#GlazersOut

[Keefy18]

Mangnall, was our third most successful and longest serving manager from 1903 to 1912 when he left for Manchester City. He won 1 2nd Division Championship and 1 1st Division. Under him we won the F.A. Cup for the first time and also the Charity Shield. He was also responsible for the building of Old Trafford.

Yep so probably 3 out of 25 or 26 I think it is.

We've had 3 managers achieve a league title and had very long spells where we've really struggled.

Gas thing is and the facts absolutely prove it, the Glazer ownership is arguably our most successful ownership's in terms of trophies won in history of the club alongside the Edwards.

But folks don't want to deal in reality and prefer to run with silly agendas.

 

[SirAF]

Yep so probably 3 out of 25 or 26 I think it is.

We've had 3 managers achieve a league title and had very long spells where we've really struggled.

Gas thing is and the facts absolutely prove it, the Glazer ownership is arguably our most successful ownership's in terms of trophies won in history of the club alongside the Edwards.

But folks don't want to deal in reality and prefer to run with silly agendas.

The common denominator? Sir Alex.

 

[Keefy18]

The common denominator? Sir Alex.

I said in terms of trophies overall.

LVG and Jose have both added trophies to the total.

In terms of leagues / CL yes Fergie is the only thus far.

His successors have been backed and should of made a better shot of it though.

 

[JK-27]

I said in terms of trophies overall.

LVG and Jose have both added trophies to the total.

In terms of leagues / CL yes Fergie is the only thus far.

His successors have been backed and should of made a better shot of it though.

What? Moyes was given a 5 year contract and sacked within a year. LVG was anti-buying Di Maria, but the club over ruled his wishes. LVG won the FA Cup and was sacked the next day, the press knew about his sacking before he did. Jose wanted several players sold and several players bought, but Woodward ignored his wishes and gave long-term contracts to fools and tried to buy players who were overpriced and never wanted to join anyway. If you think this is how you back someone then we're doomed.

 

[DoomSlayer]

What a complete garbage link. Counting share sales as taking money out of the club, even though it was most likely used for interest payments. That's one of the worst "breakdowns" I've ever seen.

Couldn't care less mate, you've been saying this every time the article is shared without even providing any reputable sources to disprove the claims in it.

I'd rather not engage in a totally pointless debate with you. Why not create your own "Glazers In" thread, instead of intentionally derailing this one? You, Wumminator, Keefy and a few other staunch Glazer supporters I've seen. It will also help to distinguish just how much of the Caf supports either side.

 

[Pearl of Wisdom]

Yep so probably 3 out of 25 or 26 I think it is.

We've had 3 managers achieve a league title and had very long spells where we've really struggled.

Gas thing is and the facts absolutely prove it, the Glazer ownership is arguably our most successful ownership's in terms of trophies won in history of the club alongside the Edwards.

But folks don't want to deal in reality and prefer to run with silly agendas.

Incidentally Keefy, where do you sit in the ground?
I ask because Im curious to what the fellow season ticket holders think of your views as you chat prior to kick of and half time?
Ive never met a single fan withing the ground who think our owners and the corporate fetus are actually good for the club..I only hear negativity..and this goes all the way back to SAF reign under the Glazer takeover and continues until today..Even travelling on public transport to and from the game with all manner of match going fans.

If the clubs most successful period under Glazer/corporate fetus was in ANY way a contributing factor to Manchester Uniteds success, they would have maintained some semblance of success post SAF & Gill.
But the fact is we have nose dived on the pitch and all our rivals and lower teams have caught us up and over taken us from a football perspective. This is a prime indicator that we have owners who are detrimental to Manchester United.

And whilst you are pissing all over our history, I think you need to remember 'The Busy Babes' and their sacrifice and the adversity.
The Ground being bombed in the war and the adversity to follow.
The FA & Fifa trying to nobble us in the mid 90's onwards when we were getting very powerful (remember the home grown talent rule forcing us us to sell??) and the adversities that followed.
And last but not least..the whole mess that allowed the Glazers to buy something they could never afford when John Magnier dumped his entire share stock to allow the Glazer takeover bid (cue: J P Morgan and the corporate fetus), which has foisted the biggest adversity on our club to date.
#WeWillOvercome

 

[shaky]

Yep so probably 3 out of 25 or 26 I think it is.

