seen any evidence to support this claim, however.
If the Glazers did put United up for sale, we'd have good reason to be concerned about this.
ChristCommon themes so far this summer:
• Pogba wants out - heavily linked with Juventus by decent sources
• De Gea hasn't signed a new contract with only months left - clearly going
•We want British players with a good attitude - linked with Daniel James and James Maddison. One a left winger when we have two already. Maddison is really a number 10 and doesn't fit into a 4-3-3 system Solskjaer prefers.
•Still not signed a player after the worst season in years
• An inexperienced manager at the realm coming off the back of the worst run of form in Premier League history.
How can any United fan stay positive right now. We need to get our club back ffs. I can't believe how quickly things have gone down hill and its all been since Woodward took over. Fergie left at the time granted but nothing was put in place for next managers. Look at Chelsea, they change manager nearly every season and even in a 'crisis', come out winning at least one trophy.
Yeah, problem was hardly just the wording...Fair enough, bad wording, I stand corrected. Point still stands though.
Yeah, that has always been my take and worry. I don´t see how its legally possible to do it either if the FA and/or FIFA/UEFA bans club for having debt at all or at some level. Which would be really difficult to do from a legal perspective if you dont set the bar very, very high. There are many clubs in the PL that is on the level with or even have surpassed United if one compares turnover/net debt ratio. I dont see how it would work, which it is why its funny to see posters here declaring with emphasis that this is already the case (debt being banned, which kinda is the only way to stop a leveraged takeover), when its actually a very real possibility that it could happen. Its how myths are being born on forums like this and they are very difficult to kill when they have taken root.I put this question to Duncan Drasdo a while ago and was told that they had been given assurances by the relevant football authorities that a leveraged buyout of the type we saw in 2005 would absolutely not be allowed to happen again. I have never subsequently seen any evidence to support this claim, however.
If the Glazers did put United up for sale, we'd have good reason to be concerned about this.
Care to elaborate?Yeah, problem was hardly just the wording...