Manchester United Teamtalk/Transfer/Gossip 23/24 - [New Thread Available]

Mitch Connor

billyhead wrote: »

Ortega family perhaps?

i know they were previously linked, but I think that was made up by sme twitter account, don't know if there has ever been any real interest.

Athletic said this morning that a person involved in brokering such deals has already received calls from America Investor groups asking about a potential sale of the club. they don't think there will be a shortage of interest.

From a selfish point of view, ideally it would be sold ASAP, cause if a sale does go into process it will massively impact signings before the sale completes.

kerplun k

paulbok wrote: »

Could they declare all individuals involved as an unfit person to be involved in running a club?

Maybe, but you can’t make them sell.
Trying to force the issue through legal means or protests or whatever would be a long drawn out affair and would be detrimental to the club with no guaranteed success. The breakdown of the ESL changed nothing. Honestly think our best way forward is to keep doing what we’ve been doing, Support the team and light the fire under the arses of the glazers when we’re not happy with a decision. Hopefully we can maintain our current trajectory and if we increase our value, they might sell. But then the question arises about the credibility of new owners. Woodward was very good at parts of his job, him leaving, or the breakdown of the ESL doesn’t change the fact that football in its current form is still f**ked.

Anyhews, we have some decent players, we could win some silverware this season and we’re playing well, that’s all I care about for now.

v3ttel

That anecdote about one of the Premier League club owners asking "which colour shirts are we playing in" if true, was infinitely more likely to be from Avram or Joel Glazer than any of the others involved with one of the six clubs IMHO.

Hopefully this protest at 3pm on Saturday goes ahead and large numbers turn up. There is never going to be a better chance to build enough momentum that will actually make them sell.

Hococop

kerplun k wrote: »

Maybe, but you can’t make them sell.
Trying to force the issue through legal means or protests or whatever would be a long drawn out affair and would be detrimental to the club with no guaranteed success. The breakdown of the ESL changed nothing. Honestly think our best way forward is to keep doing what we’ve been doing, Support the team and light the fire under the arses of the glazers when we’re not happy with a decision. Hopefully we can maintain our current trajectory and if we increase our value, they might sell. But then the question arises about the credibility of new owners. Woodward was very good at parts of his job, him leaving, or the breakdown of the ESL doesn’t change the fact that football in its current form is still f**ked.

Anyhews, we have some decent players, we could win some silverware this season and we’re playing well, that’s all I care about for now.

Might be different in usa but I remember nba forced the clippers owner to sell a few years back over racist comments I believe but might be wrong

Schism

Mitch Connor wrote: »

From a selfish point of view, ideally it would be sold ASAP, cause if a sale does go into process it will massively impact signings before the sale completes.

My first thought also. I'm sure if Woodward's priority is to facilitate a sale, it will be coming, but it also means there's no appetite for any signings whatsoever this summer from the current ownership.

Although I should say, this is perfectly acceptable if it means the Glazers are ousted.

BKtje

I have to say I would be somewhat nervous of new owners. As bad as the Glazers are it can always get worse.

Ideally there would be a fan buyout and would happily put a few grand in to buy shares though I don't see that happening

Klopp

I am convinced with Woodward now leaving who has helped the Glazers to continually bankroll their pockets from buying the Club in 2005 to the multiple million-pound commercial deals, they will sell if not already looking for buyers before he leaves, although there is nothing stopping him from continuing to work for the Glazers in another capacity.

Cookiemunster

BKtje wrote: »

I have to say I would be somewhat nervous of new owners. As bad as the Glazers are it can always get worse.

Ideally there would be a fan buyout and would happily put a few grand in to buy shares though I don't see that happening

The closest you'll get to that is if they refloat a majority of the shares on the stock market. Can't see it happening myself. If the club is sold it'll be to another Arab state fund or some American hedge fund.

Rossi IRL

Hope the government/FA implement the 50+1 rule in some way.

Would be interesting to hear them ask Gary Nev on sky if he would be happy to see it at Salford.

billyhead

BKtje wrote: »

I have to say I would be somewhat nervous of new owners. As bad as the Glazers are it can always get worse.

Ideally there would be a fan buyout and would happily put a few grand in to buy shares though I don't see that happening

Agree. The grass isn't always greener. It would be great if it was a billionaire United supporter who had success on the pitch as his priority goal.

