rss twitter facebook mobile

Club’s Not So Subtle Hint – No Green & Gold Banners In Milan

The Manchester United website launched a not so subtle warning ahead of our away leg against AC Milan next week. With protests being lined up for both games against the Italians, our club are clearly in a panic over what might happen.

As not to be embarrassed in front of the eyes of the world, the club has informed our fans that they are wasting their time in planning any green and gold flags for the San Siro.

“Flags not in club colours may not be allowed into the San Siro.”


About Scott

Scott is the editor of Red Matters - 50 Years of Supporting Manchester United and an author of Play Like Fergie's Boys and Not Nineteen Forever. He writes for ESPN, The Metro and Bleacher Report. Follow @R_o_M on Twitter.

View all posts by Scott »

 

235 Comments

  1. aig alex is god says:

    ghtt

    agree but then consider the situation now and also consider that we are United so we have to pay some 3-5 million pounds extra compared to other clubs.With City, Madrid,Chelsea and Barcelona willing to spend for every talented player there will be a bidding war and we may risk losing out everytime. There will be very few players for whom we wont face competition from other clubs.The current situation looks like it will stay for a few more years, so if we want to sign top players we will have to pay a bit over the top.

  2. Gotta hate tiny tears says:

    So I Guess I Might Get A Tattoo Saying
    Alex Is god
    In Sir Alex we Trust
    Shame Sir Alex Is A Corporate Brown Nose Sell Out That Always Liers To Us Stupid Fans

  3. aig alex is god says:

    @ghtt

    Sir Alex is not lying to us but the club arent supporting him financially which is obviously there to be seen.Because we are winning this thing isnt coming out now but God Forbid if we dont win anything this season and are found wanting in certain areas all fans will want him to spend and depending on the situation we will realise the truth.As i said earlier no point debating about it now, well see in the summer.

    At no point have i used the word liar so i cant see where that has come from. All i am saying is all the facts havent been presented before the fans by the club, not Sir Alex.

  4. willierednut says:

    I see wat your saying aig, fred done has said SAF is working with his hands tied behing his back, but he’s only known the boss for donkey years, wat wud he know.

  5. King Eric says:

    Aig – How do you know for definate Fergie hasn’t the money? He feels the squad is strong enough and in the main I am inclined to agree. Cannot see him splashing 10-12 million as reported on a young Chris Smalling in January. Thats a fair bit of money for an unproven talent. You may of course be right mate only time will tell. The summer like you say.

  6. King Eric says:

    willierednut – Hi mate. I don’t pay much attention to Fred Done. Not a fan of him to be honest. I remember him saying we were fucked back in December on talkshite.

  7. Wakey says:

    @Costas

    The PLC was ‘broken’ in a way. It wasn’t able to be efficient in the marketplace and wasn’t able to take full advantage of the opertunities. Turnover and Profit have both more than doubled and while some of thats Ticket prices being brought more in line to our Rivals (Liverpool especially) and some of its the improved TV deal a large part of it has come down to opening up new commercial opertunties and also making the club itself more efficient. Its the fact it was ‘Broken’ that made it a takeover target as people saw the chance to improve it as a business.

    And I have to ask why should they explain their plans in full detail? Both the Glazers and Gill have said they have it under control and even their bond issue made it clear that spending on top class players to enhance the squad was essential and would still be done BUT people choose to ignore that so what exactly would laying out the whole plan and hindering the clubs ability to operate at full efficiency do?

    As for your examples of things not being done under the Radar. Tevez’s deal was fairly under the radar. For over a year all that was being heard was that we were signing Torres. The Tevez deal was actually a bit of a shock and the only reason it seems to have dragged on was due to the complex nature of his ownership which to get everything agreed and rubber stamped by the FA took time. Hargreaves was also initially a bit of a shock move, Bayern leaked it to the press as they often do to push fees up and get bidding wars going.

    And I didn’t say it stopped us buying players persay, it just made it harder for us to get the players we wanted without other teams getting wind and pushing the price up. And we did miss out on players due to the PLC. Robben and Ronaldinho are two that jump to mind

  8. Wakey says:

    @aig alex is god

    There is a major difference between Benzema and Berbatov.

    We were battling Man City for Berbatov, a team whose only reason to join was either for the money or as a fall back. Berbatov did not want to join them. It was also debatable how much higher City could go with the buyout happening so late in the day.

