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

[Coxy]

Yeah, I know... we're only 2nd in the table for net spend behind a state funded City, those stingy bastards...

It's not as if both Fergie and Gill were racing to see who will leave the club first without creating a proper football structure that left us in this mess in the first place or anything...

Not to be confused, Glazers are parasites, but they are still preferable to the likes of Saudi Arabia, Abramovich, Venky or Ashley.

The problem was that our footballing men responsible for the well being of our club let us down... big time

You focus on net spending and then ignore all of that posters other points…

 

[UnitedFan93]

Yeah, I know... we're only 2nd in the table for net spend behind a state funded City, those stingy bastards...

It's not as if both Fergie and Gill were racing to see who will leave the club first without creating a proper football structure that left us in this mess in the first place or anything...

Not to be confused, Glazers are parasites, but they are still preferable to the likes of Saudi Arabia, Abramovich, Venky or Ashley.

The problem was that our footballing men responsible for the well being of our club let us down... big time

Yeah I know...however, that point only emphasises the absolute mess that we are in. We've spent all that money getting the squad in 'shape', when in fact we've blown vast sums of money due to the mis-management of the Glazer family from their sun loungers in Florida.

You mention Mike Ashley, at least he turned up for games. In fact, United have declined further under the Glazers than Newcastle did under Ashley. Fair enough, Newcastle got relegated under his ownership, but the last ten years have been the equivalent of relegation for a club the size of United.

We've got the worst owners in football.

 

[JPRouve]

How many times have we won either of those since not having one of the all time legendary managers?

United only won the league or CL with Mangall, SAF or Sir Matt Busby. I know that fact but will likely never accept it as not weird.

 

[I’m loving my life]

You focus on net spending and then ignore all of that posters other points…

Yes, and saying that the Glazers are not the problem falls right into their hands. Their ultimate goal is to screw money out of the club, it’s name and history. That’s it.

Every single activity, the employments of the ‘football’ people being blamed, the signing of players for PR reasons, the club statements and PR from the club itself, I’d geared up putting money in their pockets. We only have to finish around top 4 ish and get publicity for them to cream millions each year. For doing nothing. The yes men they put in charge all fit to the plan. The ‘restructure’….well we can all see how that’s going. The players attitudes are that of personnel who are not being conditioned to win trophies, just to earn money. The culture at the club, all stemming from the Glazers is that of greed, self-service and PR.

In that sense , to answer, the poster’s point that they are not as bad as the regime owners, actually they are worse

 

[JPRouve]

Yeah I know...however, that point only emphasises the absolute mess that we are in. We've spent all that money getting the squad in 'shape', when in fact we've blown vast sums of money due to the mis-management of the Glazer family from their sun loungers in Florida.

You mention Mike Ashley, at least he turned up for games. In fact, United have declined further under the Glazers than Newcastle did under Ashley. Fair enough, Newcastle got relegated under his ownership, but the last ten years have been the equivalent of relegation for a club the size of United.

We've got the worst owners in football.

We are not even close to have the worst owners in Football but the bold part is just from an other planet, you are talking about a club that got relegated several twice under Ashley.

 

[WeedmineR]

You focus on net spending and then ignore all of that posters other points…

And I have another question - where is the money coming from - the owners pockets or the club...

 

[UnitedFan93]

We are not even close to have the worst owners in Football but the bold part is just from an other planet, you are talking about a club that got relegated several twice under Ashley.

We have declined further under the Glazers than Newcastle did under Ashley.

It's only going to get worse under the Glazers. You don't think they are the worst owners in football, I think they are.

 

[altodevil]

We have declined further under the Glazers than Newcastle did under Ashley.

It's only going to get worse under the Glazers. You don't think they are the worse owners in football, I think they are.

Newcastle were relegated

 

[JPRouve]

We have declined further under the Glazers than Newcastle did under Ashley.

It's only going to get worse under the Glazers. You don't think they are the worse owners in football, I think they are.

Repeating it won't make it true. So you would say that they are worse owners than Gerard Lopez, worse owners than Schalke owners, worse owners, how about Barcelona?

 

[UnitedFan93]

Newcastle were relegated

It's all relative, the last 10 years is the equivalent to relegation for a club the size of United.

 

[JPRouve]

It's all relative, the last 10 years is the equivalent to relegation for a club the size of United.

So FSG relegated Liverpool several times?

 

[foolsgold]

The 11m is basically chump change, the problem isn't lack of spending, it's shit spending, crazy contract renewals, lack of any form of governance and vision.

I don't like the Glazers more than anyone else, but I could make my peace with them if the club was well run.

 

[UnitedFan93]

Repeating it won't make it true. So you would say that they are worse owners than Gerard Lopez, worse owners than Schalke owners, worse owners, how about Barcelona?

