Protest at Old Trafford

Yakuza_devils said:
Glazers should be kicked out of the club at all costs. They already destroyed our club .
Shameless and greedy cnuts should feck off back to Florida. They got no business in Manchester.
Click to expand...

Huge stretch, they are cnuts for sure, but our club isnt destroyed. And they actually have business in Manchester, they own a club there. Fix the stadium and facilities and we are good. We have great sponsorships and a great youth setup. Far from destroyed
 
Andersonson said:
Huge stretch, they are cnuts for sure, but our club isnt destroyed. And they actually have business in Manchester, they own a club there. Fix the stadium and facilities and we are good. We have great sponsorships and a great youth setup. Far from destroyed
Click to expand...

This costs at least 1B pound and we are also about 1B in debts. We also need warchest for summer transfers. Suddenly, the Glazers are willing to spend their own money on these?
 
DomesticTadpole said:
What can they do? Storm the pitch and like Blackpool fans have a sit in? Sounds fun actually.
Click to expand...

Don't go. They have paid for it, so it is not really sending a message. It isn't even a long boycott, either; could they not do a whole half, at least?
 
Lecland07 said:
Don't go. They have paid for it, so it is not really sending a message. It isn't even a long boycott, either; could they not do a whole half, at least?
Click to expand...
Then the old City excuse will come out, roadworks etc. As you say they have paid for the tickets, so it will be dramatic on screen, but will not hit the club in the pocket. Maybe it will send a message to any prospective owners that they have to get it right or they will be in trouble as well. Don't make promises if you do not intend keeping them.
 
Anyone expecting large numbers to follow the 18minute boycott will be sadly disappointed.

Will hopefully be a decent turnout for the march - not sure it will make much difference to the Glazers, but it's worth joining in to show some fan unity and create some pre-match atmosphere
 
Mickeza said:
Click to expand...

Have time for Crafton but this is daft. Did the fans influence which party would be interested in a full sale?
If Crafton can’t see why the fans want a full sale, then he’s pretty brainless.
 
By Tuesday the conspiracy that the game wasn't chosen to be televised because of the mainstream media blackout of the protest will take hold.
 
Mickeza said:
Click to expand...

… OR.. it could be telling Ineos to only do a full buyout, rather than let the Glazers stay in any form.. given that his own employers have said a full buyout from Ineos is still on the cards

No surprise journalists who’ve built contacts here over years aren’t too keen on seeing their contacts leave if a full buyout happens
 
Wumminator said:
What is the protest for?
Click to expand...
Demanding the Glazers sell. It was arranged after the Elliot stuff hence the full sale only tagline. However, since SJR has been rumoured to keep them on as a minority the 1958 have said on Twitter that anyone working with the Glazers to keep them on in any form is a Glazer. It was basically them coming out in favour of Qatar without actually saying it.
 
Mickeza said:
Click to expand...

This is a horrendous take but gotta get those let Qatar bad posts out before Jim takes over and it become a redundant.
They’re just upset about all the coverage and hand wringing they’ll miss out on if Qatar fails
 
Mickeza said:
Demanding the Glazers sell. It was arranged after the Elliot stuff hence the full sale only tagline. However, since SJR has been rumoured to keep them on as a minority the 1958 have said on Twitter that anyone working with the Glazers to keep them on in any form is a Glazer. It was basically them coming out in favour of Qatar without actually saying it.
Click to expand...
This is not true at all.
This is a problem for the Jim crowd now. It’s not as if you can say it’s the only way to get the club, apparently he’s put in two bids of 69 percent or keeping the Glazers on.
Hard to wrangle everybody against that deal into the love Qatar so you’re evil and want Mbappe corner now but I guess you’ll try.
 
cyberman said:
This is not true at all.
This is a problem for the Jim crowd now. It’s not as if you can say it’s the only way to get the club, apparently he’s put in two bids of 69 percent or keeping the Glazers on.
Hard to wrangle everybody against that deal into the love Qatar so you’re evil and want Mbappe corner now but I guess you’ll try.
Click to expand...
Which bit isn’t true? That they arranged the protest after the Elliot stories or that they said anyone working with a Glazer is a Glazer after the minority ownership under Ratcliffe stuff came out?
 
Mickeza said:
Demanding the Glazers sell. It was arranged after the Elliot stuff hence the full sale only tagline. However, since SJR has been rumoured to keep them on as a minority the 1958 have said on Twitter that anyone working with the Glazers to keep them on in any form is a Glazer. It was basically them coming out in favour of Qatar without actually saying it.
Click to expand...
They previously had Ratcliffe on a banner. He’s the only one they’ve publicly supported at any point

Sources are saying Ineos still have a full buyout offer on the table and the “full sale only” banner could also be seen as pressuring Ineos to make a full buyout and not keep the Glazers on
 
Mickeza said:
Which bit isn’t true? That they arranged the protest after the Elliot stories or that they said anyone working with a Glazer is a Glazer after the minority ownership under Ratcliffe stuff came out?
Click to expand...
It’s been Glazers for 20 years now, not Glazers minority owner. And this was arranged before the Jim news came out was it not?
Then there’s the reports that the Glazers wanted a full sale and not minority investment because they were in danger of turning sponsors etc away by becoming a toxic brand. That’s what’s happening here. This is how it begins.
Glazers out. Pretending the United fanbase haven’t been consistent with this is ridiculous quite frankly.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
They previously had Ratcliffe on a banner. He’s the only one they’ve publicly supported at any point

Sources are saying Ineos still have a full buyout offer on the table and the “full sale only” banner could also be seen as pressuring Ineos to make a full buyout and not keep the Glazers on
Click to expand...
Yes. They had his face on a banner after he released a statement saying he wanted to have a discussion and work towards long term ownership of the club. Precisely what they’ve just denounced him for trying to do.
 
cyberman said:
It’s been Glazers for 20 years now, not Glazers minority owner. And this was arranged before the Jim news came out was it not?
Then there’s the reports that the Glazers wanted a full sale and not minority investment because they were in danger of turning sponsors etc away by becoming a toxic brand. That’s what’s happening here. This is how it begins.
Glazers out. Pretending the United fanbase haven’t been consistent with this is ridiculous quite frankly.
Click to expand...
Good job that hasn’t happened then isn’t it?
 
