No!!!!!!!!!!! Major Bad News!!! (2 Viewers)

[Nicole]

++ [ originally posted by gray ] ++

Okay, so the ticket prices at Old Trafford might go up, and some players might be sold to recover some of the money...

I still don't see how ruining football comes into all of this.

btw Glazer is obviously putting all this money into Man. United as an investment. If he's going to borrow that much money to buy the club, surely he has some kind of financial plan other than raising ticket prices to $2000 a pop and selling all of United's biggest players...

Why do you think it is "good" for football to have alot of competitive teams?

Glazer's plan first bid was rejected on the grounds that "it was too agressive, it would bleed the club dry"

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[swag]

I don't buy any of this "Glazer will kill ManU" argument at all yet. Sorry. I do not see sufficient evidence to see any of this as the de facto "death of the club." What I see are a lot more superstitious, Chicken Little ManU fans squawking about everywhere yelling, "please don't touch my club -- it will die!". Talk about a petite flower.

So far, all I see are extreme biases, superstitions, and no rational arguments based on facts or truths.

 

[Nicole]

++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
I don't buy any of this "Glazer will kill ManU" argument at all yet. Sorry. I do not see sufficient evidence to see any of this as the de facto "death of the club." What I see are a lot more superstitious, Chicken Little ManU fans squawking about everywhere yelling, "please don't touch my club -- it will die!". Talk about a petite flower.

So far, all I see are extreme biases, superstitions, and no rational arguments based on facts or truths.

No rational arguments??? He has to put the club in debt of nearly 500m, now when has that ever been a good thing?

 

[JCK]

++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
I don't buy any of this "Glazer will kill ManU" argument at all yet. Sorry. I do not see sufficient evidence to see any of this as the de facto "death of the club." What I see are a lot more superstitious, Chicken Little ManU fans squawking about everywhere yelling, "please don't touch my club -- it will die!". Talk about a petite flower.

So far, all I see are extreme biases, superstitions, and no rational arguments based on facts or truths.

Let us assume the club will get killed, how does this ruin football?

 

[swag]

That certainly doesn't sound like a good thing, of course. But you cannot take that out of context of any larger plans for longer-term club growth and investment. ManU is the richest club in the world for a reason, afterall. And with any club ownership, some of their ideas are going to be very bad and some are likely to also be good. That's true of the current management or Glazer.

But I've noticed a real streak of xeonophobia in the ManU camps. Irrational, emotional statements like "Death to Malcolm Glazer" only confirm the level of superstition, sky-is-falling, hyperbole-inciting thinking going on there. I mean, why not pull out the ever-popular Hitler analogy too, while we're at it, and start making connections between Malcolm Glazer's love of Wagner operas and the Third Reich?

 

[Nicole]

++ [ originally posted by Jeeks ] ++


Let us assume the club will get killed, how does this ruin football?

Like I said, why do you think its good for football to have as many "competitive" clubs as you can? Or do you perfer having on a certain few clubs who always win?

 

[Nicole]

++ [ originally posted by swag ] ++
That certainly doesn't sound like a good thing, of course. But you cannot take that out of context of any larger plans for longer-term club growth and investment. ManU is the richest club in the world for a reason, afterall. And with any club ownership, some of their ideas are going to be very bad and some are likely to also be good. That's true of the current management or Glazer.

But I've noticed a real streak of xeonophobia in the ManU camps. Irrational, emotional statements like "Death to Malcolm Glazer" only confirm the level of superstition, sky-is-falling, hyperbole-inciting thinking going on there. I mean, why not pull out the ever-popular Hitler analogy too, while we're at it, and start making connections between Malcolm Glazer's love of Wagner operas and the Third Reich?

Its simple, Man Utd to Glazer = Money. That is all he wants to do is bleed the club dry. Does he care if he leaves in unable to breath again? No.

 

[JCK]

++ [ originally posted by Nicole ] ++


Like I said, why do you think its good for football to have as many "competitive" clubs as you can? Or do you perfer having on a certain few clubs who always win?

It is only one club ffs

 

[swag]

++ [ originally posted by Jeeks ] ++
Let us assume the club will get killed, how does this ruin football?

Another example of the irrational, sky-is-falling hyperbole going around, btw.

 

[gray]

++ [ originally posted by Nicole ] ++
Its simple, Man Utd to Glazer = Money. That is all he wants to do is bleed the club dry. Does he care if he leaves in unable to breath again? No.

Okay, so let's assume that all Glazer is interested in is the money.

Do you really think he's interested in borrowing and spending hundreds of millions of dollars so he can leave Man Utd penniless and fighting a relegation battle?

Obviously his motivation is to make money through the club. If he wants to make money from the club, he obviously wants them winning trophies and selling tickets/shirts/merchandise, right?

People don't borrow money so they can bleed football clubs dry; people borrow money so they can try to make more money.