Worst than the lot of them. The way we are going we will be like Barcelona in 5 years time, but competing in a much harder league against state run clubs.

So FSG relegated Liverpool several times?

FSG woke up a sleeping giant and have invested in all areas of the club. They got their appointments wrong at the begining but soon developed a football strategy which has led to their success. They are fantastic owners.

 

[JPRouve]

Worst than the lot of them. The way we are going we will be like Barcelona in 5 years time, but competing in a much harder league against state run clubs.


FSG woke up a sleeping giant and have invested in all areas of the club. They got their appointments wrong at the begining but soon developed a football strategy which has led to their success. They are fantastic owners.

FSG stumbled on Klopp, outside of that their results were worse than United worse results in the last 8 years. That's the interesting part about your view, it has nothing to do with reality. Similarly United were the best or second best club in the world under the Glazer when SAF, the best manager in the world, was at the helm of the club.

And our current results are no different to our historical results without SAF or Sir Matt Busby.

 

[stw2022]

And I have another question - where is the money coming from - the owners pockets or the club...

But is that a bad thing? We’re entirely self-sufficient. We all wish the debt wasn’t there but why is being a club that only survives due to the benevolence of it’s owners or paper-agreement deals from state sponsors that don’t actually exist, suddenly the desired model?

 

[predator]

The Glazers are awful football club owners but they have spent a lot of money to be fair.

I would love to see them gone and replaced with owners that can build us a new stadium and still be willing to break the world transfer fee for a player that was in our academy and who recently left on a free and also give a 37 year old 500k a week after giving a certain Chilean similar figures who now can only bad mouth the club...

Anyway... I know many united fans that would happily take a human rights abusing head of state as our new owner as long as we were back winning things. This forum, however, by majority opinion, wants new owners that are 100 percent not head of oil states yet can compete with other oil money clubs.

I personally believe that once Klopp and Pep leave, things will change. Football is a game of cycles. Their next managers will be under alot of pressure.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

The culture at the club, all stemming from the Glazers is that of greed, self-service and PR.

This point is key, and is often missed by people.

The top down / trickle down philosophy of a club comes from the owners or from a highly forceful manager…

The Glazers are only at Utd to TAKE money - NOTHING ELSE - and that philosophy literally runs through what’s left of Man Utd.

Many top owners are clearly competitive and get off on competing at the highest level to actually WIN TROPHIES.

The Glazers are a joke in elite footy circles.

They literally inherited Utd and have no desire to compete.

Their method of buying and running Utd should be illegal and they clearly do not belong in football.

They’re an embarrassment to Man Utd.

And to those saying, ‘but they’ve spent money’ - IT’S MAN UNITED’S MONEY!!!

They’ve put literally zero of their own money into United, zero.

 

[predator]

Nonsense.

This point is key, and is often missed by people.

The top down / trickle down philosophy of a club comes from the owners or from a highly forceful manager…

The Glazers are only at Utd to TAKE money - NOTHING ELSE - and that philosophy literally runs through what’s left of Man Utd.

Many top owners are clearly competitive and get off on competing at the highest level to actually WIN TROPHIES.

The Glazers are a joke in elite footy circles.

They literally inherited Utd and have no desire to compete.

Their method of buying and running Utd should be illegal and they clearly do not belong in football.

They’re an embarrassment to Man Utd.

And to those saying, ‘but they’ve spent money’ - IT’S MAN UNITED’S MONEY!!!

They’ve put literally zero of their own money into United, zero.

Man uniteds money? Who is man united?

Were they a joke when we got to the CL final 3 times in 4 or 5 years? Might be 6 actually.

Were they a joke when we won the league 3 times on the bounce?

Were they a joke when we broke the world transfer fee for Pogback or when we signed Lukaku for 75m, Maguire for 80, paid Sanchez half a million a week, re signed ronaldo etc etc the list goes on all fecking night. Whilst silently becoming the the proud owners of the highest wage bill in world football.

I agree, they are terrible owners for a football club. But I can't help myself when it comes to money because they have actually blown a fortune.

Granted, we had Ferguson but FSG are no different to the Glazers in terms of interest

 

[Robaldo]

To people saying that the Glazers have spent a lot of money on transfers: this is money generated by the club - not a penny has been invested by the Glazers!

The amount that the Glazers have directly taken out and indirectly through debt repayments would have paid for a new stadium.

 

[lefty_jakobz]

Shocking that still some are trying to justify their ownership.

They are leeches!

Bought arguably one of the biggest clubs in football with out spending any of their own money, continue to pay a debt that hasn't changed much from the amount they initially took on.

If only we had some ultras in the US to knock on their front doors

 

[Flying high]

Nonsense.
Man uniteds money? Who is man united?

Were they a joke when we got to the CL final 3 times in 4 or 5 years? Might be 6 actually.

Were they a joke when we won the league 3 times on the bounce?