Drumpot

Klopp wrote: »

I am convinced with Woodward now leaving who has helped the Glazers to continually bankroll their pockets from buying the Club in 2005 to the multiple million-pound commercial deals, they will sell if not already looking for buyers before he leaves, although there is nothing stopping him from continuing to work for the Glazers in another capacity.

After reflecting on these events I’m honestly not sure how things are going to go.

I’m not trying to be a negative nelly but Henry coming out grovelling and saying he’s not leaving is not a great sign. They may take this as a knockdown they can revover from and just try a more sensible approach to trying to sell their super league.

By Europa league final (if United get there) , this could be already a distant memory. If Glazers buy Kane (for example), the majority of fans will prob be appeased. It’s not an insult , it’s just a sad fact of life that these people know how to manipulate the masses to comply.

Uefa and EPL are happy to move on. There won’t be any sanctions as everybody wants these clubs on board. Unless there is systematic changes that prevent them from doing anything further why wouldn’t they try again?

Mitch Connor

billyhead wrote: »

Agree. The grass isn't always greener. It would be great if it was a billionaire United supporter who had success on the pitch as his priority goal.

I don't see how someone could justify spending 3b on a football club with the idea of making money being the main motivation - how long would it take to realise a profit on that?

My basic assumption is someone spending that money will want United to be a success and glorify them.

The issue with that is, imo, United being used to sportswash on that basis is quite high when you are looking at that level of money needed.

United as a going concern has been profitable for the Glazers but we have to remember that effectively United cost they 300million. In terms of direct money out of the club they have just made a profit this year (including the recent share sale iirc). They real money they will make, in terms, of profit comes from here forward, with the sale of the club being the big one.

EltonJohn69

Is their a dream buyer for the club ? The people who can afford it are probably not nice guys....

EltonJohn69

The Glazers apologising would do more damage then good, everybody would know it would lack any sincerity.

The Big Easy

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

Is their a dream buyer for the club ? The people who can afford it are probably not nice guys....

Someone who sees themselves as a custodian and can facilitate some kind on fan ownership model. Highly unlikely I know really the only way the club can be secure long-term.

Mitch Connor

Drumpot wrote: »

After reflecting on these events I’m honestly not sure how things are going to go.

I’m not trying to be a negative nelly but Henry coming out grovelling and saying he’s not leaving is not a great sign. They may take this as a knockdown they can revover from and just try a more sensible approach to trying to sell their super league.

By Europa league final (if United get there) , this could be already a distant memory. If Glazers buy Kane (for example), the majority of fans will prob be appeased. It’s not an insult , it’s just a sad fact of life that these people know how to manipulate the masses to comply.

Uefa and EPL are happy to move on. There won’t be any sanctions as everybody wants these clubs on board. Unless there is systematic changes that prevent them from doing anything further why wouldn’t they try again?

FSG are a group that own Liverpool, and other ventures. They have a value on that venture that is driven by Liverpool and others. Their recent share sale was sale of the FSG group, not of liverpool. So, imo, it is different. to buy Liverpool you would be buying an asset from a larger portfolio, but it also devalues the larger portfolio, so the desire to sell is less imo.

United are not tied in the same way to other Glazer ventures. Tampa Bay Bucs do not feed into an overall portfolio value along with United that people are invested in.

Glazers selling United only impacts the Glazers, profits the Glazers, and has no impact on the valuation of Tampa Bay for example.

My perspective is I don't see why the Glazers wouldn't sell.

There isn't anything on the horizon that will massively bump the value of United - so United the United sale value is probably about as high as it will get.
The money from selling, anywhere from 2.5b up would be a fair guess, would take more than 100 years for the Glazers to realise by their current dividend payments.

Quandary

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

The Glazers apologising would do more damage then good, everybody would know it would lack any sincerity.

And their silence is almost equally as damaging.

Its lose lose for them and its completely beautiful.

False Prophet

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

Is their a dream buyer for the club ? The people who can afford it are probably not nice guys....

i guess a long term supporter that buys the club to bring success to the club rather then take money out of the club.
Otherwise some billionare that has more money then sense, that will buy the club as a vanity project, then leave the management of it to football people (Ferguson, Ole etc).

