On here maybe but this place isn't representative of United's match going support.
The opportunism of MUST during Rooneygate.
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
Case in point.
Let's have a
"MUST's intentions are good but their methods leave a little to be desired"
v
"MUST are lying bastards with an agenda"
poll, shall we?
I'd love this.
I garentuee you though, The Red Knights are not this.
Like I said before, they will run as a Private Limited Company and the books will be kept throughly closed to us. There may be a few P.R moves that will make the fans trust them, a marquee player, the ticket prices frozen for a year or two, but all in all it's just a selection of businessmen with money in their pocket who would love to take a slice of the earning potential in the club the Glazers have started to unleash.
Everyone agrees on that sentiment. The timing and conduct of MUST is opportunism at best. Their statement yesterday, 3 lines which actually talk about Rooney. The remaining 5 paragraphs all go on about the arguments they raised last season, not actually talking about Rooney and the fact he's masking his desperate move for money with some tosh about 'ambition' at a club which came second by 1 point last season.
Result, Rooney's agent then looks at this argument and goes down the same route.
That's the problem i have with MUST.
You can't seriously suggest that they don't have an agenda, A1dan, and they certainly chat shit all the time, sensationalising everything at the club worse than even the most sensationalist of the red-top rags. Would you disagree with that?
Tried it already, mods merged it with this. I have a strong feeling that after MUST's last threat of legal action against this board and it's posters (who were United fans, the ones they are supposed to be acting on behlaf of, no?) the mods and admins are very very wary about doing anything that might upset them.
I'd love to hear an offical line on this though?
Just so it's known, I'm not trying to stir up trouble here, be it with the site or MUST. I would really like to know what other peoples opinion of them are.
Opposition or at least disapproval of MUST seems fairly consistent in the responses here, but how representative of wider sentiment among the supporters?
Is this coming up as an issue on the other fan forums do we know?
Is this coming up as an issue on the other fan forums do we know?
Quite... the other point I was about to make was that, now that I don't get to so many matches, I sometimes get disheartened by what I read on here. Having been at the match tonight, I can assure you, and myself, that I speak on behalf of the vast majority of match-going fans when I say "WE WANT GLAZER OUT".
If the likes of gchq really are the match going fans they claim, they must feel quite isolated at times in OT, and long for the caf...
Yeah seriously. Most fans want Glazer out. They've got the hardcore fans who go the games who constantly wear Green and Gold and the loudest chants are for them out.
Then you've got the fairweather fan who wants them out because well, they've been told to want them out.
The redcafe is somewhere in the middle.
Then you've got the fairweather fan who wants them out because well, they've been told to want them out.
The redcafe is somewhere in the middle.
Are you serious Sinch?
I didn't think anyone would be silly enough to think the statement from Rooney's camp was anything other than PR bullshit.
If there was any supposed truth in it then it leaves a lot of unexplained inconsistencies with his behaviour and statements over the past 12 months. In fact it makes absolutely no sense at all.
I mean what, he just decided over night last week that he wasn't happy with the club's "ambition", then travelled back in time two and a half months to tell Gill and Ferguson he wanted to leave?
Either that or Fergie's lying and he's just been leaving Rooney out of the team for the hell of it?
Right...
I don't really care why he wants to leave but it's got feck all to do with anything in that statement, that's for sure.
As I've said time and time again, it's all VERY amateurish stuff from them. They were given an easy way to collect members with the Glazer's takeover, but instead of using that to grow in the right way, they've just used it as a way of having a louder voice to shout the same tired lines with.
But I don't blame them. It's human nature to be lured by power, and ultimately some of them getting in behind the scenes at OT is like the holy grail. Hence why they jump on the equally poor joke that is the RK's.
So while I have a lot of respect for what they are trying to achieve (and no doubt there are people within the organisation that truely do want to represent us properly), I have absolutely zero faith in them to beable to pull anything off. If they ever got any kind of control over our club, I've no doubt it would end in tears.
I don't disagree, my points were against a poster who said he wasn't in favour of fan based ownership. MUST really need to work on their PR an awful lot of what they say/do actually drives some fans away and I can understand why
Wanting the Glazers out is one thing [which the vast majority share], MUST and the Green and Gold continuing to be the main voice of opposition is quite another. Or at least in my mind.
What are you on about?
