United Forum
Go Back   United Forum > Manchester United > Love United, Hate Glazer
Closed Thread
 
Old 19-11-2013, 10:42 AM
Tumescent Throb
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dunk
Any chance that the 80m cash was indeed required at that time, either to assist in the gaining of further credit or to prevent the requirement of further credit?


yeah that'll be it
 
Old 19-11-2013, 10:57 AM
Charlestown Rouge
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by believe
ffs

is that not the equivalent of paying Ferguson a wage as a director? They bought the club, albeit with borrowed money, to make money like any business person would. Is making money asset stripping?
In this form, undoubtedly yes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rafabio
he was left with no choice apart from writing more crap on this subject since he was one of the first to go ahead with dooms day scenario. As each season has passed if anything it has looked rosier for glazers (more so with the mammoth deal with Nike coming into picture soon).
Must be a comforting to have one of the forum financial and intellectual gurus in your camp though.
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:03 AM
Tumescent Throb
 
Default

are the forum financial gurus the ones that said united was worth a billion at the most in 2010 ?
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:11 AM
Charlestown Rouge
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb
are the forum financial gurus the ones that said united was worth a billion at the most in 2010 ?
What's your point Jude The Obscure?

The Glazers played Russian Roulette with this takeover - fact. A high risk game that looks like it paid out on the back of Ferguson's genius and people around the world like Deepers who become engorged at the very name of the brand and those bizarre corporate sponsorship deals we all giggle about.

Even Gill hated the idea at first publicly slating their bids until he opted for the big pay days. Same as Neville and Ole who came out against it but were soon put back in their place. Any revisionist trying to claim this was a visionary business deal can only have assumed that if it had bombed we could have been taken over by the Middle East gimps and then pretended the Chelsea/City model was good all along.
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:24 AM
Tumescent Throb
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlestown Rouge
What's your point Jude The Obscure?

The Glazers played Russian Roulette with this takeover - fact. A high risk game that looks like it paid out on the back of Ferguson's genius and people around the world like Deepers who become engorged at the very name of the brand and those bizarre corporate sponsorship deals we all giggle about.

Even Gill hated the idea at first publicly slating their bids until he opted for the big pay days. Same as Neville and Ole who came out against it but were soon put back in their place. Any revisionist trying to claim this was a visionary business deal can only have assumed that if it had bombed we could have been taken over by the Middle East gimps and then pretended the Chelsea/City model was good all along.
I don't think it is a fact at all, I think that it was never in doubt for one moment that it would work out just fine.

Of course, there were a few doubts when it looked as if the TV money might have peaked before the last round of negotiations but those were quickly dispelled.

You've got to remember that whilst people questioned what would happen if United didn't win trophies the reality was that teh takeover came at a time when we weren't winning any and the model was built around that scenario. The unprecedented success that followed possibly fast-tracked their plans, but the fact that we had brilliant players and a genius manager was hardly a surprise to them, nor should it have been to United's growing number of critics in the early years after the takeover.

Back in 2010 when the intelligentsia were lauding the red knights and mocking the notion that united was even worth a billion there were those of us who were pointing out that in reality it was worth easily double that and more besides.

Whilst the critics accused the 'stooges' of having their heads buried in the sand, the truth was that it was completely the opposite - the glazers and those that bankrolled them were working on global markets and the incredible rise in commercial revenues was as good as guaranteed. Now with BT coming in for a share of some of that as well it's going to become even more obscene over the next half a decade, by which time United will be in prime position for whatever comes next...
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:26 AM
TripDownMiseryLane
 
Default

Was Believe such an ultra leveraged buyout advocate when he worked in a warehouse in wigan or wherever it was?

Quite apart from the fact that the glazers have turned what was once a football club built on traditions, with strong links to and a mirrored identity of, the community at the root of it's origins into a homogeneous marketing gimmick that happens to enter a team into various football competitions. The fact that it is merely a cash cow for a family who neither know or care for it's history, traditions or position within it's local, regional and national communities, means that it will inevitably falter and fail.

Not only will the glazers kill the goose one day, but they will have had a major hand in the death of the game as a mass participation sport, with a mass active following within the communities that made the game what it is - or was.
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:28 AM
Charlestown Rouge
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tumescent Throb
I don't think it is a fact at all, I think that it was never in doubt for one moment that it would work out just fine.

Of course, there were a few doubts when it looked as if the TV money might have peaked before the last round of negotiations but those were quickly dispelled.
Never in doubt but there were a few doubts. Yeah but no but yeah.
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:29 AM
Ethers
 
Default

So Throb was right all along, again?

Well fancy that...
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:39 AM
believe
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TripDownMiseryLane
Was Believe such an ultra leveraged buyout advocate when he worked in a warehouse in wigan or wherever it was?
.
No I was protesting then.

My argument, as it always is, is that there is no argument anymore (there hasn't been one for about three years imo). They bought the club and have made a success of what they intended to do and all the "they closed the staff canteen down" arguments can't disguise that.

All this balls about them not giving a f*** about the club is embarrassing, the players on the pitch don't give a f*** why should they?


Quote:
Not only will the glazers kill the goose one day, but they will have had a major hand in the death of the game as a mass participation sport, with a mass active following within the communities that made the game what it is - or was.
I'd say it's the fans that have killed/ are killing the game, not the owners.
 
Old 19-11-2013, 11:42 AM
Charlestown Rouge
 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by believe
No I was protesting then.

My argument, as it always is, is that there is no argument anymore (there hasn't been one for about three years imo). They bought the club and have made a success of what they intended to do and all the "they closed the staff canteen down" arguments can't disguise that.
Just because they've made a success of what they intended to do - i.e profit from a dangerously over leveraged purchase of the club while alienating the core support, doesn't mean that everybody has to like it.
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Similar Threads for: So according to Andersred...
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
http://andersred.blogspot.com/ 19/1/11 Tumescent Throb Football 69 21-01-2011 10:07 PM
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:25 AM.

Copyright 2006 - 2018 utdforum.com. This site is in no way affiliated to Manchester United Football Club.