MUST | Sign For United | Fan Ownership

RedDevil@84

Full Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2014
Messages
15,534
Feck me. Caftards would make worse owners than the Glazers.
Matchday threads will decide who stays in the team and who gets kicked.
 

Random Task

WW Lynchpin
Joined
Feb 7, 2010
Messages
28,491
Location
Chester
I think it's a great idea.

It all depends on when (if?) the Glazers bring the plan to fruition, and my financial situation at that time, but I'm certainly interested in purchasing shares in the club.

I'm no Tom Cato with his 100-120k - more like 120p as things stand - but every penny counts.
 

PeterWunited

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 9, 2021
Messages
34
Maybe I do not fully understand the proposal, but I cannot see how this proposal alters anything.
To get any fan control will cost £2B in shares purchases. Also all the individual shareholders would have to be of the same mind to overturn any proposal by the Glazer's. You cannot get members of CAF to agree, so what chance.
 

Shiva87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,451
Location
Mumbai, India
This won't be an investment decision for me but an emotional outlay to see if the collective fan group can really constitute a sizeable stake / corner enough shares with voting rights to have a say.

I'm buying if this happens.
 

tomaldinho1

Full Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
8,567
MUST is concerned that there is a risk that the scheme will limit the number of such Fan Shares made available so reducing the opportunity for this to achieve a meaningful collective fan ownership stake - and ultimately with the potential to result in a change in control of the club.
Do not touch with a barge pole. Think about the mechanics behind this - Glazers have come in, loaded us with debt and taken advantage of the club's legacy to build a commercial behemoth, there is major fan discontent and they are playing us like a fiddle after they just lost billions from the failed ESL breakaway.
 

MU655

Full Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2020
Messages
1,258
I don't know what percentage of shares they are going to give away, but if it is anything chunky, I wonder if this might be part of a stepped disposal of Manutd for the Glazers.

It is a smarter way of selling a club like Manchester United. Trying to sell the whole lot in one go comes with the risk of a drop in the share price, but a disposal carried out over time could mitigate this to maximise returns on the investment.

It would be almost impossible to sell their current shareholding in one go to a single investor, so this could be the start them dropping out.
 

Valar Morghulis

Full Member
Joined
Apr 3, 2015
Messages
1,316
Location
Braavos
Supports
BBW
Do not touch with a barge pole. Think about the mechanics behind this - Glazers have come in, loaded us with debt and taken advantage of the club's legacy to build a commercial behemoth, there is major fan discontent and they are playing us like a fiddle after they just lost billions from the failed ESL breakaway.
This is also clearly a "jump before we're pushed" move on their behalf.

Outlining their intention to enable the fans to have more involvement within the club just in time for when an independent regulator is on the scene. No doubt they will have been thoroughly advised on this and will have a trick or two up their sleeve to ensure that this move will ultimately not have a significant impact on their ability to milk the shit out of us.

This has the potential to kill a potential Super League from ever happening but really the government should be the one's to have the possibility of that type of feckery nipped in the bud anyway.
 

Tom Cato

Full Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2019
Messages
5,354
You know zeroes are worth nothing so add a few on to what you have, make it twelve figures and buy the whole shebang with enough over for a kebab!
I'll invest 1.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 into that kebab idea
 

Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær

Lutefisk is it!
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
87,996
Location
Viva Ronaldo!
Maybe I do not fully understand the proposal, but I cannot see how this proposal alters anything.
To get any fan control will cost £2B in shares purchases. Also all the individual shareholders would have to be of the same mind to overturn any proposal by the Glazer's. You cannot get members of CAF to agree, so what chance.
I could be wrong but my understanding is that the fan shareholders will vote as a block so you will likely be required to let MUST or someone vote in a proxy fashion.
 

Bastian

Full Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
14,096
Very curious to find out more about the shares offered. If it makes sense I'm going in with 6 figures.
Steep for money to burn. Surely the Caf can come up with a better investment opportunity for you :D
 

lsd

The Oracle
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
6,841
I would rather support City than have Must involved in owning United
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time - Vaccination status: dozed off
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
82,116
Location
india
Nostalgia. I remember buying a share in 2005 through Must when the glazers were taking over.
 

Foxbatt

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
10,959
Please don't get involved in this. I did earlier on and never would I ever get involved with anything to do with MUST.
 

Tapori

Full Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
2,191
Location
Manchester - South Side
If ever digital media could show it's power, trying to crowd fund a purchase with a certified trust would be levels of unheard legend
 

cyril C

Full Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2017
Messages
2,119
Not so sure about that...see Gamestop or AMC. Fans investment into United will be based upon emotion which could in turn drive the price much higher than United's actual worth.
if there are enough suckers driving up MU to a valuation of 10B, I am sure they will sell.
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
969
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
Frankly, I’m actually very surprised they would offer this.

There is no reason to do this from a company structure standpoint. I have three companies and investors have non voting shares, and are willing to take it, given the the returns we throw off.

The volume of the voice MUST will have will really depend on the amount of shares they offer to the trust. In cases where additional capital is required to grow the business, you offer a larger “voice” or shares.

At the end of the day, sitting on the board and privy to all of the financials, you begin to realize that those running the biz may not be idiots, but rather have a lot of challenges.

A seat on the board is a BIG deal IMHO, because voicing the fan’s concern is an immense opportunity. That said, most members on the board will be concerned about profits and shareholder value.