EltonJohn69

Best case is probably a tech billionaire, with new money

Quandary

EltonJohn69 wrote: »

Best case is probably a tech billionaire, with new money

A tech billionaire who spends his spare time building solar powered homes for the homeless!

Lord TSC

Henry apologizing, and the Glazers not, would actually be a good sign for us, imo.

You apologize when you want the relationship to continue, but are worried about repercussions. An apology like that is because Henry and FSG seem to want to keep going with their project.

The Glazers maybe think they can weather the storm too, of course. But a lack of a public apology after such an outcry might hint more towards them looking for the escape hatch

Or maybe that's just wishful thinking...

Drumpot

Mitch Connor wrote: »

FSG are a group that own Liverpool, and other ventures. They have a value on that venture that is driven by Liverpool and others. Their recent share sale was sale of the FSG group, not of liverpool. So, imo, it is different. to buy Liverpool you would be buying an asset from a larger portfolio, but it also devalues the larger portfolio, so the desire to sell is less imo.

United are not tied in the same way to other Glazer ventures. Tampa Bay Bucs do not feed into an overall portfolio value along with United that people are invested in.

Glazers selling United only impacts the Glazers, profits the Glazers, and has no impact on the valuation of Tampa Bay for example.

My perspective is I don't see why the Glazers wouldn't sell.

There isn't anything on the horizon that will massively bump the value of United - so United the United sale value is probably about as high as it will get.
The money from selling, anywhere from 2.5b up would be a fair guess, would take more than 100 years for the Glazers to realise by their current dividend payments.

Lord TSC wrote: »

Henry apologizing, and the Glazers not, would actually be a good sign for us, imo.

You apologize when you want the relationship to continue, but are worried about repercussions. An apology like that is because Henry and FSG seem to want to keep going with their project.

The Glazers maybe think they can weather the storm too, of course. But a lack of a public apology after such an outcry might hint more towards them looking for the escape hatch

Or maybe that's just wishful thinking...

I hope you are both right and they’ve lost their bottle to hold onto control.

Woodward leaving could be just a token sacrificial lamb , but it may make it uncomfortable enough for them to be done.

beakerjoe

Lord TSC wrote: »

Henry apologizing, and the Glazers not, would actually be a good sign for us, imo.

You apologize when you want the relationship to continue, but are worried about repercussions. An apology like that is because Henry and FSG seem to want to keep going with their project.

The Glazers maybe think they can weather the storm too, of course. But a lack of a public apology after such an outcry might hint more towards them looking for the escape hatch

Or maybe that's just wishful thinking...

Its wishful thing Lordie. Lets be honest, people apologize when they want to continue a relationship, thats a true point. but the opposite isnt always through.

People, like Joel and Co, dont care so the absence of an apology doesnt mean they dont wanna continue. It means they just dont care enough to apologize.

Sure any apology would be rightly viewed as disingenuous anyway.

DM_7

namloc1980 wrote: »

That's already a rule in the Premier League rulebook. Clubs can't play in any competitions outside the UEFA competitions, Premier League, FA Cup and League Cup.

That rule book is produced for every season though. Those clubs did not enter and play in any other competitions than those approved for this season.


https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=116950468&postcount=2273

Emphasise added to post below

namloc1980 wrote: »

L.9. Except with the prior written approval of the Board, during the Season a Club shall not enter or play its senior men’s first team in any competition other than:



L.9.1. the UEFA Champions League;

L.9.2. the UEFA Europa League;

L.9.3. the F.A. Cup;

L.9.4. the F.A. Community Shield;

L.9.5. the Football League Cup; or

L.9.6. competitions sanctioned by the County Association of which it is a member.

Pay a few bob to the Liverpool, London and Manchester FAs to sanction the SL and job done.

Tchaikovsky

The pressure needs to be relentless on these bastards. Neville coming out last night and saying that the Glazers must go is a great first step and he could be a figure head for the movement that the green and gold campaign didn't really have.

It's imperative that legislation is passed, in the UK, but hopefully in the rest of Europe, that fans have majority ownership of a club. Political pressure is key I think and with the Tories being the way they are, the people need to hammer them on this to follow through. This should be seen as a big let off as football as a sport was close to being sent over the precipice. No more faceless billionaire owners calling the shots on beloved clubs.

bucketybuck

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

It's imperative that legislation is passed, in the UK, but hopefully in the rest of Europe, that fans have majority ownership of a club. Political pressure is key I think and with the Tories being the way they are, the people need to hammer them on this to follow through.