Were they a joke when we broke the world transfer fee for Pogback or when we signed Lukaku for 75m, Maguire for 80, paid Sanchez half a million a week, re signed ronaldo etc etc the list goes on all fecking night. Whilst silently becoming the the proud owners of the highest wage bill in world football.

I agree, they are terrible owners for a football club. But I can't help myself when it comes to money because they have actually blown a fortune.

Granted, we had Ferguson but FSG are no different to the Glazers in terms of interest

I didn't know FSG have cost that lot over a billion pounds and left them with over half a billion in debt? Would love to see the proof of that.

 

[predator]

I didn't know FSG have cost that lot over a billion pounds and left them with over half a billion in debt? Would love to see the proof of that.

But did you remember before Klopp actually won anything and the scousers wanted them out?

The Glazers are awful. There's no two ways about it. However, they have spent a fortune.

Out of interest - who would you realistically prefer to own us at this moment in time?

 

[Flying high]

But did you remember before Klopp actually won anything and the scousers wanted them out?

The Glazers are awful. There's no two ways about it. However, they have spent a fortune.

They haven't really though, have they. They have spent the minimum amount of the money, generated by the club, that they feel they have to to keep the wolves from the door. When we need 3 players we get 2. When we need 4 we get 3. It's never quite enough to seriously challenge because that's not their aim. They just want to keep their easy income stream going.

Out of interest - who would you realistically prefer to own us at this moment in time?

It's quite simple really. When we finally get ourselves organised enough to remove the current parasites, we will be in a much better position to hold the next owner to account.

I was there in 2005 protesting at the proposed Glazer takeover and I have to say, the turnout was mostly quite poor. Had we had more support then I believe we could have stopped them. This time though, things are not going well on the pitch which naturally means the more casual fans have a heightened interest in off-field activities. Also, of all the top clubs, I don't think any even come close to subsidising it's owners to the scale which we have over the last 17 years. Why should we expect that the next owner would be even in the same league as the Glazers when it comes to bleeding the club dry?

 

[stw2022]

In the 90s transfers were paid by the club’s money not by Martin Edwards popping into the Alliance and Leicester.

This again is why anti-Glazer campaigns fail to gain any kind of traction and why they get away with mismanagement of the club because fans aren’t fecking idiots and have memories and know prior to their take over we didn’t have owners that threw their own money at the club either.

This and fifteen years of “We’re skint” whilst everyone can see the money we spend. That isn’t being a Glazer apologist. That’s pointing out idiocy

 

[Flying high]

In the 90s transfers were paid by the club’s money not by Martin Edwards popping into the Alliance and Leicester.

That's pretty much all we're asking for now.

That the club can spend it's own money on the club. Not on the owners, and certainly not on paying the charges(not even the balance) of THEIR loan.

 

[stw2022]

I’ve no issue accepting the club has been mismanaged. In fact, I’d concur. It absolutely has.

But the club’s spending has always been from money the club earned and ever since 1991 we were paying dividends to shareholders - and in reality decades before that in dividends to owners before we were obliged to publish financial reports

At times it seems people genuinely seem to believe they bought the club from a benevolent billionaire.

 

[Moriarty]

I personally believe that once Klopp and Pep leave, things will change. Football is a game of cycles. Their next managers will be under alot of pressure.

If City and Liverpool have the right infrastructure in place = and it appears that they do - then it would take a monumental cock-up of a managerial appointment to break that continuity. Our infrastructure was Sir Alex. His hands were on the controls and although he delegated, Fergie was the mainstay. At one point, Gill was asked about the club's post-Fergie plans. He stated that United would not repeat the mistakes they made when Matt Busby retired, that a plan was in place, and the next man would be proven winner domestically and in Europe. So the Glazers gave Woodward the keys to the kingdom as their proxy in Manchester and the rest is history.

 

[Elcabron]

May have been discussed already, apologies if so but how much of the club do the Glazers now own and what is that worth net of debt? 3 Billion?

Surely they would be better off netting that three billon and putting the feet up rather than taking out 25m per year or whatever it is in dividends from the club? If they took 50m per year from the 3 Billion cash, they would still have 2 billon left after twenty years without any capital appreciation/compound interest.

Too simplistic perhaps and probably why I'll never have such a decision to make.

 

[Elcabron]

If City and Liverpool have the right infrastructure in place = and it appears that they do - then it would take a monumental cock-up of a managerial appointment to break that continuity. Our infrastructure was Sir Alex. His hands were on the controls and although he delegated, Fergie was the mainstay. At one point, Gill was asked about the club's post-Fergie plans. He stated that United would not repeat the mistakes they made when Matt Busby retired, that a plan was in place, and the next man would be proven winner domestically and in Europe. So the Glazers gave Woodward the keys to the kingdom as their proxy in Manchester and the rest is history.