We've had 3 managers achieve a league title and had very long spells where we've really struggled.

Gas thing is and the facts absolutely prove it, the Glazer ownership is arguably our most successful ownership's in terms of trophies won in history of the club alongside the Edwards.

But folks don't want to deal in reality and prefer to run with silly agendas.

We are now one of, if not the highest earning club on the planet now though. Pointing out that we have been historically crap a lot of the time isn't any justification for us not taking advantage of our high standing in world football these days. We might be overachieving relative to many old Utd teams but we are severely underachieving relative to the spending power we have in the modern game.

 

[the chameleon]

Incidentally Keefy, where do you sit in the ground?
I ask because Im curious to what the fellow season ticket holders think of your views as you chat prior to kick of and half time?
Ive never met a single fan withing the ground who think our owners and the corporate fetus are actually good for the club..I only hear negativity..and this goes all the way back to SAF reign under the Glazer takeover and continues until today..Even travelling on public transport to and from the game with all manner of match going fans.

If the clubs most successful period under Glazer/corporate fetus was in ANY way a contributing factor to Manchester Uniteds success, they would have maintained some semblance of success post SAF & Gill.
But the fact is we have nose dived on the pitch and all our rivals and lower teams have caught us up and over taken us from a football perspective. This is a prime indicator that we have owners who are detrimental to Manchester United.

And whilst you are pissing all over our history, I think you need to remember 'The Busy Babes' and their sacrifice and the adversity.
The Ground being bombed in the war and the adversity to follow.
The FA & Fifa trying to nobble us in the mid 90's onwards when we were getting very powerful (remember the home grown talent rule forcing us us to sell??) and the adversities that followed.
And last but not least..the whole mess that allowed the Glazers to buy something they could never afford when John Magnier dumped his entire share stock to allow the Glazer takeover bid (cue: J P Morgan and the corporate fetus), which has foisted the biggest adversity on our club to date.
#WeWillOvercome

I think this Keefy18 is someone clearly suffering Glazer / Woodward Stockholm syndrome.

He’s been spouting nonsense for a few weeks now about Glazers. Making up warped facts as he goes along to suit his arguments which are that all fans don’t quite see the bigger the picture. I would argue that he might get the vote for most unpopular poster on this forum.

 

[SirAF]

We are now one of, if not the highest earning club on the planet now though. Pointing out that we have been historically crap a lot of the time isn't any justification for us not taking advantage of our high standing in world football these days. We might be overachieving relative to many old Utd teams but we are severely underachieving relative to the spending power we have in the modern game.

Exactly.

 

[Marcelinho87]

Couldn't care less mate, you've been saying this every time the article is shared without even providing any reputable sources to disprove the claims in it.

I'd rather not engage in a totally pointless debate with you. Why not create your own "Glazers In" thread, instead of intentionally derailing this one? You, Wumminator, Keefy and a few other staunch Glazer supporters I've seen. It will also help to distinguish just how much of the Caf supports either side.

I like this idea, very much.

Makes adding to my ignore list easier then.

 

[Keefy18]

What? Moyes was given a 5 year contract and sacked within a year. LVG was anti-buying Di Maria, but the club over ruled his wishes. LVG won the FA Cup and was sacked the next day, the press knew about his sacking before he did. Jose wanted several players sold and several players bought, but Woodward ignored his wishes and gave long-term contracts to fools and tried to buy players who were overpriced and never wanted to join anyway. If you think this is how you back someone then we're doomed.

And rightly so, why wouldn't he of been sacked? He failed spectacularly.

I liked and do like LVG, But I'd also not be so stupid / naive (call it what you will) and not consider it was him saving his already bruised ego. ADM was one of the best wide attacking players in world football at the time. I don't buy for a second he was against it and admitted he already rated him, he simply couldn't get the best from him and chooses to deflect blame, exactly like Jose done time and time again by undermining the club whilst talking up former glories.

BTW, The press knew about LVG's sacking thanks to Jose's agent Jorge Mendes. He leaked it to the press right after the FA Cup Final, but yeah whatever suits your narrative.

Incidentally Keefy, where do you sit in the ground?
I ask because Im curious to what the fellow season ticket holders think of your views as you chat prior to kick of and half time?
Ive never met a single fan withing the ground who think our owners and the corporate fetus are actually good for the club..I only hear negativity..and this goes all the way back to SAF reign under the Glazer takeover and continues until today..Even travelling on public transport to and from the game with all manner of match going fans.

