We’ve borrowed another £60m

Originally Posted by Sparky***

would help if inter would pay us what they owe

And that will be the 'reason' we sign nobody.

"Well, if we'd had the money we were owed, we could have made a signing or two, but, well ... y'know ..."

Originally Posted by Sparky***

would help if inter would pay us what they owe

It certainly would.

Any chance of it actually happening?

Originally Posted by measlyshark

16 years. £#%&! me. How times have flown through a carefully launched bucket of diarrhoea.

The g&g campaign was only 2010/11 I think. No one gave a £#%&! about the glazer or the debt when we were winning things.

Originally Posted by red in cumbria

We will make at least one big name signing I suspect, might have to shift some more dead wood off our books to help finance it tho.

We could probably have made one good signing instead of pissing away money on Van De Beek and Telles who never feature.

Originally Posted by believe

The g&g campaign was only 2010/11 I think. No one gave a £#%&! about the glazer or the debt when we were winning things.

Tbf that peaked when we were looking alright for the Champions league and league. Was the 09-10 run in. There is merit in what you say but that’s human nature, you win 10 games on the spin and the last thing you’re criticising is the squad so the Glazers get a pass.

Originally Posted by believe

The g&g campaign was only 2010/11 I think. No one gave a £#%&! about the glazer or the debt when we were winning things.

Football supporters are nothing if not fickle. Look how City fans have changed their tune since the nobility in poverty days.

Originally Posted by believe

The g&g campaign was only 2010/11 I think. No one gave a £#%&! about the glazer or the debt when we were winning things.

I seem to remember a few people were upset when they took over and we were winning things then.

Originally Posted by TravellingRed

I seem to remember a few people were upset when they took over and we were winning things then.

They were lulled into a misconception of their influence because of the Murdoch success. Two completely different scenarios. One had legal basis for challenge, the other did not.

Originally Posted by ryanMUFC

It’s within their right obviously, it’s just a business to them.

At the same time they’ll expect fans to come through the turnstiles at some point every other week and be completely okay with a substandard squad that’s half arsing a title challenge.

It would be better if they reduced the number of British teams in the CL to stop clubs happily cruising into 2nd, 3rd and 4th for the financial reward of being in the competition.

And they will...

Originally Posted by sweetleftfoot

And they will...

No doubt, they hit the jackpot the day they go approved for the loan.

70,000 customers every home game no matter how little they put back in to the club. Not to mention the TV money.

Originally Posted by TravellingRed

I seem to remember a few people were upset when they took over and we were winning things then.

indeed. upset, but selfish.

Originally Posted by TravellingRed

I seem to remember a few people were upset when they took over and we were winning things then.

Yes 3 or 4 thousand of us were and we were called traitors.

Originally Posted by believe

The g&g campaign was only 2010/11 I think. No one gave a £#%&! about the glazer or the debt when we were winning things.

If you cut the engines out on a jet it doesn't just tumble straight out of the sky, it'll glide along for a bit but sure enough it's headed down.

Originally Posted by Sparky***

If you cut the engines out on a jet it doesn't just tumble straight out of the sky, it'll glide along for a bit but sure enough it's headed down.

Philosophy.

I guess Glazer went broke after winning the Super Bowl for the second time.

Originally Posted by utd99

They were lulled into a misconception of their influence because of the Murdoch success. Two completely different scenarios. One had legal basis for challenge, the other did not.

Maybe, but its still complete joke that the Glazers were allowed to buy United when they obviously didn't have the money for it. Leveraged buyout should be illegal. However this what happens when FA didn't have any regulations on who should be allowed own an English football club. THe following list (I have probably posted this elswere on here but the following list of owners in English football is complete joke, if you ask me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...football_clubs

Originally Posted by JamesPolk

I guess Glazer went broke after winning the Super Bowl for the second time.



Maybe, but its still complete joke that the Glazers were allowed to buy United when they obviously didn't have the money for it. Leveraged buyout should be illegal. However this what happens when FA didn't have any regulations on who should be allowed own an English football club. THe following list (I have probably posted this elswere on here but the following list of owners in English football is complete joke, if you ask me. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...football_clubs

and with all those American owners, do you think they have the interests of English football at heart?

Originally Posted by Mr_Ed

and with all those American owners, do you think they have the interests of English football at heart?

Ferguson was such a good manager , he managed success with a Board who’s aim is to secure top 4 and even that purely from a financial standpoint.

Never really spent huge amounts of money and managed to get players playing 10-15% better than they actually are

He must be quietly seething that the club he completely rebuilt is being eroded by Woodward and the Glazer family... mind you, his $144k per day (alleged) as club ambassador probably sweetens the pill.

Originally Posted by Mr_Ed

He must be quietly seething that the club he completely rebuilt is being eroded by Woodward and the Glazer family... mind you, his $144k per day (alleged) as club ambassador probably sweetens the pill.

McM@&%! and Magnier properly £#%&!ed him. They knew the only thing he loved more than horse racing was United and they deliberately sold their shares in it to the worst @#%&!s they could think of who were going to run it into the ground.

The club was collateral in a pissing contest about horse stud rights.

Originally Posted by Sparky***

The club was collateral in a pissing contest about horse stud rights.

Rock of Gibraltar

Originally Posted by Sparky***

McM@&%! and Magnier properly £#%&!ed him. They knew the only thing he loved more than horse racing was United and they deliberately sold their shares in it to the worst @#%&!s they could think of who were going to run it into the ground.

The club was collateral in a pissing contest about horse stud rights.

Yeah... some irony that his actions contributed to the downfall of the club. How the coolmore mafia had United squirming with their 99 questions was impressive.

All that because Fergie wanted worldwide stud payments from Rock of Gibraltar... massively underestimated them.

https://breakingthelines.com/investi...iteds-decline/