United thread 2020/21

Status
Not open for further replies.
Imagine if we don’t get the 3 points needed only for the Rags to run out of gas having to play 4 games in 8 days & just falling short, would the thick fckers blame it on fixture congestion.
 
They've lost their new training shirt contract with Hut Group over THG's fears about fan repercussions over the Glazers/ESL. £200m they've lost and got to find a replacement for before July.


This is madness. Who is going to buy that club knowing that if they don't win all the time, their fans will simply threaten the sponsors, club and the owners with a boycott ? It's the equivalent of a fan-owned club and mob rule.

They may brag about the number of fans they have and how great fan-power is but it's a double-edged sword being wielded by the type of low-life scrotes we saw in action on Sunday.
 
Last edited:
The rags debt is theirs not the Glazers. I'm sure they will be happy to keep taking the dividend and consulting fees till they're old men. The fans are just banging nails into the rag's coffin.
It's great.
 
They've lost their new training shirt contract with Hut Group over THG's fears about fan repercussions over the Glazers/ESL. £200m they've lost and got to find a replacement for before July.

That's a worry, if the cash pot starts to dry up UMS will be looking at selling.
 
The rags debt is theirs not the Glazers. I'm sure they will be happy to keep taking the dividend and consulting fees till they're old men. The fans are just banging nails into the rag's coffin.
It's great.
Indeed.

the whole ‘glazers out’ campaign seems to mentally bypass the United held debt. Not glazer held, United held.
There is no financial reason (for the glazers) for the glazers to sell.

the glazers could fold the club and themselves ‘lose’ hardly any money.

They lose the ‘potential’ profit (after debts, fees etc) of a buyout, but these fan actions just makes the club as a takeover target less and less attractive - brand related toxicity. Or opens up the club to some vampire squid investor , as the valuation falls, but has assets that can squeezed

The anti sponsor campaign is just accelerating the downward slope of the club valuation.

and who, as a profit driven buyer, would want to buy, with the knowledge that they would need to spend a large fortune on players, stadium, infrastructure , with no chance of profits for a very long time… unless it’s a like for like owner - ie dividends with no investment … and likely cost cutting.

If it’s not a profit driven investor, then you’re left with a plaything buyer, like Chelsea. But it’s a whole new level of buying, compared to what Roman bought Chelsea for. And it’s not ‘dead’ money buying the massive debt in Chelsea case.

‘Sportswashing state’ investor - nowt to do with ‘sportswashing’, just looking for profit from investing in diversified business that isn’t energy based - you’d think they would want to protect their ‘brand’ image though (as with any investor) so the fan backlash is making that less likely as well.
 
The rags debt is theirs not the Glazers. I'm sure they will be happy to keep taking the dividend and consulting fees till they're old men. The fans are just banging nails into the rag's coffin.
It's great.
In the world of corporate finance many debt structures have change of ownership clauses where the debt has to be cleared before a sale (or its gets called in). Any new buyer has to either:

1 Load on the same level of debt again through new providers (difficult and expensive) or
2 Pay hard cash to clear any such debt.
3 Either 1 or 2 plus the payment to the Glazers covering their share ownership (+ the non voting shares listed on the US exchange).

So its a tall order to shift the Glazers as they will want and expect 3 to be a significant sum given how much of a cash cow it is. The idea that some wealthy benefactor will step in and cover the costs of ousting the glazers and effectively hand over control to the fans is farcical.
 
You have to just laugh at the Rags with their view on the Glazers ownership, they seem convinced there is someone out there who is willing to meet the Glazers asking price rumoured to be £5 billion. They are now citing the guy who owns Spotify who may be prepared to pay just under £2 billion as an example of people still willing to invest.

They are not factoring in that Arsenal have a state of the art Stadium rather than a Meccano set, they are based in London rather than in downtown Trafford. There fans have seen a decline in their status over the last 10 years but have never broken into the ground and assaulted the police in order to postpone a game, because they are sat in 2nd place and in the semi final of the Europa League and splashing cash out for the Likes of Pogba and Slabhead. Any owner buying either club would be expected by the fans to invest heavily on top of this initial outlay and in the Rags case it appears they resent an owner taking any dividend on their investment.

Considering Arsenal are potentially £3 billion cheaper to buy and have no debt to service and no major stadium renovation to factor in then it is clear why they are the more attractive option.

As a club they are now eating themselves.
 
You have to just laugh at the Rags with their view on the Glazers ownership, they seem convinced there is someone out there who is willing to meet the Glazers asking price rumoured to be £5 billion. They are now citing the guy who owns Spotify who may be prepared to pay just under £2 billion as an example of people still willing to invest.

They are not factoring in that Arsenal have a state of the art Stadium rather than a Meccano set, they are based in London rather than in downtown Trafford. There fans have seen a decline in their status over the last 10 years but have never broken into the ground and assaulted the police in order to postpone a game, because they are sat in 2nd place and in the semi final of the Europa League and splashing cash out for the Likes of Pogba and Slabhead. Any owner buying either club would be expected by the fans to invest heavily on top of this initial outlay and in the Rags case it appears they resent an owner taking any dividend on their investment.

Considering Arsenal are potentially £3 billion cheaper to buy and have no debt to service and no major stadium renovation to factor in then it is clear why they are the more attractive option.

As a club they are now eating themselves.
The irony is that their thuggish and self-entitled fan base has probably helped to make a sale harder, by putting off potential buyers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.