I doubt you'll find anyone who doesn't want the Glazers out. What you find on Redcafe are more balanced views maybe, but then if you want just one side shouting then head over to one of the other forums that cater for that.
As for myself, I can't stand the leeches and I haven't spent a penny of my money on the club since early '07. However that doesn't automatically mean I have to be a Must member or agree with anything they do, because I don't.
I unfairly get tainted by that brush.
I want the Glazers out, of course, but I am equaly against The Red Knights for reasons I have given here.
Better the devil you know, as the phrase goes, can they provide a unity that will give our club a stable foundation for 5 years? 10 years? what happens when one wants out? then another? Then who gains ownership?
A group of people claiming to be United Fans, supported by an organisation as shambolical as MUST is not "Fan Ownership" and is not a stable future for our club.
The Glazers may not be kind to us fans, but they sure as hell know what they are doing when it comes to unlocking the earning potential of this club.
Excuse me I don't class the RK's as fan ownership and I am on record as saying before I have big doubts about them.
I would say there is a general feeling of disapproval of this move by MUST even within the matchgoing support and that even includes boycotters etc as well - what you reckon?
Seems the vast majority of our fans realise that Rooney is being a complete twat in this whole episode, even if he wanted to leave then it could have been handled far better - today's statement was clearly just a weak excuse.
Earning potential? There is no sense in earning £100m and then blow it all along with another £80m in debt, this is probably dangerously close to being wrong thread terrority so I will leave it there
Not sure how green and gold gets lumped into that statement. I can understand people getting frustrated by MUST's tactics, and there is a genuine debate to be had there.
But green and gold is just a symbol of the wider opposition to the Glazers, not support of MUST.
Yes MUST have enthusiastically backed it, and got involved, why wouldn't they? But they have no ownership of it... iirc it came from red issue in fact?
Mix the two and you get the truth.
MUST are lying bastards with an agenda that has good intentions
Sorry did I mention your name?
MUST's whole campaign is "giving the club back to it's fans".
We have got together a group of millionaire United fans that will wrench the ownership of the club away from The Glazers and with their owners being United Fans, the club will be "back in the hands of the fans".
I can tell you one thing is certain about millionaire investors, United fans or not, they will love money a hell of alot more than they love United.
Yeah I'd say that's true, I am one of them. I'd still say the majority of match going support are fully behind what MUST are trying to achieve though, just not in this way.
It would be a big improvement on what we have now but not my ideal situation. MUST would have been better to remain aloof from the Knights
I didn't think so either, and seeing decent people buying that absolute unmitigated rubbish honestly hurt me much more than Rooney wanting away.
Like noodles said, if that statement was anything but an obviously transparent attempt to remain in the supporters' good books (and, don't forget -- assure the supporters of his soon-to-be club he's not a callous mercenary) how do you explain the fact he's been playing under the Glazer ownership for so long?
Just answer this one question and maybe I'll regain some of my belief in humanity. Right now it feels like even the most decent of supporters can be swept away by the most vulgar form of PR spin, and that is far more depressing than any individual player disrespecting United.
What, and let a sniff at getting in on the club get away? Not a chance.
Bert and Ernie could have turned up with Elmo and told them they'd give them 20% shares in exchange for backing, and Must would have had 'in proud partnership with Sesame street' on that shirt of theirs.
These people lost the ability to speak for the average supporter a long time ago.
Threatening to sue their own in an attempt to dictate terms to one of the biggest United forums out there and silence debate about them? Check.
Becoming the PR firm for the mysterious Red Knights, while pretending to be the independent voice of the supporters? Check.
Encouraging people to transfer their investment (meant to help buy back the club when it eventually is wrested from the Glazers) into temporary 'membership dues', thus wiping out the whole point of the trust? Check.
Gleefully twisting this Rooney crap to fit their own agenda, while their pals the RK do the same? Check.
Threatening to sue their own in an attempt to dictate terms to one of the biggest United forums out there and silence debate about them? Check.
Becoming the PR firm for the mysterious Red Knights, while pretending to be the independent voice of the supporters? Check.
Encouraging people to transfer their investment (meant to help buy back the club when it eventually is wrested from the Glazers) into temporary 'membership dues', thus wiping out the whole point of the trust? Check.
Gleefully twisting this Rooney crap to fit their own agenda, while their pals the RK do the same? Check.
