imagination:

and the fact your not a fan of glazers really raises the question of why you began commenting in the first place

LEE TREVIS:

imagination:

LEE TREVIS:

imagination:

This is a fantastic thread, having read most the post most my points have already been stated, so lemme tell yow like this ......Glazers OUT, They are useless owners nothing constructive has been done TO OUR CLUB and now we have the worst possible reputation in sport with that ridiculous debt THEY IMPLEMENTED ON THE CLUB...anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is either a fool, or just another "beg freind" type of red

Here we go again, if you think this your not a true red, if you think that you're not a true red, can I just ask, how many games have you been to it the last 6 years at OT?

Considering I live half an our away from M16-0RA im pretty sure iv'e attended enough games to be considered a "true red" just because were supporters of the club doesn't mean we have to instantaneously support the ethics of our owners, there's a small minority of Chelsea fans I know that are season holders and they hate abramovich despite his investment so despite them being true followers of your logic I suppose their "not true blues" aswell. That's nonsense theirs not a person specification or set criteria that defines how you have to support a club, that's just my opinion, and most of the fellas promoting the green and gold (a good majority of our supporters) are fake too ? im hopefull the glazers do pull a breakthrough with this flotation and what not, but until I see the positives im perfectly within my rights to expose the negatives.

My point is, and it has now been proved by your reply, 'you' are full of contradiction.

Firstly you say, "..anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is a fool...", well you yourself are supporting them by paying for a match day ticket, that in itself is supporting their position, surely you can see that.

I actually wasn't suggesting you're not a true red, I don't question peoples commitment to United, I merely set you the trap to fall into by asking how often you go to Old Trafford to make the point that if you do, then you are in no position to judge others for supporting the owners and their regime when you yourself are paying into it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that you CAN'T go to Old Trafford if you claim to dislike the Glazers, what I am saying is that if you do then you're not in a position to rant at other to the level that you have, it's hypocritical.

Secondly, your latest contradiction, "...there's not a person specification or set of criteria that defines how you have to support a club." Yet you said in your previous post, "...anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is either a fool, or just another "beg freind"...", well I'd say that's you yourself judging other fans of United just because they may not have a issue with the owners.

Get this straight, I'm noooo Glazer fan and I make y comments as balanced and well researched as possible, I'm not judging you, you can support the club however you see fit, I'm just pointing out that you judging others is somewhat hypocritical.

imagination:

LEE TREVIS:

imagination:

This is a fantastic thread, having read most the post most my points have already been stated, so lemme tell yow like this ......Glazers OUT, They are useless owners nothing constructive has been done TO OUR CLUB and now we have the worst possible reputation in sport with that ridiculous debt THEY IMPLEMENTED ON THE CLUB...anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is either a fool, or just another "beg freind" type of red

Here we go again, if you think this your not a true red, if you think that you're not a true red, can I just ask, how many games have you been to it the last 6 years at OT?

Considering I live half an our away from M16-0RA im pretty sure iv'e attended enough games to be considered a "true red" just because were supporters of the club doesn't mean we have to instantaneously support the ethics of our owners, there's a small minority of Chelsea fans I know that are season holders and they hate abramovich despite his investment so despite them being true followers of your logic I suppose their "not true blues" aswell. That's nonsense theirs not a person specification or set criteria that defines how you have to support a club, that's just my opinion, and most of the fellas promoting the green and gold (a good majority of our supporters) are fake too ? im hopefull the glazers do pull a breakthrough with this flotation and what not, but until I see the positives im perfectly within my rights to expose the negatives.

Firstly you say, "..anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is a fool...", well you yourself are supporting them by paying for a match day ticket, that in itself is supporting their position, surely you can see that.

I actually wasn't suggesting you're not a true red, I don't question peoples commitment to United, I merely set you the trap to fall into by asking how often you go to Old Trafford to make the point that if you do, then you are in no position to judge others for supporting the owners and their regime when you yourself are paying into it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that you CAN'T go to Old Trafford if you claim to dislike the Glazers, what I am saying is that if you do then you're not in a position to rant at other to the level that you have, it's hypocritical.

Secondly, your latest contradiction, "...there's not a person specification or set of criteria that defines how you have to support a club." Yet you said in your previous post, "...anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is either a fool, or just another "beg freind"...", well I'd say that's you yourself judging other fans of United just because they may not have a issue with the owners.

Get this straight, I'm noooo Glazer fan and I make my comments as balanced and well researched as possible, I'm not judging you, you can support the club however you see fit, I'm just pointing out that you judging others is somewhat hypocritical.