    With Benzema we were battling Real for him. Real is one of the the elite clubs in the world who many players would like to goto. Which one of United or Real is bigger really depends on where you come from. Our Offer had already exceeded the price of Berbatov but he Benzema has expressed that he wanted to join Real (While he has since said he would have been happy to join us if he had to choose he was always going to choose Real). So to get him we would have had to outbid Real, based on their last offer for Villa that figure was going to be over £45million.

    And no he probally doesn’t have the full 80mill as money was spent during the summer. We bought players in the summer and the available money doesn’t just have to pay the transfer fee but also the signing on fees and the likes for signing players.

    “SAF and gill said that real offered more money, they did not say that he wanted to join Real which possibly could have been the case.not denying it.”

    We tried to steal a march on Real while they were trying for Villa and had an offer accepted by Lyon. Benzema had spent all summer stating he wanted to play for Real though and it had to be concluded quickly, Lyon then tipped their hat by confirming that they had accepted an offer that wasn’t from Real. A combination of Lyon releasing a statement saying they had accepted an offer from a club that wasn’t Real and Benzemas people holding the deal up to get Real to put a bid in saw real Gazzump us and the only way we were ever going to get a player who declared it was his dream to play for Real was to outbid them so we were the only offer on the table. That was going to be 45mill

    “The tevez transfer was due to be completed in summer of 2008 or jan 2009″
    Actually according to Kia there was nothing more than an informal agreement on the table. When the deal was concluded or how much was never in the terms just ball park figures suggested. So I doubt it was actually budgeted for

    “What is this new rule that we wont go in for expensive signings over 26 years, when that is the age when players are supposed to peak?”

    I doubt its a rule thats set in stone but lets be honest its not a bad rule of thumb. You don’t want to be paying top dollar for a player at his peak who it would suggest is only going to get worse when you can pay less for the a future star that could do a decent squad job now and will be a superstar in a year. I also would imagine that its not just a ‘rule’ at united but across the board just like the “1 year contracts for those over 30″ is a general rule in the premiership

    “At no point have i used the word liar”
    You don’t need to say the word liar. He has said that he has the money to spend and chose not to and you are saying he isn’t be supposrted finacially. Thats implying he is telling lies. We bid 35mill for Benzema and paid 17mill for Valencia, 3mil for Obertan and an undiscosed fee for Diouf which would have been atleast 2mill. Thats a total of 57mill BEFORE you take into account agent fees and signing on fees. You then have to add in Owen who would have got some kind of signing fee AND the offer for Douglas Costa at an initial 7mill. And in Jan we obviously signed Smalling for 12mill (And we may very well have signed Dodo in the summer for £5mill although we will have to wait till he is old enough to sign before we know if it did go through or if United pulled out due to the pressure from Football authorties)

  9. Wakey says:

    @Costas
    “Sorry, I took his word when he said he wouldn’t sell Real a virus”

    When he said that though I think it was in the heat of the moment. In reality when a player wants to go and you have a firm offer at the level Real put in I don’t think you could really let principles get in the way. Look at Villa with Barry where they they lost out on an offer of 15mill + Steve Finnan for principles and were then forced to sell him for just 12mill the season after

  10. Paul Parker says:

    Good Points Wakey

    Still don’t like the Bastards tho, lol. I agree with why the owners and Gill have no desire to reveal their financial plans in full. Of course they don’t.
    BUT… I still feel that the G and G campaign should continue to apply pressure on United until they “improve” their public relations operation, because at the moment they’re really taking the piss.
    By that I mean, Gill shouldn’t be taking a defensive approach in his statements and interviews, he should understand our concerns and reassure us not show his frustration and criticise us. If we really ARE only 300m in debt he should constantly dismiss the counter claims of 700m as complete and utter bollocks, because lets be honest, how many rank and file fans understand the inner workings of a ONE BILLION POUND STIRLING GIANT LIKE MANCHESTER UNITED? I sure for one don’t.
    the majority of fans have no clue about these issues and simply want FACTS so they can feel reassured. So rather than take the high road Gill should turn on the charm and be honest and patient with the Fans, this level of debt is new for us and the MEDIA isn’t helping either. If Gill and the Owners addressed the basic questions and concerns he would bring more stability to the Club. Its so simple, him not doing it is suspicious for some.
    And THATS why I support G and G at the games.
    The Owners needs to understand and acknowlege that this issue is dividing the club, and we want CLARIFICATION. The BBC interview is a step in that direction, but its not enough unfortunately, and even tho I understand them not wanting to disclose their finances, I think that the situation is deteriorating enough for them to make an exception. If the club has reduced the Principle from 500 odd million to 300m then he needs to be clear on that. Crystal Clear. Saying it in a BBC interview would be enough under normal situations, but this isn’t normal, so he needs to be pressured into changing the defensive approach the Owners have towards the Fans. He needs to improve the public relations and turn on the charm offensive, because not doing so is becoming more and more detrimental.