If the clubs most successful period under Glazer/corporate fetus was in ANY way a contributing factor to Manchester Uniteds success, they would have maintained some semblance of success post SAF & Gill.
But the fact is we have nose dived on the pitch and all our rivals and lower teams have caught us up and over taken us from a football perspective. This is a prime indicator that we have owners who are detrimental to Manchester United.

And whilst you are pissing all over our history, I think you need to remember 'The Busy Babes' and their sacrifice and the adversity.
The Ground being bombed in the war and the adversity to follow.
The FA & Fifa trying to nobble us in the mid 90's onwards when we were getting very powerful (remember the home grown talent rule forcing us us to sell??) and the adversities that followed.
And last but not least..the whole mess that allowed the Glazers to buy something they could never afford when John Magnier dumped his entire share stock to allow the Glazer takeover bid (cue: J P Morgan and the corporate fetus), which has foisted the biggest adversity on our club to date.
#WeWillOvercome

I couldn't give a brass monkeys what others think mate, everyone is entitled to their own opinions or at least you'd think unless you read on here cause all you get is mindless waffle posted with the same ignorant and ill informed, poorly research nonsense posted over and over again.

The bit in bold, or you know it could be due to the fact that we had 1 manager who ruled all with an iron fist and gave us many years of great times and now as a club we are struggling to modernize.

We didn't even have a feckin scouting system in place with Ferguson there for god sake, this has only been rolled out in recent years by whom? Have a guess, it'll kill you to say it, Woodward. It stuff like this that has the club struggling to get all the pieces together quickly whilst trying to compete with billionaire owners and a restructuring of TV revenue.

The post Ferguson years were always going to be a struggle, for anyone living in reality but folks like you seem to think we should of just kept walking to leagues indefinitely.

And finally no I'm not pissing on the clubs history, I'm fully aware of the sacrifices made by Busby, his staff and players! Funnily enough it was another poster on here of the anti glazer kind who said they were worse than the Munich disaster. I was the one who pulled him up over it and no other. Goes to show how incredibly warped some of you lot are, hidden agendas and ignoring comments like that, but would rather pull me up over my comments?

I know the clubs history, pity here many have rose tinted goggles on and post sentiments suggesting we've dominated consistently through our history, we haven't. That's just how it is! I wish it were otherwise but it's not and we've had plenty of dark days through our history and comparing the Glazer ownership to former greats of our club giving their lives up to it as some have is nothing short of absolutely idiotic and more importantly disgusting!

We are now one of, if not the highest earning club on the planet now though. Pointing out that we have been historically crap a lot of the time isn't any justification for us not taking advantage of our high standing in world football these days. We might be overachieving relative to many old Utd teams but we are severely underachieving relative to the spending power we have in the modern game.

Our earnings mean little when you've Oil rich Sugar daddies funding other clubs that belittle that earning. This is the point you are missing!

Previously we still had that revenue stream above other clubs and there was no sugar daddy owners.

Understand the difference now?

I think this Keefy18 is someone clearly suffering Glazer / Woodward Stockholm syndrome.

He’s been spouting nonsense for a few weeks now about Glazers. Making up warped facts as he goes along to suit his arguments which are that all fans don’t quite see the bigger the picture. I would argue that he might get the vote for most unpopular poster on this forum.

What have I made up?

It's the anti Glazer sort that sees any old nonsense on twitter and takes it as fact.

At least put the effort in to take what they've posted and go research it and form your opinions on the back of that.

 

[Keefy18]

The hilarious thing about all the abuse and vehement disagreement I get, I couldn't care less if the Glazers go.

I've already stated that if they go our club won't magically fix itself which seems to be something many of the anti Glazer sort believes.

We'll get another bunch of suits milking the club dry as it has been for generations from Louis Edwards, Martin Edwards and the Glazers.

 

[MackRobinson]

Couldn't care less mate, you've been saying this every time the article is shared without even providing any reputable sources to disprove the claims in it.

I'd rather not engage in a totally pointless debate with you. Why not create your own "Glazers In" thread, instead of intentionally derailing this one? You, Wumminator, Keefy and a few other staunch Glazer supporters I've seen. It will also help to distinguish just how much of the Caf supports either side.

