Your argument falls down immediately because it’s fundamentally flawed.
You are risking long term, if not permanent pain, for the short term gain of self satisfaction that you’ve caused some effect, no matter what the consequences might be.
Objecting to this mad idea isn’t naive or a sign of weakness. It’s flagging up the realty of how stupid it is.
Whilst I'm apathetic to the idea of a sponsor boycott, boycotting club aspects like merch, match day attendance, viewing figures... All that stuff will have a similar effect, if Man Utd is seen as a less profitable and visible brand then the sponsorship deals will get smaller anyway.
I don't know what the answer is, I just don't think there's a way to try and organise movement that doesn't harm the club in the short to medium term.
Yes. I’d rather spend a decade building upwards from division 1 than another 5 more seasons of mediocrity. We can rise from the ashes. Sponsorship is a fickle thing. It’ll come back soon enough. City were in Divsion 1 not too long ago and look where they are now.And this is a price worth paying for you?
I think the whole be careful what you wish for or cutting nose off to spite fact arguments have had their day now. They are running club into the ground on and off the pitch, they borrow in USD which is now extremely expensive to do. Club is becoming less and less attractive commercially and qualification for a champions League is hit and miss.
Any damage done to upsetting sponsors is going to be pretty insignificant in comparison to what the Glazers are doing. They have and will continue to run club same way. It’s unlikely to get better unless they find a genius manager that can succeed in-spite of all the issues at the club.
That's the point. People need to think very clearly before jumping on any 'Yeah! Any change must = good!' bandwagon because it won't necessarily.
Devaluing the club would open us up to a much wider range of potential investors and consortium's and I personally think that's a very bad thing with a much higher likelihood of disaster.
Let's be honest here. The Glazers are a problem but they aren't the only problem. We are where we are for so many different reasons, and getting recruitment and player compensation right will be a far easier way of getting United back to the top.
Ultimately, if there were an investor out there who wanted to do it for love and not money, and was prepared to throw a fortune at us with no expectation of return, then they would have come forward by now and made major moves to buy the club.
I think you're underestimating the demand for Manchester United by way of buyers. Ratcliff is one investor who would more than likely wait in the wings should Glazers sell.That's the point. People need to think very clearly before jumping on any 'Yeah! Any change must = good!' bandwagon because it won't necessarily.
Devaluing the club would open us up to a much wider range of potential investors and consortium's and I personally think that's a very bad thing with a much higher likelihood of disaster.
Let's be honest here. The Glazers are a problem but they aren't the only problem. We are where we are for so many different reasons, and getting recruitment and player compensation right will be a far easier way of getting United back to the top.
Ultimately, if there were an investor out there who wanted to do it for love and not money, and was prepared to throw a fortune at us with no expectation of return, then they would have come forward by now and made major moves to buy the club.
I think you're underestimating the demand for Manchester United by way of buyers. Ratcliff is one investor who would more than likely wait in the wings should Glazers sell.
Yes, but the problem is not solely that Glazers are taking dividends out the club. It's that Joel Glazer is disturbing football operations in a terrible manner, and doesn't care about on-pitch results, or going to see games, investing in the facilities/training ground/stadiums.The demand is there but how many of those are in it to make money like the Glazers? How many will take a dividend like the Glazers? Most I think, and if they are taking out then they aren't putting in.
Yes, but the problem is not solely that Glazers are taking dividends out the club. It's that Joel Glazer is disturbing football operations in a terrible manner, and doesn't care about on-pitch results, or going to see games, investing in the facilities/training ground/stadiums.
You are basically saying that all the investors, or most of them would 1) want to take dividends and 2) not give a shit about the footballing like the Glazers - which I find far fetched.
