Glazers / Woodward out! (One down)

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
18,357
The Premier League should have been made to answer for why they didn't do more in 2005
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
1,376
This thread tells it all

There are some shills on here arguing the Glazers aren't really that big of a problem or something.

The disgusting parasites are the root of everything wrong in the club.
 

I’m loving my life

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 22, 2022
Messages
525
Yes, of course. Here is the letter:

“Dear Premier League,

I would firstly ask that this email be forwarded to the relevant authorities, please.

In 2020, the existence of the premier league was put in doubt as owners of several clubs attempted to get the European Super League off the ground. It was rightly derided and met with huge opposition from fans across the UK as an attack on the fundamental values of the game as we know it. Joel Glazer, co owner of Manchester United Football Club, was named as Vice President of the move/organization, and for me, and many other Man United fans, he is still seen as a figurehead of that.
The Premier League and even parts of the UK government were also strongly opposed to the ESL, and ultimately, its establishment attempts were thankfully thwarted.

This brings me to the Premier League’s new ban on leveraged debt-fueled buyouts of clubs, which are hugely important cultural/social assets, as I’m sure you agree.
(https://news.sky.com/story/premier-league-expected-to-restrict-debt-fuelled-club-takeovers-12629946)
Arguably, one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the UK, Manchester United, as you know, were bought in 2005 by the Glazer family who used a bank loan of approximately £600 million to leverage the deal. This level of debt has drained well over a billion pounds from the club and game itself in bank repayments over the years, and the debt remains largely the same.
This was and still is completely wrong, as you have now acknowledged this with your new rules.
I believe that it is now time for you, the Premier League, to step in and require the Glazer family to either remove the debt immediately or sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership, of which there are many interested parties, including a fan ownership model.

On the Premier League’s new rules and auditing on ‘fit and proper’ ownership, I believe Manchester United’s current ownership is gravely in breach of those that you have set out. I have studied your ‘Premier League Owners’ Charter’:

You state that the owners, as ‘custodians’ of the club, should commit to upholding the heritage of the club. Manchester United were the first English team to win the European cup in 1968, before that, in 1931, local businessman, James Gibson, put a large amount of his own money into the club to remove its debts and allow the club to grow, and fast forwarding to the years before the Glazers’ take over, Manchester United were completely debt free and regular challengers for trophies, which enhanced the Premier Leagues standing worldwide. This, however, is now entirely not the case and therefore, the Glazers have already broken your first rule, and quite probably their ownership has worked against the ethos of your second rule.

Your third rule:
‘We recognise the value each Club has to its broader community and the desire of each individual Club to win and to grow. We will run our Club in an economically stable, sustainable, and socially responsible manner.’
As acknowledged by your ban on leveraged buyouts, it is clear that Manchester United has not been allowed to grow, while chances of winning trophies has been significantly reduced due to the amounts of money that is drained from the club.
Importantly, your ban acknowledges that leveraged buy outs are not socially responsible and morally wrong. Again, I emphasize that Manchester United are a huge socio-cultural asset to the UK, like Liverpool Football Club, and that status should be protected, certainly not actively damaged.
(I am not claiming that the club deserves guaranteed success, just that it has a status and heritage to uphold for the sake of the Premier League if nothing else)

Many other fans and I, not only of Manchester United, could make a fair argument that the Glazers have breached most of your other rules on ‘fit and proper’ ownership.

On rule 10, that all shareholders should have an ‘equal voice’, this is also not the case at Manchester United, where the Glazers family owns all of the ‘Class B’ shares which have significant voting rights. Therefore, the shareholders of ‘Class A’ are nothing more than numbers mined for money which then went directly to the Glazers themselves and was not invested back into the club.

Old Trafford, once one of the best stadiums in the world, has fallen behind other Premier League grounds in size, upkeep and facilities, yet the ownership continues to take money out. The Glazers are the only owners in the premier league who take annual dividend payments.

I’m sure you will agree also, that planned protests by Manchester United fans throughout this season will not be beneficial for the League overall.

I implore you, if you accept that a huge, revered cultural asset should be protected, and in line with your recent rulings on debt-fueled ownership and ‘fit and proper’ ownership, to strongly consider the requirement of the Glazer family to remove the club’s debt in full or to sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership who present a fair purchase offer in the immediate future, like which occurred in the recent sale of Chelsea Football Club.

I hope my message is passed to the relevant authorities and that I receive a sufficient response.

Thank you for your time,“


Im not sure of the rules on posting email addresses on here but here they are:

supporters@premierleague.com, nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk, enquiries@dcms.gov.uk

I’m sure there are other email addresses that you could send to but they’re the ones I used so far. I wasn’t able to get through to the fa.
I tweaked the email slightly depending on where it was going.