The debt figures have been refuted countless times (and what you posted isn't from a reputable source). It's your choice to ignore them. Selling shares do not count as taking money out of the club, since you are giving up equity. This is common knowledge. Here is a video explaining why the debt isn't an issue in the long term. Here is an article from the BBC explaining that proceeds from the share sales were used to pay off some of the debt. All this stuff is extremely easy to fact check, but of course nobody cares to.

For the record, I couldn't care less about the Glazers. I just find it remarkable that some of you would rather peddle half-truths and lies just to push an agenda. It's quite sad that a person is called a Glazer supporter b/c they fact check. Carry on with your crusade though.

 

[Class of 63]

Bullshit opinion piece by a libertarian roughneck. So it's either the Glazers or the Saudis? Poor article.

Don't know what a libertarian roughneck is, and google didn't help, so....

I'm firmly in the better the devil you know camp and until somebody can come up with a suggestion as to how the Glazers can be ousted without it being another leveraged buy-out, or somebody with dodgy money that's where i'll stay.

 

[Escobar]

The sooner the owners and Ed piss off, the better

 

[Class of 63]

One of the worst articles I have read in my entire life. Not only does the author not understand the ideas behind the "Glazers out" movement, he also seems to think us fans should just accept that we are a corporation now and it should be none of our business if the owners leech money out of the club.

Guess what - even in business terms we are stakeholders to Manchester United and our only interest should be the good of the club, not our greedy ignorant owners.

Can't believe that unless you only started reading last week.

It is what it is, whoever owns the club will take money out that's a given, my fear is if the Glazers are hounded out the next owners might take a damn site more out, and or asset-strip - cue the we haven't got any assets crowd

 

[Keefy18]

Don't know what a libertarian roughneck is, and google didn't help, so....

I'm firmly in the better the devil you know camp and until somebody can come up with a suggestion as to how the Glazers can be ousted without it being another leveraged buy-out, or somebody with dodgy money that's where i'll stay.

I think this pretty much sums up where I sit if I'm honest.

We'll just get more of the same with new owners most likely.

Folks crying out for Saudi sugar Daddy owners haven't a fecking clue what their talking about cause they haven't bothered their arse to look at City's financials either.

City owe £300m in deferred payments and sold £200m in shares about 2 years back, but they are saints to our supporters. There's £500m down the swanny and that's before their books are really looked at.

It's going to rear its head, City are into all kinds of questionable practices. I mean there's already plenty of talk about a Champions League ban, but the anti glazer sort will blow smoke up their backside and suggest that's the route we should take?

 

[Gasolin]

The hilarious thing about all the abuse and vehement disagreement I get, I couldn't care less if the Glazers go.

I've already stated that if they go our club won't magically fix itself which seems to be something many of the anti Glazer sort believes.

We'll get another bunch of suits milking the club dry as it has been for generations from Louis Edwards, Martin Edwards and the Glazers.

That I agree, making the Glazers leave won't fix Manchester United, the football club. We need more planning, and we probably need to re-think how the club is to be ran.

 

[Gasolin]

The debt figures have been refuted countless times (and what you posted isn't from a reputable source). It's your choice to ignore them. Selling shares do not count as taking money out of the club, since you are giving up equity. This is common knowledge. Here is a video explaining why the debt isn't an issue in the long term. Here is an article from the BBC explaining that proceeds from the share sales were used to pay off some of the debt. All this stuff is extremely easy to fact check, but of course nobody cares to.

For the record, I couldn't care less about the Glazers. I just find it remarkable that some of you would rather peddle half-truths and lies just to push an agenda. It's quite sad that a person is called a Glazer supporter b/c they fact check. Carry on with your crusade though.

I think the one worry I have is that the debt is paid too slowly. Revenue are alright but the gross debt level should be half or 75% less than its current level to reach a healthy level compared to the revenue. I think the debt went down and went back up, hence the disappointment.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...cord-revenues-debt-financial-results-football

 

[Tarrou]

It's good that the Glazers supporters have retreated to "well the Glazers are bad but any new owner would be bad too" territory...

Progress

 

[Pearl of Wisdom]

And rightly so, why wouldn't he of been sacked? He failed spectacularly.