    But like I said good points Wakey, the problem is, WHY should the average fan have to delve into the internet on sites such as this to glean pieces of information to make up a full picture? Why should the average fan have to know what YOU know, per se? That BBC interview was far too defensive, Gill needs to do an interview with the Papers with tought questions and DEFINITIVELY PROVE that the current debt is 300 million like he said. That information alone would change the atmosphere at the club – just knowing there has been a reduction of debt would force everybody crying that United are on the brink of Oblivon to tone down the scaremongering and be more accurate with their Anti-Glazier rhetoric. I guess its like politics, where politicians continue to take the piss until they get a bloody nose. Eitherway, until the owners change their approach that, the rumours will continue….
    which is understandable, because right now, the amount of debt we owe is uncertain for most fans. whose fault is that ? the fans ? fuck off, its the OWNERS fault, cos they’re the ONLY ONES in a position to put us all in the picture… or risk the wrath of “disgruntlement” from the SUPPORTERS.

  11. Costas says:

    @Wakey

    As far as Ronaldinho goes, I think it was Peter Kenyon fucking up more than anything. We got cocky, PSG got fed up and chose a different club. The Berbatov case almost had a similar outcome. Luckily for us, City got into the game too late and Berba had already made up his mind. As far as Tevez and Hargreaves go, things were never going to remain a secret. Not the way the transfer maket operates now. Look at how long it took to sign Smalling. Clubs and agenst will always look to bring as many players to the game as possible.

    Say you are a neutral. On one hand, you have Davig Gill, a man who was against the takeover at first, and the Glazers, whom you know very little about, just saying that everything is ok. On the other hand, you have papers and financial analysts giving you detailed analysis about the status of the club. Who is easier to believe? Man United is a private company. They want to operate in a secretive manner? It’s their prerogative. They can’t expect fans to buy into everything they say though. And contrary to what United fans might feel quite often, reporters don’t wake up in the morning thinking of ways to destroy us.

    The last 4-5 years have been very profitable, but the club won’t always be this succesful. Also, you can’t keep increasing seasont icket prices without a cost. And that’s why I am asking what is their backup plan. Because they will need it at some point. Things won’t always be so rosey. I want to believe that they have a plan to keep the squad strong, but where are the contract extensions for talismatic players like Fletcher, Evra, Rooney and Vidic? I won’t say anything about transfer yet, because I am on a wait and see basis for the summer transfer market.

  12. Costas says:

    @Wakey

    About Ronaldo now. Principles don’t mean much, I agree. But if Calderon’s comments are to be believed, we had already agreed to sell him at the time the virus comment was made. So either Fergie didn’t know the full story, or he was lying. I find it hard to belive that he didn’t know at the time that Real would come back fo Ronaldo with that kind of offer.

  13. rooney the new king says:

    Wakey – when you look back on it now united should have kept with tevez and let shitty make complete idiots of themselves by buying berbatov, who would have suited the dumb transfers they were buying.

    has for that ass colderon he is saying this to get more attention because he is such an awful president I would not take any notice, fergies comments I wont sell that mob a virus was aimed at calderons camp not madrid in general.

    well the glazers are worryed and aint it disgusting they sack a steward of 19 years who was against their ownership.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/manchester_united/article7021240.ece

    and whats with gills debt comments united are in 300 million of debt if that was the debt why dont they just pay the entire debt off at once.

  14. Costas says:

    @RTNK

    Well as they say, you don’t cross the boss. It sucks for the steward, but I didn’t expect any better. Anyway, why would Calderon come out and lie about this? What’s in it for him? If the deal to sign Ronaldo was made before the summer of 09, then we did do business with Calderon.

