I don’t think empty the stadium is as positive As huge demonstrations and banners. Game disruptions etc. seats are paid for pre kick off how will that impact anything.
Glazers / Woodward out! (One down)
- Thread starter Icemav
- Start date
I don’t think empty the stadium is as positive As huge demonstrations and banners. Game disruptions etc. seats are paid for pre kick off how will that impact anything.
We ended the Rangnick consultancy so that Ed Woodward could advise the Board. Man Utd that.
Now its clear, why we have struggled in almost every aspect of club management post SAF.
They have no clue what the feck they are doing for 10 years.
Restructuring, cleanup, new beginning etc is all bogus, a farce.
To win a race you have to know where is the finish line, these guys as well as the ones appointing them simply have no idea .
The answer is to block the teams from entering the Old Trafford and get the games postponed.
Empty stadium isn't going to do anything.
We need to postpone the Liverpool game so we can get some response from the Glazers on this and get them selling up, enough is enough.
It wouldn't be postponed. It would be forfeit and we'd be fined as well as losing the points. Maybe even a deduction.
So?
At this point, I wouldn't care. The points dedution and forfeit would actually make them sit up and pay attention.
Right now their Sunday consists of getting up, opening the paper, seeing Man Utd lost and getting on with their day without care.
Even better.
If relegation was ever a seriously possibility the Glazers would have to consider selling.
Because it would take even more money to get us back on track. And they know they're incompetent. Easiest thing to do would be to cash out.
They would only cash out for big bucks, they wouldn't sell with the club being in the Championship, they would be cutting off their nose to spite their faces.
Sounds like a plan. Lets get every game cancelled, the league, the cups the lot.
Wouldn't it be great if we hired people who could, I dunno, actually do their fecking jobs?
They put very little money in originally, they take Millions out every year and stand to make billion plus from any sale, possibly several. There will be buyers.
Would be more than happy, in fact delighted, to finish the season in our current position if it meant the Glazers selling up.
Look at our wage bill, do you really think the Glazers would stick in millions to cover the losses?
The club is already saddled with debt so their only options would be to pump millions of their own cash in or sell the club.
Either way if the fans said we are going to do everything we can stop games taking place until you sell it would send a pretty strong message.
I wouldn't put it past them to hire a professional PR firm that outsources social media posts to some call center.
Saw this on Reddit
Glazers don't own 31% of the outstanding stock. Would be easier to buy that first. Considering United got listed at $14 and a lot of trading happened at $18, I'm assuming that you'd have to pay at least 20% above $18 to convince people to sell - $22/share (close to its peak of $26).
31% of 52.8 million shares outstanding is $360 million at $22/share.
Very hard to coordinate that amount with 100,000 fans, let alone a million fans. Also other considerations include:
- What are the taxes/rules for foreign fans investing in US-listed companies?
- How will the non-profit's board be setup to reflect non-UK, non-White fans who make up the 1.1 billion United fans (per United website)?
- Can the non-profit's board guarantee that no-related party transactions take place? For example a board member's kid is in the catering business. Can it guarantee full disclosure during any decision on catering?
If I buy more shares, I deserve a higher number of votes. Each fan cannot have the same voice then.
Isn't there a Chinese person out there ready to bring some hard earned communist cash for us?Saw this on Reddit
I’ve sung ‘we’ll never die’ for forty years. These days, I’m not so sure. Feels like the end of terminator where we drag along with only a head and arms left, and still the Glazers hang on.
Fake account, please delete or edit your post
Better losing 3-0 than 6 or 7
That is a joke that the two Milan club have been funded more than the three plastic clubs.Saw this on Reddit
Very creative accounting surely
Yes, of course. Here is the letter:
“Dear Premier League,
I would firstly ask that this email be forwarded to the relevant authorities, please.
In 2020, the existence of the premier league was put in doubt as owners of several clubs attempted to get the European Super League off the ground. It was rightly derided and met with huge opposition from fans across the UK as an attack on the fundamental values of the game as we know it. Joel Glazer, co owner of Manchester United Football Club, was named as Vice President of the move/organization, and for me, and many other Man United fans, he is still seen as a figurehead of that.
The Premier League and even parts of the UK government were also strongly opposed to the ESL, and ultimately, its establishment attempts were thankfully thwarted.
This brings me to the Premier League’s new ban on leveraged debt-fueled buyouts of clubs, which are hugely important cultural/social assets, as I’m sure you agree.