Youre welcome to use wherever you think would help.
Thanks for this. Will adapt something and send. This is a good direct way of highlighting the issue to decision makers. Maybe the Trafford MP would also be a good target.

The protests need to be multifaceted to work and sending eloquently well thought out letters will help offset the (wrongly) perceived unrest from physical protests.
 

downunder red

Full Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2017
Messages
565
Location
the land of oz
Yes, of course. Here is the letter:

“Dear Premier League,

I would firstly ask that this email be forwarded to the relevant authorities, please.

In 2020, the existence of the premier league was put in doubt as owners of several clubs attempted to get the European Super League off the ground. It was rightly derided and met with huge opposition from fans across the UK as an attack on the fundamental values of the game as we know it. Joel Glazer, co owner of Manchester United Football Club, was named as Vice President of the move/organization, and for me, and many other Man United fans, he is still seen as a figurehead of that.
The Premier League and even parts of the UK government were also strongly opposed to the ESL, and ultimately, its establishment attempts were thankfully thwarted.

This brings me to the Premier League’s new ban on leveraged debt-fueled buyouts of clubs, which are hugely important cultural/social assets, as I’m sure you agree.
(https://news.sky.com/story/premier-league-expected-to-restrict-debt-fuelled-club-takeovers-12629946)
Arguably, one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the UK, Manchester United, as you know, were bought in 2005 by the Glazer family who used a bank loan of approximately £600 million to leverage the deal. This level of debt has drained well over a billion pounds from the club and game itself in bank repayments over the years, and the debt remains largely the same.
This was and still is completely wrong, as you have now acknowledged this with your new rules.
I believe that it is now time for you, the Premier League, to step in and require the Glazer family to either remove the debt immediately or sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership, of which there are many interested parties, including a fan ownership model.

On the Premier League’s new rules and auditing on ‘fit and proper’ ownership, I believe Manchester United’s current ownership is gravely in breach of those that you have set out. I have studied your ‘Premier League Owners’ Charter’:

You state that the owners, as ‘custodians’ of the club, should commit to upholding the heritage of the club. Manchester United were the first English team to win the European cup in 1968, before that, in 1931, local businessman, James Gibson, put a large amount of his own money into the club to remove its debts and allow the club to grow, and fast forwarding to the years before the Glazers’ take over, Manchester United were completely debt free and regular challengers for trophies, which enhanced the Premier Leagues standing worldwide. This, however, is now entirely not the case and therefore, the Glazers have already broken your first rule, and quite probably their ownership has worked against the ethos of your second rule.

Your third rule:
‘We recognise the value each Club has to its broader community and the desire of each individual Club to win and to grow. We will run our Club in an economically stable, sustainable, and socially responsible manner.’
As acknowledged by your ban on leveraged buyouts, it is clear that Manchester United has not been allowed to grow, while chances of winning trophies has been significantly reduced due to the amounts of money that is drained from the club.
Importantly, your ban acknowledges that leveraged buy outs are not socially responsible and morally wrong. Again, I emphasize that Manchester United are a huge socio-cultural asset to the UK, like Liverpool Football Club, and that status should be protected, certainly not actively damaged.
(I am not claiming that the club deserves guaranteed success, just that it has a status and heritage to uphold for the sake of the Premier League if nothing else)

Many other fans and I, not only of Manchester United, could make a fair argument that the Glazers have breached most of your other rules on ‘fit and proper’ ownership.

On rule 10, that all shareholders should have an ‘equal voice’, this is also not the case at Manchester United, where the Glazers family owns all of the ‘Class B’ shares which have significant voting rights. Therefore, the shareholders of ‘Class A’ are nothing more than numbers mined for money which then went directly to the Glazers themselves and was not invested back into the club.

Old Trafford, once one of the best stadiums in the world, has fallen behind other Premier League grounds in size, upkeep and facilities, yet the ownership continues to take money out. The Glazers are the only owners in the premier league who take annual dividend payments.

I’m sure you will agree also, that planned protests by Manchester United fans throughout this season will not be beneficial for the League overall.

I implore you, if you accept that a huge, revered cultural asset should be protected, and in line with your recent rulings on debt-fueled ownership and ‘fit and proper’ ownership, to strongly consider the requirement of the Glazer family to remove the club’s debt in full or to sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership who present a fair purchase offer in the immediate future, like which occurred in the recent sale of Chelsea Football Club.

I hope my message is passed to the relevant authorities and that I receive a sufficient response.

Thank you for your time,“


Im not sure of the rules on posting email addresses on here but here they are:

supporters@premierleague.com, nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk, enquiries@dcms.gov.uk

I’m sure there are other email addresses that you could send to but they’re the ones I used so far. I wasn’t able to get through to the fa.
I tweaked the email slightly depending on where it was going.