  15. Dave Mack says:

    Costas … to answer your question… I didn’t say that being American make the Glazers bad owners, nor did I suggest that you said it.
    I was simply trying to address something that has been said directly in various posts on this site or inferred when they are accussed of “not understanding the English football culture” or “not having love of the club in their hearts” or the fact that they “refer to the club as a franchise” or that “the red knights would at least understand us” etc etc.

    My point being is that good owners understand how to invest and run a global sporting enterprise and whether they are from Manchester or Montana should have no baring on it.

    In all honesty I much prefer the Glazers to Chelski or Shity’s ownership not because they are Russian or Middle Eastern but because they interfer in football matters.

    What protest did you see at the bridge when their sugar daddy removed their most succesful and loved manager because of personality issues and unwillingness to allow interference in transfer or team selection matters?

    It’s ironic that United who have arguably the least interferring ownership in the league, the ones that are most supportive of the manager and vice-a versa is the one that is be subjected to an aggresive “owners out” campaign. Makes you wonder whose manipulating who and why?

    LU -IFIT

  16. rooney the new king says:

    Costas – well it shows the glazers are worried and the protests against them are growing every hour of everyday.

    - Cmon this muppet calderon is just begging for attention he wants to get any kind of legacy he can get from madrid its what clutching at straws. if it ment he was part of ronaldos transfer he will thinke has something gain if it ment air imeoreoney pafor his story he will. So if ronaldo creates legendary status at madrid and ronaldo is part of madrids golden era of the new bullshit gallacticos legacy, which is going to fail. say its a success? calderon will say I played my part making it happen. you will be suprised what ends guys like calderon will go to get attention, he is like some ugly elephant man version of paris hilton well maybe not that ugly but you get my interpritation he just wants the lime light simmple has that.

  17. Costas says:

    @Dave Mack

    Didn’t take it personally. I see what’s happened. I remember Paul H(i think it was) saying a story about an American asking if the protests revolved around the fact that the Glazers are Americans. And I honestly can’t understand how that notion came along. There might be a few daft people here or there who think like that, but it’s a non issue for me. For one thing, you don’t have to be a fan to run a club in a succesful manner.

    It’s true that the Glazers haven’t interfered. But has that theory been put to the test? Who would interfere with Sir Alex’s work anyway? Chelsea fans on the other hand, didn’t have much to look forward to until the Russian came in. He revived them, so their loyalty with him, not Mourinho. Besides, what do you expect from Chelsea fans? They still think Terry is the best England Captain ever!

  18. Costas says:

    @RTNK

    Calderon is a twat either way. No debating that. But when do you think the decision to sell Ronaldo was made? Not that it matters a great deal nowdays, just curious. Personally, I feel that we decided to sell him about 6-8 months before he signed for Real.

  19. rooney the new king says:

    Dave Mack – well for me I prefure neither the shitty chelski and our ownership. I dont care what wakey says for me a fans ownership is the only way forward long term for united. unless a rich owner with bottemless pockets who does not interfier and spends wisley on tranfers and wages then a fans ownership is the only model for me, bcause when a owner leaves you want a ownershiip that will be debt free and knows how to spend wisley and run the club profesionally so the club wnt get into sticky situations, and with the money the club makes fans ownership in this era of football will be perfect.

  20. rooney the new king says:

    Costas – na united did not agree at the time. I think united and ronaldo in august 2008 propably agreed we will sell you a year later but keep it qiuet we just want another year out of you and get to 18 league titles, and a chance to make history try and defend the european cup and be the first club to do it in the CL format, it was just the carrot and goal to keep him here for one more year.

  21. Costas says:

    @RTNK

    Yeah, I kind of feel the same. I just think that we informed Real about this. Or at least Ronaldo did. That’s why I don’t believe that Calderon is talking out of his ass this time. Fergie was right to deny the reports at the time. Just shouldn’t have been so defiant.

    Anyway, it’s 2:35 am over here mates, so I am going to say goodnight to all. Lets hope tomorrow at the same time we will be top of the league.

  22. Red Devil says:

    @ Wakey, mack etc

    You know what guys…. you can keep trying to defend the glazers as if they were saints.
    Both of us can keep coming up with points to counter each other and this debate can drag on endlessly for ages.