Mickeza said:
Good job that hasn’t happened then isn’t it?
Click to expand...
You’re literally doing it here. In what world has a 20 year protest been twisted to wanting Qatar ownership? The way you’ve framed this is appalling.
 
Mickeza said:
Yes. They had his face on a banner after he released a statement saying he wanted to have a discussion and work towards long term ownership of the club. Precisely what they’ve just denounced him for trying to do.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome to your opinion, I see why you’re there, and I can’t speak for 1958 because I’m not one of them

But I genuinely think they just want the Glazers gone completely. It just happens that Jassim is the only one who has designs on a full buyout only
 
LawCharltonBest said:
You’re welcome to your opinion, I see why you’re there, and I can’t speak for 1958 because I’m not one of them

But I genuinely think they just want the Glazers gone completely. It just happens that Jassim is the only one who has designs on a full buyout only
Click to expand...

If you a supporters group leading a movement, you have to accept the criticism that might come your way.

Actively cheering for one set of owners is making a statement. They (the 1958 group) need to come out and explain who they are and what their intentions are rather than hiding behind a Twitter account.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
… OR.. it could be telling Ineos to only do a full buyout, rather than let the Glazers stay in any form.. given that his own employers have said a full buyout from Ineos is still on the cards

No surprise journalists who’ve built contacts here over years aren’t too keen on seeing their contacts leave if a full buyout happens
Click to expand...

Oh yeah Crafton knows what we wants
 
Also worth pointing out that holding one banner saying "we want our club back" next to a Qatar flag is a bit daft.
 
Been wondering, if Ratcliffe takes over, what his plans would be for Old Trafford. A lick of paint and a small rebuild or a completely new stadium? Would he have the finances for a new stadium?
 
cheekybackheel said:
Been wondering, if Ratcliffe takes over, what his plans would be for Old Trafford. A lick of paint and a small rebuild or a completely new stadium? Would he have the finances for a new stadium?
Click to expand...

Wants to keep the Glazers on…

Hasn’t mentioned anything about new stadium / sorting OT…

Hasn’t mentioned anything about clearing debt…

What do you reckon?

SJ has publicly stated they’ll completely clear the debt and sort the stadium. Also they want to remove the Glazers completely.

You’re being fecked by the leeches. AGAIN.
 
All the news we've heard about the Ineos bid, is that they can't or have not proposed a full sale.
So, a full sale essentially does mean sell to Qatar - there is no take here, unless you are burying your head in sand.

So, what do we want - a partial Glazer stake + Ineos, or full state sponsored ownership.

What yarns will we spin to erase everything we've said about City in the past, to justify how our Qatar ownership will be different.
 
tvoLAD said:
All the news we've heard about the Ineos bid, is that they can't or have not proposed a full sale.
So, a full sale essentially does mean sell to Qatar - there is no take here, unless you are burying your head in sand.

So, what do we want - a partial Glazer stake + Ineos, or full state sponsored ownership.

What yarns will we spin to erase everything we've said about City in the past, to justify how our Qatar ownership will be different.
Click to expand...

It’s different because Utd don’t need financial doping.

They just need the debt cleared. That’s it.

Very different.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
Wants to keep the Glazers on…

Hasn’t mentioned anything about new stadium / sorting OT…

Hasn’t mentioned anything about clearing debt…

What do you reckon?

SJ has publicly stated they’ll completely clear the debt and sort the stadium. Also they want to remove the Glazers completely.

You’re being fecked by the leeches. AGAIN.
Click to expand...
If RATcliff takes over.. we’ll probably get 1 or 2 good windows..buy good I mean we’ll spend a lot. That will shut up 90% of fans for a while.
 
AlPistacho said:
If RATcliff takes over.. we’ll probably get 1 or 2 good windows..buy good I mean we’ll spend a lot. That will shut up 90% of fans for a while.
Click to expand...
If we spend big for two consecutive windows we will be ok, say we spend 250m in the coming summer then dial down the spending to 150m in the summer of 24 we could live by spending 80m per season for the next three summers until we are due to replace Casemiro, Bruno and others around the 30 year old age range.

It wouldn't be bad because teams don't need big spending summers every season. We also have young players coming in to fill up the squad like Garnacho, Pellistiri and Amad. We will be ok if we don't go Woodward 2.0
 
Cloud7 said:
This is a pretty bad take. Fans are quite right to want the Glazers gone completely.
Click to expand...

A quite ridiculous take but then Crafton has been trying himself in knots over Qatar for months now

He's gay so I do understand his issues with the state of Qatar but his strong bias makes for poor journalism
 
Replacing bad owners, welcoming bad owners, it is not worth getting involved for me.
All over the internet you read about hatred towards chelsea, city and PSG and now we’re going to be part of this soon. I don’t know what to think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.