Youre welcome to use wherever you think would help.
Brilliant!!! Getting on to it right away. Don't know if they will care receiving e mails from down under but I'm still a British citizen.
 

Gordon Godot

Full Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2016
Messages
471
There are some shills on here arguing the Glazers aren't really that big of a problem or something.

The disgusting parasites are the root of everything wrong in the club.
The Glazers are everything wrong with teh club, it has rotten from the top down. Anyone who claims otherwise is a fool or a WUM. They simply dont care and treat the fans for fools yet the club has enriched them beyond their wildest dreams. Nothing changes while they are the owners. MUST should stop engaging with them. Fans need to boycott. Its the only way.
 

Lee565

Full Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2019
Messages
3,464
I'm kinda hoping we get relegated as at the moment in time with our fanbase being a soft touch with the glazers that it may be the best way we see them sod off as they would hopefully feel it's best to cash out with us going downwards
 

plex

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
207
Nicely put, the way the club is handling the current situation is less-than-ideal. Even if you come to the conclusion that, for whatever reason, you do not wish to continue with Rangnick (as consultant, part of management..) you could still use his blunt assessment to change things for the better. However, the management board did not change a single thing. I’m also not sure if ETH took Rangnick’s opinion into account. I mean ETH had the perfect excuse to ask for new players or get rid of low performers. If he did, and the management board did not listen to him, then the management board itself needs to be replaced.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
42,318
Location
Manchester
Yes, of course. Here is the letter:

“Dear Premier League,

I would firstly ask that this email be forwarded to the relevant authorities, please.

In 2020, the existence of the premier league was put in doubt as owners of several clubs attempted to get the European Super League off the ground. It was rightly derided and met with huge opposition from fans across the UK as an attack on the fundamental values of the game as we know it. Joel Glazer, co owner of Manchester United Football Club, was named as Vice President of the move/organization, and for me, and many other Man United fans, he is still seen as a figurehead of that.
The Premier League and even parts of the UK government were also strongly opposed to the ESL, and ultimately, its establishment attempts were thankfully thwarted.

This brings me to the Premier League’s new ban on leveraged debt-fueled buyouts of clubs, which are hugely important cultural/social assets, as I’m sure you agree.
(https://news.sky.com/story/premier-league-expected-to-restrict-debt-fuelled-club-takeovers-12629946)
Arguably, one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the UK, Manchester United, as you know, were bought in 2005 by the Glazer family who used a bank loan of approximately £600 million to leverage the deal. This level of debt has drained well over a billion pounds from the club and game itself in bank repayments over the years, and the debt remains largely the same.
This was and still is completely wrong, as you have now acknowledged this with your new rules.
I believe that it is now time for you, the Premier League, to step in and require the Glazer family to either remove the debt immediately or sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership, of which there are many interested parties, including a fan ownership model.

On the Premier League’s new rules and auditing on ‘fit and proper’ ownership, I believe Manchester United’s current ownership is gravely in breach of those that you have set out. I have studied your ‘Premier League Owners’ Charter’:

You state that the owners, as ‘custodians’ of the club, should commit to upholding the heritage of the club. Manchester United were the first English team to win the European cup in 1968, before that, in 1931, local businessman, James Gibson, put a large amount of his own money into the club to remove its debts and allow the club to grow, and fast forwarding to the years before the Glazers’ take over, Manchester United were completely debt free and regular challengers for trophies, which enhanced the Premier Leagues standing worldwide. This, however, is now entirely not the case and therefore, the Glazers have already broken your first rule, and quite probably their ownership has worked against the ethos of your second rule.

Your third rule:
‘We recognise the value each Club has to its broader community and the desire of each individual Club to win and to grow. We will run our Club in an economically stable, sustainable, and socially responsible manner.’
As acknowledged by your ban on leveraged buyouts, it is clear that Manchester United has not been allowed to grow, while chances of winning trophies has been significantly reduced due to the amounts of money that is drained from the club.
Importantly, your ban acknowledges that leveraged buy outs are not socially responsible and morally wrong. Again, I emphasize that Manchester United are a huge socio-cultural asset to the UK, like Liverpool Football Club, and that status should be protected, certainly not actively damaged.
(I am not claiming that the club deserves guaranteed success, just that it has a status and heritage to uphold for the sake of the Premier League if nothing else)

Many other fans and I, not only of Manchester United, could make a fair argument that the Glazers have breached most of your other rules on ‘fit and proper’ ownership.

On rule 10, that all shareholders should have an ‘equal voice’, this is also not the case at Manchester United, where the Glazers family owns all of the ‘Class B’ shares which have significant voting rights. Therefore, the shareholders of ‘Class A’ are nothing more than numbers mined for money which then went directly to the Glazers themselves and was not invested back into the club.

