The debt is the major thing imo. That should be first and foresmost in my view.How do you want them to change? We need to reach a consensus on that.
The debt is the major thing imo. That should be first and foresmost in my view.How do you want them to change? We need to reach a consensus on that.
That's going to do a lot of good, threatening themMUST have sent an open letter giving the Glazers until Friday to respond.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Yep yep yep. noooooI dont know if this has been mentioned, but the only other way I can think of and legally I dont know if it would be viable, is for the Premier league to fold end of a season and the season after a new Premier league starts with different rules that states all clubs that play in the Premier league (or whatever its rebranded as) must .... and you can add whatever rules you want. Be owned 51% by fans, Major shareholder can only own 25%. Cannot put a club in debt. Cant spend more than you earn on player transfer fees, etc etc.
That board is so grim. Fashion designers and media producers but not one football related person.Unless things have changed they're non-executive Directors. They sit on a different board in what are effectively ceremonial positions rather than on the actual listed board.
This is the board as is, I think:
https://ir.manutd.com/corporate-governance/board-of-directors.aspx
tick. NaïvetéThe naivety of some 'supporters' is bordering on a Disneyland mentality.
If we were winning we wouldn’t care &I wonder if those protests would have gone ahead if we had won the league for the last 7 years, like we mainly did for many years before - with the same ownership.
Business is business. It was a hostile takeover so suck it up, legacy fans. (Adjust mask)....None of it ideal, but the shape of the original deal to buy the club was agreed, accepted, and moved forward. If the club was purchased via a loan, then it was fairly obvious from the beginning, that additional revenue would not be pumped into the club - unless through revenues received.
Business is business. Naïveté. Yes you are on a roll, mr hefty turnover man.Also, being in business myself for way over 20 years, with high turnovers, etc. I understand that altruism is in short supply where business is concerned. Do you really think somebody is going to come in and spend £3-4billion and just hand out everything that fans 'demand'?
But let’s insert some “reality”... despondency #2What SHOULD have happened by now, is that the loan amount (debt) should have been removed by way of the Glazer family selling some of their own shares (with the increased value of the club neutralising any immediately equity loss); that way there would be no need to service endless millions a year servicing any debt; the shareholders get a dividend, but shareholders will also want what is best for the club (in an ideal world....)
The people who went over the top and injured police were wrong. On that we agree. The Elephant in the room is you seeing fans as gnats, against all powerful owners against whom resistance is futile.My feeling is that the Glazer family will stand firm, they have already made a lot of money with the increased value of the club over the years, and they will know that there is plenty more to be made long-term. The protests will be like a gnat pressing against an elephant's leg.
Those loons yesterday breaking into private property, fighting with the police, and causing criminal behaviour have tarnished the message that was intended.
So we keep protesting against owners until we get one we like? Yeah, good luck getting new owners with that plan.Then we protest them too. We commit to not accepting anything less than what's best for the club.
Why are you so intent on being submissive to somebody who wants to exploit our support for profit?
They need us more than we need them.
Yes.So we keep protesting against owners until we get one we like? Yeah, good luck getting new owners with that plan.
It's not being submissive, it's being realistic, something which a high proportion of Glazer-outs don't appear to be showing at this time.
They obviously do on certain things else Phelan and Ole wouldn’t currently be managing United, nor would Moyes ever have been “selected”.Ahh, fair enough.
You would think they'd at least listen to someone like Sir Alex though. He's undoubtedly on the fans side relating this.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Don’t know how realistic any of that is but good on them for at least trying to get something tangible out of all the chaos.MUST letter to Glazers without snidey comment from newbie who joined this year.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
You really have no idea, do you; and it's highly likely you've never even stepped foot inside Old Trafford.tick. Naïveté
If we were winning we wouldn’t care &
Praise the Glazers. Two for the price of one.
Business is business. It was a hostile takeover so suck it up, legacy fans. (Adjust mask)
Business is business. Naïveté. Yes you are on a roll, mr hefty turnover man.
But let’s insert some “reality”... despondency #2
The people who went over the top and injured police were wrong. On that we agree. The Elephant in the room is you seeing fans as gnats, against all powerful owners against whom resistance is futile.
You are wrong on quite a few levelsYou really have no idea, do you; and it's highly likely you've never even stepped foot inside Old Trafford.
It’s the right move trying to get them to the table and would be in everyone’s interest. Joel Glazer’s ESL statement is the first communication he’s ever uttered - how can they build trust if they don’t ever enter into a dialogue?That's going to do a lot of good, threatening them
Don't think they are remotely interested in engaging in dialogue with the match going fan, its the WWTV audience and overseas sponsers they want, hence the attempt at a '3 ring circus' via the Super league.how can they build trust if they don’t ever enter into a dialogue?
