This chap has strong links to the Saudi Royal family from what I've read.
8 years for united not making ucl final.11 years in a row without making the SuperBowl Playoffs
That sounds absurdly high, is it really an accurate figure?They have taken around 1bn out of united since 2005. Jeez. Nearly an amount city owner invested into the club.
I'm not defending Jose, I disliked him intensely, my point is that if you hire someone like that then you have to back him, even if you don't agree, how can he follow a plan if they won't get the players he wanted, I didn't want Peresic, but sure as hell he'd have been better than Martial or Sanchez have been on the left, I didn't want Maguire, in fact I thought we were ok at CB, but there is no doubt Jose was right that we needed someone there, and when he didn't get it he downed tools like the petulant child he is, because he knew we were goosed. As for Sanchez, there is not a chance in hell Jose wanted him, he was signed to for commercial reasons, and to make Ed look great, ADM never wanted to come to us, which is never a good start, and I doubt much due diligence was done on his personality, and how he would handle things under LvG, who didn't want him imo.ADM was arguably one of the best attacking wide players in the world at the time. I don't buy into this notion he was only signed for commercial reasons at all, its bit like saying if we signed Messi sure he was only signed for commercial reasons! Great players will also bring commercial gain, just how it goes.
The board wanted a long term plan put in place, Jose agreed to this when he joined. He spoke of wanting to build a similar history to Ferguson's and being here for year but what he done was a 180 then in the middle of season 2 and reverted to form.
To say the board should just fold and deliver him Perisic for me personally isn't right then, cause its a mutual agreement from the point of taking the job. He wanted to rid the club of the talented kid with far greater upside than a short term option in Perisic.
But feck it, are you telling me Perisic was the missing player and the one to win us a league? Not a chance mate, no way in hell was he going to be that player. Sure sod, I'll go one further... He wanted Maguire for ridiculous sums of money of £80m and the like, if they delivered him as well we still wouldn't of won the league I'd be certain of it.
Reality is this folks, make out that he only got 3 players in Fred, Grant and Dalot. Few months prior the club broke all kinds of spending records to deliver Sanchez who City were also chasing. That deal was mind boggling, Jose no doubt wanted him as he wanted an attacking wide player to replace Mikha (another expensive failure under Jose)... He was failing repeatedly with every single transfer the board gave him, but folks wanted players to just keep on being given to him?
That sounds absurdly high, is it really an accurate figure?
Why do you find it embarrassing for fans to criticise their club owners? It seems perfectly healthy to me.No we weren't we were in a period of restructure and won only 2 leagues in 5.
If you also knew our club history the club was ANYTHING but fine due to Ferguson having an extremely volatile and worse public fall out with the previous owners (Magnier & McManus) .
Supporters were protesting due to the fall out between manager and board and how it was affecting the club and supporters were going to protest even at a fecking horse race meet!!
To say we were doing just fine is well, nonsense! Ferguson was on the verge of quitting due to the fall out over the race horse Rock of Gibralatar!
This here is what we call revising history.
Except they do give 2 fecks because the go to example to support anti glazer sorts arguments is to cite how great City are doing. But the reality is and I know for a fact many don't bother their arses actually looking at City's books.
I mean, in the last year we had a good laugh on twitter tweeting their supports and club about the scandals that were breaking over how they conduct their business. We've journalists asking Pep is he receiving illegal funds whilst at City in press conferences.
You don't suddenly give two fecks because I've shown you the truth of the matter that the problems at United aren't exclusive to United but one that is quite common in the modern game.
Old Trafford could do with an upgrade alright but when we've managers constantly failing and demanding funds to rebuild... that will be put on the long finger.
You can sulk all you like about it but its extremely difficult to simultaneously fund a team rebuild with a stadium rebuild!
I didn't say they were positive, I just pointed out the fact they weren't entirely true.
That an its basically absolutely fecking embarrassing carry on.
If that Journo from SA is anything to go by, they are going to be doing just that.I'm so glad to see there is some real movement on this. Any prospective buyer can use our unrest as leverage. We need to keep the momentum going.
Have you any interest in the clubs accounts and finances?Except we already did, we were 1 point shy of winning 5 leagues on the bounce with the very same owners and you say I'm beyond clueless
Wonderful narrative, keep believing the spin from thicko twitter trolls as your source of information instead of educating yourself on the topic.
You know what they say, if its online well it must be true.
As much as i hate the Glaziers we dont want dirty oil middle east oil money washed in the clubThis chap has strong links to the Saudi Royal family from what I've read.
