rss twitter facebook mobile

INTERVIEW: AndersRed On The Red Knights, The Glazers and The Debt

The anti-Glazer protests have found a new momentum this season with green and gold taking over Old Trafford but there is as much confusion as ever in regards to what the club’s future holds.

AndersRed is a brilliant United blog which looks at our debt and Glazers in great detail. Andy, who is behind the blog, has spared a few minutes of his time to give his view on the debt and the Red Knights.

Scott the Red: How long have to been following United for?

Andy: I can’t really put a date on it, but it was sometime after the ’79 Cup Final, I was seven. My dad was in the army and we moved around a lot when I was a kid so I didn’t feel that I “came” from anywhere. His family was from Chester and nobody had heard of Chester City at my school. United were near Chester, were glamorous and different and everyone else in my little school claimed to be Liverpool or Forest supporters so it seemed a good idea. Much to my shame I didn’t start going until I left university and met a lad at my first job who was a Mancunian red stranded in London and was looking for someone to travel to OT with.

Scott: You’ve been watching the reds play for some time them. What have been your favourite moments?

Andy: 26th May 1999 as I was lucky enough to be there. Two moments that day stick in my mind, looking up and seeing the flares in our end (such an amazing sight the club put them on a credit card) and then the all night party on La Ramblas, singing “Gillingham’s a big game”, “Happy Birthday Sir Matt” and “taking over, taking over, taking over Barcelona”. That last song strayed in my head for months afterwards.

More recently the 7-1 against Roma was amazing. I’d been at the away leg and seen the police battering men, women and kids. OT wanted blood that night and the team delivered beautifully.

Scott: Your blog gives wonderfully insightful information about our ownership and the debt. How did you come to know so much about it all?

Andy: I just applied a pretty common set of skills to looking at the situation. The surprising thing is that nobody else with similar skills had bothered to do the analysis. The more I looked at what was revealed in the bond documents the angrier I got and the more I wanted to do something about it and that meant digging further and further. Whilst I get a certain satisfaction out of, I’d prefer to go back to the old days of football being an escape from the day job rather than part of it.

Scott: So, the bond issue hasn’t improved anything?

Andy: For the Glazers yes, for the club not at all. The bank debt was cheaper than the bonds and limited what dividends the Glazers could take out. Some of it was being steadily repaid (at a rate of about £5m every six months) but the rest didn’t have to be repaid until 2014-16. The terms on the bonds aren’t bad given the credit crunch but the whole bond issue was totally unnecessary.

Scott: So, can you see a way of United maintaining success whilst the Glazers are in charge?

Andy: Maybe for another season or maybe two but not in the longer term. Their business model demands success on the cheap and that is an incredibly hard trick to pull off. Fergie has done an amazing job squeezing the last drop out of the Giggs/Scholes generation (as City found out to their cost) but that can’t last. I can’t see the Glazers providing the investment needed and Sir Alex will eventually retire.

Scott: With your anti-Glazer stance very apparent, why have you chosen to keep renewing your season ticket and not following FC United?

Andy: Whilst I understood and respected those who felt they couldn’t step inside Old Trafford after the takeover I never believed a boycott would work in 2005. There really was strong demand for tickets back then, even after the 2005/6 price rises. I never had any allusions about the Glazers, but not enough supporters cared to make collective action a viable option in my view.

Having said that I have huge respect for those who took a stand and boycotted. Andy Walsh did a Radio 4 programme about giving up going to United a few years ago and it was a very emotional and powerful story to listen to and I know many others went through the same thing. I contributed a bit of cash to FC when it started and went to a few games but it wasn’t for me. I totally agree with the club’s aims and principles and wish them all the best. FCUM is part of the United family and I really hope the two Uniteds can coexist happily in the years to come.

Scott: There has been a lot of talk about the Red Knights over the past couple of months. Do you think they are they the answer?

Andy: Yes I do. I’ve been lucky enough to meet some of those involved and I think they are the real deal. Whether they can pull it off and find enough like minded individuals I don’t know. We all know we need new owners, so what sort of owners? Owners who are reds, who want United to return to being a football club and for the fans to be part of the club or another Mansour or Abramovich with unknown aims and motivations?

