06 Jan 2020 11:42:20
The business men at MUFC need to remember they need to protect the MU product as it has to be value for money.

For me looking from the outside in it is honestly like watching British Leyland in the 1980s. Everybody could see it was being poorly managed and run by idiots but the heirachy did nothing about it.

All while Ford, The German and The Japanese companies employed a professional yet fluid business management technique which allowed them to grow and grow. Top down change is required.


1.) 06 Jan 2020
06 Jan 2020 12:08:39
The difference is that United’s owners haven’t put in a single penny of their own cash. The original leveraged buyout means there’s no risk.

If the club is profitable, they can take dividends and sell shares. If it all goes tits up, the debt belongs to the club, and they can just walk away.

However, the owners are not responsible for the poor management. That’s down to the board and the people they have hired to run the club. The owners don’t care as long as money keeps coming in, and if it starts to slow down they’ll simply try to sell.


2.) 06 Jan 2020
06 Jan 2020 16:10:10
tampa bay buccs 2.

that is all.


3.) 06 Jan 2020
06 Jan 2020 16:18:47
Well said Bolger.

As an NFL fan, I have been saying this for years.

If you want to see how a Glazer owned sports team fares, look no further than Tampa Bay.

Won 1 superbowl, and been in decline ever since, a stadium falling apart, poor management, endless manager changes.


4.) 06 Jan 2020
06 Jan 2020 17:06:42
Aqueous. United's share price is the highest it's been in ages. Even with the worst manager, worst squad and worst result in decades, we're still a money making machine.

That golden goose won't last forever but they're in no danger of keeping the brand "value for money". We're a money making bohemouth.