Manchester United Ladies Football Club.
- Thread starter Roman Bellic
- Start date
Are the Arsenal Ladies team profitable? If they are, then United have no excuse.
I'd rather we have a basketball team than a women's team.
I'm all for it. Get rid of Falcao and his wages will probably cover that of the best women in the country.
It definitely has the potential to be profitable. We can increase our fanbase for a start.
I think the main reason is that we dont want an unsuccessful Manchester United. That would bring down our "image" a bit. To avoid that, we would have to invest significantly in the team. The owners probably do not want to have a team "just for fun".
I think the main reason is that we dont want an unsuccessful Manchester United. That would bring down our "image" a bit. To avoid that, we would have to invest significantly in the team. The owners probably do not want to have a team "just for fun".
It's not like Bayern Munich women's team is that successful, but their image is not suffering at all because of it. Besides, United have more than enough resources to build a top women's team. Falcao's wages could easily cover any total wage bill for a women's team; that's money well spent, Glazers or not Glazers.
Just the fact that Arsenal still kept the Ladies team even when they were extremely tight financially, it gives United NO EXCUSE WHATSOEVER for not having one.
I know,thanks.
On that note, can we also push Fulltimedevils to hire a pretty female crew member on their show.
Chelsea's Sophie is so pretty, although she seems like a dumb fan who doesn't know a lot.
I'm sure we can find someone who looks better and has better grasp on football on Fulltimedevils.
Chelsea's Sophie is so pretty, although she seems like a dumb fan who doesn't know a lot.
I'm sure we can find someone who looks better and has better grasp on football on Fulltimedevils.
Real Madrid use the same reasoning. It's believed (by the RM fans who campaign for one) that they don't have a women's team because they don't want a women's team that loses to Barcelona and Atletico. They do have a men's basketball team that they subsidise to avoid the same problem, but they're stuck with that (because it would be a loss of face to drop it) and they see it as a marketing expense because it changes the sponsors/markets.
For us, I don't see it as such a big deal. I can't see our sponsors getting upset if the women's team lost to City or Arsenal, but maybe I'm wrong. It may be that it will start to make more marketing sense as televised women's football starts to increase. Maybe even attracting some different sponsors. After all the budget wouldn't be huge compared to the men's team, so nor would getting into the sponsorship game.
We really should have one, profitable or not. It would hardly be a huge expense.
Well, I just saw on the Manchester United foundation facebook page that there is a under 17 Women / Girls team. Equality.
Last edited:
Respect!
Time for the gimps to understand what good it can bring to have a first team for women named with the Manchester United brand.
Some really think this is some sort of charity club, if it's profitable then why not? If not, dont do it. Should we also make a team for 45+'er, official ex-players team etc.
It's not charity - but the club should take it up on themselves to have some sort of responsibility to make improvements for the game of football, not just for Manchester United.
Eeehm why? That's not close to their responsibility. That's why we got the UEFA / FIFA.
Why wouldn't United want to do what they can to help the industry they're in grow and expand? It can have all sorts of long term benefits.
Because we're a major part of the football world - it's in our interests (not just ethically) as a club for the game to improve on all fronts. We hardly want the game of football to decline.
Most huge businesses generally do things for their industry,
But that would make it profitable, doesnt it?
Depends - It might not directly make the Ladies team profitable, but Manchester United as a whole more profitable, or it might do both, or neither.
I'd equate it to local community work. United do it first and foremost to make improvements to their local community, but it can of course benefit them in the long run.
It's a bit sad to see supporters of a football club saying that they should only do something if it's profitable.
Quite frankly I think it is pathetic that the club hasn't shown a proper commitment to women's football. Even from a brand point of view imagine the kudos the club would get from being renowned as the leading club in women's football... Arsenal get a lot of respect for their ladies side and I just think its wonderful to give something back to the community whether or not it yields a profit.
I doubt fielding a ladies side would be a terribly expensive exercise anyway.
I doubt fielding a ladies side would be a terribly expensive exercise anyway.
If that's the case it would be fine by me, dont think the club should do those things just pure ethically. If its the club helping sick people or kids without hope etc, (kind of stuff you see on MoTD weekly), charity, fine by me.
Exactly. If its profitable if its a bonus, if not, it doesn't matter as it will benefit United and the community in other ways.
If Falcao left this summer i would much prefer that money be spent on another world class player for the first team, if he is on £250k pw that could or should pay a top midfielder or forward to improve the team.
Of course in reality United should be able to afford both easily and it's not a case of one or the other i know. There would be obvious benefits to United starting a women's team but it seems it won't be happening under the Glazers.
Do the Arsenal Ladies team play at the Emirates?
I'm almost certain that they don't.
Kind of shocked tbh,"only establish a women's team if it's profitable" in 2015?
Exactly, plus I imagine the club already does loads of things that aren't profitable.
Foundation work, community work, stuff in schools, Radamel Falcao, etc.
Says it all doesn't it, Arsenal ladies are the best and they still only get crowds in the hundreds, the market/interest just isn't there.
Isnt that a huge difference? That's genuinely community work, helping the others, some that are less onfortunate etc. But I dont see how having a women team is really doing something for the community when you do it on professional basis, hiring 20 women and having not more than a few hundred people (going by Arsenals attendances, whose ladies football team is well established) is that community work? When it possibly costs you millions over a longer period, is that charity or community work? While it doesnt really bring money to the club. Deliberate question.
If the likes of Notts County and Milwall can have a women's team then there's no reason why we shouldn't.
Interestingly (or perhaps not), the Milwall ladies team is called Milwall Lionesses.
Interestingly (or perhaps not), the Milwall ladies team is called Milwall Lionesses.
Not all the community work that United do is for the less fortunate - but I digress - it gives girls, something to aspire too, show's how football is an inclusive sport, and it would also help the image of women's football. Getting kids into sports is always a good thing in my book.
And just because Arsenal only get a couple of hundred fans doesn't mean that a) we can't strive for more and b) we shouldn't do our bit to help improve those attendance figures. By all accounts, women's football is something of a minor growth market, so there can be potential to do better.
FC United of Manchester too.
Who says the attendance figures won't improve though? City have a higher attendance than Arsenal for instance since they entered the WSL. Women's football is growing and a Manchester United women's team will only quicken the process.