(https://news.sky.com/story/premier-league-expected-to-restrict-debt-fuelled-club-takeovers-12629946)
Arguably, one of the biggest clubs in the world, let alone the UK, Manchester United, as you know, were bought in 2005 by the Glazer family who used a bank loan of approximately £600 million to leverage the deal. This level of debt has drained well over a billion pounds from the club and game itself in bank repayments over the years, and the debt remains largely the same.
This was and still is completely wrong, as you have now acknowledged this with your new rules.
I believe that it is now time for you, the Premier League, to step in and require the Glazer family to either remove the debt immediately or sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership, of which there are many interested parties, including a fan ownership model.
On the Premier League’s new rules and auditing on ‘fit and proper’ ownership, I believe Manchester United’s current ownership is gravely in breach of those that you have set out. I have studied your ‘Premier League Owners’ Charter’:
You state that the owners, as ‘custodians’ of the club, should commit to upholding the heritage of the club. Manchester United were the first English team to win the European cup in 1968, before that, in 1931, local businessman, James Gibson, put a large amount of his own money into the club to remove its debts and allow the club to grow, and fast forwarding to the years before the Glazers’ take over, Manchester United were completely debt free and regular challengers for trophies, which enhanced the Premier Leagues standing worldwide. This, however, is now entirely not the case and therefore, the Glazers have already broken your first rule, and quite probably their ownership has worked against the ethos of your second rule.
Your third rule:
‘We recognise the value each Club has to its broader community and the desire of each individual Club to win and to grow. We will run our Club in an economically stable, sustainable, and socially responsible manner.’
As acknowledged by your ban on leveraged buyouts, it is clear that Manchester United has not been allowed to grow, while chances of winning trophies has been significantly reduced due to the amounts of money that is drained from the club.
Importantly, your ban acknowledges that leveraged buy outs are not socially responsible and morally wrong. Again, I emphasize that Manchester United are a huge socio-cultural asset to the UK, like Liverpool Football Club, and that status should be protected, certainly not actively damaged.
(I am not claiming that the club deserves guaranteed success, just that it has a status and heritage to uphold for the sake of the Premier League if nothing else)
Many other fans and I, not only of Manchester United, could make a fair argument that the Glazers have breached most of your other rules on ‘fit and proper’ ownership.
On rule 10, that all shareholders should have an ‘equal voice’, this is also not the case at Manchester United, where the Glazers family owns all of the ‘Class B’ shares which have significant voting rights. Therefore, the shareholders of ‘Class A’ are nothing more than numbers mined for money which then went directly to the Glazers themselves and was not invested back into the club.
Old Trafford, once one of the best stadiums in the world, has fallen behind other Premier League grounds in size, upkeep and facilities, yet the ownership continues to take money out. The Glazers are the only owners in the premier league who take annual dividend payments.
I’m sure you will agree also, that planned protests by Manchester United fans throughout this season will not be beneficial for the League overall.
I implore you, if you accept that a huge, revered cultural asset should be protected, and in line with your recent rulings on debt-fueled ownership and ‘fit and proper’ ownership, to strongly consider the requirement of the Glazer family to remove the club’s debt in full or to sell the club to a new ‘fit and proper’ ownership who present a fair purchase offer in the immediate future, like which occurred in the recent sale of Chelsea Football Club.
I hope my message is passed to the relevant authorities and that I receive a sufficient response.
Thank you for your time,“
Im not sure of the rules on posting email addresses on here but here they are:
supporters@premierleague.com, nadine.dorries.mp@parliament.uk, enquiries@dcms.gov.uk
I’m sure there are other email addresses that you could send to but they’re the ones I used so far. I wasn’t able to get through to the fa.
I tweaked the email slightly depending on where it was going.
Youre welcome to use wherever you think would help.
Interesting!
Didn't the share price go up this week out of nowhere?
StrettyNews is not exactly the source you’re hoping for regarding a potentially major merger and acquisitions story I must say.
Most clubs have a 50% wage cut provision in contracts in the event of relegation. Guarantee that we don’t.
It may be but would you raise an eyebrow if it were true? It would be a very United thing to do.
Complete BS, These are the same guys the reported last about Rio returning to the club and he denied that report at the same week.
Is there any type of petition to be signed for the sports minister to intervene rather than individual fans writing letters. Dont they have to act if we get so many signatures?
More Yanks and bankers? Just what we need.
Though at this point I'd take anything over the parasites we have now. Probably a load of bollocks anyway.