LEE TREVIS:

imagination:

This is a fantastic thread, having read most the post most my points have already been stated, so lemme tell yow like this ......Glazers OUT, They are useless owners nothing constructive has been done TO OUR CLUB and now we have the worst possible reputation in sport with that ridiculous debt THEY IMPLEMENTED ON THE CLUB...anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is either a fool, or just another "beg freind" type of red

Here we go again, if you think this your not a true red, if you think that you're not a true red, can I just ask, how many games have you been to it the last 6 years at OT?

Barring somebody leaving 2-3 billion in there will to purchase the club off the Glazers for the fans, you are always going to see the club run as a business. Say for example an individual wants to buy the club and the Glazers accept the offer for say 2 billion, Do you think that new owner is not going to want a return on there investment? Would that return be more or less than what is currently bleeding from the club?

People need to start accepting that the Glazers are not going anywhere in the near future. I also expect if there is any flotation in the future the glazers will use the money from what is left to repurchase the shares originally sold.

imagination:

This is a fantastic thread, having read most the post most my points have already been stated, so lemme tell yow like this ......Glazers OUT, They are useless owners nothing constructive has been done TO OUR CLUB and now we have the worst possible reputation in sport with that ridiculous debt THEY IMPLEMENTED ON THE CLUB...anyone who stands by them and supports their practices is either a fool, or just another "beg freind" type of red

Firstly, yes as regards to MUST, I donated what I could afford at the time to their fund which was at that time supposed to be used to buy shares so the Glazers couldn't get enough of them to force a buy out, however that was a somewhat over-ambitious idea in the end. I didn't ever ask for my money to be returned and so yes it is still a very small part the fund they were going to add to the Red Knights offer.

My late Grandma, a lifelong red, actually donated to MUST too and they still have her donation even though she's no longer with us, I'm sure she's happy to still be part of it though :)

I think at the time we donated the fund was only around £3 million or was it £30 million? It's too long ago now for me to remember and I honestly don't know how big the MUST fund got or what it is now as I guess many will have asked for their money back over the years. I guess a quick net search and visit to their site would tell you/us.

Also I'm not sure what we did financially the year before the Glazers came but we weren't in any trouble obviously, we still generated considerable revenues then, the Glazers have just taken that and sped the growth up even more.

I stand in a similar place to you now, in that I see the Glazers' position as a very strong one, the strongest it has ever been, therefore the best we can hope for is for the commercial deals to keep growing and new ones rolling in, at least that way we have the means to clear what debts the Glazers wish to clear and be in a much better position to compete under FFP rules than some blue clubs I won't mention lol :D

You are correct I believe on the balance between success on and off the field, the Glazers cannot have failed to realise that on field success is a huge part of our appeal and they know that you cannot continue to grow that huge worldwide fanbase without success and without some star names on the books, enter Kagawa.

They were very keen to sanction the Rooney pay rise as they knew full well that he was one of their marketing crown jewels and one that unlike Giggs, Scholes, Ferdinand and even Park, will be around for years to come. The Kagawa signing is a no brainer for both footballing and marketing reasons, Hazard was also one I believed they wanted due to the fact he has become the new darling of European football but it wasn't to be.

I believe unlike some others that the Glazers would have sanctioned both deals as both players would have been great marketing tools at a time when we are negotiating a new potentially record shattering deal with Nike AND looking at a part flotation in the Far East. I believe that they will still sanction more big transfers if the right balance of quality, necessity and marketability is on the move, I wouldn't be surprised if try to muscle in on any Van Persie deal if it looks like he is off to another EPL team, yes you can argue about injury records etc but the marketing potential would be a huge factor.

Anyway rambling on now so I'll leave it there, oh and it's good to see Marcred getting in on the thread too :)

PS Others have answered the question about what kind of sum may make the Glazers consider a full sale and it is much the same as my estimate of around £2.5billion.

MarcRed:

we'llbeback:

@ anyone with knowledge of business the Glazers and our club, what in your opinion would be the smallest offer which the Glazers would have to consider?

I don't keep as closer eye on the finance stuff as I used to, but I'd take a guess at well north of £2bn, if not £2.5bn. It's bit like the saying, the whole is greater than the sum of it's parts, the gross assets were listed at £1.6bn in last year's accounts so in theory that is the value of the club.