Scott: What do you think would be the ideal solution, in a perfect world, to the situation we’re in?

Andy: In a perfect world the Glazers’ financial situation would become so bad that they became “distressed” sellers willing to take almost any price. Then the Red Knights could snap up the club, pay off the bonds and off we go.

Scott: Cheers Andy.

edit: In light of the talk about renewing season tickets. My advice would be to NOT RENEW for now at least. If the Glazers think they will still have the guaranteed revenue from the thousands of season tickets around the ground, then they are under no pressure to sell. The deadline is Sunday 13 June 2010 which means you still have plenty of time to decide. Even if you have every intention of renewing your season ticket, I believe it would be in our best interest to delay doing this.

Resources on the debt
What’s all this fuss about the Glazers anyway?

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 »



  1. Wakey says:


    I don’t know about Paul H but I myself have posted on a number of posts recently. Ofc you ignore that fact because it doesn’t support your idiotic campaign of spouting complete and utter crap

  2. Wakey says:

    @rooney the new king
    Sorry but if you don’t think that he lets his hatred for the Glazers cloud his judgment then you are a fool. You can read a lot of his posts and you can see where this is happening either intentionally or its subconsciously. His support of the Red Knights despite them only really being in a position to make things worse perfectly highlights this, so much so that he even wrote one article the other week about how even keeping the Bonds the RK’s were a better bet and he tried to justify it with the ‘savings’ the Red Knighst would make by removing the Glazers. These savings included the Management and Parent company fees (Fees which United paid as a PLC and would almost certainly have to pay under the Red Knights for services rendered) and then by using things like ‘permitted dividends’ (Which the Glazers haven’t taken yet and which totally ignores the fact the Red Knights HAVE TO take a hefty dividend). He also then choose to ignore the fact that the Red Knight deal included more debt which even if his savings were true would actually wipe them out

    As for me ‘Defending’ the Glazers. I’ll admit I do feel more inclined to post on these kind of topics but that’s because it needs me to post more than on many other threads (On some of the football matters many have often made the point I would have so there isn’t any need for my post. Infact when reading the comments I usually note my replies in notepad until i get to the end of the comments and on football issues I often end up deleting a lot of my potential replies as others have covered it). The issue has been blown way out of proportion to a point where as a general fan base we are in a position to do more damage to the club than the Glazers could in five lifetimes and all because things are being blown out of proportion.

    If the Glazers can be replaced with a better option that makes the clubs situation better then that’s great but atm we are being used and taken as fools by the ABU Media, The Red Knights, MUST and others to push an agenda that helps them in some way. I mean seriously we are at a point now where some fans are boycotting things like season tickets and we have had more than one appeal for mass boycotts which will leave the club worse off and perhaps damaged beyond repair.

    As for defending the undefenable. The fact that we can defend them kind of proves they aren’t undefendable.Even those who the likes of Fred like to try and imply are pro Glazer have concerns about aspects of the Glazers ownership and we would probably talk about these a lot more if people were willing to have a real debate rather than making these over the top claims like you are so often prone to. At the end of the day I don’t think any of us who are supposedly Pro Glazer are so (certainly i’m not) but we are pro common sense.

    “hideous businessmen who do not care about the normal man on the street because they do not know jack shit about what its like in the real world”
    And you think the Red Knights or anyone else who would buy the club would be any better? There is a lot of money in football and the ‘customers’ of a football club (the fans) are very demanding, you just have to look at how much complaining about this season people have been doing and the massive list of expensive players people draw up to see that this is the case.