I think they should investigate the legalities of declaring certain clubs to be listed entities of cultural significance in the same way that certain historical buildings are listed and so protected.

There is a lot of history attached to some of these clubs, history that could be lost in an instance if a current owner decided to bin the whole lot of it just on a whim.

Feasible? Probably not, but what this week has shown is that regardless of its history or the emotional investment of millions of fans, that these clubs are wholly owned products that can be lost at any time.

Mitch Connor

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

The pressure needs to be relentless on these bastards. Neville coming out last night and saying that the Glazers must go is a great first step and he could be a figure head for the movement that the green and gold campaign didn't really have.

It's imperative that legislation is passed, in the UK, but hopefully in the rest of Europe, that fans have majority ownership of a club. Political pressure is key I think and with the Tories being the way they are, the people need to hammer them on this to follow through. This should be seen as a big let off as football as a sport was close to being sent over the precipice. No more faceless billionaire owners calling the shots on beloved clubs.

Don't see how you could retroactively take ownership of a business away from the people that bought it.

Can only really see an ability to demand fan representation on club boards - so that even if they don't have power of veto they are fully aware of what the club is doing and why.

Tchaikovsky

bucketybuck wrote: »

I think they should investigate the legalities of declaring certain clubs to be listed entities of cultural significance in the same way that certain historical buildings are listed and so protected.

There is a lot of history attached to some of these clubs, history that could be lost in an instance if a current owner decided to bin the whole lot of it just on a whim.

Feasible? Probably not, but what this week has shown is that regardless of its history or the emotional investment of millions of fans, that these clubs are wholly owned products that can be lost at any time.

The clubs are huge for the UK economy, as Real and Barca are for the Spanish and Catalan economies, so that should certainly be looked at. These owners are but a slight sh1t stain on the fabric of these clubs. That the Glazers and Woodward tried to do this under the noses of Sir Alex Ferguson and Sir Bobby Charlton, who is seriously unwell but is someone who survived a plane crash after representing the club in a competition he would then go on and win a decade later, is truly unforgiveable.

beakerjoe

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Don't see how you could retroactively take ownership of a business away from the people that bought it.

Can only really see an ability to demand fan representation on club boards - so that even if they don't have power of veto they are fully aware of what the club is doing and why.

Fact is, whether we like it or not, the clubs have not actually done anything wrong.

Sure they had intent, but they didnt actually play an unsanctioned minute of football.

The set our their intentions and change their minds. While no one likes their intentions or behavior, I think we all agree the owners are awful humans, the fact remains they didnt break the rules.

Daroxtar

beakerjoe wrote: »

Fact is, whether we like it or not, the clubs have not actually done anything wrong.

Sure they had intent, but they didnt actually play an unsanctioned minute of football.

The set our their intentions and change their minds. While no one likes their intentions or behavior, I think we all agree the owners are awful humans, the fact remains they didnt break the rules.

You can be jailed for just plotting to murder someone.....

loyatemu

Daroxtar wrote: »

You can be jailed for just plotting to murder someone.....

"Attempted murder of the beautiful game"

Lithium93_

https://twitter.com/utdreport/status/1384849723249643520

beakerjoe

Lithium93_ wrote: »

https://twitter.com/utdreport/status/1384849723249643520

That tells me that Joel Glazer is in it for more than the immediate future. I can just hope that Ed's replacement results in better signings.

But as long as the Glazers stay in charge, our club will be run pretty much as it has done the last 10 years

Trigger

Daroxtar wrote: »

You can be jailed for just plotting to murder someone.....

Intent is clearly defined in Law, It is not clearly defined, or defined at all in the FA/PL rules regarding this

El Gato De Negocios

Smidgen of pressure on City this evening. Drop any points and that pressure increases. Though I believe villa are without Grealish so very difficult to see them get anything.

Lithium93_

beakerjoe wrote: »

That tells me that Joel Glazer is in it for more than the immediate future. I can just hope that Ed's replacement results in better signings.