    For instance-
    We didnt miss out on robben and Ronaldinho because we were a PLC, we lost out because Peter Kenyon was an over-smart idiot, the players wanted to play elsewhere(ronaldinho) or were simply offered more money(robben)
    If you are trying to imply that there were information leakages due to being a PLC, the same thing can be said about Berbatov and Chris Smalling deal in the Glazer regime, where the only reason we won was that the players were wanting to play for us and that we were prepared to pay extra sums to get them, both in case of berbatov and smalling.

    You keep saying we made profits after the interest payments…I certainly dont see any profits in the accounts of red football ltd last couple of years…excpet if take into account the Ronaldo money which as I said is not gonna happen every year.

    So as you see, I can accuse you of lying and perpetuating and spreading lies just as much as you can accuse me of scare-mongering.

    Do not try to misrepresent facts to suit your own end. I am not scare-mongering, I am just facing up to the facts for what they are, not trying to bury my head in the sand and hope that everything turns out alright.

    As Paul parker right points out, if indeed things are so hunky-dory, why dont they come out and be TRANSPARENT about it…why be afraid to come clean, where are they investing the surplus funds to generate astronomical returns greater than the PIK debt? just tell everybody so that we can all rest in peace!

  23. aig alex is god says:

    @Wakey

    I get your point. However there are some things i am worried about. Fair enough on the Benzema thing. He had stated he wanted to play for Real since the summer of 2008 and even though SAF and gill said Real paid more the reality must have been they let it go due to him wanting to play for Real.

    Also 80 million from the Ronaldo sale and 20 million which is his budget for the window,that makes it 100 million.We have spent approx 35 million on valencia,obertan,diouf and Smalling so there should still be 65 million plus the 20-25 miilion SAF is given every transfer window.Now will he get 90 million in the summer to spend?. Remains to be seen

    Therefore the summer will give us a clearer indication of the issue.With Scholes nearing the end and we havent yet replaced him(anderson was supposed to do that but hasnt) and Berba and Owen not having done as well as expected and the constant speculation surrounding Vidic SAF certainly will have to spend in the summer to strengthen the team.

    SAF has said he has money to spend. Has he ever said how much? which is what my concern is.so you cant blame him at all. Hardly expect him to reveal that amount but if the Glazers say he has all the Ronaldo money to spend, they must back their words and give him all the funds he needs.

  24. aig alex is god says:

    @King Eric

    Not definite by any means but i have my doubts especially with some new shocking financial revelations coming out every week that suggest we arent in the best position financially.The smalling transfer suggest otherwise although the picture will become crystal clear in the summer.

    Hope i am wrong and SAF has money to spend. Whether he wants to is his choice of course,who knows better than him but i feel this summer he will have to spend and spend quite a bit.

  25. King Eric says:

    Aig – Morning mate . Yeah thats just it though, DOES Fergie need to spend big? I ain’t so sure. Of course a lot depends on if Edwin and Scholesy call it a day. Will Ando step up. Will Diouf be an answer? Nani looks a different player? The twins? Will Cleverley and James provide options? So much talent coming through I am not so sure Fergie needs to spend big. Maybe one or two players thats all. Most of our spine are only still late twenties as well. Fletch, Carrick, Vida (if he stays) and Wazza only 24. Our squad is still excellent.

  26. Wakey says:

    @King Eric

    I doubt we will spend that big in the summer anyway because of the new squad rules in the EPL that mirror the CL rules. As the CL squad issue shows our squad is too big already and some of those on the B list now will have to be A list players.

    If any player is brought in its going to see a couple go out first so we won’t see mass spending IMHO. It will be a player or two to enhance the squad and may not even be automatic starters being signed but squad players who will grow.

  27. Wakey says:

    @Costas

    Kenyon was a factor in Ronaldinho BUT it wasn’t Kenyons own money that was being spent. He was working on instructions of having to do the best deal possible for the shareholders. Barca were also fully aware of the offer that was about to go in from us despite PSG never officially acknolowleding a fee had been agreeded until after the Barca deal had gone through. Even with Kenyons messing around we might have been able to still have pulled it off before Barca could get a bid in. Now yes Kenyons a complete tool and i’m sure if Gill was doing it he would have not only got the right deal for the Shareholders and got the deal through BUT with the PLC and the tool that was Kenyon it was always going to fall through especially when Ronaldinho had said in the past that Barca was his preference.