    And they haven’t really do anything really against the man on the street, except perhaps the ticket rises. But as bad as they might seem its also the fact that as United Fans we were spoiled for many years by the PLC mistakenly believing they would always be the team with the most money to throw around. United ticket prices were under priced and were rising slower than others and all the Glazers have done is bring it in line with the rest. It seems a lot as the rise was done over a shorter period of time but really we can’t complain too much at the current level. They are at roughly what you would consider the market rate to be based on other clubs although they have pushed it close and the Automatic Cup Scheme has been implemented in an awful manner (Yes they needed all the tickets sold because running costs are the same no matter how many are in the staduim so you are flushing money down the toilet unless its ‘sold out’ but perhaps a better
    middle ground could have been found). Perhaps if the PLC hadn’t been so lax not only would the ticket rises have been applied more evenly BUT perhaps those initial years of Chelsea money wouldn’t have caught united out as much as it did

    Even the debt doesn’t really impact ‘the man on the street’. Its on record that Glazer questioned the way United was run on a number of occasions as they felt not enough was being done to maximise revenues and marketing opportunities and that aspects of the club were ‘bloated’. They have made the club a better run club and opened up so many new marketing/revenue streams. So much so that even with the debt servicing the profits are well above where the PLC had them and were ever likely to have the club

  3. Wakey says:

    My Finacial Background is a hard question to answer as its kind of a yes and no response. I run my own Consultancy Business which specialises in Business and IT services. I myself have some financial qualifications and obviously running a business you have to deal with financial matters BUT I don’t deal with the financial side myself. As we do offer financial services though I have staff from that background as well as having various contacts I have made from these backgrounds. As the whole Glazer takeover is something that intersts me I have since day 1 read as much as I could and educated myself on the situation and used my access to these people to help me understand as much as I can.

    On the Red Knights options. IMHO I think their options are limited largely due to being stubborn. Its been widely reported they turned down an offer by two United supporting billionaires who were willing to put $500mill in each to the buy out. The reason being that they don’t want anyone having an unequal stake, they want everyone to put in 20mill and all the Red Knights to be equal. The problem is this makes a buy out from them very hard to achieve. Unless they get over themselves and decide that its more important for the club to be financially secure then more debt seems the only solution they have. Especially as the chances of MUST raising £250million is slim so they will have to also fine some or all of that as well (Will be interesting to see how they handle the MUST golden share IF MUST can’t guarantee 250mill, will they cut them out completely or will they let them have the golden share for a smaller amount)

    It would be interesting if those two Billionaires that the Red Knights apparently turned down could put together a bid on their own but again you have to wonder if they could do it debt free

  4. libero99 says:


    If I had the time, I would question several of your “facts”. But I’ll go with one big error you have made:

    “Profits after debts were serviced were 90mill for 2008-2009 season”

    Is not true at all. This figure is BEFORE servicing any debt. If what you say is true, where has this £90mil gone? To the Glazers? Invested in the team? (clearly not). Invested in facilities? ~(clearly not.)
    It must have vanished eh?

    No, this 90mil figure is BEFORE debt repayments. The figure AFTER debt repayments is more like profits of £20-30mil. That is what United the club gets to retain after paying off the Glazer’s acquisition debt. This is what SAF has to build a team to win trophies with.

    Hard to take anything you say seriously when you can get such a fundamental fact wrong.

  5. libero99 says:

    And Wakey,

    I have pulled you a few times before on your incorrect financial figures. You back tracked and then went silent. You got PLC profits wrong then, you got PLC dividend levels wrong then. You got Glazer debt repayments wrong then.

    Here, you have made a whole load of claims on what the RKs will do, and what they have done. How on earth could you know what their plans are?? You are making stuff up

    “the issue has been blown way out of proportion to a point where as a general fan base we are in a position to do more damage to the club than the Glazers could in five lifetimes and all because things are being blown out of proportion.”

    Utter nonsense. If the Glazers remain, United will be paying of THEIR debt for decades, and the manager will be starved of funds. Blown out of all proportion? Please.

    I have no idea if the RKs can provide a better ownership structure as their plans have not yet been revealed. But the fact that you think you do know their plans, and choose to smear them is very revealing about your motives. You can’t know what they plan to do, but you are happy to jump to worst case scenario conclusions.

    How about we await and see the details of what the RKs propose before casting them as “worse than the Glazers”??

    PS – I work for an IT services company as a business consultant, so I know my stuff for the most part and I am capable of educating myself to fill in the gaps.

