Woodward, Glazers....

Womp

idiot
Joined
Jun 23, 2013
Messages
9,262
Location
Australia
Got absolutely no time for people who are only anti Glazer when the transfer window opens at all. When Woodwood bought Di Maria and Falcao a few years ago there were memes about how he was buying everyone and how much we loved him.
I agree with this sentiment, but I'll try and explain my perspective. I've been Glazers out for some time, during the actual season though, I try to be positive and get involved, so I put it on the backburner. I'm also all for change, so if I see positive progress, I'll be happy.

On top of that, I really don't think anything I'll say or do will ultimately have any influence on getting the parasites out, so it would be a waste of time and energy, so much easier to just accept our fate and try and be positive. It's just much more touchy in situations like this window where people are obviously coming off huge excitement given the previous season, itching to make another step forward, extremely frustrating when that sentiment isn't shared by the board
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,638
Location
London
The plan is obvious; Do everything to keep the fans appeased while spending as little as possible to keep their cash cow producing milk. As soon as the fans are starting to, or showing signs of, uniting against the Glazers (Woody is their shield) they promise changes, DoF briefings etc... This happens every year and they are certainly monitoring the mood on social media to attempt to put out any potential fires before they ignite. They drag out every transfer to get as much social media clicks as a performance metric to show potential sponsors. Appointing OGS was made to have a well-liked player in charge, so it would be more difficult for the fans to show their dissent towards the club, Owners and Woody.

One fundamental aspect of how this club is rotten is the way they view their fans (should here be noted that there is no proof for this, just my personal opinion): Some companies and clubs view thinks that the club is for their fans. Meaning that how they operate, play etc is to satisfy their customers (fans) and delivering a quality product (results and entertainment) is vital for their fans(customers) satisfaction. Our club runs on the premise of the shareholders and owners. Meaning that "customer management" is to deliver a quality product(££££) to the owners. Thus the fans are seen as something exploitable. A revenue stream. A source of income. As long as the product (result and performance) offered is good enough, they will keep paying, being interested etc. The problem here is that within the sport world industries, brand loyalty is extremely strong and thus makes it possible for a company (club) to deliver a really bad product without losing the customer...
The problem with this theory is that it is not based on the fact. Despite the ignorant belief that they like to spend as less money as possible (I assume, because by doing so, then they get that money for themselves), the dividend has been a constant for many years now, regardless of how much we have spent. United is their cash cow, but cash cow in the sense that the stock value increases over time, increasing the Glazers' wealth. They are not interested at all at putting money outside of United (that is why they get only 20m in dividends when they can get much more if they want). Taking too much money out of United is bad news, it weakens their stock value, in turn making them less rich.

The truth is, we simply do not have near as much money as you and many people seem to believe. Our cash reserves are at only 90m (were at 300m last summer). We took a new 150m debt to cover operational costs. We reported financial losses last quarter. We simply do not have enough money to spend on buying very expensive players. What you (and others) are asking is a sugar daddy. Only in that case we would be able to spend money that we do not have.

This is besides the point that they have been bad at spending money. We have spent over 900m (net spent) on transfers over the last decade (only Barca - who have had a higher revenue than us during that time - and City wo have a sugar daddy have spent more). That is and has always been a fair critic.
 

NinjaZombie

Punched the air when Liverpool beat City
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
10,166
If we end the transfer window without strengthening, I'd be interested to hear what our ex players have to say about the owners and Woodward.

Ole has clearly said we needed signings. That's the positive of having him as manager. You can't question whether or not he has an agenda that doesn't line up with how successful the fans want Manchester United to be.

So there will be no arguments about "Woodward vetoed the manager's signing because it wasn't in line with the long term aspirations of the club" or such other nonsense.

My hope is, if he fails and gets sacked, Ole would unite Man Utd fans against the Glazers.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,638
Location
London
The Glazers have an offer on the table from the Spanish Ortega Family. Amancio Ortega and his daughter believe that it is the perfect time to buy the club.
Source - RadioelFuego1 (Reliable?)
No way. Ortega does not even allow people to take photos of him, he is not on dick-waving business. The club would be too high risk low reward for him, and he is not interested on spending his own money to win titles.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,638
Location
London
If we end the transfer window without strengthening, I'd be interested to hear what our ex players have to say about the owners and Woodward.

Ole has clearly said we needed signings. That's the positive of having him as manager. You can't question whether or not he has an agenda that doesn't line up with how successful the fans want Manchester United to be.

So there will be no arguments about "Woodward vetoed the manager's signing because it wasn't in line with the long term aspirations of the club" or such other nonsense.

My hope is, if he fails and gets sacked, Ole would unite Man Utd fans against the Glazers.
Won't have any effect. Fans are not allowed to go to the stadiums anyway.

