United Thread - 2023/24

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kinkybyname said:
The UK Government is not expected to use taxpayer money to pay for Manchester United to build a new stadium, i has been told.
Speaking publicly for the first time since purchasing a £1.2bn stake in the club, billionaire Sir Jim Ratcliffe insisted this week that "there has to be a conversation with the national government" about using taxpayer funds to build a venue that could also act as a national stadium for the north.
However, government sources have told i: "It's just not something we'd entertain. The Government doesn't tend to fund football stadiums. Where would it end?"
After taking over football operations of the club from the unpopular Glazer family, who remain majority owners, Ratcliffe is exploring options to deal with the club's ageing stadium.
Old Trafford, still the country's largest club stadium with a capacity of 74,000, is falling into disrepair and solutions include renovating it or building an entirely new venue on nearby land.
Renovation would cost about £800m and increase the capacity towards 90,000, whereas an entirely new venture would cost up to £2bn. Ratcliffe, 71, would prefer the latter option and made an impassioned plea that people who pay tax in the north deserve a stadium that can host England games and major finals.
"The people in the north pay their taxes like the people in the south pay their taxes," Ratcliffe, who was born in Greater Manchester but in 2020 officially relocated to taxfree Monaco, said. "But where's the national stadium for football? It'sin the south. Where's the national stadium for rugby? It's in the south. Where's the national stadium for tennis? It's in the south. Where's the national concert stadium? It's the O2, it's in the south. Where's the Olympic Village? It's in the south."
But a source maintained that "it would raise integrity issues" if the Government paid for it.
Comparisons have been drawn by some to the public purse being used to pay for Manchester City's stadium and the Olympic Stadium, now occupied by West Ham United. Manchester City Council sought to build a stadium to host the 2002 Commonwealth Games and agreed to collaborate with City, who paid around £14m of the £150m cost.
Last year, David Bernstein, City's chairman at the time, told i: "We did an amazing deal for the stadium. It was the greatest deal of its time in football. We managed to get Sport England and the City Council and others to virtually pay for the whole thing. They were desperate to get a proper stadium for Commonwealth Games."
Tax expert Dan Neidle told i he hoped Ratcliffe's idea was given short thrift by the Government. "It's very common in the US for sports teams to essentially blackmail local and state governments into paying for new facilities," he said. "Often they threaten to move if they don't get the money. That's never happened here - not least because Manchester United is not about to move to Liverpool. So I very much hope Ratcliffe is ignored."
Ratcliffe has also drawn criticism for asking for taxpayer money to build a stadium for a football club he bought his 28 per cent stake in via a company based in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe purchased his shares in Manchester United via
Trawlers Limited, which a United States Securities and Exchange Commission document describes as "a company limited by shares incorporated under the laws of the Isle of Man". It means Ratcliffe would pay no capital gains tax in the UK upon selling his shares.
View attachment 107956
Click to expand...
Let's just go over this again.
 
r.soleofsalford said:
I don’t want the cunts to have any excuses.
Click to expand...
They can play the under 7's for me, in years to come only the result stands nobody will remember the teams/circumstances....it's only us the moan about the offside Rashford goal and that was only recently.

To summarise, 25-0 v rags under 7's is not being disrespectful it's being professional and not giving a sucker and even break.
 
They can share FCScums ground in moston while they rebuild.

I mean it is full of petulant nited fans anyway
 
Scuffy Jim has a track record of getting Government funding to support his enterprises
His INEOS Automotive company who plagiarized the Land Rover Defender obtained funding for the production facility and in the press release said what a great opportunity to support british talent and workers remember that he was a big supporter of the UK leaving the EU

INEOS Group Chairman Sir Jim Ratcliffe said: “We have looked long and hard at possible manufacturing locations for Grenadier across the world with lots of good options to choose from. The decision to build in the UK is a significant expression of confidence in British manufacturing, which has always been at the heart of what INEOS stands for.”

Just 15 (fifteen) months later

What “INEOS stands for” quickly evaporated

Hambach France 8 December 2020

“Hambach France presented us with a unique opportunity that we simply could not ignore, to buy a modern automotive manufacturing facility with a world-class workforce" It's also just up the road from my Monaco tax haven​

Scuffy Jim RATcliffe, INEOS Group Chairman


He had billed his venture into car production as a boost for the industry in the UK and was handed £150,000 in government funding for green for the project as part of a competition to develop zero-emissions vehicles.

Sir Jim, whose personal fortune is estimated at £12.2bn, has previously lobbied the government to reduce green taxes and slash restrictions on fracking – the controversial method of extracting fossil fuels in which Ineos has heavily invested.

Scuffy Jim is in everything for himself and his rag investment is no different, a fake rag who moved from Oldham age 10, to live in Yorkshire has houses in the south of England Switzerland and Monaco

Jamie Wallis, MP for Bridgend said he was "very disappointed" at this week's news.
He said: "I am disappointed and sad to hear the news that Ineos has abandoned its planned investment in Bridgend which is a massive blow to the local economy and Wales as a whole.
"I have been in touch with the company throughout this process and this decision is one I am deeply disappointed about, not least for those who had hoped to regain employment after the Ford factory closure.
"This investment was due to create many jobs in my Bridgend constituency and with the closure of the Ford Factory, this is leaving even more families worried about where their next pay packet may come from.
"The workforce in Bridgend are a highly-skilled and able workforce and this decision is in no way a reflection of their determination and hard work for Ford over the years."

On Twitter, Mr Wallis added: "The Welsh Government needs to reclaim all of our money it has spent on the site for them and send the bill to Ineos."

It is understood the Welsh Government had spent around £5m on supporting the project to date.

Will the Welsh rag supporters remember what this rag did to their countrymen?
 
The name INEOS was derived from INspec Ethylene Oxide and Specialities, a previous name of the business. As of 2021, it is the fourth-largest chemical company in the world

INEOS accused of Greenwashing

www.clientearth.org

The Greenwashing Files - INEOS | ClientEarth

Advertising vs. reality - discover the greenwashing practices of INEOS
www.clientearth.org www.clientearth.org
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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.