I liked and do like LVG, But I'd also not be so stupid / naive (call it what you will) and not consider it was him saving his already bruised ego. ADM was one of the best wide attacking players in world football at the time. I don't buy for a second he was against it and admitted he already rated him, he simply couldn't get the best from him and chooses to deflect blame, exactly like Jose done time and time again by undermining the club whilst talking up former glories.

BTW, The press knew about LVG's sacking thanks to Jose's agent Jorge Mendes. He leaked it to the press right after the FA Cup Final, but yeah whatever suits your narrative.



I couldn't give a brass monkeys what others think mate, everyone is entitled to their own opinions or at least you'd think unless you read on here cause all you get is mindless waffle posted with the same ignorant and ill informed, poorly research nonsense posted over and over again.

The bit in bold, or you know it could be due to the fact that we had 1 manager who ruled all with an iron fist and gave us many years of great times and now as a club we are struggling to modernize.

We didn't even have a feckin scouting system in place with Ferguson there for god sake, this has only been rolled out in recent years by whom? Have a guess, it'll kill you to say it, Woodward. It stuff like this that has the club struggling to get all the pieces together quickly whilst trying to compete with billionaire owners and a restructuring of TV revenue.

The post Ferguson years were always going to be a struggle, for anyone living in reality but folks like you seem to think we should of just kept walking to leagues indefinitely.

And finally no I'm not pissing on the clubs history, I'm fully aware of the sacrifices made by Busby, his staff and players! Funnily enough it was another poster on here of the anti glazer kind who said they were worse than the Munich disaster. I was the one who pulled him up over it and no other. Goes to show how incredibly warped some of you lot are, hidden agendas and ignoring comments like that, but would rather pull me up over my comments?

I know the clubs history, pity here many have rose tinted goggles on and post sentiments suggesting we've dominated consistently through our history, we haven't. That's just how it is! I wish it were otherwise but it's not and we've had plenty of dark days through our history and comparing the Glazer ownership to former greats of our club giving their lives up to it as some have is nothing short of absolutely idiotic and more importantly disgusting!




Our earnings mean little when you've Oil rich Sugar daddies funding other clubs that belittle that earning. This is the point you are missing!

Previously we still had that revenue stream above other clubs and there was no sugar daddy owners.

Understand the difference now?



What have I made up?

It's the anti Glazer sort that sees any old nonsense on twitter and takes it as fact.

At least put the effort in to take what they've posted and go research it and form your opinions on the back of that.

Keefy, youve spewed some absolute kak on these boards, but the green bolded statement sums your absurd stance in one line
Can you qualify that statement please?
That Woodward himself set up the scouting system at MUFC, and that we didnt have a scouting system in place until he did it?
Its an unfounded wild allegation..
(Did you know slippery Pete, the self proclaimed fan of MUFC, took the crux of our scouting network to Chelsea and Abromovic for a handful of sheckles? when he was stabbing us in the back and selling the club down the river? before the corporate fetus was injected into the club)

 

[Class of 63]

No it's not but SAF had less under the Glazers because they were managing a loan they created and before that our revenue was smaller. Before you credit the Glazers for our growth look at the other established clubs in the PL and see what their % growth was under the same period, you'll find out they all grew in a similar fashion. The Glazers aren't some magic money men, who did wonders like some apologists keep using as an excuse for them.

They are using the club to line their pockets, which is their right, they do own the club but I personally don't have to like it, or keep my opinion to myself.

I am convinced they have no ambition beyond top 4, It took Moyes season for them to start releasing transfer funds. SAF kept saying there's no value in the market, I believe he simply wasn't given funds.

The lack of transfers last season was because we finished 2nd and they believed the team was good enough to make top 4. I don't buy that bullshit that they lost faith in Mourinho and cut the funds, why keep him on as a manager if they did? I can bet anything that when we establish ourselves in the CL spots the funds will be cut significantly. It is all about profit for them and if they feel that the reward is less than the cost, they won't invest for just the glory.

We're going over old ground here, Mourinho had already rubbed everybody at the club up the wrong way with his comments after the Sevilla embarrassment then asked for players that he knew the club would refuse to go for, but that's Jose for you.

How can you say SAF wasn't given money? The Glazers would have been justified if they'd refused to pay £17m and obscene wages(relative)for Ashley Young when he would have been available on a free 12 months later, or pay £24m for RvP when everybody in football knew he was one more injury from being a crock.

