Because that's complete nonsense. Do you think Magnier still holds the same shares in different businesses he did in 2003? Or do you think maybe investors sell stakes in businesses and invest in new ones on a regular basis?
Do you think the Glazers chanced upon buying a football club on the off chance two strangers had a falling out over a horse?
How many horses did the rest of the shareholders that sold to the Glazer's co-own with Alex Ferguson?
This narrative that two guys fell out over a horse and Malcom Glazers decided to buy a football club on the spur of the moment, it's just childish and silly. Corporate deals aren't petty little soap operas. You don't buy a football club because two strangers have a row about horse sperm.
People act as if the Glazers were minding their own business when Rock of Gibraltar's load landed in their lap and they suddenly decided to buy a football club.
As a minority shareholder at the time, and someone who followed it very closely, I'm fairly sure I know a lot more about the whole thing than you do, from beginning to end.
Roy Keane who at the time had connections with Magnier in Ireland was told to tell Ferguson to drop the legal case, but he persisted, and so did Magnier.
Magnier submitted 99 questions to the board at the time referring to United's transfer dealings and finances.
Magnier threatened to "take action" against United if the questions were not answered.
At the same time, Malcolm Glazer was buying up shares in United as they became available he was already a minority holder (I think about 5% of the total)
Magnier and his fellow Irishman on the board (McManus) owned 28.7% of United's shares, under the corporate name of Cubic Expression.
Cubic made it known that they wanted to sell their shares in the club.
Glazer approached them, and offered a price they couldn't refuse and they knew he couldn't afford, knowing he would have to borrow heavily to secure the funds.
Many (including me and a lot of other minority holders) saw this as Magnier "taking action" against the club, putting it in so much debt, that it would destroy what Ferguson had built.
Ferguson and Magnier settled out of court, part of that settlement was that the matter was "closed" and details of it would never be made public.
How many horses, ROG (Rock Of Gibraltar) was the only horse that Ferguson claimed to have a share of in Magniers stable, at the time of the court case he (Ferguson) could not produce any paperwork to to say he actually owned any part of the horse, Ferguson was said to believe that he had been "given" a share, Magnier & McManus disagreed.
So why the disagreement?
The wasn't supposed to be that good, but it was a winner, by the end of 2002 it thought the horse was worth around £50m if it went to stud, Ferguson wanted to cash in, the Irishmen didn't agree that Ferguson was entitled to any money. So this is not some disagreement over horse that's won the local gymkhana.
Ferguson got a quarter of his nag, meanwhile Magnier has watched United fail under the Glazers tenure.
Now onto Malcolm Glazer.
Glazer at the time was heavily invested in the retail development in Florida and other parts of America (shopping malls), and they were failing miserably, tenancies were failing as the American economy was crumbling, he was at the time a minority shareholder in United, and was still buying shares when he was approached to purchase the Cubic Expression holding, so he did not "buy the club on a off chance" he did not "buy it on the spur of the moment", he was an existing board member.
There were rumours at the time that SAF was the person who approached him to buy the Cubic Expression holding, but that is just a rumour.
What is known is that because Glazer was offering stupid money (not his money) for shares, others sold out, only minority holders like myself held out until we were told by the LSE that we had to sell under LSE rules.
What you had was a series of unrelated instances that led to a deal that resulted in the sale of the club to an American businessman who saw United as a cash cow to prop up his failing business interests in the States. if you don't believe that, look into the Glazers investment into Tampa Bay Bucs, and the local community, and compare it to the millions and lack of investment they have put into United, it's still true today, that the Glazer family have never put a cent of their own money into United
Now you can believe or disbelieve what you like, if you want to read all the paperwork, most of it is out there in the public domain, and was no doubt well discussed on this forum and others at the time.