  6. libero99 says:


    “Even the debt doesn’t really impact ‘the man on the street’. Its on record that Glazer questioned the way United was run on a number of occasions as they felt not enough was being done to maximise revenues and marketing opportunities and that aspects of the club were ‘bloated’. They have made the club a better run club and opened up so many new marketing/revenue streams. So much so that even with the debt servicing the profits are well above where the PLC had them and were ever likely to have the club”

    Highly questionable analysis.

    1) The debt will be paid off by the man in the street. All of it. The Glazers want the fans to buy the club, and then just hand it to them for nothing.

    2) The Glazers pressured the PLC board and called for directors to be removed only so they could take the club over more easily. They have done the exact same thing with other companies – Zapata being one. It is a typical tactic for hostile takeovers.

    3) Most of the increased revenue for United is because of a) increased tv deal home and oveseas (nothing to do with the Glazers) and b) increased ticket prices (are we supposed to be pleased about that?)

    4) Profits now after paying off our debt are around £20-30mil. The last few years we have been paying approx – £60mil for debt interest on our senior bank loan. This figure has changed because of the new bond to £45mil – but lets not forget we are just servicing the interest – in 2017 we have to find £500mil to repay the “capital” amount, or we re-finance and it starts all over again with the debt remaining.

    But we also have those pesky PIKs to deal with too. And the Glazers do not tell anyone what is happening there but we can be confident that they are taking more of our profits to deal with these. Currently standing at £200mil approx, these will be closer to £600mil in 2017 when they have to be repaid. Oh yes, and Gill claimed the PIK was not the club responsibility. Sneaky. They may be secured against the Glazer’s personal assets, but the new bond allows them to use United’s profits to pay them off. So they are now United’s problem despite the untruths from Gill.

    So your analysis of our current financial health/debt with respect to the PLC era is totally incorrect and also disingenuous.

  7. redscot says:

    @Wakey Thanks,I had a morning off from work and revisited this thread and the various links and some mind blowing documents on AndersRed’s blog.Having sat for nearly 5 hours reading this information and trying to digest the figures and implications I am just left feeling bamboozled.
    Far be it for me to direct anyone to any page or link on financial data, as I indicated I am as a layman as you can get,but I would suggest everyone if they have the desire and will to read on that gentlemans blog, the 39 pages i think it was by JP Morgan,Initiation research on the united bond.In there I believe they give different case scenarios based on different possiblities and the way I interpret the situation they are saying the Glazer model as of now is acceptable.
    However if the performances on the field and remaining in the top4 EPL and failure to qualify for the Champions league and progress out of the group stages,then the model begins to unravel.So if we dont see player investment to maintain improve our squad then the sucess we have had will vanish and so does the Glazer’s budgets.
    So we will have to wait and see what sort of war chest Sir Alex is given to bolster the squad with a few recognised stars.

    It is a bit of a kick in the guts though to realise and semi appreciate that they can withdraw from the club 30 million pounds in dividends fee’s and expenses.During there tenure 500 million will be taken out by 2017 and Manchester United will still have the Albatross of 500 Million pounds debt.
    As that gentleman indicates and highlights there requires some laws outwith football laws to stop these People/acts happening as we have witnessed at Portsmouth etc.
    Anyway lets hope and pray that the Red Knights can live up to there PR and deliver a viable and financially robust plan.If they dont however I think with fans like you and AndersRed surveying the proposals they are gonna have a torrid time.Buts lets in the meantime wish them well and wait and see.
    Away for a lay down in a dark room. lol

  8. willierednut says:

    libero99 gives a different perspective to that of Wakey so, someones telling porkies.

  9. libero99 says:


    You can establish the facts for yourself, but it can take some mental horsepower to wade through it.

    Andresred blog contains a resources page of published financial information from United and holding companies. He has obtained these from Companies House as all UK companies are legally obliged to declare key financial information. They won’t be lying or mis-representing the financial in those documents to the UK government.

