Glazers / Woodward out! (One down)

laughtersassassin said:


Looks like Arsenal might end up the lucky ones. Hopefully we can as well. Either way this looks to be proof we have done effect.
Click to expand...


For me, this is the best way of getting rid of the Glazers...getting someone who is genuine about buying the club, coming out & saying it! 50 + 1 etc is going to just take too long.
 
Colin Clarke said:
When it comes to getting sponsorship deals yes Woodward has been Somewhat of a success but United are an attractive options for sponsors, but regards Managers and players, Moyes was chosen before Sir Alex and David Gill stepped down, so not his fault, whether or not Moyes should have been given longer is debatable, but both Van Gaal and Mourinho are his choices. Van Gaal was never a could never be long term and the same for Jose where every where he goes turns toxic. But all three managers have complained of not getting the players they wanted or of deals being pulled just before being signed off. Felaini could have been cheaper if bought earlier, we wasted all of last summer on Sancho instead of moving on, Bruno was bought six months later than he should have been and Cavani brought in as a free agent in October could have been here all season. And there is an extensive live of failures as he tried the "Galactico" model that has Real Madrid broke. You could add giving long term contracts to players not good enough for the 1st team just to protect their value (Jones, Rojo, Smalling etc). At the end of the day.if , and I assume he would have been, was totally kept in the loop about ESL plans, his actions while dealing with the FA, UEFA and fellow PL clubs show him to be sneaky, untrustworthy and devious so I am not sad to see the back of him, I won't wish him harm but I won't wish him a bon farewell either, just wish he would take the rest of the snakes with him.
Click to expand...
So if the responsibility of choosing managers is with Woodward, does he get the credit for Ole if he turns out to be successful?

Every sacked manager will try to blame the club for not getting the players they wanted. Gill was a lucky guy who was in charge during Fergie days, I don't see him doing any better than Woodward in the same period of time. We've spent more money under Woodward as well.

I agree with the points you've made, but I have little hope the guy replacing him will be better, because I think it's very likely to be a business oriented person with little to none football background - because eventually it'll be Glazers man.
 
alexthelion said:
By whom? Who would come in as manmager and put the club first above themselves?

Regarding the Glazers, sometimes it's better the devil you know. What needs changing are PL/FA rules before we even consider a change of ownership.
Click to expand...
Well as an United fan under Louis Edwards, Martin Edwards, the PLC and now the Glaser's I know which was the worst and it's the Glaser's hands down. They bought their initial shares in United and that's it. It's the fact that they have plunged United from a club in the black into the Red, a debt that would cripple most other clubs that makes them so hated. The money being given to the banks year in year out not to clear the debt but to pay off the interest is immense ands could have been spent on the Squad, facilities, the ground and all the while the Glaser's still take their dividends. If United could find an owner who would replace them and rid us of this debt, United would easily fund itself and still pay even higher dividends to the owners yet be unmatchable in the transfer market.
 
Borys said:
So if the responsibility of choosing managers is with Woodward, does he get the credit for Ole if he turns out to be successful?

Every sacked manager will try to blame the club for not getting the players they wanted. Gill was a lucky guy who was in charge during Fergie days, I don't see him doing any better than Woodward in the same period of time. We've spent more money under Woodward as well.

I agree with the points you've made, but I have little hope the guy replacing him will be better, because I think it's very likely to be a business oriented person with little to none football background - because eventually it'll be Glazers man.
Click to expand...
Hence why we need the Glaser's gone also. The one problem I have with Woodward is.his failure to recognise his weaknesses, If you know nothing about football, players etc you get someone in beside you to help and advise you. It took Woodward till his final year to make that move, all because he didn't want to give up the power.
 
Harry Harries said:
Yeah. Football clubs that people pour their heart and souls into are a bit different though.
Click to expand...
At the end of the day, a football club is a business. I don't like it but taking out a loan secured by the business or asset your are about to acquire is very common.
 
Adisa said:
At the end of the day, a football club is a business. I don't like it but taking out a loan secured by the business or asset your are about to acquire is very common.
Click to expand...
That's precisely the problem. There's a middle ground that's been lost amid the flurry of big money and investments. It's why people are pining for the German model of ownership here, despite it likely being a pipe dream.
 
Colin Clarke said:
Well as an United fan under Louis Edwards, Martin Edwards, the PLC and now the Glaser's I know which was the worst and it's the Glaser's hands down. They bought their initial shares in United and that's it. It's the fact that they have plunged United from a club in the black into the Red, a debt that would cripple most other clubs that makes them so hated. The money being given to the banks year in year out not to clear the debt but to pay off the interest is immense ands could have been spent on the Squad, facilities, the ground and all the while the Glaser's still take their dividends. If United could find an owner who would replace them and rid us of this debt, United would easily fund itself and still pay even higher dividends to the owners yet be unmatchable in the transfer market.
Click to expand...
Yes, so? Answer, who will replace the Glazers and be better?
 