To be fair we wouldn't need them to invest beyond buying the club, just give the club free reign to use it's own cash.As much as i hate the Glaziers we dont want dirty oil middle east oil money washed in the club
They will own the club, I would rather we were relegated.To be fair we wouldn't need them to invest beyond buying the club, just give the club free reign to use it's own cash.
Not really. £42m last year in interest payments and dividends to the Glazer family, from revenues of £590m.Have you any interest in the clubs accounts and finances?
They are milking the club dry.
Wouldn't we? I thought the whole point of this #glazerout campaign was to get the Saudis in so that we can compete financially with City and PSG and buy lots of shiny new toys. Essentially turn us in to the play thing of a sovereign state.To be fair we wouldn't need them to invest beyond buying the club, just give the club free reign to use it's own cash.
42 million for saddling the club with huge debt!Not really. £42m last year in interest payments and dividends to the Glazer family, from revenues of £590m.
They are shitty owners but they are not milking the club dry.
well it is obvious that we need to Glaziers to leave as it is never going to happen with then in charge.Wouldn't we? I thought the whole point of this #glazerout campaign was to get the Saudis in so that we can compete financially with City and PSG and buy lots of shiny new toys. Essentially turn us in to the play thing of a sovereign state.
If all we want to do is "spend what we earn" and be able to compete financially with every other club in football aside from City/PSG, then we don't need new owners for that. We're already as rich or richer than Bayern, Barca, Real, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Juve etc etc.
No arguments from me, they have been bad owners. But we are not hamstrung financially anymore. It's a lack of ambition and a lack of competence at senior management level that is holding us back and preventing us competing with Liverpool, Juve, Barca, Bayern etc42 million for saddling the club with huge debt!
If they had actually spent their own money buying the club then i would have less of an issue with 40 plus million going out.
Get whoever in, as long as they let the club spend the money it generates then all is good. With that we can compete with these other clubs in the market but not when the money is being held back.Wouldn't we? I thought the whole point of this #glazerout campaign was to get the Saudis in so that we can compete financially with City and PSG and buy lots of shiny new toys. Essentially turn us in to the play thing of a sovereign state.
If all we want to do is "spend what we earn" and be able to compete financially with every other club in football aside from City/PSG, then we don't need new owners for that. We're already as rich or richer than Bayern, Barca, Real, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Juve etc etc.
I'm honestly not sure he would of been better than Martial myself.I'm not defending Jose, I disliked him intensely, my point is that if you hire someone like that then you have to back him, even if you don't agree, how can he follow a plan if they won't get the players he wanted, I didn't want Peresic, but sure as hell he'd have been better than Martial or Sanchez have been on the left, I didn't want Maguire, in fact I thought we were ok at CB, but there is no doubt Jose was right that we needed someone there, and when he didn't get it he downed tools like the petulant child he is, because he knew we were goosed. As for Sanchez, there is not a chance in hell Jose wanted him, he was signed to for commercial reasons, and to make Ed look great, ADM never wanted to come to us, which is never a good start, and I doubt much due diligence was done on his personality, and how he would handle things under LvG, who didn't want him imo.
It all comes back to the same thing, that the board, and in main Ed are not fit for purpose, and that falls with the Glazers, so why are they not doing anything about it? it's not like it will cost them more to oust Ed, and put someone who knows what they're doing there, also it's not like it will cost them more to back a proper manager in the transfer market (long term), but it needs to right structure in place, which they are just not willing to do.
The only conclusion is that the footballing side is just not important to them, they don't care, and I fully expect a reigning in on transfer spending now, becasue as you say the money will keep rolling in, so why chuck £100's more millions at it for minimal extra income, they have basically got us to the peak income wise for the time being, so they can just tread water for a while now, and just let Ed do all the propaganda work to keep everyone as happy as possible.
It's just fundamentally wrong for United to be treated like this, so some sort of concerted effort in making them aware of how the fans are feeling can only be a positive thing.
I find it embarrassing running with a fecking twitter trend as a means to get them to leave.Why do you find it embarrassing for fans to criticise their club owners? It seems perfectly healthy to me.
Would you find it embarrassing criticising a player after years of poor performances? Or does this embarrassment exclusively apply to fans who criticise owners?
How do you suggest fans should communicate their discontent with the Glazers?
As pointed out already by Infared its not "milking the club dry" as you put it. It accounts for 7% of the annual profit.Have you any interest in the clubs accounts and finances?
They are milking the club dry.