    But I would ask this of anyone who doubts me over Wakey – how on earth can he realistically claim to know so much about what the Red Knights plan to do when they have actually said very little? Their offical statements have said very little so far, so how can Wakey claim to know what they plan to do as he does repeatedly on here? It is just not possible. He is on a smear campaign – he is obviously quite smart so why does he get his facts wrong? He is trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes, and he is doing a decent job at it judging by other’s responses.

    I don’t claim to know what the RKs plan to do, or whether they will actually be better than the Glazers.

    We need to wait and see the details of their plans before deciding. Wakey has decided already, and that should set alarm bells ringing.

  10. willierednut says:

    libero99 – I always said, i would wait for the RK to bring out their business plan, before i make any judgement.

  11. libero99 says:

    Here you go

    Using some simple maths, if we make £90mil AFTER servicing our debt, that would mean our pre-debt payment profits would be something like £135mil or higher (assuming our debt payments are £45mil as confirmed in the bond docs). Total turnover is £280mil. Players wages are about £140mil, so how can that add up? What about paying all the other staff like Fergie and Gill – where does that money come from? What about all the other costs of running the business – travel, expenses, equipment, maintenance of facilities? Wakey’s figures just do not add up.

    Also, if we made £90mil AFTER servicing debt last year as Wakey claims, I ask again, where has this money gone? Have we spent big on transfers? No. Have we invested in facilities? No. So where has it gone? After corporation tax that figure will be more like £60mil – so where has it gone?

    SAF talks of value in the market, yet Wakey wants us to believe we have made £90mil last year AFTER servicing our debts? Totally illogical.

    Let me remind everyone that net transfer spend under the 5 years of the Glazers is approx £10mil. That is approx. £2mil net spend on players each season. This is distorted by one huge transfer but until we spend the “Ronaldo” money it holds true. And you really believe we made £90mil last year? Why does SAF care about value when we are making so much money? He never cared about value under the PLC when we made profits of around £20-30mil per season after tax did he? So why so frugal now?

    I’m not having a pop at SAF – he is doing a fine job under severe financial constraints. But will his replacement be able to continue to find diamond players on the cheap? Whoever we get will need more money than £2mil net per season.

  12. rooney the new king says:

    libero99 – if you do respond to this page you made a very interesting point, he condemned the RK saying no one knows much about their plans but he is quick to judge what they plan to bring to the table by going at worse case scanario.

  13. NotoriousRedDevil says:

    @ libero 99 – You’re spot on mate. You’ve put it into better text than myself but I have said similar things just not so eloquently. Wakey and Paul H may be United fans but they are the type that go to games leave 5 minutes before the first half ends to get their pie, and ten minutes before the 90 to beat the traffic. Anyone who backs increased ticket prices to service a debt that wasn’t there before the owners came in is quite frankly a moronic cunt.

  14. redscot says:

    @ notorious, cmon mate calling some one a moronic cunt, bit below the belt and a bit childish.I think Wakey is trying to explain his view as a passionate United supporter. And all is not as gloomy as portrayed. Not that I am a season ticket holder far from it sadly because of geographical location, but I do know the season ticket prices at Manchester United are well below many clubs in the Epl. Check if you care too, anger at Wastelands regards seating prices.You mate are being served a diet of football the world crave for.
    I just want to learn more regards this topic, but I dont think I can read much more on Anders blog lol joking fabulous site. just need determination, i have never had got up such a sweat prior to the Sun crossword.

  15. Wakey says:

    I don’t have much time but wanted to reply to a few things

    1) Selective memory much. I semi conceeded to one point you made, But countered with sources the rest. You choose to then ignore it and run off to another comment section.