Spoony said:
I suspect you've asked this question a few times. Seems utterly pointless. No one knows, how's that??
Click to expand...
Then why continually call to get rid of the Glazers when noone knows how bad the alternative will be? It's just stupid, imo.
 
stepic said:
At 4bn there’s likely only one bidder surely.
Click to expand...

I can think of a lot of people that can afford that. If they want to is a entirely different question.

I can envision Jack Ma being a interested party.
 
i
alexthelion said:
Then why continually call to get rid of the Glazers when noone knows how bad the alternative will be? It's just stupid, imo.
Click to expand...

Why not?? They're hated. People naturally hope for better. You can keep defending them but you're one of a very few.

Let's see how it pans out...
 
RedDevilRoshi said:
Other than MBS, which other person out there has a spare £4B lying around?
Click to expand...

Well Bezos & Musk are both worth well over £100bn and yes I know they are wealthy businessman types but being realistic that is our only other options outside of MBS which quite frankly doesn't even bear thinking about. You get the impression that unlike the Spotify guy looking at Arsenal that neither of them is remotely interested in buying a football club
 
Last edited:
Feck no to Steve Ballmer :lol: He was like a Moyes/Woodward hybrid for Microsoft after Bill Gates stepped down from CEO.
 
I want anyone who has a genuine interest in football and isn't affiliated to murderous regimes.
 
Paxi said:


Look at that horrible looking cnut. Good grief he's a rancid bastard.

Looks like mole rat.

Click to expand...


While normally I'd say mentioning the appearance of a person in order to make negative remarks against their character is a low move, there are instances you can feel the appearance has been shaped by the character somewhat.
In this case, this man's face has clearly been deformed by greed and selfishness to the point of making him look like a disgusting mole rat.
 
The issue is that we are much too 'big' to be bought. The Saudis are the only ones who have the power to do it and still invest. The way football is going then the likes of Arsenal or even Liverpool are much more affordable. Why buy us for 4 billion and still have to invest in the team when City proved you can buy a club for relative peanuts and create a top side from investment? Long term we will have to rely on our academy and signings like Mjebri and Diallo and hope that no other smaller clubs get bought like City did. This is modern football and a big reason that the Super League was even a thing.
 
There is no one person who remotely would be universally accepted...and therein lies the issues!

You can't get Manchester United fans to agree on anything, so even a fan led consortium probably wouldn't be ideal.

I feel we need obviously a a rich owner, who is the lesser evil of MBS. MBS has to be the pedestal of who you don't want...so hopefully this can only get better!
 
Spoony said:
i

Why not?? They're hated. People naturally hope for better. You can keep defending them but you're one of a very few.

Let's see how it pans out...
Click to expand...
I'm certainly not defending the Glazers, I just want measures put in place before they sell/are forced out.

Seems to me, some would just be happy to be rid reagrdless of how much worse the next owners could be.
 
They’ve owned us for 15 years. They’ve owned the Buccaneers for 25 years. This is what their family business model is, sports team ownership. Like it or not we’re staying in the Glazer family for some time. Maybe even generations.
 
stw2022 said:
They’ve owned us for 15 years. They’ve owned the Buccaneers for 25 years. This is what their family business model is, sports team ownership. Like it or not we’re staying in the Glazer family for some time. Maybe even generations.
Click to expand...
Not sure about that, the dad was the mastermind businessman, and theres only 2 of the family who bother with the club. the family dont seem to give a shit about it
 
alexthelion said:
Then why continually call to get rid of the Glazers when noone knows how bad the alternative will be? It's just stupid, imo.
Click to expand...
Cause we have rock bottom ownership. You can't get much worse.

We know we are basically fecked forever under the Glazers. We might build something every now and again but it takes so long that it gets dismantled twice as quick.

Exhibit Liverpool. Hicks and Gillette to FSG.

Glazers are our Hicks and Gilette. Only difference is we where too big to fail when they took us over.

It's essentially a measured risk. The chances of getting worse less interested owners is close to 0. They don't provide us any funding or improvements to the stadium so if new owners don't either it's no difference.

The Glazers provide nothing so the possibility of an upside is very high if we get rid of them.
 
clarkydaz said:
Not sure about that, the dad was the mastermind businessman, and theres only 2 of the family who bother with the club. the family dont seem to give a shit about it
Click to expand...
Agree there these two feckers left Joel and Avram. The rest doesn't give one Feck and to be fair they are willing to move some shares for the right price.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.