Old Trafford, once one of the best stadiums in the world, has fallen behind other Premier League grounds in size, upkeep and facilities, yet the ownership continues to take money out. The Glazers are the only owners in the premier league who take annual dividend payments.

I’m sure you will agree also, that planned protests by Manchester United fans throughout this season will not be beneficial for the League overall.

I implore you, if you accept that a huge, revered cultural asset should be protected, and in line with your recent rulings on debt-fueled ownership and ‘fit and proper’ ownership, to strongly consider the requirement of the Glazer family to remove the club’s debt in full or to sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership who present a fair purchase offer in the immediate future, like which occurred in the recent sale of Chelsea Football Club.

I hope my message is passed to the relevant authorities and that I receive a sufficient response.

Thank you for your time,“


Im not sure of the rules on posting email addresses on here but here they are:

supporters@premierleague.com, nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk, enquiries@dcms.gov.uk

I’m sure there are other email addresses that you could send to but they’re the ones I used so far. I wasn’t able to get through to the fa.
I tweaked the email slightly depending on where it was going.

Youre welcome to use wherever you think would help.
Good letter.

Any response yet? And did you find a contact for the FA?
 

Slysi17

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
723
The Glazers are everything wrong with teh club, it has rotten from the top down. Anyone who claims otherwise is a fool or a WUM. They simply dont care and treat the fans for fools yet the club has enriched them beyond their wildest dreams. Nothing changes while they are the owners. MUST should stop engaging with them. Fans need to boycott. Its the only way.
I have said stop focusing on the players and the owners are the main problem on Facebook. I got called a plastic fan, said I have never been Old Trafford, a simpleton. Its crazy Manchester United fans don't see the main problem here.
 

DomesticTadpole

Doom-monger obsessed with Herrera & the M.E.N.
Joined
Jun 4, 2011
Messages
91,747
Location
Barrow In Furness
People saying that they money they have taken wouldn't make much difference regarding transfers, well if they weren't in charge it would as the club might have been run properly in the first place.
 

Adisa

likes to take afvanadva wothowi doubt
Joined
Nov 28, 2014
Messages
46,453
Location
Birmingham
Books will be written about how they have run one of the world's most recognisable institutions into the ground.
 

Jericho

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
776
There are some shills on here arguing the Glazers aren't really that big of a problem or something.

The disgusting parasites are the root of everything wrong in the club.
There are two different problems IMO. The Glazers might be problem in a financial sense, but they can't be blamed for how this team is "performing". Granted we don't all the players we want but there's a lot of money out on the pitch and yet these players have served up nothing but shite for months (years?), lacking any real effort and seemingly unwilling to even attempt to implement a managers plan. A change of ownership shouldn't be required to get a tune of this lot against fucking Brentford.
 

newgiz

Full Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2014
Messages
868
Books will be written about how they have run one of the world's most recognisable institutions into the ground.
This.

Also a perfect opportunity for someone to make a Docuseries. How to ruin a multi-billion pound institution.
 

HookedOnAPhelan

Full Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2022
Messages
821
We'll need to sabotage every home game until the greedy parasites agree to sell to get them out I think. Because if we don't hurt them financially they won't care. Arnold said so himself at the pub, they don't give a feck about protests. It won't be until we convince them that we're not backing down until they feck off (even if it means relegation) that they'll change their mind.
 

Ricardo de la Vega

Full Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
725
There are two different problems IMO. The Glazers might be problem in a financial sense, but they can't be blamed for how this team is "performing". Granted we don't all the players we want but there's a lot of money out on the pitch and yet these players have served up nothing but shite for months (years?), lacking any real effort and seemingly unwilling to even attempt to implement a managers plan. A change of ownership shouldn't be required to get a tune of this lot against fecking Brentford.
How can you say the Glazers can't be blamed for how the players are performing? They are the ones who have refused to bring in proper football people on the board, proper managers (Solksjaer) and who appoint PR people like Ashton to allow the players an easy way out of criticism by focussing it on one guy like Ronaldo? The Glazers are to blame for EVERYTHING.
 

cj_sparky

Full Member
Joined
May 15, 2008
Messages
7,022
Sounds plausible given the previous stories of meddling concerning Martial sale, and the lucky strike they had with Tom Brady in Florida.
When it was being said United wouldn't sell him because Joel Glazer thought Martial was United's answer to Pele :lol:
 

Jericho

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
776
You blame the glazers for Maguires mistakes? For Bruno wasting/losing possession? For Rashford's inability to do anything right? For that fact that nobody can but a decent ball in the box? I could go. We have a better squad and a better manager than (on paper at least) than Brentford. The Glazers shouldn't be used as an excuse for what we saw on Saturday.

