When the Glazer sons first came to old trafford to look at the stadium they thought it was going to be a peacefull affiar.....it was anything but that......as you could see from the protesters outside, no one wanted them there. this just goes to show the hate that Man. United fans have for the glazers..i think that he will totaly ruin the club and its reputation and even though i strongly dislike Man. United (being an Arsenal fan) i am sad to see the club fall into such unworthy hands.....but like i said i am an Arsenal fan. All i have to say is "good luck Malcom Glazer"-----your going to need it Arsenal - all hail the gunners
1. Of course you would. 2. Who am I to say that subjective values are dependent upon the individual frame of reference? Um, I'm Ian.
I think you're basically right about this. I think there may be a fundamental misunderstanding on Glazer's part, however, about MarketingUtd's value and where it comes from. I think he thinks it has intrinsic value no matter what product is on the field (hence reports of his transfer funds limitations, etc.) whereas the reality is that the value of MerchandisingUtd (or any team) is directly contingent on its results on the pitch. All that being said, I take some guilty pleasure knowing that so many MarketingUtd supporters are so razzed by the takeover.
Somehow I get the feeling that the billionaire venture capitalist might have done a wee bit more research into his investment than you're giving him credit for. Of course, if you have any direct quotes you'd like to share to prop up your opinion I will gladly reverse my statement.
Doubtful he does......I believe he's just saying that the dude has figured out how to make himself rich.....rich enough to buy United. Therefore, while he may not know much about football.....he's still probably smarter than a lot of people are giving him credit for.
I'm not a manu fan so it doesn't really interest me beyond the level of trivial conversation. At first I thought it was funny that manu was getting a taste of the old "live by the sword, die by the sword" thing, but now I'm just really sick of it all. I didn't post in this thread to "support" Glazer; I'm perfectly capable of poking fun at Frankgarrison's and your statements without doing so. Really, my comments have nothing to do with the Glazier debate at all; you said something ridiculous and I laughed at it, Frank decided to tell us where MG's gone wrong through what seems to be pure speculation of what Glazer's thinking, which I also laughed at. Actually, come to think of it, on some level I do back Glazer. Manu was a publicly traded commodity and you, he and I had every right to purchase it for ourselves. The impact that it has on the club is irrelevent to the right he had to purchase it. The club's board was well aware of this risk when it offered shares over a decade ago and could have easily limited the number of shares offered to prevent this "problem;" it's not Glazer's fault that they were too greedy and shortsighted to do so. To prevent him from purchasing publicly sold shares simply because the fans don't like him would seem like a civil rights violation to me. (Rupert Murdoch's blocked attempt at buying the club being an altogether different situation). All those fans should shut the fvck up, apologise to the Glazer boys and go picket outside the homes of the board members who were actually responsible for the current situation. So, mt, do you back glazer or are you in favor of "selective" sales? ... And please, feel free to make fun of me in return, it's only a messageboard after all, but I'd appreciate it if you could at least be either relevant or funny. "Sam's army spazzo?" Where did I say that Glazer bought the club to be a talent feeder for the vastly superior MLS?
I support him, it can either be an effect like that of Abramovich and so be good for English football or it could ruin Man United, either way Im happy!
nah, i agree with you. it's the clubs fault for making the club a PLC and to be fair he had every right to buy the club. but someone like glazer is bad for the sport because he's destroying what a club is all about a loyal relationship with the fans, and he's taking it away from them. and yes, selectively choosing who buys the club is a good idea in some cases, and this being one of them. this glazer guy cares ******** all about manchester united he's only interested in making himself money. and you don't know me, if this was our club he was taking over i would fucking lose it.
The emotional fan in me can totally empathize, but why should anyone other than the owners of the shares be the "selecters?" And who exactly gets to enforce this type of thing? The FA? The government? How would you like it if the cops or - ha - Ford stopped you from selling your Mustang to an old woman because they felt she wouldn't appreciate it? Think of the potential ramifications in terms of price-fixing or racism/sexism/etc-ism that could ensue. But you're right, I don't know much about you other than some posts on a messageboard, and I don't doubt that you'd "lose it," but I really really reallly really really doubt that you'd ever actually do anything to hurt a billionaire American if one were to magically acquire the Arsenal. I'd explain my beliefs, but I've already written far too much over a flippant comment.
He's only doing what the board gave him the oppurtunity to do when they floated the club, so if anybody's responsible for taking the club away from the fans then it can only be the board that decided to float it. You reap what you sow and all that ********. KJ