I was on the verge of becoming City's owner (well majority shareholder) but the deal fell through at the last second.

MCFC Wirral said:
Now that I’ve never heard before… That’s shocked me.

I’ve been to The Swamp twice. Putting everything aside, it’s a horrible ground. Far too many seats cramped in. Arsenal is far more pleasant.
Click to expand...
It all came from some research I did for one of my books. A related article appears here:

FERGET IT; REDS PLANNED SHOCK EXIT FROM OLD TRAFFORD: Sir Alex blocked Utd move to Eastlands. - Free Online Library

Free Online Library: FERGET IT; REDS PLANNED SHOCK EXIT FROM OLD TRAFFORD: Sir Alex blocked Utd move to Eastlands.(Sport) by "Sunday Mirror (London, England)"; News, opinion and commentary General interest City councils
www.thefreelibrary.com

The full story is in the 2010 edition of Manchester A Football History.
 
Gary James said:
In the end it was Fergie who had final say. Manchester Council tried to persuade Utd that even just playing European games at, what they intended to be a 80,000 capacity stadium, would be beneficial to both parties. Full story in 2nd edition of Manchester A Football History. I’d interviewed several key decision making figures in the process and then when the book came out Simon Mullock helped by getting the story in the Sunday Mirror as part of publicity for the book. Utd will probably deny it today but Fergie’s decision back then ultimately led to City’s investment all those years later.

Football clubs often impact the lives of their neighbours. For once a decision went our way.
Click to expand...
There was no way that Fergie was gonna leave that stadium he re-built in the 90's. It was his legacy.

And why would they want to go halves with MCC on a bonafide cash cow, that his horseracing pals had all the shares in.
 
cleavers said:
Apart from the twats in the stadium.
Click to expand...
Arsenal fans > U****d fans

I did Arsenal away a number of times when I was living in London and not one had the bollocks to have a go without police in front of them.

I’ve never been so furious at football in my life at when Balotelli got sent off and Arsenal won 1-0. They were goading us inside but not one wanted to know afterwards. Thankfully we still won the title that season.
 
Gary James said:
In the end it was Fergie who had final say. Manchester Council tried to persuade Utd that even just playing European games at, what they intended to be a 80,000 capacity stadium, would be beneficial to both parties. Full story in 2nd edition of Manchester A Football History. I’d interviewed several key decision making figures in the process and then when the book came out Simon Mullock helped by getting the story in the Sunday Mirror as part of publicity for the book. Utd will probably deny it today but Fergie’s decision back then ultimately led to City’s investment all those years later.

Football clubs often impact the lives of their neighbours. For once a decision went our way.
Click to expand...
City were in the 3rd tier as the decisions were being made. The story behind the stadium's inception is riddled with intrigue.

City had just paid £8m for the new family stand at Maine Road when we were approached about becoming tenants.

If stadium discussions had started with City first, imagine what a difference that £8m would have made to us at the time. \0/
 
MCFC Wirral said:
Now that I’ve never heard before… That’s shocked me.

I’ve been to The Swamp twice. Putting everything aside, it’s a horrible ground. Far too many seats cramped in. Arsenal is far more pleasant.
Click to expand...
It caused a stink at the time mate. Yup, the Etihad was ManUre's sloppy seconds. In the end it was the iconic name Old Toilet that the Rag's didn't want to lose their association with why they turned it down, but on reflection, thank fuck they did!

Having the newly built CoMS & all the surrounding land for development massively helped seal the deal for Sheikh Mansour's takeover.
 
dronefromsector7G said:
Ferguson being responsible for his beloved rags being in our shadow for 10 years and counting - oh yes
Click to expand...
You could also say that if Fergie hadn't have been so successful, and by proxy, putting Manchester on the map as a sporting entity, investors wouldn't have been sniffing around at all. I think it is no co-incidence that City were bought 3 months after United won the Champions League with Ronaldo, Tevez, Rooney etc..