We could in theory get to a point where if the players were performing to their best that it might become apparent that the Glazers are holding the team back from competing with the likes of Liverpool, City and Chelsea due to lack of investment. But more than enough has been invested that you can't say they're holding us back from competing with Brentford. Once the players start doing they're part (some effort and desire would be a start) it'll be a lot easier to point the finger at the Glazers.
 

Rightnr

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2015
Messages
7,216
You blame the glazers for Maguires mistakes? For Bruno wasting/losing possession? For Rashford's inability to do anything right? For that fact that nobody can but a decent ball in the box? I could go. We have a better squad and a better manager than (on paper at least) than Brentford. The Glazers shouldn't be used as an excuse for what we saw on Saturday.

We could in theory get to a point where if the players were performing to their best that it might become apparent that the Glazers are holding the team back from competing with the likes of Liverpool, City and Chelsea due to lack of investment. But more than enough has been invested that you can't say they're holding us back from competing with Brentford. Once the players start doing they're part (some effort and desire would be a start) it'll be a lot easier to point the finger at the Glazers.
Ban
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
29,148
Location
Ginseng Strip
You blame the glazers for Maguires mistakes? For Bruno wasting/losing possession? For Rashford's inability to do anything right? For that fact that nobody can but a decent ball in the box? I could go. We have a better squad and a better manager than (on paper at least) than Brentford. The Glazers shouldn't be used as an excuse for what we saw on Saturday.

We could in theory get to a point where if the players were performing to their best that it might become apparent that the Glazers are holding the team back from competing with the likes of Liverpool, City and Chelsea due to lack of investment. But more than enough has been invested that you can't say they're holding us back from competing with Brentford. Once the players start doing they're part (some effort and desire would be a start) it'll be a lot easier to point the finger at the Glazers.
Oh please, we've heard that reductionist nonsense before.

Its down to pure and utter incompetency from the top down. We've had a decade of Woodward, a Glazer yes man who was woefully bad at his job, and largely responsible for the terrible business we've done over the years. And now he's been replaced (9 years too late) by more bankers and Glazer plugs who look every bit as woeful. We have a passive ownership who don't seem the slightest bit bothered by the club's rapid decline, and seem content being the only PL owners to take dividends out, and siphoning profits towards paying interest off a debt they themselves forced on the club. We've not been proactive in recruitment for the last decade, our scouting has been non-existent, we've brought in players solely on marketing potential, we've renewed contracts for the sake of it, offering ludicrous salaries for an average-at-best group of players who we struggle to offload without them leaving on a free. We take an absolute age to carry out any transfer business while our rivals snoop in, and get it done. And I've not even gone into our antiquated facilities or stadium that's been embarrassingly falling apart.

So yes, its all on the owners. Anyone who doesn't see that is a Glazer apologist, pure and simple.
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
1,376
There are two different problems IMO. The Glazers might be problem in a financial sense, but they can't be blamed for how this team is "performing". Granted we don't all the players we want but there's a lot of money out on the pitch and yet these players have served up nothing but shite for months (years?), lacking any real effort and seemingly unwilling to even attempt to implement a managers plan. A change of ownership shouldn't be required to get a tune of this lot against fecking Brentford.
The squad we have is shite. A lot of the players in it have no business playing for a club supposed to compete for the highest honors.

The reason they are here is because of the lack of vision and ambition. And the source of that are the leeches. Why was Ole manager for as long as he was? Why was Fletcher promoted from kid's coach to technical director within two years? Why is Murtough DoF despite having absolutely no experience in an even remotely similar position? Why is he still there? Why did Woodward despite being unfathomably incompetent in all matters football remain in the club for a decade? And that's obviously without touching upon the financial aspects.

The Glazers decide what goes on in the club because they appoint the people. And since they couldn't care any less people who are clearly stealing a living infest the club on and off the pitch. If they wanted the best for the club, had a vision and appointed the correct people Maguire and AWB wouldn't be here. Rashford would have been sold this summer. Lingard, Jones, Pogba, Bailly would have been a distant memory.

Everything traces back to the parasites. Everything. And the club is finished as long as they are here. This has been proven again and again and again. Some people on here like to use the argument that it's not really the Glazers because we won things under them while SAF was manager. Yes, we did, because he was a one man club and could make a title-winning team out of dirt. They didn't contribute jack shit to that. But towards the end of his tenure you could see the influence of the parasites already spreading. What has happened ever since he left? Moyes, LvG, Jose, Ole, Rangnick, now Ten Hag. The only constant in all of this is the ownership and their puppets.