The only way to force Glazers to leave is to totally boycott (as in, not leave on protest on 90th minute, but don't buy the tickets). Do that for some time, and in effect it will mean that the corona situation (no money from the stadium) will continue indefinitely for them. While we are there, don't also buy the United shirt, don't subscribe to facebook/twitter/instagram etc, effectively making the United's value smaller and forcing them to sell. They don't care about the symbolic gestures as long as the revenue is floating (which in turn increases the club's value).
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,165
Location
Manchester
Sure. So what's enough? Of the 330 million they claim how many do you need to get to achieve a material difference? The big problem is coordination with potentially hundreds of millions of people. How do you get them to stop buying, engaging, impacting on social media? It will take cold, hard cash. That's it.
Point is, the defeatist and accepting attitude you propose is self fulfilling. It will not facilitate any change whatsoever.

Actually, once fans can attend matches again, it would only take a vocal proportion of that 70,000 to begin to have the influence I mentioned.
 

Revan

Assumptionman
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
49,638
Location
London
Point is, the defeatist and accepting attitude you propose is self fulfilling. It will not facilitate any change whatsoever.

Actually, once fans can attend matches again, it would only take a vocal proportion of that 70,000 to begin to have the influence I mentioned.
It won't Fans protested and were vocal for years, and Glazers didn't give a shit. Heck, they even started selling green and yellow scarfs as official merchandise, both to increase revenue and as a feck you to those fans.

Until we see many empty seats in Old Trafford (and not cause of corona) they won't care.
 

backofthenet

Correctly predicted France to win World Cup 2018
Joined
Oct 15, 2009
Messages
4,537
Location
He's not the messiah... he's a very naughty boy
It won't Fans protested and were vocal for years, and Glazers didn't give a shit. Heck, they even started selling green and yellow scarfs as official merchandise, both to increase revenue and as a feck you to those fans.

Until we see many empty seats in Old Trafford (and not cause of corona) they won't care.
And as previous people have said, they don't always go to the football because of the football, but to see their friends, and for the crack. People are right to say that the only way to have a positive impact is to boycott, but it won't happen. There are too many day trippers, tourists, and general football fans that would snap up a ticket if it became available. Yes its a defeatist attitude, but I think, as a fan you have to accept the rough with the smooth. We had 30 years of awesome. Now is currently not our time. With some shrewdness and patience it will be our time again, but probably not now. Unfortunately, patience is an alien concept these days.
 

red thru&thru

Full Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2004
Messages
7,657
If people want change, they will have to unite on the same cause. Some of the GOM, LUHG, etc groups, amongst others, just don't cut it.

They lose credibility as either the facts & figures they use are incorrect/presented in the wrong way, or some start attacking the players & the manager and talk about how great Jose was over SAF!

I think all United fans can be in unison to say the planning and execution of the football side of the club has been mismanaged. Let's demand changes there. This is something more realistic.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,165
Location
Manchester
It won't Fans protested and were vocal for years, and Glazers didn't give a shit. Heck, they even started selling green and yellow scarfs as official merchandise, both to increase revenue and as a feck you to those fans.

Until we see many empty seats in Old Trafford (and not cause of corona) they won't care.
It sometimes takes more than one attempt, 10 years ago to have an impact. If you want change at the club then you have to work towards it. If you don't want change then do nothing.
 

Razwy

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 28, 2017
Messages
19
Location
Bucharest
I'm at the point of thinking that the Glazers PR machine intentionally put these rumors out there just to fool us all that they're looking to sell and that's why they don't spend.
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
9,954
It's been mentioned again tonight by a lot of outlets about Ortega maybe something in it
 

Nou_Camp99

what would Souness do?
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
10,274
It's been mentioned again tonight by a lot of outlets about Ortega maybe something in it
A lot of? 'Im just seeing the same source and nobody else. Radio elfuego.

I have been praying for the day that the club is sold and that 'their' debt is cleared but I'm not buying this story one bit. It seems too good to be true.

How have some tiny radio station got the lowdown on a Spanish billionaire buying an English football club? Impossible. It's just some attention seeking moron no doubt.
 

Nou_Camp99

what would Souness do?
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
10,274
Interesting their latest tweet goes into specifics about the complexities of our class A and class B shares so if this is a wind up, which it almost certainly is, they have at least done some homework.

Seems very wierd for a media Co based in Catalunya to make this up though. Surely their main audience couldn't care less about us or the Glazers. But that's my hopeful side coming up with that theory. Chances are it's absolute BS.
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
9,954
A lot of? 'Im just seeing the same source and nobody else. Radio elfuego.

I have been praying for the day that the club is sold and that 'their' debt is cleared but I'm not buying this story one bit. It seems too good to be true.

