Official statement on G & G from FC United

Originally Posted by redloner

FWIW and I think Zorg will agree, a blog Andy Walsh wrote for the FC members site would have been better put in the public domain rather than this rather #@&%!ly "official" offering.

Was he paid for that too?

Originally Posted by Zorg

No it isn't. Hth.

well obviously i didn't expect you to agree. although whetehr you do or not is irrelevant

Originally Posted by redloner

No. That's because all the things we thought they could do before, they were actually prevented from doing by covenants in the debt documentation. Now, the bond prospectus tells us what they CAN do and it includes all the things we were worried about in the first place.

Stripping out £100m to pay down debt is the first such instance.

nonsense.

you can't claim they would've done all the things you said but were prevented from doing so and expect to be taken seriously.

tbph this line about stripping out £100m is a bit of a nonsense as well, since they are the owners of the business and, more importantly, were the owners when the document was drawn up, like it or not. i realise it's only rhetoric designed to emphasise a point, but even so.

the bond document includes a whole lot more than all the things you were worried about in the first place as well.

Originally Posted by redloner

But it makes no difference. I wasn't going to be at Old Trafford, so what difference does it make where I've been spending my Saturday afternoons. I've never rubbed anyone's nose in it, or suggested I'm in any way superior, or anyone's choice, if different, was inferior.

I'll now do everything I can, as a United fan, to help get rid of the Glazers and if we're successful I might go back to Old Trafford, or I might not. It's my choice. Like everyone else has exercised theirs, of their own free will, over the last five years.

i completely agree with you and going off my personal experience, that's the view of the majority of fc fans i have spoken to.

BUT (and this is where i suspect we will never agree)

i don't agree that setting up a new football club was the best form of protest against the glazers. alternatives? how about not renewing and protesting outside OT (or as near as we could get) at every home game?

even if you didn't want to protest but didn't renew, there were/are plenty of local established non/lower league clubs that would've appreciated the extra support without creating a new one.

i think it was MNIK that said on here a bit ago that fc took the most militant fans away from the club which made any protests against the glazers far more likely to fail.

i'm genuinely not trying to be personal, it's just my opinion, right or wrong.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

well obviously i didn't expect you to agree. although whetehr you do or not is irrelevant



nonsense.

you can't claim they would've done all the things you said but were prevented from doing so and expect to be taken seriously.

tbph this line about stripping out £100m is a bit of a nonsense as well, since they are the owners of the business and, more importantly, were the owners when the document was drawn up, like it or not. i realise it's only rhetoric designed to emphasise a point, but even so.

the bond document includes a whole lot more than all the things you were worried about in the first place as well.

I'm not claiming they would have done anything. I'm simply pointing out that in the absence of any information, people speculated what they might do, assuming they COULD do those things. We've since found out they couldn't do them after all.

Now, it appears they can do these things in the future and as you say, a lot more besides.

Of course I realise the owners of any business can take money as and when they wish, the £100m withdrawal mentioned in the bond prospectus was one example designed to show what they can do in future compared with what they couldn't do in the past. I was trying to emphasise the Glazers are potentially more dangerous to United now than they were previously...

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

Was he paid for that too?

Even for someone of your limited intelligence that's a pretty stupid thing to say.

Were you trying to be funny?

cheers for posting it anyway, zorg

Originally Posted by Jack Duckworth

i completely agree with you and going off my personal experience, that's the view of the majority of fc fans i have spoken to.

BUT (and this is where i suspect we will never agree)

i don't agree that setting up a new football club was the best form of protest against the glazers. alternatives? how about not renewing and protesting outside OT (or as near as we could get) at every home game?

even if you didn't want to protest but didn't renew, there were/are plenty of local established non/lower league clubs that would've appreciated the extra support without creating a new one.

i think it was MNIK that said on here a bit ago that fc took the most militant fans away from the club which made any protests against the glazers far more likely to fail.

i'm genuinely not trying to be personal, it's just my opinion, right or wrong.

I'm sad to say in a way I agree with you.

However, if there was no possibility of those who remained behind mounting any kind of ongoing resistance without the few who stopped going, why on earth would a couple of thousand of us put up with the abuse, the ridicule and the heartbreak of turning up to protest outside OT, for fifty or sixty-odd thousand to £#%&! off inside at ten to three?

I remember the catcalls and abuse from the marches and leaflet dropping during the run up to the takeover. It would have been much worse with the pro-Glazer activists we all know and love being there to make their presence felt afterwards.

This is making me feel like I did in May 2005 and that's not something I want right now. I'm knocking this thread on the head.

Originally Posted by Withers

Even for someone of your limited intelligence that's a pretty stupid thing to say.

Were you trying to be funny?

yeah, didnt work did it

Originally Posted by redloner

I'm not claiming they would have done anything. I'm simply pointing out that in the absence of any information, people speculated what they might do, assuming they COULD do those things. We've since found out they couldn't do them after all.

Now, it appears they can do these things in the future and as you say, a lot more besides.