I wish wasn't invested so much, but I am, and I hate them so much. I wish I'm alive to see them driven out of this club.
 
Last edited:

grahamo

Full Member
Joined
May 20, 2004
Messages
1,266
Location
Its a funny old game
Yes, of course. Here is the letter:

“Dear Premier League,

I would firstly ask that this email be forwarded to the relevant authorities, please.

In 2020, the existence of the premier league was put in doubt as owners of several clubs attempted to get the European Super League off the ground. It was rightly derided and met with huge opposition from fans across the UK as an attack on the fundamental values of the game as we know it. Joel Glazer, co owner of Manchester United Football Club, was named as Vice President of the move/organization, and for me, and many other Man United fans, he is still seen as a figurehead of that.
The Premier League and even parts of the UK government were also strongly opposed to the ESL, and ultimately, its establishment attempts were thankfully thwarted.

This brings me to the Premier League’s new ban on leveraged debt-fueled buyouts of clubs, which are hugely important cultural/social assets, as I’m sure you agree.
(https://news.sky.com/story/premier-league-expected-to-restrict-debt-fuelled-club-takeovers-12629946)
Arguably, one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the UK, Manchester United, as you know, were bought in 2005 by the Glazer family who used a bank loan of approximately £600 million to leverage the deal. This level of debt has drained well over a billion pounds from the club and game itself in bank repayments over the years, and the debt remains largely the same.
This was and still is completely wrong, as you have now acknowledged this with your new rules.
I believe that it is now time for you, the Premier League, to step in and require the Glazer family to either remove the debt immediately or sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership, of which there are many interested parties, including a fan ownership model.

On the Premier League’s new rules and auditing on ‘fit and proper’ ownership, I believe Manchester United’s current ownership is gravely in breach of those that you have set out. I have studied your ‘Premier League Owners’ Charter’:

You state that the owners, as ‘custodians’ of the club, should commit to upholding the heritage of the club. Manchester United were the first English team to win the European cup in 1968, before that, in 1931, local businessman, James Gibson, put a large amount of his own money into the club to remove its debts and allow the club to grow, and fast forwarding to the years before the Glazers’ take over, Manchester United were completely debt free and regular challengers for trophies, which enhanced the Premier Leagues standing worldwide. This, however, is now entirely not the case and therefore, the Glazers have already broken your first rule, and quite probably their ownership has worked against the ethos of your second rule.

Your third rule:
‘We recognise the value each Club has to its broader community and the desire of each individual Club to win and to grow. We will run our Club in an economically stable, sustainable, and socially responsible manner.’
As acknowledged by your ban on leveraged buyouts, it is clear that Manchester United has not been allowed to grow, while chances of winning trophies has been significantly reduced due to the amounts of money that is drained from the club.
Importantly, your ban acknowledges that leveraged buy outs are not socially responsible and morally wrong. Again, I emphasize that Manchester United are a huge socio-cultural asset to the UK, like Liverpool Football Club, and that status should be protected, certainly not actively damaged.
(I am not claiming that the club deserves guaranteed success, just that it has a status and heritage to uphold for the sake of the Premier League if nothing else)

Many other fans and I, not only of Manchester United, could make a fair argument that the Glazers have breached most of your other rules on ‘fit and proper’ ownership.

On rule 10, that all shareholders should have an ‘equal voice’, this is also not the case at Manchester United, where the Glazers family owns all of the ‘Class B’ shares which have significant voting rights. Therefore, the shareholders of ‘Class A’ are nothing more than numbers mined for money which then went directly to the Glazers themselves and was not invested back into the club.

Old Trafford, once one of the best stadiums in the world, has fallen behind other Premier League grounds in size, upkeep and facilities, yet the ownership continues to take money out. The Glazers are the only owners in the premier league who take annual dividend payments.

I’m sure you will agree also, that planned protests by Manchester United fans throughout this season will not be beneficial for the League overall.

I implore you, if you accept that a huge, revered cultural asset should be protected, and in line with your recent rulings on debt-fueled ownership and ‘fit and proper’ ownership, to strongly consider the requirement of the Glazer family to remove the club’s debt in full or to sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership who present a fair purchase offer in the immediate future, like which occurred in the recent sale of Chelsea Football Club.

I hope my message is passed to the relevant authorities and that I receive a sufficient response.

Thank you for your time,“


Im not sure of the rules on posting email addresses on here but here they are:

supporters@premierleague.com, nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk, enquiries@dcms.gov.uk

I’m sure there are other email addresses that you could send to but they’re the ones I used so far. I wasn’t able to get through to the fa.
I tweaked the email slightly depending on where it was going.