I am in no way a shill for the Glazers... feel free to check back thru my posts. But understand that the world of finance is different from the football pitch. But BOTH wars need to be won for us to be successful as a club.
 

Red_toad

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
9,437
Location
DownUnder
https://www.marketbeat.com/stocks/NYSE/Man Utd/dividend/ - Manchester United do pay out dividends annually. But the key factor for any investor here would be stock valuation and potential profit on sale.

My motivation personally is to own a reasonably sizeable stake in the club I love, so the owners can maintain their dividend payments and possibly sign an over priced player, who probably doesn't solve an issue we have, but will appease the fans (see Van Beek as an example).
Edited that for you ;)
 

Pexbo

Online influencer who has never watched Star Wars
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
58,075
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
What’s up with MUST guys? They seem to be pretty divisive. I wasn’t following online during the takeover so I’m sure I’ve missed some stuff there.
DD has always struck me as the same as most people who want to lead these type of organisations - a bit of an egotist.
 

stw2022

Full Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
1,179
I think we'd have reached this point and had greater engagement with the club years earlier if not for MUST to be quite honest. Don't get me wrong this is 100% on the Glazers but MUST have always been far more vehemently hard-line than the majority of supporters and over the years I don't think that's helped bridge the divide.

I know fans need to be represented by groups for practical reasons but I do think MUST/Drasdo have let us down and at various times over the years put their own promotion/ego over representing the fans.
 

terraloo

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 6, 2012
Messages
121
Supports
Chelsea
Yep seems a great idea.

I would advocate every supporter at every other club buys shares and take control of Man Utd

Seriously it seems to me a classic PR move that on the surface seems a great idea but as they say the proof of the pudding and all that
 

stw2022

Full Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
1,179
It reminds me of when my granddad, who was a staunch socialist, used to prey every day for Maggie's death yet gleefully bought shares in British Gas
 

georgipep

Full Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2015
Messages
1,262
Location
Not far enough
Maybe I do not fully understand the proposal, but I cannot see how this proposal alters anything.
To get any fan control will cost £2B in shares purchases. Also all the individual shareholders would have to be of the same mind to overturn any proposal by the Glazer's. You cannot get members of CAF to agree, so what chance.
What were you (and other people) expecting? I hope it's not that the owners would just donate half of the club to fans? Or if they will sell shares at lower than market prices?
 

Ali Dia

Full Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
9,466
Location
Souness's Super Sub/George Weahs Talented Cousin
DD has always struck me as the same as most people who want to lead these type of organisations - a bit of an egotist.
It’s nearly always the way. United fans are also a notoriously hard bunch to get to agree on even the more simple stuff as our online fans come from all over the world and all walks of life. I wonder how the local fans view MUST?
 

Ali Dia

Full Member
Joined
May 10, 2013
Messages
9,466
Location
Souness's Super Sub/George Weahs Talented Cousin
How much could realistically be raised this way? And how much would be needed to gain a controlling stake - assuming there is no actual limit which is doubtful?
I wish I knew more about it. It’ll all hopefully become clearer in the next few days what their actual plan is. I can imagine there’ll be massive worldwide interest in shares with potential voting power and representation at board level. It could also all just be a PR stunt/crude cash grab from the glazers. They sell a billions worth of shares but still have veto.
 

Maticmaker

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
2,665
Why are the Glazers talking to MUST about this scheme and apparently not directly to the Fan's Forum, or are MUST now representing the Fans Forum?
I believe a lot of the MUST original members were ex-United shareholders (prior to Glazers takeover) and so probably have more collective knowledge about share dealings etc., but surely its the Fans Forum (of which MUST is only one member) who should be driving this?
 

Rightnr

Full Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2015
Messages
4,265
Frankly, I’m actually very surprised they would offer this.

There is no reason to do this from a company structure standpoint. I have three companies and investors have non voting shares, and are willing to take it, given the the returns we throw off.

The volume of the voice MUST will have will really depend on the amount of shares they offer to the trust. In cases where additional capital is required to grow the business, you offer a larger “voice” or shares.

At the end of the day, sitting on the board and privy to all of the financials, you begin to realize that those running the biz may not be idiots, but rather have a lot of challenges.

A seat on the board is a BIG deal IMHO, because voicing the fan’s concern is an immense opportunity. That said, most members on the board will be concerned about profits and shareholder value.

I am in no way a shill for the Glazers... feel free to check back thru my posts. But understand that the world of finance is different from the football pitch. But BOTH wars need to be won for us to be successful as a club.
We are not being run well. That much is obvious even to a blind man who's got sound-cancelling headphones on 24/7.

One of the key things in running a company is making sure you have the right tools for the job. We have a leaking stadium that's not been upgraded for years which has also cost us money. Just a few weeks ago, the swimming pool was unavailable. Our senior women's team coach left because of our poor facilities. These are things directly linked to making our resources work the best for the Manchester United, the football club and the business.

On the transfer side, we are slow, make awfully expensive purchases, have no long-term strategy. Our contract renewals are a complete joke. Once again, this is because we lack specialists in those roles, who know our industry (i.e. the sport of football) well.

All this bullshit about running United being difficult is just a load of nonsense. We're not struggling financially. We can easily go and appoint a few good people that will cost us - at most - £5-10m a year but will probably pay that investment off in a matter of months when we don't sign the Harry Maguires of this world for stupid money.

The way people go on about running businesses on here, you'd think you'd need to be some sort of modern-day genius. You don't and this is espically true with the resources and stature we have at our club.