General Glazer Discussion | To receive the majority of £11m stakeholder dividend today

RedStarUnited

Full Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2008
Messages
8,118
Not spending should not be the major complaint about the Glazers. But running a football club only to make money is. That is why they appointed bankers who could get them more money and turned a blind eye when the footballing side suffered because of the sheer incompetence of the guys they had hired.

I mean, as businessmen, it is almost ridiculous that they couldn't see that the better way to run football club and make profits is by appointing competent people. You hire trash, you get trash.
Contradicting statement isnt it? If they spent less they would be able to extract more money.

The issue with Glazers is the mis management of the spending not the actual spending.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,567
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
Wonder if this is a bit of an attack on Woodward. He’s right in that they’ve spent the money it’s just be horrendous management from the top down. I wouldn’t be surprised if he let Woodward go and ordered this shake up, nobody likes to see their money frittered away.
 

tenpoless

No 6-pack, just 2Pac
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
16,306
Location
Ole's ipad
Supports
4-4-2 classic
Wonder if this is a bit of an attack on Woodward.
Then they have basically commited a sudoku, they attacked themselves since they were the ones who appointed Woodward and let him spread around the "stopping players from going to Madrid" and "watch this space" nonsense.
 

Lentwood

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Didsbury, Manchester
All he cares about is the dividends he sucks out each year. A parasite.
The dividends are inconsequencial, insignificant and so boringly standard across all businesses in all industries that we really shouldn't even be wasting our time talking about them.

There are plenty of things to get at the Glazers for but I have always felt the divident argument is ridiculously naive and weak
 

McSauce FC

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 15, 2019
Messages
51
Thanks for spending the clubs own income on shite players. Thanks alot.
 

Foxbatt

New Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
14,297
The first time I looked at the headline I thought we were talking about some high ranking military officer. :lol:
 

Foxbatt

New Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
14,297
Thanks for spending the clubs own income on shite players. Thanks alot.
Thats what clubs are supposed to do. Spend their own money. Shite players is due to shite management. Their fault is keeping Woodward in that position for so long.
 

pacifictheme

Full Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
7,714
Maybe there should be a balance?

Edit: I do agree that the amount we've spent is absolutely fine by the way. Investing their own money could come in different ways.

I'm no expert, but did they even put up any money to buy us?
I have no idea but then you used to be able to get 0% deposit mortgages and people would believe thry owned their own home whilst paying that back.

What they did was fecking shite and I don't really understand why it was allowed to happen. Taking debt out against the club to buy the club.

Ultimately though whether they put their own money in is not relevant, sadly they own the club so they get to say we when talking about it. It's shit but it is what it is. Their strategy has been what's fecked us. If they had spent a billion with the structure Liverpool and City have (which they could have) very few people would care about whether they bought us with their own money.
 

DevTheRed

Full Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
1,077
I have no problem with the amount of money we spend on players.. we’ve spent the most of any team in the league.

It’s the lack of actual investment from them, it’s the neglect to the stadium, the training ground, womens and youth team facilities, the amount of debt and interest payments we have to pay and probably most of all just the amount that they don’t give a crap about the club.

To have an owner who actually cares about the club and attends games would be amazing. They’re parasites who brought the club on debt and think of us no more than an opportunity to make a quick buck.
 

Bubz27

No I won’t change your tag line
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
21,547
I have no idea but then you used to be able to get 0% deposit mortgages and people would believe thry owned their own home whilst paying that back.

What they did was fecking shite and I don't really understand why it was allowed to happen. Taking debt out against the club to buy the club.

Ultimately though whether they put their own money in is not relevant, sadly they own the club so they get to say we when talking about it. It's shit but it is what it is. Their strategy has been what's fecked us. If they had spent a billion with the structure Liverpool and City have (which they could have) very few people would care about whether they bought us with their own money.
By itself, it isn't relevant, no. But on top of all their other failings, structure being a huge one, it adds to the relevancy.