Youre welcome to use wherever you think would help.
Well done on that letter. Brilliant! Surely there is grounds for some type of legal challenge on rule 10. The class A & B shares are clearly n breach of this rule as they don't have equal voting rights. (Why have the Glazers not been taken to task about this?)
I'm not going to go through the rest as its pretty clear from Your research the Glazers are not "fit and proper" owners. Do the Premier league Audit Premier League clubs? because if they did United would certainly fail the audit.
Copies of that letter should be sent by as many people as possible to MP's, FA bigwigs, UEFA, FIFA the whole lot!
 

Barthez

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 15, 2012
Messages
876
Off to Busch Gardens today in Tampa. God help me if I bump into the rat tailed weasel!
 

mav_9me

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
8,557
I'm kinda hoping we get relegated as at the moment in time with our fanbase being a soft touch with the glazers that it may be the best way we see them sod off as they would hopefully feel it's best to cash out with us going downwards
I've been thinking of it too but that would mean ETH is gone too.
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
1,376
Yes, of course. Here is the letter:

“Dear Premier League,

I would firstly ask that this email be forwarded to the relevant authorities, please.

In 2020, the existence of the premier league was put in doubt as owners of several clubs attempted to get the European Super League off the ground. It was rightly derided and met with huge opposition from fans across the UK as an attack on the fundamental values of the game as we know it. Joel Glazer, co owner of Manchester United Football Club, was named as Vice President of the move/organization, and for me, and many other Man United fans, he is still seen as a figurehead of that.
The Premier League and even parts of the UK government were also strongly opposed to the ESL, and ultimately, its establishment attempts were thankfully thwarted.

This brings me to the Premier League’s new ban on leveraged debt-fueled buyouts of clubs, which are hugely important cultural/social assets, as I’m sure you agree.
(https://news.sky.com/story/premier-league-expected-to-restrict-debt-fuelled-club-takeovers-12629946)
Arguably, one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the UK, Manchester United, as you know, were bought in 2005 by the Glazer family who used a bank loan of approximately £600 million to leverage the deal. This level of debt has drained well over a billion pounds from the club and game itself in bank repayments over the years, and the debt remains largely the same.
This was and still is completely wrong, as you have now acknowledged this with your new rules.
I believe that it is now time for you, the Premier League, to step in and require the Glazer family to either remove the debt immediately or sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership, of which there are many interested parties, including a fan ownership model.

On the Premier League’s new rules and auditing on ‘fit and proper’ ownership, I believe Manchester United’s current ownership is gravely in breach of those that you have set out. I have studied your ‘Premier League Owners’ Charter’:

You state that the owners, as ‘custodians’ of the club, should commit to upholding the heritage of the club. Manchester United were the first English team to win the European cup in 1968, before that, in 1931, local businessman, James Gibson, put a large amount of his own money into the club to remove its debts and allow the club to grow, and fast forwarding to the years before the Glazers’ take over, Manchester United were completely debt free and regular challengers for trophies, which enhanced the Premier Leagues standing worldwide. This, however, is now entirely not the case and therefore, the Glazers have already broken your first rule, and quite probably their ownership has worked against the ethos of your second rule.

Your third rule:
‘We recognise the value each Club has to its broader community and the desire of each individual Club to win and to grow. We will run our Club in an economically stable, sustainable, and socially responsible manner.’
As acknowledged by your ban on leveraged buyouts, it is clear that Manchester United has not been allowed to grow, while chances of winning trophies has been significantly reduced due to the amounts of money that is drained from the club.
Importantly, your ban acknowledges that leveraged buy outs are not socially responsible and morally wrong. Again, I emphasize that Manchester United are a huge socio-cultural asset to the UK, like Liverpool Football Club, and that status should be protected, certainly not actively damaged.
(I am not claiming that the club deserves guaranteed success, just that it has a status and heritage to uphold for the sake of the Premier League if nothing else)

Many other fans and I, not only of Manchester United, could make a fair argument that the Glazers have breached most of your other rules on ‘fit and proper’ ownership.

On rule 10, that all shareholders should have an ‘equal voice’, this is also not the case at Manchester United, where the Glazers family owns all of the ‘Class B’ shares which have significant voting rights. Therefore, the shareholders of ‘Class A’ are nothing more than numbers mined for money which then went directly to the Glazers themselves and was not invested back into the club.

Old Trafford, once one of the best stadiums in the world, has fallen behind other Premier League grounds in size, upkeep and facilities, yet the ownership continues to take money out. The Glazers are the only owners in the premier league who take annual dividend payments.

I’m sure you will agree also, that planned protests by Manchester United fans throughout this season will not be beneficial for the League overall.

I implore you, if you accept that a huge, revered cultural asset should be protected, and in line with your recent rulings on debt-fueled ownership and ‘fit and proper’ ownership, to strongly consider the requirement of the Glazer family to remove the club’s debt in full or to sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership who present a fair purchase offer in the immediate future, like which occurred in the recent sale of Chelsea Football Club.