    2) The intrest payments have never been 60mill, that’s a figure people come to based on the piks and bank loan/bond. As united hadn’t paid the Glazers a penny in dividends at the point of the bond offer they weren’t servicing the pik so that figure is incorrect. It’s in the 40 range

    3) The profits were in the 90 range. 71.8mill plus the last minute upfront payment by AON which is said to be 15-20mill

    4) The improved tv deal is 17% higher than while SOME tickets have risen by 50% it’s not all and this only accounts for part of the matchday revenue. The higher ticket prices maybe account for 25mill a season extra. Neither of these account for the much improved finacial figures alone. The glazers have explored and taken up new revenue streams and have streamlined how the club is run. It’s easy to dismiss this but they are things which the PLC could have done but choose to sit on their hands doing nothing allowing Chelsea to catch us out with the money influx

    5) the red knights. I know the pro rk lot like to bury their head in the sand and believe the hype and pretend we know nothing about the rks but sadly it’s not the case. They have been divuging information . For example after their meeting they confirmed the richest of the knights was WORTH 220mill but most are worth just millions or tens of millions. Now I’m sure we all know a persons worth isn’t a sign of how much liquid funds they have access to. Alot of you Reading this who own propery will be worth hundrds of thousands on paper but if I was to ask you to pay me 20k you wouldn’t be able to raise the money without taking loans or leveraging against assets. This is where the knights are, they need 20mill each but almost all will be unable to find this without borrowing as for many it’s more than their total worth and for the rest it’s a large percentage of their worth.

    We also know the basic deal on the table and this isn’t coming from Harris and his pr to get the fans on his side. It’s coming from the investment bank they have hired and the rks themselves. We know they are looking to pay 1.2bn in total, that they won’t clear the bonds, that they require 250mill from MUST if they want their golden share so they can boycott future takeovers and that they are looking to make up the difference in Bank Loans sucured against the club.

    How exactly does all that fit in with returning the club to a sound finacial footing, reducing costs to fans and increasing transfer budgets. They can’t increase debts by 250mill (or if you want to include the piks then 50mill) while having personal liabilities of upto 700mill and then have the ability to reduce fan costs, and increase spending.

    5)If the red knights were so serious they wouldn’t have spent months now using us the fans as pawns in their game. They are using us to get a better business deal and have used a variety of promises which they have later gone back on. First it was the clearing of all debts, then it was the barca style setup, then it was a golden share, which is now a golden share for MUST which the fans have to stump up 250mill for. Harris also lied about who was involved with his super rich comment that got peoples hopes up. They are a bunch if jokers who if they had been serious would have been open and honest with us from the start and certainly wouldn’t be going around turning investment down just because it diluted their own stake

    Anyway as I have said don’t have much time. Writing this on iPhone while travelling for work which isn’t the best way to use and reply to this blog. If I get some time later I may expand on this

  16. libero99 says:


    Once again you choose to smear the Red Knights before their plans have been published.

    Why is that? If you really have the best for United and fans at heart, why not wait until the full details are available and then judge then?

    What you refer to as “their plans” are nothing more than speculation by journalists. The official statements from the red knights contain almost no details of the actual structure of the deal – so please stop inventing things and passing them off as fact.

    To all reds – we should treat those like Wakey who jump to negative conclusions based on paper rumours with great suspicion.

    What is your motive Wakey?

    Why try and destroy the prospect of a better ownership before the facts of any deal have been released?

    Anyone with any sense will wait and see what is proposed. But you have chosen to make up a load of “facts” about their plans and use this to rubbish the proposals.

  17. libero99 says:


    And you failed to address any of the points I made.

    Lets take the profits levels. Your last post said they were in the region on £90mil – which is exactly what I said.

    But your FIRST post said profits were £90mil AFTER DEBT REPAYMENTS WHICH IS NOT TRUE.

    Why do you duck the point?

    Profits were £90mil BEFORE DEBT PAYMENTS.

    You are either terrible at maths, or you failed to read my posts (despite the fact that I made the point in capital letters for emphasis) or you are telling porkies.

  18. libero99 says:

    Wakey is one of these Glazer apologists who clearly has something personally to gain from seeing them remain in charge.

    He trolls websites like this spreading misinformation and encouraging right minded reds to go against a group that might (only might – lets see) just offer a better ownership structure for United.

    Regardless of the RK deal, the Glazers have been a financial disaster for United.