Newcastle will be top dogs within a decade. City are paupers compared to Newcastle's wealth.

 

[Flying high]

I’ve no issue accepting the club has been mismanaged. In fact, I’d concur. It absolutely has.

But the club’s spending has always been from money the club earned and ever since 1991 we were paying dividends to shareholders - and in reality decades before that in dividends to owners before we were obliged to publish financial reports

At times it seems people genuinely seem to believe they bought the club from a benevolent billionaire.

You sure sound a lot like an apologist for these leeches.

No mention of their loan and the ridiculous amount of money it has cost the club to service?

It's not like we have a nice new stadium to show for the debt, like spurs or arsenal.

 

[K Stand Knut]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned previously in this thread or another but the latest United We Stand podcast is depressingly good.

local Manchester lad talking about the ownership.

We’re stuck with these cnuts for a long, long time

 

[Andersonson]

Its not the lack of money, it's how they're spent.

Yes we use a shit ton on wages and transfers and that should be more than good enough for something better than a 5th place.

And that's on the glazers.

 

[stw2022]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned previously in this thread or another but the latest United We Stand podcast is depressingly good.

local Manchester lad talking about the ownership.

We’re stuck with these cnuts for a long, long time

That’s been obvious for years though. Hasnt stopped people profiting by convincing fans in huge numbers buying merchandise they’re selling would make any difference.

There are ways pressure can be put on the owners and there are metrics by which they can be held accountable for what they do but that’s never really been tried because there’s money to be made duping fans into thinking buying a green and gold scarf will hasten their exit. It won’t and we deserve better than just being whipped up once a year to help someone get rid of excess stock

A decade of mismanagement deserves more scrutiny and higher standard of pressure than we’ve seen so far else they’ll continue getting away with it

 

[Coops73]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned previously in this thread or another but the latest United We Stand podcast is depressingly good.

local Manchester lad talking about the ownership.

We’re stuck with these cnuts for a long, long time

Yeah, I listened to that, it just got me down to be honest, it sounds like they ain’t going anywhere soon.

 

[K Stand Knut]

Yeah, I listened to that, it just got me down to be honest, it sounds like they ain’t going anywhere soon.

Depressingly honest but pretty insightful.

 

[K Stand Knut]

That’s been obvious for years though. Hasnt stopped people profiting by convincing fans in huge numbers buying merchandise they’re selling would make any difference.

There are ways pressure can be put on the owners and there are metrics by which they can be held accountable for what they do but that’s never really been tried because there’s money to be made duping fans into thinking buying a green and gold scarf will hasten their exit. It won’t and we deserve better than just being whipped up once a year to help someone get rid of excess stock

A decade of mismanagement deserves more scrutiny and higher standard of pressure than we’ve seen so far else they’ll continue getting away with it

Well, people will always profit off any situation. Can’t really blame anyone but the fans for stuff like that. Them and the kinds of people who are there to only make a profit.

Not sure you can throw those aspersions at groups like MUSA etc.

 

[clarkydaz]

Yeah, I listened to that, it just got me down to be honest, it sounds like they ain’t going anywhere soon.

what was the gist of their reasoning to stay?

 

[Coops73]

what was the gist of their reasoning to stay?

Basically Jim O’Neil was saying he couldn’t see anyone with the wealth/want to buy the club and while they were taking dividends it was a constant flow of money for them so why sell.

He did say that potentially they may consider a sale if they were “forced” to stop taking dividends, something to do with the “glazer clause” that had been inserted in the Chelsea sale but how that could affect the glazers I didn’t really understand.

 

[JPRouve]

Basically Jim O’Neil was saying he couldn’t see anyone with the wealth/want to buy the club and while they were taking dividends it was a constant flow of money for them so why sell.

He did say that potentially they may consider a sale if they were “forced” to stop taking dividends, something to do with the “glazer clause” that had been inserted in the Chelsea sale but how that could affect the glazers I didn’t really understand.

I have had the same feeling but there is one scenario that makes sense for the Glazers it's if one of their advisors suggest to swap Manchester United ownership for one of the future NBA expansion teams, Seattle or Las Vegas. United could finance it easily and generate a bit of leftover money. A year old rumour estimated the cost of an expansion team at 2.5bn$, they'd make a similar amount of money without many of the cultural issues that they are currently facing.

 

[clarkydaz]

Basically Jim O’Neil was saying he couldn’t see anyone with the wealth/want to buy the club and while they were taking dividends it was a constant flow of money for them so why sell.

He did say that potentially they may consider a sale if they were “forced” to stop taking dividends, something to do with the “glazer clause” that had been inserted in the Chelsea sale but how that could affect the glazers I didn’t really understand.

thanks. On that it doesnt appear they have concrete plans, maybe after their masterplan of the superleague failing, anything else is small fry.