They have invested their own money as I pointed out already on a previous page. At the point of buying the club they did invest some of their own money / assets into the buyout. Yes the bulk was leveraged against the clubs earning ability I'm aware of that but its not true either to say as many do they haven't invested, cause they have.42 million for saddling the club with huge debt!
If they had actually spent their own money buying the club then i would have less of an issue with 40 plus million going out.
That is partly true but the lack of ambition is rooted in their corporate model which is to achieve the maximum personal profit with minimal investment.No arguments from me, they have been bad owners. But we are not hamstrung financially anymore. It's a lack of ambition and a lack of competence at senior management level that is holding us back and preventing us competing with Liverpool, Juve, Barca, Bayern etc
They invested 200 million to buy one one of the largest sports companies in the world and mortgaged the club to pay for the rest.As pointed out already by Infared its not "milking the club dry" as you put it. It accounts for 7% of the annual profit.
They have invested their own money as I pointed out already on a previous page. At the point of buying the club they did invest some of their own money / assets into the buyout. Yes the bulk was leveraged against the clubs earning ability I'm aware of that but its not true either to say as many do they haven't invested, cause they have.
They paid of the worst (high risk) PIK loans in 2010. Which in turn freed up profitability and in turn ability to invest in the team.
When the CEO says "On the field performances don't matter or affect the commercial side of the business"I'm honestly not sure he would of been better than Martial myself.
Perisic was involved in 12 goals in Serie A over 2705 mins, meaning he was involved in a goal every 2.50 games.
Martial was involved in 13 goals in the PL over 1623 mins, meaning he was involved in a goal every 1.38 games.
Martial was nearly twice as productive as Perisic was last season in reality. Sanchez has been a disaster alright.
Sorry, but Jose downed tools long before any fall out over centre halves. What about his CL loss to Sevilla and his post match rant? Where he belittled the club and praised his former glories? He admitted through April and May he couldn't motivate the players and he demanded that Fellaini also be kept. Then he lost a cup final. He then told supporters not to attend games. The fall out of Centre backs happened after all that.
It's not so simple as to say he should be supported unequivocally, no manager is given that level of support...none! Not even Ferguson got that kind of support as he routinely missed out on his targets.
See I don't buy into this narrative that they don't care about the results on field, why would they make Jose the best paid manager in world football if they didn't care? Did they pay him that kind of salary just to win the odd cup and ultimately fail? When you apply simple logic, it doesn't make sense.
Further more, why invest 1 billion there about on players in 6 seasons... to again fail? They part with that kind of money because they want and demand on field success. It hasn't happened in terms of a league win yet but that doesn't auto translate to meaning they want failure.
Jesus even as kids its inherently built into each of us to not want to fail. Why would egomaniacs like these want failure?
The Glazers are parasites, it's frankly odd that you have so much invested in defending them, are you some kind of neckbeard libertarian?All depends really on how you view it, the interest rates have been lowered due to the direct investment of the glazer family. Rather than reply that "I must be Ed Woodward", read up on it. They have a "vested interest" if you will cause they've parted with funds themselves but that isn't told in the protest agenda.
The overall interest payments is a considerable sum but its not damaging the club as we can clearly see from player investment in the post Fergie era, we repeatedly spend vast sums of money.
The debt everyone bangs on about is again a narrative spun that this is exclusive to United and damaging us, its not. We have cash reserves and assets that effectively write that off.
Leveraged buy outs are completely common place within business, its not something that is again exclusive to United.
Chances are extremely likely that if we had new owners something similar would happen again with a leveraged buyout or in City's case a sneaky cooking of the bookings in terms of "deferred payments".
Read the previous page, I've already upset you cause you couldn't dare have a person offer up proof of things not being true like the narrative that dividends are only paid by United and cherry picking stuff about season ticket prices but ignoring the fact an 8 year price freeze has happened.
You fervently defend the Glazers at every opportunity, you claim the anti glazer crew are basing their protests on half truths,I find it embarrassing running with a fecking twitter trend as a means to get them to leave.
When you dig deeper and look at the information being used as a foundation for the basis of said protest much of it is lies and half truths at best.
As pointed out already by Infared its not "milking the club dry" as you put it. It accounts for 7% of the annual profit.
They have invested their own money as I pointed out already on a previous page. At the point of buying the club they did invest some of their own money / assets into the buyout. Yes the bulk was leveraged against the clubs earning ability I'm aware of that but its not true either to say as many do they haven't invested, cause they have.