What we can say is that the fans aren't only complaining because we're shite now. The fans were protesting when we were winning 3 titles in a row, when we were reaching 3 CL finals in 4 years.
 

Marwood

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2021
Messages
4,314
Glazers have also taken out more than 1 billion from the club. The money could be invested in the club. Glazers also use "zero" of their own money to buy the club.

We are not asking for Abramovich, Qatar or Abu Dhabi type of owner but the 1 to 2 billions taken out to fill the Glazer's pockets could easily double our spending towards building the club without any money from the owner. The money is totally generated by the club.

How competent the board spend the money is another story altogether.
But you can always argue more should be put in.

For instance the money put into City so far. Not all that much relative to the owners wealth. Why not invest more? Secure that Chanpions League win.

Ultimately had the money spent by United been allocated properly there'd be no complaints about investment.
 

Marwood

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2021
Messages
4,314
I have no problem with the amount of money we spend on players.. we’ve spent the most of any team in the league.

It’s the lack of actual investment from them, it’s the neglect to the stadium, the training ground, womens and youth team facilities, the amount of debt and interest payments we have to pay and probably most of all just the amount that they don’t give a crap about the club.

To have an owner who actually cares about the club and attends games would be amazing. They’re parasites who brought the club on debt and think of us no more than an opportunity to make a quick buck.
Can you provide detail on how the training ground has been neglected?
 

Escobar

Shameless Musketeer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
30,180
Location
La-La-Land
The dividends are inconsequencial, insignificant and so boringly standard across all businesses in all industries that we really shouldn't even be wasting our time talking about them.

There are plenty of things to get at the Glazers for but I have always felt the divident argument is ridiculously naive and weak
There is a huge difference if you own a football club or a producing company. Glazers are the only owners wjo pay out a dividend.
 

GDaly95

Says he's one of the best posters
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
6,273
Location
Wicklow, Ireland
Money and negligence is no use.

Money on the wrong players, money pursuing the wrong strategies, money in the hands of the wrong people and money sometimes withheld at the wrong time.

If a parent buys his or her child a random shiny toy once or twice a year and does nothing beyond that, its neglect. You can't just say 'there, that's my job done'.

EDIT- Also obviously its not money invested by them themselves. Just funds generated by the club itself.
 

steffyr2

Full Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
1,774
All he cares about is the dividends he sucks out each year. A parasite.
I suppose you know him personally?

These type of threads are really annoying. As has been pointed out time after time, the amount of money provided to Utd to buy players is at the top of the league. The local team management just does a bad job picking players, picking managers, picking staff, running the club. (See all the end of the season news.)
 

SalfordRed18

Netflix and avocado, no chill
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
14,021
Location
Salford
Supports
Ashwood City FC
Did the Glazers buy the players that the coaches of the time wanted?

Or did they buy prima donnas for commercial purposes?

Van Gaal seems to have made his views on this clear
We signed Fellaini over kroos.
 

bazza3727

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Messages
119
I am struggling to frame it but that's basically what I mean.

It's very rare in the UK to see responses to interviews like this, let alone in the US where wealthy people seem to be an even more protected species.

Of course the Glazers are slimy etc.
Check out the Sunday Times Rich List last weekend and see how many people you know of. None of these people talk to the media unless they have something to sell, and then they use proxies.
 

bazza3727

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Messages
119
Money and negligence is no use.

Money on the wrong players, money pursuing the wrong strategies, money in the hands of the wrong people and money sometimes withheld at the wrong time.

If a parent buys his or her child a random shiny toy once or twice a year and does nothing beyond that, its neglect. You can't just say 'there, that's my job done'.

EDIT- Also obviously its not money invested by them themselves. Just funds generated by the club itself.
It could be argued that until the Glazers came along the club wasn't generating much in commercial revenue. They brought in Woodward who seems to have been some sort of genius at raising the revenue streams to astronomical proportions (noodle partners, tyre companies, far east fan base, etc.). Pity he couldn't manage a football club!
 

marktan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
6,930
I suppose you know him personally?