  19. redscot says:

    I agree totally, the heat needs taken out of this critical monumental decision.All views should be listened to in a calm collected manner,with clear heads and thinking.
    I would however prefer to take guidance from someone like AndersRed who clearly has no vested interest in this( ousting) other than his Support and season ticket.

  20. NotoriousRedDevil says:

    @ Redscot – Our season ticket prices are below 6 clubs in the Premiership and 5 of them are from London. Before the glazers we were hovering about 10th or 11th I believe. Its not just prices but the way they add an extra £5 on per round of the champions league and the ACS that have vexed many including myself. No payment structure plans to pay off the season ticket bit by bit has to be paid in one go. No guarantee of cup seats I could go on and on about the way they have handled the ticket situation which in turn affects the supporters. If prices had increased 3 times since they’ve been here then fair enough but they have increased every year with this year being the first time they have frozen. They aren’t listening to the fans they are just looking at their business model the part we play is how much money we can plow into the club. Whoever buys the club has debt to pay off which quite simply should never have been there in the first place. The bonds are simply a glorified balance transfer of a credit card. Short term we may be okay but long term we most certainly aren’t especially as Fergie is approaching 70 and not 55.

  21. redscot says:

    @Notorious Thanks for explaining the league table of pricing,this is an averaging out I assume over the whole range of prices availiable depending on your seat in the stadiums.The other club just to clarify that on average is more expensive than US for season tickets , is Manchester city?.
    So even Sheik Monsoor is looking for an improvement on revenue return per bum on seat, and match day revenue.I suppose there is a cost to watching world class players in a wonderfull arena, and having to pay the going rate.
    Now please dont think that is minimising the feeling you are conveying regards the effect of the one off, lump sum payment you are being asked to make, or as I have read significantly over Inflation increases for the last 4 seasons,possibly there was just a plan to bring the pricing inline with our competitors.To compete on a even playing field, I guess you have to derive your income from your fan base.
    This a very difficult topic for me to actually comment on mate, as I said I am not a season ticket holder and therefore the damage to my pocket is zero.I do understand what you must be feeling though.
    I read some very wieldy documents on the Gentlemans blog who was interviewed on this thread,and the Clubs/Glazer banker’s JPMorgan give 3 case scenarious for the immediate future non particularly critical I suppose this is a biased slant.I also have read on this blog(or another site) how the departure of Sir Alex will not be critical as there is foundations in place to minimise this loss.This company also quote the loss of Mourhnino at Chelsea and how they continued with there success.Minor detail of course was there financial backer did not go AWOL.
    Again AndersRed explains its not necessary to clear all the debt in one swoop, he explains you could take some of it on board and service it and eventually start reducing the principle debt.The big savings to be made as I am begining to understand with less fuzzieness is the funds that are being removed both in fee’s expenses and bond agreements, that leads to and only the Glazer, and hence the need for them to be removed.
    However I am a total novice on this subject but I can assure you I personally I am going to take a serious personal interest in this now and start reading substantially more on this very serious area of the club.
    However as has been said on numerous occasions lets wait and see what the Red knights proposals are and financial people like AndersRed and people with no vested interest view there proposals.
    Ps I have today ordered the Financial times, the Investors Chronicle and Economist.Lol joking.But not the part above I am gonna work on this so I can make my own judgement based on knowledge.

  22. NotoriousRedDevil says:

    No its isn’t redscot the other club is Liverpool it was based on this season prices ranging from lowest to highest so I’ve taken our lowest ticket prices into account. There aren’t many of these the most likely season ticket available is towards the middle to expensive so you’re looking at about £670 for a season ticket upwards.

  23. redscot says:

    @ Notorious.Thanks I had semi forgotten them,I guess its an American trait the pricing policy.Although on my investigation’s on this I viewed a bar chart which indicated Manchester City were priced with the increases proposed! would be higher than a season ticket at United, on average.
    I probably should stay away from anything…….with Bar in it. lol…… I will be back as Arnie said, I will research this further.
    But its a mere detail, just for comparisons I take on board what you tell me.The bigger picture is more important.Step forth the RedNights I just hope they are not mounted on Asses.


You must be logged in to post a comment.