I'm sure we signed Lukaku and Lindelof for not insignificant money after qualifying for the Champions League, maybe not.

 

[Pearl of Wisdom]

I think this pretty much sums up where I sit if I'm honest.

We'll just get more of the same with new owners most likely.

Folks crying out for Saudi sugar Daddy owners haven't a fecking clue what their talking about cause they haven't bothered their arse to look at City's financials either.

City owe £300m in deferred payments and sold £200m in shares about 2 years back, but they are saints to our supporters. There's £500m down the swanny and that's before their books are really looked at.

It's going to rear its head, City are into all kinds of questionable practices. I mean there's already plenty of talk about a Champions League ban, but the anti glazer sort will blow smoke up their backside and suggest that's the route we should take?

SAF worked miracles at this club to set it on a good standing for years to come and remain competitive.
The fact that we have a 'skint arse' leaching the club for his families legacy is testament to the incompetency of the FA who allowed the Glazers to pass the 'Fit and proper person' test in the first place..

The Glazers dont own us, its as clear as day, the banks own our debt and they hold dominion over us until that debt is payed..
The banks corporate fetus has gestated within the club and has now grown to set about maximizing profits for the bank for the foreseeable future.
We will continue to be used as a cash cow whilst the corporate fetus plays 'Snakes & Ladders' with the share prices and his play 'tactical' purchases of players.
From a football perspective, he is not fit for purpose.
From the banks perspective who own the debt..he is the star man.

 

[Class of 63]

You cannot compare Sir Alex's time to today. 25m used to be a fortune. Its now a promising youngsters price

Oh if only

 

[Class of 63]

Are you saying they've put money in?
Or have they simply allowed the club to spend a minimum amount of its own money so their investment stays so hugely profitable?
Only upping the spending after particularly disastrous seasons.

I take it you're not happy, out of interest how much do you think they should make available each year, £200m, £300m ???

 

[Class of 63]

Didn't realise Avram had been invited onto the forum.

Roflmao.

Somewhere there is a stage with your name written on it, I suggest you try the Outer Hebrides and keeping going North.

ps. don't forget your brush

 

[Class of 63]

Why is that?

To keep the numbers down.

 

[Dec9003]

Roflmao.

Somewhere there is a stage with your name written on it, I suggest you try the Outer Hebrides and keeping going North.

ps. don't forget your brush

Weird reply, also not denying that you're Avram.
I knew it.

 

[Sandikan]

I take it you're not happy, out of interest how much do you think they should make available each year, £200m, £300m ???

I'm not as angry as many, as who is the perfect owner? Someone who puts the football side first for sure, but not a regime of questionable morals.
Who would that leave us with?

 

[Saffron]

I'm not as angry as many, as who is the perfect owner? Someone who puts the football side first for sure, but not a regime of questionable morals.
Who would that leave us with?

An FSG style owner. Football first, no questionable morals. No dividends. Lets the club use its own money.

They’re still in it for the money, but only in terms of growing the value of LFC. They don’t let their thirst for profit conflict with the footballing side like the Glazers do.

 

[Class of 63]

Weird reply, also not denying that you're Avram.
I knew it.

I was suggesting that you were so funny you should be on a stage. But then you knew that.

Yeah because i'd be wasting my time on here with the commoners and underclass if I was Avram, or any of the Glazers for that matter, nah i'd just pay people to do it for me.

 

[Class of 63]

I'm not as angry as many, as who is the perfect owner? Someone who puts the football side first for sure, but not a regime of questionable morals.
Who would that leave us with?

Not sure we've had anybody at United since Harold Hardman in the 50's and 60's who put the football side of the business first.

 

[DoomSlayer]

An FSG style owner. Football first, no questionable morals. No dividends. Lets the club use its own money.

They’re still in it for the money, but only in terms of growing the value of LFC. They don’t let their thirst for profit conflict with the footballing side like the Glazers do.

Exactly. Consistent investment into the core of the club is also extremely important to keep us at the top.

Instead of financing the costs of risky loans and paying millions of pounds in interest (or other related costs), United could have been modernising Old Trafford, the facilities of both the first team and the youth teams, and every department that is part of the structure of operations. It's not all about wasting incredible amounts of money on transfer fees and wages - that doesn't prove that the owners or club hierarchy care about the long-term future of our team.