These type of threads are really annoying. As has been pointed out time after time, the amount of money provided to Utd to buy players is at the top of the league. The local team management just does a bad job picking players, picking managers, picking staff, running the club. (See all the end of the season news.)
It's true. They take out huge amounts in dividends every year since 2015 (was like £20m in 2018), director's salaries (all 6 glazer siblings get about a mil each) and management fees.

The money they've spent is money the club generates, minus all they've taken out.

We've got a high net spend because we sell terribly, but if you go back to like 2008 when City were taken over, you'll see where the disparity starts.

Circa 2008 we were paying £70m per year in interest alone, and we've paid over £1 billion (!) servicing the debt since. 2009 was when we sold Ronaldo for £80m, and spent £20m on Obertan, Owen and Valencia. Wonder where the extra cash went? From 2009 to 2013 we barely signed any players and there's where the rot set in. We've merely tried to play catch up since, and done a bad job at that because the club's operating structure is so bad, which is all set up from the top - the board which has 6 Glazer's on it. Read any article with John Henry of Liverpool on both how to run a club and the amount he's extracted from them (hint, zero) and you'll see how badly we've been run and milked by the Glazers.
 

Lentwood

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
6,828
Location
West Didsbury, Manchester
It's true. They take out huge amounts in dividends every year since 2015 (was like £20m in 2018), director's salaries (all 6 glazer siblings get about a mil each) and management fees.

The money they've spent is money the club generates, minus all they've taken out.

We've got a high net spend because we sell terribly, but if you go back to like 2008 when City were taken over, you'll see where the disparity starts.

Circa 2008 we were paying £70m per year in interest alone, and we've paid over £1 billion (!) servicing the debt since. 2009 was when we sold Ronaldo for £80m, and spent £20m on Obertan, Owen and Valencia. Wonder where the extra cash went? From 2009 to 2013 we barely signed any players and there's where the rot set in. We've merely tried to play catch up since, and done a bad job at that because the club's operating structure is so bad, which is all set up from the top - the board which has 6 Glazer's on it. Read any article with John Henry of Liverpool on both how to run a club and the amount he's extracted from them (hint, zero) and you'll see how badly we've been run and milked by the Glazers.
Everybody knows this and understands it but you have to deal with the 'here and now'.

Since 2010 and the restructuring of the PIK loans, the Glazers have "allowed" the club more than enough to challenge. You can blame them for the initial rot, you can blame them for appointing ineffective CEOs, you can wish we were owned by a benevolent United fan...all of those are legitimate....but still, we need to recognise that it needn't be hopeless and we can still be competitive under Glazer ownership.
 

Crashoutcassius

Full Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2013
Messages
10,308
Location
playa del carmen
I've always thought this, I wasn't sure if it was SAF and his reluctance to bow to agent fees etc, but the lack of investment under him the last few years of is tenure really boils my piss, we'd have gotten a few more titles and a CL for sure - it was a running joke about our midfield problems.

You see the likes of Klopp and Pep getting £100m plus investment a year guaranteed and you'd wonder what SAF could have done with a billion worth of players instead of getting Owen, Valencia and Obertan.
Don't think it was agent fees, it was the glazers and the debt. Once that got under control the spending has been good. It was bad then
 

MackRobinson

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
5,134
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
Then they have basically commited a sudoku, they attacked themselves since they were the ones who appointed Woodward and let him spread around the "stopping players from going to Madrid" and "watch this space" nonsense.
Did they solve the puzzle? :lol:

Seppuku?
 

honirelandboy

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 24, 2021
Messages
356
He's just clueless. Imagine you knew nothing about cars and spent 50 million on a nissan micra and 100 million on a ford focus thinking your doing the right thing and its money well spent.

There business smart but I bet there ego's stop them from taking advice from people with actual football knowledge and you'd have a better conversation with a goldfish.
 