Perhaps it is time for a new fans organisation with only fan's interests at heart
I think you remember correctly about the RI involvement, although whether current perception or that definition in general still exists, of that i am not so sure.
The media view the opposition as one mass so to speak, and perhaps that is something that needs to change if it is to be of greater effect. Green and Gold couldn't have prevented MUST's support of course, however another independent and vocal opposition group could have been welcome.
Complete stupidity by MUST, they're having their plonker pulled by Paul Stretford.
Yes, earning potential.
Lets put it simply.
You buy something that makes £10 a day, for £700 but it costs you £8 a day to pay the interest on the loan you bought to take it out and £2 to keep it running. £0 Profit for you.
So £10 - £8 - £2 = £0
Over the next 5 years, it makes you £2 a day extra per year. But, costs you £2 per day extra in interest each year you own it.
So its now:
£20 - £18 - £2 = £0
Eventually there comes a time when a part of your debt is freed up after it is finally paid off by the profit you are making. Let's say £4 a day.
£20 - £14 - £2 = £4 profit.
That £4 then goes towards making the remaining £14 smaller. All while your initial profits have grown. Lets say by £5.
£25 - £10 - £2 = £15 profit.
Until you reach a point that is something like:
£30 - £0 - £2 = £28 profit.
At this point, you have no debt and the thing you bought that was making you £10 / Day is now making £30 / Day and is worth a whole lot more when you sell it on.
That in a very very basic nutshell, is the Glazers business plan.
Ironically, the person who started the G&G campaign (a MUST committee member, as I understand it) has repeatedly defamed members of the RedCafe membership and admin team.
None of us have threatened to sue.
Yup @pete.
Also why does the Caf put PR in small-caps?
Also why does the Caf put PR in small-caps?
I would like to pull his flaming neck tonight, how this piece of dogs doings calls himself a United supporter is beyond me. Like Rooney I m sure he will not be a regular at OT again
Let's look at the reasons why Rooney might want to leave
1) His stated reasons, which the debt is to blame for
2) The club not offering him enough money, again, the club could offer him the money if not for the debt
3) An argument with Ferguson - unlikely, no indication of that from either side, officially at least
The fact Rooney's not even looking at contract offers suggests it's not No. 2, and I don't understand why the general consensus in here is that Rooney must be a lying bastard. There is no reason that Ferguson's statements and Rooney's statement cannot both be true. The only contradiction is in the dates of the meeting between Rooney and Gill - Ferguson says it was August 14th, Rooney says it was last week. I would tend to believe Rooney on that one, given that the snake Gill said 12 days ago that there was no pressure to sell Rooney, despite apparently knowing since August 14th that Rooney would refuse to sign a new contract.
1) His stated reasons, which the debt is to blame for
2) The club not offering him enough money, again, the club could offer him the money if not for the debt
3) An argument with Ferguson - unlikely, no indication of that from either side, officially at least
The fact Rooney's not even looking at contract offers suggests it's not No. 2, and I don't understand why the general consensus in here is that Rooney must be a lying bastard. There is no reason that Ferguson's statements and Rooney's statement cannot both be true. The only contradiction is in the dates of the meeting between Rooney and Gill - Ferguson says it was August 14th, Rooney says it was last week. I would tend to believe Rooney on that one, given that the snake Gill said 12 days ago that there was no pressure to sell Rooney, despite apparently knowing since August 14th that Rooney would refuse to sign a new contract.
Because otherwise the software defaults it to say "page ranking". Very odd, but a solution nonetheless.
Ahh. Nice work around then.
Well the general feeling seems to be that people are behind the intention but don't agree with the methods - that has been my view for quite some time.
I cannot understand why you would want a scenario where you are given the impression of being in control of the club's direction when, in reality, this "control" boils down to a vote in a presidential election whereby the candidate who appeals to the most transfer muppets wins.
Look at the knee jerk reactions to almost everything that goes on in the club on this very forum. Would you really want us to be in charge? It'd be bloody chaos.
I really don't want to get into this again and it is the wrong thread. Take it up with the experts on the Glazer thread, after Sunday Im staying away from that place
No - they're having it pulled by Paul Stockport! ((c) Moriarty)
Sorry for the silliness, but I've just gone round the bend from this 'Rooney the anti-Glazer martyr' idiocy. Might as well just throw any semblance of rationality to the four winds and rave on!