How have some tiny radio station got the lowdown on a Spanish billionaire buying an English football club? Impossible. It's just some attention seeking moron no doubt.
I googled Ortega Man Utd it is the same source but it's an update from 2 days ago
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
5,998
Location
DKNY
Ortega didn't become as obscenely wealthy as he is by buying the ultimate ego project, a football club. Specially not one in the price range of Manchester United. An even less so in a covid19 economy which is wreaking havoc in Spain.
If United is sold, it will not be to a European buyer. That kind of silly money is only found in the Gulf states, China, the US and Russia. Maybe an Indian billionaire. But that's it.
 

Rooney24

Full Member
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
8,346
Interesting their latest tweet goes into specifics about the complexities of our class A and class B shares so if this is a wind up, which it almost certainly is, they have at least done some homework.

Seems very wierd for a media Co based in Catalunya to make this up though. Surely their main audience couldn't care less about us or the Glazers. But that's my hopeful side coming up with that theory. Chances are it's absolute BS.
But its not even overly complicated.

The Class A shares are available for public sale and hold one vote per share.
The Class B shares are completely owned by the Glazers, not for public sale, and carry 10 votes per share.
 

Gandalf Greyhame

If in doubt, follow your nose!
Scout
Joined
Dec 7, 2013
Messages
7,454
Location
Red Card for Casemiro!
If we end the transfer window without strengthening, I'd be interested to hear what our ex players have to say about the owners and Woodward.

Ole has clearly said we needed signings. That's the positive of having him as manager. You can't question whether or not he has an agenda that doesn't line up with how successful the fans want Manchester United to be.

So there will be no arguments about "Woodward vetoed the manager's signing because it wasn't in line with the long term aspirations of the club" or such other nonsense.

My hope is, if he fails and gets sacked, Ole would unite Man Utd fans against the Glazers.
I'd be interested in what Ole has to say. He has been let down after a good season, just like Mourinho after we finished second. A lone midfielder while rivals strengthened.
 

ShinjiNinja26

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
11,185
Location
Location, Location
Absolute joke. I’ve just accepted now we’re never going to truly challenge for titles again until we get rid of these leeching bastards. The worst thing is there’s no end in sight.
 

hmchan

Full Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
1,429
Location
Hong Kong
If you want money from the board, you have to finish outside top 4. That's why I've never felt that we can get Sancho at all.
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,307
I'd be interested in what Ole has to say. He has been let down after a good season, just like Mourinho after we finished second. A lone midfielder while rivals strengthened.
Whether it's actually a case of Ole being backed or not, remains to be seen. But not backing Mourinho was absolutely the right decision. I don't know why people see a trend here, apart from Glazer hate.
 

Shiva87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,854
Location
Mumbai, India
Whether it's actually a case of Ole being backed or not, remains to be seen. But not backing Mourinho was absolutely the right decision. I don't know why people see a trend here, apart from Glazer hate.
The reason for the comparisons is that the club chose to stick with Jose without backing him. This basically meant that the board was not interested in going beyond 2nd, and thought the squad was good enough for top 4.

Now with Ole, it's similar. Although Ole's vision is aligned with the club's in terms of football style, if the board does not spend - it shows they don't want more than top 4.

The absolutely right decision would have been to part ways with Jose in the summer, instead of halfway through the next season (by when he had turned our club toxic)
 

wolvored

Full Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
9,954
I thnk when they revamped the youth setup and the amount of talent being bought from around the world, the glazers are expecting around 90% of the squad to eventually be ex youth players, sprinkled with 1 maybe 2 new signings a season. In theory its a great idea. Who wouldnt want 9 starters a game all originally from the youth?
The reality is 99% wont be good enough, so we do need a minimum of 2/3 players a season and some seasons obviously more.
They also have this wrong idea that if the team finishes top 4 then thats good enough and only needs minimum investment. This satisfies the contracts they have signed wth the likes of Adidas for example.
I feel going forward the Adidas and Chevrolet deals will start to diminish and they wont get such good deals, certainly the shirt sponsor in future. This will have a further tightening of the purse strings. Hopefully this will get them to think more about selling up.
 

Jim Beam

Gets aroused by men in low socks
Joined
Feb 10, 2017
Messages
13,087
Location
All over the place
The absolutely right decision would have been to part ways with Jose in the summer, instead of halfway through the next season (by when he had turned our club toxic)
Ditto. Even my dog could see he is about to hit meltdown the following season with half of players already alienated from the manager.

By sticking with him and not backing him they practically written off the whole season from the start.
 

Crustanoid

New Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2008
Messages
18,511
The ‘backing the manager’ trope and the ‘invest until we get 4th place’ are not mutually exclusive. They had given Morinho a new deal, but didn’t have the ambition to improve on 2nd place so then let him fall on his sword after not backing him.

Now their spending patterns are the same with Ole. He’s got us on the right trajectory but we’re some way off still. In the Glazers eyes top 4 = don’t need to invest and fans and trophies are not important. They probably hope Ole, being a former player, won’t kick off about this like Mourinho.