The Glazers' main goal seems to be to maximise their earning and profit from Manchester United in the next 5 to 10 years. I bet they will be looking to sell after that if we still haven't recovered (which unfortunately I believe is very possible).

 

[Tincanalley]

Incidentally Keefy, where do you sit in the ground?
I ask because Im curious to what the fellow season ticket holders think of your views as you chat prior to kick of and half time?
Ive never met a single fan withing the ground who think our owners and the corporate fetus are actually good for the club..I only hear negativity..and this goes all the way back to SAF reign under the Glazer takeover and continues until today..Even travelling on public transport to and from the game with all manner of match going fans.

If the clubs most successful period under Glazer/corporate fetus was in ANY way a contributing factor to Manchester Uniteds success, they would have maintained some semblance of success post SAF & Gill.
But the fact is we have nose dived on the pitch and all our rivals and lower teams have caught us up and over taken us from a football perspective. This is a prime indicator that we have owners who are detrimental to Manchester United.

And whilst you are pissing all over our history, I think you need to remember 'The Busy Babes' and their sacrifice and the adversity.
The Ground being bombed in the war and the adversity to follow.
The FA & Fifa trying to nobble us in the mid 90's onwards when we were getting very powerful (remember the home grown talent rule forcing us us to sell??) and the adversities that followed.
And last but not least..the whole mess that allowed the Glazers to buy something they could never afford when John Magnier dumped his entire share stock to allow the Glazer takeover bid (cue: J P Morgan and the corporate fetus), which has foisted the biggest adversity on our club to date.
#WeWillOvercome

Well said

 

[Rusholme Ruffian]

I couldn't care less if the Glazers go.

For the record, I couldn't care less about the Glazers.

I bet you guys are neighbours. What part of the US are you from?

 

[Tyrion]

We are now one of, if not the highest earning club on the planet now though. Pointing out that we have been historically crap a lot of the time isn't any justification for us not taking advantage of our high standing in world football these days. We might be overachieving relative to many old Utd teams but we are severely underachieving relative to the spending power we have in the modern game.

That's exactly what I was about to post. Saying we didn't win much in the 70s so can't be surprised that we're not winning now doesn't make sense.

 

[MackRobinson]

What part of the US are you from?

What part of the UK are you from?

I don't actually care. I just thought I'd answer a pointless question with a pointless question.

 

[MackRobinson]

I think the one worry I have is that the debt is paid too slowly. Revenue are alright but the gross debt level should be half or 75% less than its current level to reach a healthy level compared to the revenue. I think the debt went down and went back up, hence the disappointment.

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...cord-revenues-debt-financial-results-football

The debt went back up b/c interest payment went down (the increased valuation allowed the Glazers to refinance). The Glazers will be under pressure to payback those loans if their revenue dries up substantially. As it stands they have enough cash to afford the interest payments and continually increasing valuation of the club allows them to refinance without much fuss.

 

[Valar Morghulis]

I was suggesting that you were so funny you should be on a stage. But then you knew that.

Yeah because i'd be wasting my time on here with the commoners and underclass if I was Avram, or any of the Glazers for that matter, nah i'd just pay people to do it for me.

Ah Ha! The jig is up @Keefy18

 

[InspiRED]

I think this pretty much sums up where I sit if I'm honest.

We'll just get more of the same with new owners most likely.

Folks crying out for Saudi sugar Daddy owners haven't a fecking clue what their talking about cause they haven't bothered their arse to look at City's financials either.

City owe £300m in deferred payments and sold £200m in shares about 2 years back, but they are saints to our supporters. There's £500m down the swanny and that's before their books are really looked at.

It's going to rear its head, City are into all kinds of questionable practices. I mean there's already plenty of talk about a Champions League ban, but the anti glazer sort will blow smoke up their backside and suggest that's the route we should take?

All your pro-Glazer b.s. is clearly falling on deaf ears so why not like others suggested, create your own 'Glazers in' thread?

You seem to think you have some above average insight into the finances of the club. You don't. A lot of us here just cant be bothered to engage you in debate because its clearly just a waste of time and energy. Make it sound like it's just an everyday thing to saddle a club with hundreds of millions in debt, then tell us all we just dont understand finance. Feck off It's really odd whatever it is you get out of it, but surely it must have dawned on you it's not going down too well.