They paid of the worst (high risk) PIK loans in 2010. Which in turn freed up profitability and in turn ability to invest in the team.
I find it embarrassing running with a fecking twitter trend as a means to get them to leave.
When you dig deeper and look at the information being used as a foundation for the basis of said protest much of it is lies and half truths at best.
As pointed out already by Infared its not "milking the club dry" as you put it. It accounts for 7% of the annual profit.
They have invested their own money as I pointed out already on a previous page. At the point of buying the club they did invest some of their own money / assets into the buyout. Yes the bulk was leveraged against the clubs earning ability I'm aware of that but its not true either to say as many do they haven't invested, cause they have.
They paid of the worst (high risk) PIK loans in 2010. Which in turn freed up profitability and in turn ability to invest in the team.
Not that I know of - Club owners sell when they get an acceptable offer, fan sentiment tends to have little to do with that.Genuine question, as I don’t pay much attention to the going’s on at other clubs, but has fan pressure ever forced a club’s owners to sell up? I mean at a big club as well. What did they do that had an impact?
Also didn’t MUST pocket a load of donations around the LUHG times? Couldn’t that go to a professional PR agency to drive a campaign?
And to think we have actual glazer bootlickers hereIf even half of what is written here is correct, we are in even deeper siht than i thought...
Crazy stuff. The glazers could solve all their issues if they just put the right people in the right places. How stupid would it be if we suggested that Paul Mitchell be hired to run the commercial side of the club. fecking laughable, yet here we are.And to think we have actual glazer bootlickers here
Crazy stuff. The glazers could solve all their issues if they just put the right people in the right places. How stupid would it be if we suggested that Paul Mitchell be hired to run the commercial side of the club. fecking laughable, yet here we are.
Dear Glazers,
I’ve been a fan since that Super Bowl run from when I was a little kid. Then you drafted Carnel Williams and this Auburn homer was a fan for life. The Bucs never won another playoff game in my adult life.
If Jason Licht managed a Walmart he would have been fired a long time ago, and I have seen some DUMB folks running these economy crushers. If Jason Licht managed a Walmart he would stock 300 different off brand breakfast cereals while only carrying canned condensed goat’s milk. If Jason Licht managed a Walmart he would let the competent employees quit to go work at Target over 1 measly extra dollar per hour while he retains and promotes Debra even though she’s late and her cash register is short 50 bucks every day. Jason Licht would hire a blind man to be the auto shop mechanic because it’s a “feel good story”. Is that what an NFL team is supposed to be? A feel good story for CNN?
How does this guy merit a 6 figure salary? Whose cock has he sucked to be granted diplomatic immunity from performance reviews? This guy signed Luke freaking Mccown. In fact, Licht reminds me of Mccown. Both aren’t good enough to be anywhere near an NFL team, but they’ve rubbed the right elbows and stroked the right jocks for so long that the fat cat good ole boys will keep employing them over any “unknown”. Can’t risk losing, so we best stick with what we know which just so happens to be: LOSING!
This team is the living breathing definition of nepotism. If you were ever pals with Licht or one of the coaches congratulations you’re probably getting signed over a more talented player. Slow Motion Chris Conte was our starting safety because he was buddies with Lovie Smith, not because of talent or merit. Now the team is signing Cardinals rejects. Color me damn shocked.
Every year I hear the same bull crap about a “culture change”. It’s football. Pick the best player available that fits the scheme. Use the run to set up the play action. Don’t draft based on immediate need. Don’t give draft picks to the Patriots for old players they no longer want. Don’t draft kickers 3 rounds early just because it worked out for you in Madden that one time.
These are tenets even message board members can adhere to (at least last decade when I was active), but Licht runs this team like it’s his college Xbox Madden 2007 savegame. If Licht is actually reprimanded for his bonehead decisions and strategy, then he sure isn’t learning anything or changing anything. It seems as long as Licht smiles for the media cameras, doesn’t say any cuss words to offend 70 year old women and doesn’t get arrested then he’s in the clear! Just “run” the team because wins don’t matter as long as we’re having fun, spreading good vibes, and making some Glazer money! Another photo op, boys!
Licht is the incompetent government bureaucrat in this revolving door of a team. It’s like when the same guy keeps getting elected in politics, but all the voters hate him and can’t figure out who’s keeping him in power much less who’s voting for him. As if someone keeps stuffing the ballot box. Keeping their finger on the scale.
It’s not me, it’s you, Glazers. Sell the team to someone that wants to win.
Sincerely,
Jacob from Tennessee.