The bottom line is
the Glazers are arseholes.
 

Bilbo

TeaBaggins
Joined
Sep 27, 2004
Messages
14,302
People are underestimating how significant the Sancho purchase would be for this club financially. We can all see the balance sheet. It is healthy, but not obscenely so, and paying £100m for a player is a stretch to say the least in very uncertain economic times.

There seems to be a view that the club are trying to play a clever game to reduce the cost of Sancho, and this is undoubtedly true, but if they are doing that because they NEED that reduction to be able to do the deal, rather than simply wanting a 'pat ourselves on the back' outcome, then it all makes a lot more sense.

This is going to be a long season and im personally happy for the club to take all the time they need to secure Sancho, as long as we give ourselves enough time to execute a Plan B should the need arise
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,307
The reason for the comparisons is that the club chose to stick with Jose without backing him. This basically meant that the board was not interested in going beyond 2nd, and thought the squad was good enough for top 4.

Now with Ole, it's similar. Although Ole's vision is aligned with the club's in terms of football style, if the board does not spend - it shows they don't want more than top 4.

The absolutely right decision would have been to part ways with Jose in the summer, instead of halfway through the next season (by when he had turned our club toxic)
You're right he should've been sacked in the summer, that's a mistake. A bigger mistake was giving him a contract extention in the middle of the season. However, backing him would have been a third mistake. Can you imagine the state we'd have been in if he was backed?

So no, I don't see any parallels between that transfer window and this window. The actual, logical explanation for this window has already been spelt out by @Revan a few posts ago. If we'd been able to clear out some of our unwanted players quicker, we'd have seen more incoming activity as well.
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,307
The ‘backing the manager’ trope and the ‘invest until we get 4th place’ are not mutually exclusive. They had given Morinho a new deal, but didn’t have the ambition to improve on 2nd place so then let him fall on his sword after not backing him.

Now their spending patterns are the same with Ole. He’s got us on the right trajectory but we’re some way off still. In the Glazers eyes top 4 = don’t need to invest and fans and trophies are not important. They probably hope Ole, being a former player, won’t kick off about this like Mourinho.

The bottom line is
the Glazers are arseholes.
Your bottom line is absolutely right. However, you're using it to fit a supposed trend of not backing a manager after securing CL.
 

MadDogg

Full Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2002
Messages
15,973
Location
Manchester Utd never lose, just run out of time
This is going to be a long season and im personally happy for the club to take all the time they need to secure Sancho, as long as we give ourselves enough time to execute a Plan B should the need arise
That's the key. I think most would understand if we can't afford Sancho because of Covid. But we need to make that realisation early and spend whatever we can wisely on the rest of the squad.

If we mess around and spend the entire window on Sancho and ultimately fail to get him or anyone else it means one of two things. Either it's pure incompetence, or Woodward and the Glazers don't actually want to spend anything at all and they are going to use the Sancho saga to try to create the excuse why we didn't spend (other than VDB). "We tried to buy Sancho but those nasty people at Dortmund refused to sell so we ended up not buying anyone at all. Don't blame us, it's all Dortmund's fault!"
 

hmchan

Full Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
1,429
Location
Hong Kong
Your bottom line is absolutely right. However, you're using it to fit a supposed trend of not backing a manager after securing CL.
The trend is pretty evident.

13/14 (1) - 75.33m
14/15 (7) - 146.09m
15/16 (4) - 53.93m
16/17 (5) - 137.75m
17/18 (6) - 152.9m
18/19 (2) - 52.15m
19/20 (6) - 142.02m
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,307
The trend is pretty evident.

13/14 (1) - 75.33m
14/15 (7) - 146.09m
15/16 (4) - 53.93m
16/17 (5) - 137.75m
17/18 (6) - 152.9m
18/19 (2) - 52.15m
19/20 (6) - 142.02m
No, it's not. Van Gaal was given everything he wanted in that window and it only looks low spend because Di Maria was sold.

Mourinho is the only one who wasn't backed, and like I said, it was absolutely the right thing to do.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,165
Location
Manchester
The trend is pretty evident.

13/14 (1) - 75.33m
14/15 (7) - 146.09m
15/16 (4) - 53.93m
16/17 (5) - 137.75m
17/18 (6) - 152.9m
18/19 (2) - 52.15m
19/20 (6) - 142.02m
Exactly my thoughts too. The trend is damming. No doubt this year they will blame covid19. But it has been happening for 7 years now.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,165
Location
Manchester
No, it's not. Van Gaal was given everything he wanted in that window and it only looks low spend because Di Maria was sold.

Mourinho is the only one who wasn't backed, and like I said, it was absolutely the right thing to do.
Yes, but Di Maria was sold. So the point stands.