However one of the key differences between football clubs and ordinary companies is the players. A player being sold in the transfer market is usually worth far more than their accouting value, United's entire playing staff at the end of June 11 was worth £129m according to the accounts, in actual football terms we could get that for Rooney, Nani and Vidic between them. So already your well above the accounting value of the club.

Then there's the scope for growth, look at the way revenues and value have shot up in the last couple of years, the Glazers will believe that'll continue so it's a case of why sell up now when you don't need to when you could get another couple £100m 2-3 years down the line?

Finally there's the bond debt, even if you could afford to, would you buy a company that owes the best part £500m to investors, plus 4 more lots of 8% interest? No you wouldn't. So the debt needs to be paid as part of the takeover, the Glazers won't want to take it out of their valuation, so you're going to have to pay for that on top, such is the strength I believe the Glazers position currently is. Now the way I understand it, if United pay off the bond before it's 2017 maturity date, it's a case of a negotiation with each individual investor how much you them, they're obviously expecting their interest for another 4 and a half years, so if you close out early, they need compensating.

So add all that up and you're talking scary amounts of cash. Hope all that helps.

I have no desire to be like City or Chelsea and would like too always see us operate self sufficiently, but obviously first and foremost I want what is best for the club and it's long term future.

With the continued uncertainty surrounding the Glazers, I don't think I can relax on the matter entirely, as long as they own the club.

I suppose another way to get rid of them, would be if the club was no longer useful to them, although that in itself is a terrifying thought.

pele 10:

MarcRed:

United's entire playing staff at the end of June 11 was worth £129m according to the accounts,

Nice post mate. But I have a question. That £129mil isn´t that the total wages of the squad for one season and not the valuation of the players if they were sold?

we'llbeback:

So basically, someone would have to make them an offer which far exceeds the clubs necessity, over the given time they intend to be here.

The offer would be so big it would have to be a long term investment.

Not sure how many people could afford such an offer, but it surely could be possible

@ anyone with knowledge of business the Glazers and our club, what in your opinion would be the smallest offer which the Glazers would have to consider?

I'm asking this after resigning to the idea, that it wouldn't be possible to force them out.

MarcRed:

United's entire playing staff at the end of June 11 was worth £129m according to the accounts,

manoob:

pele i dont understand to why are you so intent to defend them on every thread? children or not, it looks like you allways are ready to jump in evertime someone says anything about glazers that tend to make you look like defending them. mothing personal it just in every thread you are it looks like that. guys glazers are smart and are only doing what makes them most money possible. as long as we argue on small matters it wont change anything. the fact are simple we have paid a sum unheard of in football for an owner, who has no intrest in utd except how much he can get out of it. for him seeing us competeing at the top is more than enough being 2. or get to quarters of champ.l. -he dosent share the same ambition for our club as we do! thats where the problem is! now i understand some fans have given up, and saying there is nothing we can do. but utd has 58000 season ticket holders! looking at this forum and others there are a lot of unhappy fans. a single boycott of an game and a petition that is sent to sponsers about an boycott of their product is the way! to keep glazers on their toes. you see if we dont do anything they will do even more damage to the club. but if we do they will know that they have trat with a litle more care. if that dosent work flafs of we hate GM and other sponsers during the game should really give those sponsers a reason to react. if we dont do this , you better get used to summer after summer like this and the cost of not doing anything is far more than the cost of doing for united! (around 6 years time it could be 1 billion£) here is a list of cost made about over a year a go! http://andersred.blogspot.co.uk/2010/05/437m-of-glazer-costs-full-sources.html here are some links for you guys about glazers. http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2012/feb/22/manchester-united-glazers-debt http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2145794/Manchester-United-net-debt-rises-26m.html

The other thing is I believe this season is a one off and next year we will be back where we belong. The Glazers had nothing to do with all of the bad luck the club was hit with this season anymore then SAF, Gill you or I did. No amount of investment was going to overcome the injury crisis we suffered this year which was the major factor in our season.

The Glazers will do what it takes to keep the club successful because they know that is what keeps it profitable. That´s what smart businessmen do. They don´t bite the hand that feeds them. Profits. As I understand it the debt is getting smaller all the time, the profits are getting larger, and the club is successful.

I have probably read more about the Glazers, Manchester United and their other businesses then you have and the links you are directing me to have all been against the Glazers from before the takeover. So I have a suggestion for you maybe you should read some things from impartial jounalists such as Mike Ozanian at Forbes magazine or Sean Leahy of USA Today or what the present and previous NFL commisioners have to say about Glazers ownership of the Bucs. It won´t change your mind but it may give you a clearer picture of the Glazers and how they do business.