    On Ronaldo. Its hard to believe anything Calderon says. I suspect that he is just trying to take the credit to make his term in charge look successful. Remember he also claimed that
    1) They had agreed to sign him in the summer of 2008
    and
    2) That in the Summer of 2008 they had agreed to sign him the season after.
    Now its Decemeber 2008 when they agreed to sign him. He should make up his mind.

    “Personally, I feel that we decided to sell him about 6-8 months before he signed for Real”
    I wouldn’t be surprised if internally SAF, Gill and the Glazers decided it would be best for all parties to let him go in the Summer if he wanted to go BUT I doubt we actually agreed anything with Real until the offer came in as it did seem as if SAF still thought he could persuade him that this was the club for him (Just look at the tactics employed at the end of the season that seemed to be building the team around him as the main focal point of the attack)

    @rooney the new king
    Its not actually United sacking him though and tbh he has probally been sacked for theft. TBH i’m sure any of us would be in the same boat if we took something that had been confiscated at our workplace

    While Berba has yet to show his best it is debatable who was the better choice. Berba after all does bring something to the team that no-one else at the club has where as Tevez was really a worse version of Rooney.

    “I dont care what wakey says for me a fans ownership is the only way forward long term for united.”

    The thing is not ONE person has posted anything that proves Fan Ownership is credable. The only argument anyone ever brings up is “Barca do it” but they ignore the fact that Barcas setup is the setup of Real and even more worringly Valencia. It also ignores all the Finacial help these clubs get (As I have said before Valencia are in a finacial position that make Portsmouth look sound, yet in the summer o 2008 they could turn down £25mill for David Silva from United and then in the Summer of 2009 could turn down amounts approaching £45mill from Real and Barca for Villa).

    And remember at all these clubs Fan ownership means very little in reality. You get a vote on the president and thats pretty much all the control you have. Its the president who has paid his running fee and has guarenteed investment who then runs the club however they see fit

    And how do people think the profits are enough compete alone? And do you really think you can grow these profits at a decent rate under fan ownership. Is a Fan ownership going to be ok keeping ticket prices at the current price or even increasing them OR are they going to demand they are reduced knocking millions off the turnoever. Will they have the contacts and the business knowledge to open up new income streams. Will the have the business skills and nerve to try new things on the business front to increase turnover

    Also the Fans CANT afford to buy the club. Take the 5 biggest ‘Fan’ owned sports teams of Barca, Real, Valencia, Bilboa and Green Bay Packers and they have fewer ‘Fan owners’ than we would require just to buy the club with each person paying £1000. It would require someone else to fund most of the takeover and the amounts they would have to spend they WILL require a return and our voices will be meaningless. After all lets say the Glazers released some shares to the fans today, unless it was 51% of the shares do you think that the fans would have any real say? Ofc not.

    All those who support the Fan ownership idea are living in dreamworld just like those who think that the ‘Red Knights’ are automatically better than the Glazers. If either a Fan Ownership or the Red Knights want Fan support then it should be done on a plan thats fully detailed and based in REALITY and addresses every issue thats on the table. Until then we shouldn’t be helping destabilise the club on a pipe dream that there is a better ownership structure than we have

  28. Wakey says:

    @Red Devil
    Where is anyone making out the Glazers are saints. Despite people like you wanting to imply that we have something to do with the Glazers to help your cause and while I can’t speak for the others I certainly would in an ideal world prefer we weren’t owned by the Glazers. That doesn’t mean I should be joining the OTT reactions of the masses and the pinning hopes on Fan ownership deals that have no basis to them or in the case of MG’s are totally based in cloud cookoo land OR some ‘Red Knights’ who hide in the shadows and get their public face to encourage fans to take actions that damage the club only to reduce the price they will have to pay so that they can then make more money from the deal.

    “I certainly dont see any profits in the accounts of red football ltd last couple of years”
    Thats because the Red Football accounts don’t show a profit but those aren’t the clubs accounts. Red Football is a holding company of the Glazers setup for accountancy/management reasons. While it is linked to the clubs accounts its not the same. The club accounts show a profit. This is opposed to Liverpool where both the holding company and the clubs accounts generally have shown losses

    “Chris Smalling deal in the Glazer regime”
    I’m not sure we can say there was much leaks with that tbh. It was a deal that was done very quickly and didn’t break until it was pretty much fully agreed

    “We didnt miss out on robben and Ronaldinho because we were a PLC”
    As I said to Costa the PLC played a part. It showed our hand immdediatly. With Robben it allowed Chelsea to steal a march in getting a bid in and accepted.

