United thread 2012/13 (inc merged IPO thread)

[sniff]

Well, just maybe, you should hold your's. This keyboard worrior gobshite act is quite tiresome. You must notice how everytime you log on you have to try and take a pop at someone.

As for the Pseudo finance comment, well tell me where it is wrong ?

None of you know the figures, i reand rammy blue and he has a good grasp of the subject to be fair, but it's all subjective.... that's how you define it. It isnt taking the piss, its being acurate with the language...

Tell me how I have been a keyboard warrior here or anywhere else. Everything I say on here I would say to anyone's face so it's nothing to do with being a keyboard anything.

You were the one having a pop at people such as myself and PB (PB who called it fairly well and myself when I rubbished the volatility claims). Define "psuedo finance" then as you meant it and then I shall assess where it is wrong.

And none know what figures? I'm not sure what you mean by "reand rammy blue" so can't comment.

I meant PB, ans suggesting you would say whatever to a persons face is moot really since we all know you almost never have. But you do seem rather quick to jump on someones post as soon as it raises a point you dont like.

I never once mentioned the "volatility claims" so please do show me where i did. I made a guestimate based on the fugures avaliable at that time, and they look very good. I never debated the IPO so i have ni idea where thats comming from.

"Define "psuedo finance" then as you meant it and then I shall assess where it is wrong." you dont think that come's over a little arrogant ? You will tell me where im wrong before you know the answer !! really !!

In my terms it's being used to explain that you are speculating like the others, although you say it with more authority and almost rubbish opinion as if you are perfect and correct in the methods you use. The reality is quite different and you have no more insight than the rest of us. Its all quite reasonable really, but you have to throw a little pop in each time.

If you cant take other opinions then you need to step away from the internet.

Oh ! ive just seen the PM.... genius, i dont agree so you get all im gunnaz beatz you up if iz sees you. serious, grow up.

 

[Pigeonho]

 

[sniff]

thought pigeonho would avoid all form's of cat containing popcorn...

 

[WEMBLEY76]

Manchester United.Registered in the Cayman Islands.
Couldn't happen to a nicer club.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Well, just maybe, you should hold your's. This keyboard worrior gobshite act is quite tiresome. You must notice how everytime you log on you have to try and take a pop at someone.

As for the Pseudo finance comment, well tell me where it is wrong ?

None of you know the figures, i reand rammy blue and he has a good grasp of the subject to be fair, but it's all subjective.... that's how you define it. It isnt taking the piss, its being acurate with the language...

Tell me how I have been a keyboard warrior here or anywhere else. Everything I say on here I would say to anyone's face so it's nothing to do with being a keyboard anything.

You were the one having a pop at people such as myself and PB (PB who called it fairly well and myself when I rubbished the volatility claims). Define "psuedo finance" then as you meant it and then I shall assess where it is wrong.

And none know what figures? I'm not sure what you mean by "reand rammy blue" so can't comment.

I meant PB

So I'm the target of the "pseudo-finance" remark am I? But I was the one saying the Glazers would use this to settle their personal debts all along and it seems I was right. And as for knowing the figures, I only know what's written down in the IPO filing document.

Yet you were the one saying this would get them back into profit, when (a) it's got very little to do with profits and (b) they've always been profitable.

So you're hardly Warren fucking Buffett yourself are you?

 

[bluemonkey71]

Fucks sake. Another seemingly interesting thread goes south

 

[sniff]

Tell me how I have been a keyboard warrior here or anywhere else. Everything I say on here I would say to anyone's face so it's nothing to do with being a keyboard anything.

You were the one having a pop at people such as myself and PB (PB who called it fairly well and myself when I rubbished the volatility claims). Define "psuedo finance" then as you meant it and then I shall assess where it is wrong.

And none know what figures? I'm not sure what you mean by "reand rammy blue" so can't comment.

I meant PB

So I'm the target of the "pseudo-finance" remark am I? But I was the one saying the Glazers would use this to settle their personal debts all along and it seems I was right. And as for knowing the figures, I only know what's written down in the IPO filing document.

Yet you were the one saying this would get them back into profit, when (a) it's got very little to do with profits and (b) they've always been profitable.

So you're hardly Warren fucking Buffett yourself are you?

Well no actually....

i said you had been quite informative, but that would require you reading my posts i suppose...

It was aimed at the board in genereal, but you and SWP take that as a personal insult if you wish ? It would be a persecutuion complex, but feel free, it bothers me not a jott...

The only people throwing weight around and getting all offended are you two.

But please show me where i singled either of you out, id be happy to apologise if it was out of order, but you will not find anything i assure you.

And just for the record, to silence the frankly pathetic little digg's that have been chucked in.... a £300m ipo, added with the first suggested GM deal, and the new Nike kit negotiation.... that would have been almost £400m, and as i said that would almost take them out of debt.

 

[waspish]

Bottom line is, is it a good thing or a bad thing? Well they are paying off 75m so it must be a good thing?..

 

[SWP's back]

Well yes as what we said was/is correct whereas you said the pseudo finance was wrong.

You also mention profit which is odd as the ipo was nothing to do with that and they have always made a profit.

Anyway, I'm out. You spoke a little early and turned out wrong.

Whether you choose to read me or not, listen to pb as his posts on finance are golden.

 

[sniff]

Well yes as what we said was/is correct whereas you said the pseudo finance was wrong.

You also mention profit which is odd as the ipo was nothing to do with that and they have always made a profit.

Anyway, I'm out. You spoke a little early and turned out wrong.

Whether you choose to read me or not, listen to pb as his posts on finance are golden.

So in a nutshell you are now saying what i said all along ?

that i made a post based on info avaliable at the time, then later explained that it was wrong... yet you still decided to dish it out. Without the aid of either Dr Who, or a time machine i could not see into the future.

Just for the record, i ask again where i gave PB anything but credit for his input ? or where i said PB or yourself where the target of a comment. ?

you have even said im wrong on things i never posted about, how the fuck that works i have no idea

shame the same respect can not be shared around i suppose, true gents in every sense.