I couldn't have put that any better myself and I would imagine a lot of the "Silent members" of this group would also agree but not express their opinion as it goes against the general opinion seemingly. Personally, while I don't like the idea of them owning the club, they would be more of a shadow that you would hopefully forget about in time. (Not completely) They don't need our money and we don't need their's. We just need to have the ability to use our own self generated money for the club, rather than being used to pay off debt and dividends to the current owners.I totally understand a large section of fans would be against it.
For the reasons we’ve both mentioned though, regarding the difficulty in finding a buyer that has deep enough pockets to buy us without then gutting us financially to re-line their pockets, means there isn’t any other possible positive outcome.
At least we would be able to fully operate to our fullest potential. We are a behemoth of a club, a giant, built on the life’s work of men like SAF and Busby who elevated us to our current standing in the game. Why then should we of all clubs be restricted whilst other clubs get a lottery win to bypass us and spend ten times what they could previously. We deserve an owner that doesn’t seek a financial return, like our competitors have.
The game has moved on, we would all go back to the glory years under SAF if we could, winning everything whilst being ‘morally sound’ (or robbed by our owners is another way of putting it.)
I’m sick of us having to work in spite of owners instead of being pushed forward and liberated by them like our competitors are.
Wouldn’t paying off the debt any quicker than they are already make it difficult for the club to balance the books? Never mind making the sort of investment in the squad that fans are looking for.The more I think about it, the more I cannot see a reasonable outcome to this matter.
It has been discussed to death already but nobody is dumping £4bn on a football club with a ROI of circa £20m/annum.
Someone might have a leveraged buyout but I suspect that this might get vetoed by the government in this day and age.
i personally don’t want an oil state anywhere near our ownership.
As a best case scenario, it might be best if the Glazers were to agree to pay off the debt and remain as the owners.
At least we can then run as a debt-free business and live off our revenue streams like any decent club should
While I would be certainly behind any peaceful protest this clearly wasn't one and was probably never intended to be, and the injury to the copper and the damage caused is intolerable. This protest will not get rid of the Glazers but, if the FA dock us points and we fail to qualify for the CL it might well persuade some players to go and others not to come; Bruno had already stated that he wants to win trophies, will he be happy without top flight European football next season? Without CL football next season Paul Pogba will definitely go this summer, and its not outside the realm of possibility that Rashford and Greenwood might decide to seek more success elsewhere too. The likes of Kane, Grealish and Haarling will go to other teams and Manchester United will stagnate and wither. Maybe similar protests will force the Glazers out in time but at what cost? Most of us want them gone....but at any price?tick. Naïveté
If we were winning we wouldn’t care &
Praise the Glazers. Two for the price of one.
Business is business. It was a hostile takeover so suck it up, legacy fans. (Adjust mask)
Business is business. Naïveté. Yes you are on a roll, mr hefty turnover man.
But let’s insert some “reality”... despondency #2
The people who went over the top and injured police were wrong. On that we agree. The Elephant in the room is you seeing fans as gnats, against all powerful owners against whom resistance is futile.
I’m curious about what the most optimistic scenarios are from here on?
I didn’t want the Glazers to take over and it sickens me to see how much money they’ve taken out of the club for personal gain. What I’m struggling with is what plan B looks like? And what needs to fall into place for it to happen.
Could everyone who has a clear idea about what they hope will happen next write a few lines describing how this all pans out.
Valid points. Start off point, I think the vast majority of fans were peaceful. Injury and and damage unacceptable, right. The whole question of short term success versus owners is of course a totally different matter. You seem a bit uncertain on this topic, saying in one sentence that the protests won't get them out, and in another that protests might succeed.While I would be certainly behind any peaceful protest this clearly wasn't one and was probably never intended to be, and the injury to the copper and the damage caused is intolerable. This protest will not get rid of the Glazers but, if the FA dock us points and we fail to qualify for the CL it might well persuade some players to go and others not to come; Bruno had already stated that he wants to win trophies, will he be happy without top flight European football next season? Without CL football next season Paul Pogba will definitely go this summer, and its not outside the realm of possibility that Rashford and Greenwood might decide to seek more success elsewhere too. The likes of Kane, Grealish and Haarling will go to other teams and Manchester United will stagnate and wither. Maybe similar protests will force the Glazers out in time but at what cost? Most of us want them gone....but at any price?
You clearly have never been involved in negotiations if you think that's unusual.That's going to do a lot of good, threatening them
The suggestion wasn’t meant to be that the club pay off the debt using its own cashWouldn’t paying off the debt any quicker than they are already make it difficult for the club to balance the books? Never mind making the sort of investment in the squad that fans are looking for.
They won’t ever do that. Absolutely no chance. That debt is irreversibly bundled into the business from their perspective. It’s a pain in the arse but it is what it is. We can’t turn back time.The suggestion wasn’t meant to be that the club pay off the debt using its own cash
I was suggesting that the Glazers pay off the debt themselves with their own cash and make us debt free.