    “why dont they come out and be TRANSPARENT about it”
    So now you not only want them to be transperant about the club itself BUT about their whole business empire. Tell me this would you be willing to give all your finacial records to your employees and customers? Ofc you wouldn’t.

  29. A_Red says:

    Not sure if this has already been mentioned but surely Green and Gold are still club colours!? Other wise why would we have had them during the 93/94 season? And we’re still the same club as we 1st were when set up as Newton Heath.

    LUHG

  30. willierednut says:

    1 or 2 players mite come in, if the money is there of course.

  31. rooney the new king says:

    Wakey you keep repeating yourself when in reality it can work, barca are different they are self funded while madrid are funded by the goverment.

    I hate the guy but to just say tevez is worser than rooney when tevez himself will get past 20 goals this season is poor judgment, yes he may not have the vision and the teqnique rooney has but he is still is way better than berbatov no offence. And the irony is tevez and rooney both have scored more than ronaldo and twice the amount berbatov has scored, add the fact tevez is a great impact sub overall he makes far greater impact, and he has shown his worth and in the big games like against us he was always a threat which like him or hate him you got to give him credit for which a lot of players are judged.

  32. Wakey says:

    @rooney the new king

    Barca are NOT self funded. They get aid from the Barcelona Local government and local banks just like Real do.

    Also Barca’s main funding source just like Reals comes from the vast amount of Investment (Thats Investment so has to be paid back) that the president brings in and which then gives them free reign to run the club as they wish. And once again the Fans have pretty much NO say

  33. rooney the new king says:

    Wakey – you keep downing the prospect of fans ownership when the club is making tons of money of players sales tv deals old trafford sell outs shirt sponshirship deals, united will not even have to be funded by some goverment. add the fact red knights will help towards funding the club it is far better than the freeloaders running the club who are such bad owners they make abramovich seem like angels.

  34. Red Devil says:

    @ Wakey

    i still dont see too much of a difference between the PLC deals of Robben and the Smalling deal and Berbatov deal of now. In both cases, there were information leakages which bumped up the price for us. te only difference being in this case the player was either determined to play for us (berbatov) or that we outbid Arsenal for smalling(just as we were outbid by barcelona and Chelsea for ronaldinho and Robben). So I dont think there’s too much of a difference there.

    Are the club accounts published ?? On the Man Utd site, i just found the accounts for Red Football….
    In any case if you see the holding structure, Red Football’s principle assets are the club itself and the losses of red football are after taking into account the hedge losses, management expenses relating to the club only etc. So if you pierce all the corporate veil, basically overall we are losing money as I see it and I dont see any reason to think otherwise…

    Just tell me, if a company is making just book losses without any “real” losses in actual fact, then wouldn’t it try to offer some explanation in the notes to accounts, etc to keep the stakeholders like bankers, financiers, creditors etc informed ?

    I am just trying to trust my own judgement and experience here, not some sensationalist tabloid stories…you could have known that if you had just read my article or comments carefully…..

    I have not ever tried to imply that the situation is completely out of hand, just that the way things are it is too risky from a financial prudence point of view and sincerely I dont see the cash flows to be able to pay down the debt, as well as providing enough to sustain our success. The risk of a downturn in our performances or fortunes is too huge.

    What if the club fails to qualify for europe one year—-a loss of almost 40 million in cash flows means we are barely able to pay down the interest..leave alone the principal portion of debt service….and with the holding company making huge losses I dont see them in a position to help us out.

    As for transparency, all businesses in the world have to disclose their basic dealings in an annual report….at least disclose the balance sheet depicting the true state of affairs at the club. then we can know for sure how much the net-debt is, how much cash sits in the bank accounts, where have they invested the surplus funds hoping to generate returns greater than the PIK debt (which as I already pointed out in earlier post is a very unlikely scenario as otherwise our bonds wouldn’t have been subscribed)

    I am just a fan who is worried for the club. I do not like the way the Glazers have been piling on the excessive leverage, which you surely must agree is excessive by any stretch of the imagination.

  35. Haakon says:

    @aig alex is god

    Gill said we had £55m to spend.

LEAVE YOUR COMMENT BELOW

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Log in with your Facebook or Twitter account: