Good for you, cider. Well done.
I'll still remember you as the witty young chap from RedCafe even when you're boring the shit out of us with spreadsheets on your own Blog, though.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
Good for you, cider. Well done.
I'll still remember you as the witty young chap from RedCafe even when you're boring the shit out of us with spreadsheets on your own Blog, though.
That's fantastic Ciderman!
And if it doesn't lead to a job in that sector you can always use it to school the anti-Glazer fanatics on here. You win both ways!
The fact we don't have to pay Ron's enormous salary would have helped the figure.
Hehe yeah!
This thread is more likely to inspire me to cut my wrists.
A sleepless night for Andersred awaits.
Well, it was either this or the Ozil thread so I plumped for this one. I'm still alive but I believe 1,000 Ozil muppets jumped off a bridge on deadline day.
Dont shoot the messenger
You seem very confident, I take it you have already had a look
I think he's just saying that if tomorrow's accounts are released and they show that the carveout hasn't been taken then anders admittedly has no clue as to what's going on at the club; it'd kind of bring the dampers down on his blog and mess up all his predictions a bit.
I think everyone's just a little surprised that no news of the carveout being taken has leaked yet; it's a large sum of money and GCHQ reckons that as such its transference would unlikely have gone unnoticed.
I'm sure if it happens to be the case that it hasn't been taken though that there must be some logical explanation: anders just doesn't know what that explanation is, and so, you know, hence a sleepless night and that.
What Irish property? Likely get my intelligence insulted for asking but Im curious
That's it Cider.
Good to know we were spending millions even back in 2000 and not even using the thing we spent it on.
I told you things are largely the same as they always were.
Also good to see that the Glazers aren't the only ones who can't fill their tenancy spots.
Good to know we were spending millions even back in 2000 and not even using the thing we spent it on.
I told you things are largely the same as they always were.
Also good to see that the Glazers aren't the only ones who can't fill their tenancy spots.
Another bad investment by the look of it. Loved to know where it is out of curiousity
I bet it's some kind of castle.
It's not an investment. It seems (from that snippet) that we signed up for a 15 year lease for this property but don't utilise it and have been unable to find a sub-tenant for so they appear to have provided against the remainder of the lease.
Let's be fair, I think it will be a surprise to everyone on either side of the argument if they don't take the full available dividend.
How did we sign up for it when GCHQ said the lease was taken out in 2000. Was this dumped onto the club as well?
It would have been signed up under the PLC.
Ok sorry I took it to be a Glazer investment in 2000, apologies for that Malcom. What the hell where we leasing for that money and how come nobody has ever heard of it?
Would be shocked myself
Oh, come on Crerand! Keep up! The Glazers took over in 2005, remember?
This means you can't blame them for letting Law go on a free, either.
I wonder if it was intended to be some kind of Academy over there or something like that. It has to be something United related. I'm sure Edwards and co weren't using shareholder money for some dodgy property investments and forgot to tidy that one up before they handed over the keys in 2005.
My over-riding emotion will be something nearer "pretty pissed off" to be honest.
For the last ten months, Anders has been saying that the whole point of the Bond Issue was to enable the Glazers to get their hands on "United money".
His argument was completely sound and, with nothing better to offer for all the various entitlements inserted into it, the rest of us have had to grudgingly concede that he's probably right.
(Although given what has happened to Liverpool recently, removing us from the whims of the banks appears to have been a pretty smart move for an entirely different reason, now - shudda done a Bond Issue boys!)
MUST have been counting this money has having already been taken out since the start of the year and including it in their various propaganda figures (their source, of course, Anders).
Every single discussion I have had with people on here and elsewhere has had to have £95million inserted into it for their benefit and I have had to argue around it. It has become a given.
I think you are overestimating the influence of anders on other people who have come to their conclusions independently. He only speaks for himself.
Yeah i know. What do you think the reaction will be if they haven't taken the carve-out, datura?