Zen86

Full Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2007
Messages
13,908
Location
Sunny Manc
They have spent the money needed to buy new players in fairness. Who we spend that money on isn’t directly on them, but keeping Woodward in charge of the whole operation certainly is.
 

marktan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
6,930
Everybody knows this and understands it but you have to deal with the 'here and now'.

Since 2010 and the restructuring of the PIK loans, the Glazers have "allowed" the club more than enough to challenge. You can blame them for the initial rot, you can blame them for appointing ineffective CEOs, you can wish we were owned by a benevolent United fan...all of those are legitimate....but still, we need to recognise that it needn't be hopeless and we can still be competitive under Glazer ownership.
Can we? What operational ability do the 6 Glazer siblings have between them? They're just glorified trust fund babies riding off of the work their dad put in building all that wealth.

There's a reason why boards at companies are filled with successful people at high ranking jobs from other big companies, why chairmen and CEOs are paid huge amounts and have lots of experience - the direction of any company or organisation comes from the top. Ours are severely lacking.

When you have ignorant people in charge, the natural course is that those under them will be supbar and that their choices will be subpar. They may get lucky like they did with Tom Brady, where prior to that Buccs hadnt won a single playoff game in like 18 years, but more likely that not they won't. It's no surprise to me that Liverpool are successful under John Henry when you look at his career, or Brighton and Brentford under their owners. Leadership and direction comes from the top.
 

The Irish Connection

Full Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
2,324
Don't think anyone could really disagree with that, they have.


As times gone on I feel like this was more ferguson than the glazers. Transfer fees were just beginning to get ridiculous and didn't want part in that. Roll on to today and average players go for £40-60 mil.
You’ve pretty much answered your own argument there. Transfer fees of the last 10 plus years have been massive.
Given how we didn’t invest properly after Ronaldo left and how the squad was aging when fergie left, compared to city’s squad, the bare minimum that was required was to purchase a lot of good players.
Pogba cost 90m. Pretty much one tenth of 1 billion. Maguire 80m.

What I’m saying is, when people say we have spent a lot, it’s far from black and white, there is context. Obviously we have spent a lot because it was necessary and the transfer fees are huge for average players. Especially with bankers in charge.

The problem was that, if a player turned out to be a poor performer, the finance team wouldn’t allow us to shift them quickly for less than was paid.

In my opinion, given the costs of players, where our squad was and that our recruitment was poorly run, we definitely needed to spend more than we have and taken losses on players bought.
Let me remind you, in Moyes first summer, we only signed Fellaini (at the last minute for more than he was worth) despite our midfield having a huge hole in it.

Last summer, we didn’t sign a defensive midfielder, but the Glazers still took their dividend.
 

glazed

Eats diamonds to beat thermodynamics
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
7,637
Not spending should not be the major complaint about the Glazers. But running a football club only to make money is. That is why they appointed bankers who could get them more money and turned a blind eye when the footballing side suffered because of the sheer incompetence of the guys they had hired.
I feel like it's a myth that they appointed incompetent people through indifference. They appointed incompetent people because competent ones didn't want to be associated with such a dysfunctional project. So we ended up with chancers, mercenaries and the terminally unqualified. And because even competent mercenaries could not function in an environment where (for example) Woodward extended the contracts of redundant players because he thought it increased their asset value.

Then they have basically commited a sudoku, they attacked themselves since they were the ones who appointed Woodward and let him spread around the "stopping players from going to Madrid" and "watch this space" nonsense.
While I agree, I think you mean Seppuku? I'm not sure what committing Sudoku would look like but I want to see it one day.
 

Giggsy13

Full Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
4,313
Location
Toronto
The club has spent money, the glazers haven’t spent anything themselves. The state of OT and Carrington is the true measure of their worth, and that in itself should end this debate; they are leaches and have done much more harm than good for United.
 

r0663664

Worships Man City
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
2,664
Location
Singapore
I don't defend the Glazer but honestly speaking, Ole decided to buy all the shining toys. Maguire, AWB, Bruno, Telles, Sancho, Amad, Pellestri and Varane. 300 million outlay just to fund Ole. If it was a better, we would be top 3 consistently and challenging to top spot. I hope ETH get 300 million, I think he would spend it wisely for fit and function rather than star power.
 