But as long as the Glazers stay in charge, our club will be run pretty much as it has done the last 10 years

One has to wonder what those at the Club on a day to day basis think of all this, from being left in the dark, and the Glazer's involvement in it, from when it broke on Sunday afternoon here, to the whole house of cards tumbling down last night.

I'd imagine, there'd be an even bigger disdain towards the Glazers. Could share holders hypothetically revolt/force the Glazers hand?

The Big Easy

It really is startling the disconnect between the owners and the players and manager in all this.

Apparently Pirlo was pro the move because he had been informed and convinced by Agnelli prior to the announcement.

That the others felt no need what-so-ever to consult with the manager even before this debacle. They really do have utter contempt for everyone involved.

Sending their managers and players out into a complete buzzsaw unprepared and unaware, no wonder they were openly revolting.

beakerjoe

Plenty of jobs have disconnect between the staff and the overall owner. Its nothing new. Most get on with it.

fergiesfolly

beakerjoe wrote: »

Plenty of jobs have disconnect between the staff and the overall owner. Its nothing new. Most get on with it.

How many senior managers are kept completely out of the loop on huge changes within their company and are then expected to give a press briefing to the world's media when unaware of all or even any of the facts.

Most of those managers would consider their position if treated so badly by their bosses.

beakerjoe

fergiesfolly wrote: »

How many senior managers are kept completely out of the loop on huge changes within their company and are then expected to give a press briefing to the world's media when unaware of all or even any of the facts.

Most of those managers would consider their position if treated so badly by their bosses.

Aye, but this isnt a regular job.

EltonJohn69

Was Woodward staring to get a hang of the job after 15 years ? The team/club structure is starting to look potentially good. Are the Glazers going to insert another marking executive that has no clue about football and sets the club back years ??? Or maybe Ole makes a power grab ?

Tchaikovsky

beakerjoe wrote: »

That tells me that Joel Glazer is in it for more than the immediate future. I can just hope that Ed's replacement results in better signings.

But as long as the Glazers stay in charge, our club will be run pretty much as it has done the last 10 years

He's done, they'll be forced out, as will the Liverpool and Arsenal owners. Fans are pissed off.

Tchaikovsky

The Big Easy

beakerjoe wrote: »

Plenty of jobs have disconnect between the staff and the overall owner. Its nothing new. Most get on with it.

But a general comparison with business and companies really does nothing to inform a very particular anomaly that is professional sport.

Where 'employees' are often paid more than their 'managers', 'CEOs' and yes sometimes, even their owners.

v3ttel

United tweet a goal that Andy Cole scored away to Leeds. Literally every reply I've read is anti-Glazer.

Hopefully people are energised enough to take the right actions to get rid of them. The green & gold movement never really had a figurehead, but if Neville or someone similar can lead it, it would make a big difference in unifying all of the different various supporters groups.

PhlegmyMoses

beakerjoe wrote: »

That tells me that Joel Glazer is in it for more than the immediate future. I can just hope that Ed's replacement results in better signings.

But as long as the Glazers stay in charge, our club will be run pretty much as it has done the last 10 years

I think that th le Glazers are in the endgame now tbh. The value has reached where it's gonna reach and 20m a year really is not much in perpetuity for an asset that has likely appreciated as much as it's going to.

Cookiemunster

Tchaikovsky wrote: »

He's done, they'll be forced out, as will the Liverpool and Arsenal owners. Fans are pissed off.

They may well sell, but none of them are going to be forced anywhere. Yes the fans are pissed, but come next season they'll be back in the grounds they haven't been able to get into for nearly two years and the owners will still be counting their billions across the Atlantic in the US.

Don't fool yourself into thinking this level of anger will last over the summer. It probably won't even last until the end of the season.

Mitch Connor

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

I think that th le Glazers are in the endgame now tbh. The value has reached where it's gonna reach and 20m a year really is not much in perpetuity for an asset that has likely appreciated as much as it's going to.

that is my view on it too.

They aren't in it for trophies, so if they are after profit their best angle for that now is selling now.

I also think selling in 2 years or so was on the cards if the ESL got going - see if that ESL participation could bump the market cap to 4b or 5b, and sell for a lot more than they will get now.

billyhead

So is the consensus a **** show of a transfer window?

Cookiemunster

billyhead wrote: »

So is the consensus a **** show of a transfer window?

When's the last time it was anything else?