Oh, come on Crerand! Keep up! The Glazers took over in 2005, remember?
This means you can't blame them for letting Law go on a free, either.
I wonder if it was intended to be some kind of Academy over there or something like that. It has to be something United related. I'm sure Edwards and co weren't using shareholder money for some dodgy property investments and forgot to tidy that one up before they handed over the keys in 2005.
I have already made my apologies as I always do when I am wrong, thankfully that it is not very often
It is a mysteryOh, I am sure that a relative handful of people such as yourself are able to read and understand the accounts for themselves and are able to form their own independent judgement.
I am talking about the 150,000 MUST members who are fed the "Anders Lite" version of the situation.
I am talking about the media who take their cues from Anders and MUST which lead to articles such as that pile of shit which was posted this evening which in turn are read and watched by millions of people around the world.
Personally, I think you under-estimate his/their influence.
Let's just wait and see what happens tomorrow, eh?
See, this is the sort of argument that I really have no respect for as it basically assumes that there is a pack mentality and people just believe everything they see and read.
You can vote Labour but not agree with everything they say or do. The same with MUST.
The Glazer's have had numerous opportunities to have made press releases etc to express their side of the discussion and have repeatedly ignored that, so surely they are as much to blame for the reporting by not putting across their side to act as a counter-balance?
He's always doing this. It's a bit odd how a reasonably intelligent chap like him can believe that the media doesn't have a very significant impact on how people think about Manchester United's financial situation.
What reason, other than negative publicity, would they have for not taking the full dividend they're entitled to? Doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Surely they will have taken it?
The only reason I can think of for not doing so would be if they were planning to use the money to make a significant club investment in some asset or another.
The only reason I can think of for not doing so would be if they were planning to use the money to make a significant club investment in some asset or another.
Let's wait and see? You do realise that this attitude is explained and condemned in the MUST Bible in The Book of Duncan (19) Chapter 3 as:-
"Let it be known that the person attempting such a congenial stance is, in fact, an ostrich who buries their head in the sand and should be exposed as such. Let them not get away with such congeniality. Let them feel your wroth. For yours is the divine path, the power and the glory. And if it isn't we'll seek some kind of legislation to make it so."
He is intelligent correct and he is well able to spot the holes in the finances of Glazers, intelligent enough to know that most people recognise fact, the Glazers being in over their heads from fiction, they are cash rich with the interests of the club and fans at heart. The media did not create the Glazer mess they did that all themselves
Significant investment in the club would be at long odds in the bookies. More chance of a flashy new mansion in Florida
What is your hourly rate from the Glazers? Whitehall must surely pay better.
I'm in a similar position, I can't understand what benefit (other than tax reasons perhaps) they would have from retaining the PIKs. I would have thought they would have been paid off as soon as possible.
Yeah, same. They're not going to find a better use for money in this financial climate than paying down a 16% loan - nothing's going to generate more than a 16% return.
If they aren't taking the full dividend - and I'm still thinking they will have - then it makes me wonder whether in fact they own more than the 20% of the PIKs than has been suggested.
G&G was a classic case of pack mentality, as far as I'm concerned. I appreciate that amongst the pack, there would have been some pretty clued up people who knew what the hell they were protesting about but all of them? Give me a break. There were kids waving their scarves about.
I also know a few people personally who got into the whole G&G thing and I know for a fact that if you left them in a cold room with, say, a box of matches, some dry twigs and a log, you could come back to them six hours later to find them freezing but... hey... they've made a dinosaur!
Well. They may have noticed that every time Gill speaks, he is ridiculed and called a liar. Every time Fergie has spoken on the situation, he is ridiculed and accused of sucking up to his employers and they may have thought to themselves, "Why bother?"
Been through this one over and over again. I've clearly touched a nerve with the MUST thing there. I think they're a bunch of idiots who have caused more harm to United than they have done good down the years.
Their heart might be in the right place but god knows where their brains are.
- Status