Loon

:lol:
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
9,189
Location
No-Mark
We don't need them to spend money from their own pocket, because then they'd find some ways to recoup those money later anyway. It's perfectly fine if they only spend United money. What we need and cry for is them spending it wisely and be more responsible.

The way they have run United these past years is like those rich parents who just pump money to their kid and the serving maids, thinking that alone makes them great parents. The truth is the opposite. Their "child" (Manchester United FC) needs better care and correct guidance from them, not just senseless money being pumped in with no coherent direction. And Woodward is like that private tutor of the kid who only got the job because he is close friend with the parents. He helped the kid got in fancy clothes, events and various "trendy" institutes just for the image, without actually looking in to see what's best the kid's development.

I know the comparison may put some people off. But that's how I see United under the Glazers and Woodward's leadership. We don't lack money. We lack direction, and accountability in leadership. I still dislike the Glazers due to all above reasons, but I think they deserve time to show how the new "spine" of leadership (Arnold-Murtough-Erik-Rangnick) would work.

I'm liking what I see so far, ever since Arnold got appointed. The way we approached Erik/Pochettino (With due process, interviews...etc instead of jumping on the bandwagon) and the way we handle players who are out of contract (Taking back Pogba's offer) make sense. In a way, we can say that the board has earned themselves this summer.
That wasn’t my point, but nevermind. As long as United improve, we’re all together.

IF things improve.PLEASE Improve! :lol:
 

yumtum

DUX' bumchum
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
7,129
Location
Wales
Don't think it was agent fees, it was the glazers and the debt. Once that got under control the spending has been good. It was bad then
Yeah, looking back it was obvious excuses to redirect the issues we were having at the time.

Imagine having our current level of spending under someone like Sir Alex? It's what irks me so much, we were so successful in spite of the American leaches but it could have been much, much more.
 

Spark

Full Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
2,248
Have they wasted money in a football sense? Yes. Have they wasted money in a profit maximising sense? No.

They know what they're doing, you only have to look at who makes up the independent directors on the actual board (not the nonsense fake one that SAF's on). Basically a who's who of upper echelon money men and marketers.

They don't and will never give a feck about actual football. We just have to hope that ETH/whoever is in charge throughout their already horrifically long reign can mould a football team despite them. So far, so shit.

ETH is the right step forward, so at least that provides some hope.
 

ForeverRed1

Full Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
5,414
Location
England UK!
One thing you can’t argue with is they have spent money on players. The wrong ones... but they have invested.

They however, haven’t spent a dime of their own money on the club.
 

SirAF

Ageist
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Messages
37,606
Location
Then they have basically commited a sudoku, they attacked themselves since they were the ones who appointed Woodward and let him spread around the "stopping players from going to Madrid" and "watch this space" nonsense.
Seppuku! :lol:
 

Loon

:lol:
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
9,189
Location
No-Mark
Well that's how it works unless you're owned by a state or something.

Nothing wrong with the club spending its income on players
Absolutely. Of course. United self-fund. Shame they cannot completely self-fund due to skimming and debt repayments.
 

Sassy Colin

Death or the gladioli!
Joined
Jan 29, 2010
Messages
71,001
Location
Aliens are in control of my tagline & location
I feel we need a central hub for all Glazer updates, their sporadic appearances, and what they are saying when folk do get words out of them.

This shouldn't devolve into Glazer hate. Definitely happy for criticism etc, but discussion should focus on tweets/updates related to their actions specifically.
Well, that went well.
 

jeff_goldblum

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
3,917
The money the Glazers siphon out of this club could buy us the best stadium, the best training facilities and the best youth academy in world football. Instead it goes into a billionaire's bank account, and what we are left to spend is largely wasted because of the incompetence of the people the Glazers have hired to run the club.