Of course I realise the owners of any business can take money as and when they wish, the £100m withdrawal mentioned in the bond prospectus was one example designed to show what they can do in future compared with what they couldn't do in the past. I was trying to emphasise the Glazers are potentially more dangerous to United now than they were previously...

in that case I agree with what you are saying on the thread so far

sorry, i've only just wakened ;-}


the bond document is not a manifesto though.

Originally Posted by redloner

FWIW and I think Zorg will agree, a blog Andy Walsh wrote for the FC members site would have been better put in the public domain rather than this rather #@&%!ly "official" offering.

Definitely. I think my view on this statement is clouded by the context of that blog post, which was far more focused on the G&G campaign.

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

well obviously i didn't expect you to agree. although whetehr you do or not is irrelevant
.

It's difficult to agree with such a vague statement. 'The language...' - whose language do you mean? Can you expand?

Originally Posted by Jack Duckworth

i completely agree with you and going off my personal experience, that's the view of the majority of fc fans i have spoken to.

BUT (and this is where i suspect we will never agree)

i don't agree that setting up a new football club was the best form of protest against the glazers. alternatives? how about not renewing and protesting outside OT (or as near as we could get) at every home game?

even if you didn't want to protest but didn't renew, there were/are plenty of local established non/lower league clubs that would've appreciated the extra support without creating a new one.

i think it was MNIK that said on here a bit ago that fc took the most militant fans away from the club which made any protests against the glazers far more likely to fail.

i'm genuinely not trying to be personal, it's just my opinion, right or wrong.

I realise you're not trying to be arsey Jack, you're completely entitled to your opinion.

The way I see it is, those clubs would certainly not have welcomed thousands of United fans turning up and dominating their set-up - and we wanted a supporter-run club. In any case, your view is somewhat self-contradictory: on the one hand you say FC fans walking away harmed the protests, and on the other say they should have supported a different club. So, how would supporting Altrincham have helped the protests?

At the time, some of us did advocate boycotting and protesting outside the ground, and were met with short shrift. It's the same now - I have been advocating a one-match mass boycott for the last two weeks and the response has been 1) ignore him 2) tell him it'll never work or 3) tell him to £#%&! off.

It's galling that FC receive criticism for not doing what others have no inclination to do themselves.

£#%&!ing %@#$&!s this thread. FC are in a no win situation.

Say nothing and it's "why you not saying anything".
Say something "Using it to publicise yourself".

There's a much greater "enemy" than FC and bringing devisive arguments will only dilute the G&G campaign.

Originally Posted by Jack Duckworth

cheers for posting it anyway, zorg

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

will they be selling green and gold scarfs with the fc badge on them on the website?

elephantstone wants one

do I £#%&!

Originally Posted by Zorg

It's difficult to agree with such a vague statement. 'The language...' - whose language do you mean? Can you expand?

Yours will do for starters

for example, if you say you're not trying to occupy/re-occupy the moral high ground you're basically saying you were right all along

Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb

Yours will do for starters

for example, if you say you're not trying to occupy/re-occupy the moral high ground you're basically saying you were right all along

Mine? Where is this?

Originally Posted by Zorg

I realise you're not trying to be arsey Jack, you're completely entitled to your opinion.

The way I see it is, those clubs would certainly not have welcomed thousands of United fans turning up and dominating their set-up - and we wanted a supporter-run club. In any case, your view is somewhat self-contradictory: on the one hand you say FC fans walking away harmed the protests, and on the other say they should have supported a different club. So, how would supporting Altrincham have helped the protests?

that's not what i am saying at all. my position is that i think if the same amount of effort had gone into coordinating proper protests as it did into setting up fc, we would have been far more effective in getting our message across. i think the protest route was the way to go. my comment about supporting another club was in response to redloner saying it was up to the individual what they did on a saturday. imo, though, going to watch altrincham or fc does exactly the same thing in terms of protesting against glazer - nothing.

Originally Posted by Zorg

At the time, some of us did advocate boycotting and protesting outside the ground, and were met with short shrift. It's the same now - I have been advocating a one-match mass boycott for the last two weeks and the response has been 1) ignore him 2) tell him it'll never work or 3) tell him to £#%&! off.

i know and i think it's out of order. fwiw, i agree that boycotting is the best way to make an impact, hence why i stopped going myself.

@forwardirektion: i hope you're not trying to insinuate that i'm somehow an "enemy" of united because i don't support fc or i don't see the point of the statement they have released?

everyone's entitled to their opinion and most of us are trying to express it in the least antagonistic way.

Originally Posted by waynes ear's

yeah, didnt work did it

Can't believe you were my branch secretary.

Originally Posted by elephantstone

do I £#%&!

When I am a vmillionaire I am getting you one.

Originally Posted by Zorg

Mine? Where is this?

you want me to go back through your recent post history and post some quotes?

tbh, i'd rather not.

can i just add something that hopefully shows that i'm not a, jcl, oot, bitter abfc...

when fc were originally set up, i actually supported the idea, became a founder member and went to the first game at leigh. however, this was because i understood that fc were to be a protest club that would disband as soon as glazer was ousted. once it became clear to me that this wasn't going to be the case, i wasn't interested as i personally didn't see the point in it.

as you were...