Yes, if the club paid it off, it would cripple us but that isn’t what I mean at all
I know that!!!They won’t ever do that. Absolutely no chance. That debt is irreversibly bundled into the business from their perspective. It’s a pain in the arse but it is what it is. We can’t turn back time.
That's wrong though. They didn't engage United fans because they wanted to go and create something. They created it first, spent years secretly building it, and ONLY ENGAGED when they were soundly rejected and publicly humiliated. And yes, fans (and others) did have something to do with that. It is an indication of them feeling the pressure that they were dragged kicking and screaming to engage. Joel must have felt so dirty! In my view that pressure was do do with worries about image, sponsorship, government regulation, and loss of revenue. So yes, smiles, songs and dances might have a role. Do what you can to get them out.You clearly have never been involved in negotiations if you think that's unusual.
The Glazers didn't engage United fans for 15 years until two weeks ago they wanted to go and create something that is against the fabric of the club and English football in general. Do you think you'll convince these people with smiles, songs and dances?
I honestly think some of you need to sit down and read up on history, across all causes and eras to get a bit of perspective.
Hm, hm. But what if the Premiership (backed by government legislation) instituted a rule. In order to compete, a club must hold a majority of its own voting rights. And what if UEFA and FIFA had the same rule. Then the Glazers would have to sell 25% shares or whatever to compete or be left behind. Interesting to game out what happens at that point.They won’t ever do that. Absolutely no chance. That debt is irreversibly bundled into the business from their perspective. It’s a pain in the arse but it is what it is. We can’t turn back time.
I am assuming he meant to pay the debt off with their own money, not the clubs. Even if they had that sort of personal cash the chances of them doing that is pretty much nil.Wouldn’t paying off the debt any quicker than they are already make it difficult for the club to balance the books? Never mind making the sort of investment in the squad that fans are looking for.
But we don't have to have a single person buy all £3-4b of the club. If the Glazers released their premium shares(the ones with voting rights) for sale, then they could reduce their stake in the club without needing a billionaire. The way they have it setup right now, is that even if someone came into and bought most of the publicly held shares, the Glazers would still have complete control.Being completely honest why is it such a strange idea that the Glazers would sell?
If they can get £4 billion that’s a huge return on investment for them. With the Super League in doubt the maximum sale price is starting to level out. The FA are bringing in rules so these clubs cannot break away. Post COVID I expect sponsorship deals won’t increase in value. BT are trying to sell BT sports because their shareholders did not see value in the football packages they had purchased, suggesting they’re overpriced. The maximum level of revenues is levelling out.
Surely there are better investments for them now? The issue we have is finding a wealthier owner willing to spend £4b on the club, then provide the manager with funds, capital investment in the stadium and surrounding areas. There is only a couple of people on the planet with that sort of money. It’s not exactly easy.
Forget about Jack. He won't be able to get his cash out of the country.Yeah what IS plan B?
"Get the Glazers out" - But then what? Unlike Arsenal we do not have a tech giant who also is a boyhood fan of the club. One of the boyhood Manchester United fans, Sir Ian Ratcliffe who also happens to be the richest man in the UK wants nothing to do with the valuations of the clubs. And to quote the man himself: "United have spent an immense amount since Ferguson left and been poor, to put it mildly. Shockingly poor, to be honest."
Just to make something very clear:
The clubs debt is there to stay. It serves a fiscal purpose in the sense that it reduces taxes and is used to fund operations. A potential buyer won't simply pay off the clubs debt. The new owner(s) will pay for a controliling stake of the company and that's it. Paying off the debt simply means giving away money. No one is going to give away hundreds of millions of pounds.
After a takeover a few things could potentially materialize: Outside investment into the club for favorirable or 0% interest rates. Potentially used to upgrade Old Trafford, replace the roof, whatever needs upgrading and modernizing. Developing the outside grounds, etc. Things that we are currently not doing. "Money to buy players" will not be gifted from new owners.
New ownership usually means investment into infrastructure if needed. What Manchester United needs is key personell that oversees transfers and operations.
Anyone who thinks that a new owner is going to come in and A) Clear the debt B) Buy Haaland, Rice, Sancho and Varane next summer C) Invest a massive amount of money into the club should probably tamper their expectations quite a bit.
The list of parties with a realistic interest in owning a huge Premier League club is very small. Some potential asian buyers, more Americans, and oil rich middle eastern investors who tend to be part of or tied in with the royal families.
Personally I think the most realistic option no one are speaking much about to take over the club is Jack Ma. Manchester United has a working relationship with Alibaba, and China remains a focusmarket. If the Glazers do want to sell, he'll probably be listening in.
50+1 just won't happen. It's not realistic with club values as massive as they have become. It's a nice idea on paper but we really should have gone that route in the 90s when it was financially possible.