I hope my message is passed to the relevant authorities and that I receive a sufficient response.

Thank you for your time,“


Im not sure of the rules on posting email addresses on here but here they are:

supporters@premierleague.com, nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk, enquiries@dcms.gov.uk

I’m sure there are other email addresses that you could send to but they’re the ones I used so far. I wasn’t able to get through to the fa.
I tweaked the email slightly depending on where it was going.

Youre welcome to use wherever you think would help.
Maybe we should sent it or an edited version of it en masse to those email addresses? Perhaps get a Twitter campaign going through some of the more popular accounts, like whoever started the St. Petersburg Vinoy thing?
 

Van Piorsing

Lost his light sabre
Joined
Feb 10, 2006
Messages
21,458
Location
Polska
Nothing crucial gets done. They're sitting in States counting debt money while supporters bleeding out of any interest in this season and it's not even end of August. The worst type of relationship.

When it eventually turns into violence watch how they spin it on the so called toxic fanbase, while team they own reaching new depths of low in the table.
 

Koldbeer2021

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 18, 2021
Messages
33
Supports
West Ham
The squad we have is shite. A lot of the players in it have no business playing for a club supposed to compete for the highest honors.

The reason they are here is because of the lack of vision and ambition. And the source of that are the leeches. Why was Ole manager for as long as he was? Why was Fletcher promoted from kid's coach to technical director within two years? Why is Murtough DoF despite having absolutely no experience in an even remotely similar position? Why is he still there? Why did Woodward despite being unfathomably incompetent in all matters football remain in the club for a decade? And that's obviously without touching upon the financial aspects.

The Glazers decide what goes on in the club because they appoint the people. And since they couldn't care any less people who are clearly stealing a living infest the club on and off the pitch. If they wanted the best for the club, had a vision and appointed the correct people Maguire and AWB wouldn't be here. Rashford would have been sold this summer. Lingard, Jones, Pogba, Bailly would have been a distant memory.

I wish wasn't invested so much, but I am, and I hate them so much. I wish I'm alive to see them driven out of this club.
As someone looking in who has no emotional connection to the club (being a West Ham fan, we as a fanbase are also quite often at odds with the owners, so I do know how it feels, though there is some light at the end of our tunnel next year) all I can say is what the Glazers have done is nothing short of a total disgrace.

No one decision can not be blamed upon the Glazers. Yes the amount of money that has been spent both in transfers and wages over the years should have been good enough to stick you guys pretty much in the top 3 for the last decade, but even here you can blame the Glazers.

This is because they have been hiring people who will not rock the boat, who will not say what is needed, will not speak home truths and just are not football people, but commercial people. And of course they've got to get the commercial part right because how can the leech board justify their dividends, etc otherwise? So they buy big names, big signings who may not be right for the time but will sure sell the shirts, etc.

As for the squad, I very seriously look at your squad and think there really isn't a great deal of players in that team that I'd want or be bothered about. That would have been unthinkable 15-20 years ago. Whilst no doubt West Ham have improved in the last couple of years, equally it is about how Man Utd squad has continued to weaken. Yet the squad left is on wages that would justify a top 4 position usually, so thats a hell of a disconnect. Once again caused by utter disgraceful mismanagement from the board.

For owners to sucked out of the club over a billion dollars, at a time when most owners (even our hated Gold and Sullivan) have put money into the clubs one way or the other, is disgusting and I think like a succubus they will just keep sucking out money at the same rate...and if the income drops, all that will drop is the player budget. They sure as hell aren't going to drop their dividends and other such measures that benefit them.

Its also going to be hard to drive them out because with such a large fanbase there will always be huge numbers of casual fans who won't give a jot about the board situation and will always buy the shirts (I'm thinking particularly overseas here) so boycotting I'm not sure would have the same effect as it would with smaller clubs, though anything is better than nothing I suppose.
 

Ryan_

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
14
Not that they have ever cared but I think they have properly given up on the club.
I just saw someone defending the Glazers as they've "committed" funds to sign De Jong.

The wool is being pulled over our eyes once again. I fully believe that the Glazers strategically target big-name players who they know we won't actually sign, just to keep supporters busy. It happens every single summer in a repeated cycle of Glazernomics.

The reality is hitting home. Our owners have zero interest in footballing performance. They never did. They stand to make incredible profits, all while driving the club into the ground. The takeover will go down as a truly detrimental moment in our history as our team flounders, stadium rots, players waste their careers, and fans remain powerless.

Sorry for the negativity, but without a miracle takeover, there's absolutely no way out of this downward spiral.
 
X