http://football.guardian.co.uk/breakingnews/story/0,1273,-3172435,00.html That's one way to beat Champion's World at their game. (Thanks to Aris for pointing this out.)
If Uncle Phil managed to buy man u, could he then, if he chose, move them to the U.S. and MLS? Kinda like the Dodgers got moved from Brooklyn? Even theoretically, would it be possible? And frankly, wouldn't it make the team more profitable? If they sold out Giant Stadium every game, wouldn't that bring in more money than Old Trafford?
Man Utd/Anschutz Let's see, AEG owns half of MLS and Man Utd? Isn't he up on securities charges? Sounds like a load of cobblers to me!
You, however, are apparently brilliant for making a statement on a topic I never even addressed. I am aware that others are supposedly interested in buying the team. My question was - if someone (Phil, in this particular theory) bought the team, would he then have the right to move it if he so chose? Even out of the country? If you care to answer, rather than call names, I'd appreciate your thoughts.
how can he move man u? so they can nolonger play in the champions league and only in the 10 team mls? use your brain sir!
So in other words, you weren't being facetious? That's frightening. Asking if Phil could move MUFC out of the City of Manchester -- let alone the totally insane idea of moving them to the USA -- is like asking if you could push your own excrement back up your ass with a plunger. Perhaps you technically could, but why would you ever want to?
I heard a rumor that Michael Keaton is going to buy a Scottish team and move them to Dublin. Are there any laws governing this sort of thing? - Paul
There is also a Rupert Murdock trying to buy ManU rumor brewing. According to some message board some guy said it's all over Australian papers. Rupert was trying to buy ManU a few years ago but didn't succeed.
He has no thoughts of moving Man Utd. out of Manchester. He will just be using Man Utd. as a farm club for the Galaxy.
Jeez, a little vitrolic - aren't we? I figured, as long as we were rumormongering, why not get even more fantastical with the possibilities? See who it freaks out. But it's also a valid question, NO MATTER HOW UNLIKELY. It's not like Man U has done well in CL lately - and there's only a couple of teams that can ever seem to challenge their hold on the EPL, and they always seem to choke. So who's to say a visionary decides that in one fell swoop he'll bring legitimacy to MLS by bringing in the top team from England? And if the idea drives you crazy, whose sucker are you?
Re: Man Utd/Anschutz femfa, please, for the love of God, tell me you are joking. I always wonder about guys like this. This is his 3rd post in the 2 years since he's joined. You'd figure it would be something special to get him to take the plunge. But it's 3 short sentences. I'm not criticizing the sentences. You'd just think that if a guy had an "annual post" schedule, each post would be dynamite.
So what's your theory then on someone who has 7,616 posts in four years. To be fair, 5,719 of those posts were reminding people of FIFA's rules against the international transfer of children, but...
SHHHH, davey, the joke's no fun if you fess to it! I was actually meaning to tease dark knight a little - since he's from Brooklyn - with a reminder of that infamous move. Which did happen, though many swore it never would. A country and league move, I've never seen - but Man U likes to claim it makes history all the time, no? If Phil bought the team, why wouldn't he want to keep all his toys in one playground? (the U.S.)
Re: Man Utd/Anschutz No he is not up on any secruities charges. He payed 3 million dollar fine and its over and done with. He is also the largest shareholder of Union Pacific railroad and Forest Oil as well as PEP Energy INC. Lets not forget Qwest and Regal Cinemas as well. IF anyone could do it he could.
Moving clubs out of country Any such move must be approved by the FA (Federation) that club is a member of, e.g. a Scottish club must get permission from the S.F.A. A few years ago Sam Hamman floated the rumor that he was willing to move Wimbledon to Dublin. It was shot down faster than a biplane.
I don't think there's anything in this. Shareholders United will make this an unattractive option for any wouldbe bidder.
Since Man U is a public-trading company, I think, which behaves like a stock, thus anyone can buy a piece of that company. Uncle Phil might buy a piece of it, 10% maybe if it is doable. The more people wanting to buy a stock, the higher the value will be. With Uncle Phil connection to SUM, Regal Entertainment, and Concert Venues, and of course MLS, Man U will probably be one of the best marketed foreign sport club in America (not that it is not number 1 already) just by making it more than it is already so. I don't think Uncle Phil can be the majority owner of Man U though. But it looks like a good investment since if Man U can crack into the US market, its value will go up by 25% if not more. Owning Man U could provide extra matches for his future Soccer Specific Network. (cable TV)
At the moment, it's probably somebody could get about 45% of the stock, but not controlling interest in the club. I posted something on the Shareholders United plans on this here: https://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=72136
There are two ways Phil can be the majority owner. 1. ManU board decides to sell him the team. 2. Hostile take over. He tries to buy all the shares he can. Phil can buy the team and turn the team into private. Public companies can become private. One example is Seagate. They use to be a public company with stock being trade in Nasdaq, but now you can't buy their stock because they turned private after a person buys the whole company.