 

[swag]

++ [ originally posted by Nicole ] ++
Its simple, Man Utd to Glazer = Money. That is all he wants to do is bleed the club dry. Does he care if he leaves in unable to breath again? No.

It's pretty clear that this is too an emotional topic to discuss rationally.

But as an aside, you do illustrate what I think is retarded about the fact that Manchester United has even issued shares on the public market. Doing that is really all about making money. If you're looking for someone to blame about making ManU all about money, go back to 1991 when the club management made that decision. It's been beeatching and moaning, about Rupert Murdoch in 1998 to Malcolm Glazer today, ever since.

 

[#10]

a mate of mine is a passionate utd fan, and we have numerous discussion on the matter.

he has invested a stupid amount of money/debt into this....so there must be some big plan for this. I believe a large chunk of this will be in relation to online betting.

As a utd follower (not me the m8).. he is worried about the stealing of assets, which is a reasonable worry however, its will be a long term problem.

Glazier obviously wasnt clued up too much about the football world when he announced he would give utd a transfer budget of 20 million............without checking hey usually had double that.

Imo Glazier is bad news for utd fans, and the underlieng fact that whatever he does to utd will effect other clubs...so in some way football will be affected good or bad.

 

[Zlatan]

++ [ originally posted by Nicole ] ++
American business tycoon Malcolm Glazer has bid £790.3 million for Premiership giants Manchester United.
Glazer is the majority shareholder at United after buying Irish racing tycoons JP McManus and John Magnier's 28.7 percent stake in the club.
The owner of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers NFL team now owns 56.8 percent of The Red Devils after adding to his existing 28.1 percent share in the club.
It is bad news for the supporters who have strongly opposed the takeover and threatened to boycott matches and sponsors associated with the club in protest.
Glazer had been given until May 17 to 'put up or shut up' but his ability to persuade McManus and Magnier to sell their Cubic Expression stake has completely altered the picture regarding ownership of the club.
With that obstacle out of the way, the path seems clear for the American businessman to take over the Old Trafford outfit.
The Irish duo stand to receive an estimated figure of up to £60 million for their stake and the shares in the club rose substantially on Thursday in the wake of the major development.
Analyst Dr Bill Gerrard told Sky Sports News that he shares the fears of the United supporters.
"They certainly have every right to be very, very concerned," stated Gerrard. "The only redeeming argument to make is that anyone coming in to any sports team, if they are going to make it successful in the medium to long term, has got to win the fans over.
"But Glazer is no Roman Abramovich - he has borrowed much of the money to buy United."
Glazer needs over 75 percent stake in the club to tie up the financial loose ends of any takeover.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THIS MEANS A TAKEOVER BID IS INEVITABLE!!! THIS IS BAD!!!!

Yeah, that might be bad for Manyoo, but see, the for rest of us... it means nothing.

 

[#10]

Just got worse:
-------------------------------------
Glazer buys more shares
by Adam Marshall - created on 12 May 2005

FOOTBALL AID COMPETITION
Fancy running out at Hampden Park on June 5?
email this pageprint this page
Have your say
Team Pages:Manchester United

Malcolm Glazer has taken another major step towards taking overall control of Manchester United by buying more shares from Harry Dobson.

Click here to read our earlier story on Glazer's £790 million bid for United.

The American tycoon followed up his buy-out of Irish duo J.P.McManus and John Magnier's Cubic Expression vehicle by splashing out on the 17 million shares owned by Dobson's Mountbarrow Investments Ltd.

With Dobson selling his 6.45 percent stake in The Red Devils, it is surely only a matter of time before Glazer has the 75 percent total that rubber-stamps his takeover and takes the company private.

After taking control earlier on Thursday, the American has paid 300p per share to Dobson, according to a statement released on the Regulatory News Service. The developments mean he now owns 63.25 percent of United.

Some sources are indicating that the 75 percent threshold could even be breached within 24 hours, although it may take a little longer before the Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner gets his way.

Glazer has overall control, in any case, and could make sweeping changes within 60 days - including alterations to the current board.

United supporters are planning to protest at Old Trafford on Thursday evening as they continue to fight the takeover.

Click here to to read Your View on the Glazer takeover.
-----------------------------------

Its inevitable,

 

[Dragon]

LOL

 

[JCK]

I am still not able to comprehend why is that bad news, it is wonderful news IMO

 

[Bjerknes]

Forza Glazer, run that club into the ground.

 

[JCK]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
Forza Glazer, run that club into the ground.

Careful when you say that Andy, Nicole is saying that Glazer will ruin football

 

[Bjerknes]

Absolutely ridiculous notion. It might ruin Manchester United's football, however for the rest it will just be a little breeze passing by. Won't do a thing.

 

[JCK]

++ [ originally posted by Andy ] ++
Absolutely ridiculous notion. It might ruin Manchester United's football, however for the rest it will just be a little breeze passing by. Won't do a thing.

Tell that to Nicole, or let her explain how will football be ruined.