You'd have to say that the owners were bedazzled by the prospect of getting in on the action. Yes, they looked at Everton, but Liverpool FC were in the wilderness by then. It was less of a challenge becoming top dog in Merseyside.
 
Dribble said:
It caused a stink at the time mate. Yup, the Etihad was ManUre's sloppy seconds. In the end it was the iconic name Old Toilet that the Rag's didn't want to lose their association with why they turned it down, but on reflection, thank fuck they did!

Having the newly built CoMS & all the surrounding land for development massively helped seal the deal for Sheikh Mansour's takeover.
Click to expand...
I wasn’t really that involved at the time. I dedicated much of my early 20’s to music so City wasn’t on my mind so much.

Putting everything to one side, it wouldn’t have been right for Trafford to move there. City were the natural choice.
 
Mr Edward's shoe mirror said:
There was no way that Fergie was gonna leave that stadium he re-built in the 90's. It was his legacy.

And why would they want to go halves with MCC on a bonafide cash cow, that his horseracing pals had all the shares in.
Click to expand...
Yes Whisky face certainly spuffed that up for them, chortles :)
 
MCFC Wirral said:
I wasn’t really that involved at the time. I dedicated much of my early 20’s to music so City wasn’t on my mind so much.

Putting everything to one side, it wouldn’t have been right for Trafford to move there. City were the natural choice.
Click to expand...

It is closer to their original home in Newton Heath than ours (just)! And it's always been more of a rag area. I'm not sure whether our owners would have still invested. Plenty have invested in other clubs despite hurdles around their grounds. Everton went for a new build, Newcastle we'll have to wait and see. We could have had a new stadium built somewhere with better connections and it would have probably been a lot cheaper and easier for the club. But what they've done has been fantastic for both the club and Manchester in general. If they can fund improvements to the transport network heading out to the stadium and collar site then there legacy will be everlasting.
 
bluealf said:
Yes Whisky face certainly spuffed that up for them, chortles :)
Click to expand...
The logistics of that Manchester City Council proposal doesn't really add up, either. To make a 41,000 seater stadium into an 80,000 seater stadium, would have been a complete re-build. Something that would have cost half a billion quid to build in 2003. Even with the council going halves, nobody had that sort of cash up their sleeve twenty years ago. And then you had the local residents to appease, poor transport links to the site.

The old gasworks site was not particularly appealing to anyone at the time. As we all recall, the site of the new training ground complex was a dumping zone for industrial waste and scrap metal, and was privately owned.

Also, have you seen how much property that United own in Salford Quays/Trafford park. They own the freight terminal next to their ground and all of the industrial estates on either side of Wharfside way. They've been secretly buying up property round there for years. Back in the David Gill days.
 
Mr Edward's shoe mirror said:
The logistics of that Manchester City Council proposal doesn't really add up, either. To make a 41,000 seater stadium into an 80,000 seater stadium, would have been a complete re-build. Something that would have cost half a billion quid to build in 2003. Even with the council going halves, nobody had that sort of cash up their sleeve twenty years ago. And then you had the local residents to appease, poor transport links to the site.

The old gasworks site was not particularly appealing to anyone at the time. As we all recall, the site of the new training ground complex was a dumping zone for industrial waste and scrap metal, and was privately owned.

Also, have you seen how much property that United own in Salford Quays/Trafford park. They own the freight terminal next to their ground and all of the industrial estates on either side of Wharfside way. They've been secretly buying up property round there for years. Back in the David Gill days.
Click to expand...
This was before the stadium was built or plans finalised. The idea was to create a larger athletics stadium that would be converted. Even after Fergie said no the plans initially were to build a stadium that could hold 60,000 for City - that got scaled back as Lee’s City dropped. The eventual agreement to move came in 1999 after the play off final, so who knows what would’ve happened if we’d not won that game too!

Worth remembering that the tram lines were supposed to be running before the Games but ended up several years later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top