Manchester Utd & Glazer: An Epic Swindle?

[txj]

Doesn't say anything really...

Value, which is about assets is one thing, but what about the outgoings; what about the debt?

The hard numbers show a club that is highly leveraged...

UPDATE:

Manchester United 'is world's most valuable sport club'

Manchester United is the most valuable club in sport, according to Forbes magazine, which values the Premier League club at $2.23bn (£1.43bn).

United is rated top thanks to lucrative global sponsorship deals, including with AIG, Turkish Airlines, and DHL.

Second is Real Madrid at $1.88bn, with baseball team the New York Yankees and American Football club the Dallas Cowboys joint third on $1.85bn.

Fifth placed is American Football team the Washington Redskins at $1.56bn.

Earlier this month Manchester United applied to list on the US stock market in a share sale aimed at raising a minimum $100m (£64m).

In documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Premier League giant said it was listing on the New York Stock Exchange.

The club had earlier explored the possibility of a $1bn flotation on the Singapore stock market.

United, among the best-supported clubs in the world, said it would use money from the listing to repay debt.

The club has been controlled since 2005 by the Glazer family, the billionaire US sports investors who also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers American football franchise.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18868223

[Heliopolis]

Can someone dumb down this talk of Man Utd being 'highly leveraged' for me? What exactly is going on?

[wanaj0]

Every year same gloomy story but United keeps waxing stronger! As Tunisian Gooner aptly put it, even the unlikely event of total bankruptcy will only result in even more Billionaires queuing to buy the club .

Fans don't OWN the club. Fans are customers. While they are stakeholders, it is the owners of the look that need to look after their investment.

Glazer did not stop anyone from buying the club. Not sure why people are complaining about how he is running his business empire. If the club crumbles, he will lose his investment.Glazer

With the debt, United has won more trophies than Pool and Arsenal combined. So the fans pf those clubs should be worried about their own clubs lol.

The post shows how daft and clueless u can be....

In football, esp in England fans are not just customers. Neither is it simply about Glazer losing his investment...

2nd, and maybe its a lame attempt at humour, but MnU hasn't 'won more titles than Arsenal & LFC combined.

I will not trade insult with you. It basically shows who you are. Soon you will claim never to have insulted anyone. What a pity.

Maybe you should find out the difference between shateholders and stakeholders.

If fans are not customers/stakeholders what are they?

Man U has won more titles than Arsenal and Pool combined since the Glazers took over.

The owners of a business can decide on the vision and mission of the business and run it as they like for as long as they do not contravene the law of the land.

There is no law against using debt to buy stocks or any asset for that matter.

If the fans wanrnto own the club then they should buy the shares.

[txj]

Every year same gloomy story but United keeps waxing stronger! As Tunisian Gooner aptly put it, even the unlikely event of total bankruptcy will only result in even more Billionaires queuing to buy the club .

Fans don't OWN the club. Fans are customers. While they are stakeholders, it is the owners of the look that need to look after their investment.

Glazer did not stop anyone from buying the club. Not sure why people are complaining about how he is running his business empire. If the club crumbles, he will lose his investment.Glazer

With the debt, United has won more trophies than Pool and Arsenal combined. So the fans pf those clubs should be worried about their own clubs lol.

The post shows how daft and clueless u can be....

In football, esp in England fans are not just customers. Neither is it simply about Glazer losing his investment...

2nd, and maybe its a lame attempt at humour, but MnU hasn't 'won more titles than Arsenal & LFC combined.

I will not trade insult with you. It basically shows who you are. Soon you will claim never to have insulted anyone. What a pity.

Maybe you should find out the difference between shateholders and stakeholders.

If fans are not customers/stakeholders what are they?

Man U has won more titles than Arsenal and Pool combined since the Glazers took over.

The owners of a business can decide on the vision and mission of the business and run it as they like for as long as they do not contravene the law of the land.

There is no law against using debt to buy stocks or any asset for that matter.

If the fans wanrnto own the club then they should buy the shares.

It shows who u are and how uninformed u can be that u have said two different things on the subject of titles in practically one breath!

Fans are co-owners of a football club, though not in the legal sense. They are not customers and not simply stakeholders. They can run an owner out of town as the case of LFC clearly demonstrated.

And the Glazers are in trouble here, and they know it!

[wanaj0]

Every year same gloomy story but United keeps waxing stronger! As Tunisian Gooner aptly put it, even the unlikely event of total bankruptcy will only result in even more Billionaires queuing to buy the club .

Fans don't OWN the club. Fans are customers. While they are stakeholders, it is the owners of the look that need to look after their investment.

Glazer did not stop anyone from buying the club. Not sure why people are complaining about how he is running his business empire. If the club crumbles, he will lose his investment.Glazer

With the debt, United has won more trophies than Pool and Arsenal combined. So the fans pf those clubs should be worried about their own clubs lol.

The post shows how daft and clueless u can be....

In football, esp in England fans are not just customers. Neither is it simply about Glazer losing his investment...

2nd, and maybe its a lame attempt at humour, but MnU hasn't 'won more titles than Arsenal & LFC combined.

I will not trade insult with you. It basically shows who you are. Soon you will claim never to have insulted anyone. What a pity.

Maybe you should find out the difference between shateholders and stakeholders.

If fans are not customers/stakeholders what are they?

Man U has won more titles than Arsenal and Pool combined since the Glazers took over.

The owners of a business can decide on the vision and mission of the business and run it as they like for as long as they do not contravene the law of the land.

There is no law against using debt to buy stocks or any asset for that matter.

If the fans wanrnto own the club then they should buy the shares.

It shows who u are and how uninformed u can be that u have said two different things on the subject of titles in practically one breath!

Fans are co-owners of a football club, though not in the legal sense. They are not customers and not simply stakeholders. They can run an owner out of town as the case of LFC clearly demonstrated.

And the Glazers are in trouble here, and they know it!

Mr well informed, what do fans own in a club?

Just like a community ad stakeholders can make life unbearable for companies operating in their environs same way fans as stakeholders can make life unbearable for owners of the club. Government, FA and other stakeholders can frustrate the owners. That does not make those stakeholders owners of the club.

Maybe you can explain how fans became owners of the club.

Again I encourage you to learn the difference between shareholders and stakeholders so that you can save yourself from embarassment. Throwing insults will not help you.

[anointed]

Every year same gloomy story but United keeps waxing stronger! As Tunisian Gooner aptly put it, even the unlikely event of total bankruptcy will only result in even more Billionaires queuing to buy the club .

Fans don't OWN the club. Fans are customers. While they are stakeholders, it is the owners of the look that need to look after their investment.

Glazer did not stop anyone from buying the club. Not sure why people are complaining about how he is running his business empire. If the club crumbles, he will lose his investment.Glazer

With the debt, United has won more trophies than Pool and Arsenal combined. So the fans pf those clubs should be worried about their own clubs lol.

The post shows how daft and clueless u can be....

In football, esp in England fans are not just customers. Neither is it simply about Glazer losing his investment...

2nd, and maybe its a lame attempt at humour, but MnU hasn't 'won more titles than Arsenal & LFC combined.

Of course "with the debt" Utd have more titles than LFC and Arsenal.

[txj]

Every year same gloomy story but United keeps waxing stronger! As Tunisian Gooner aptly put it, even the unlikely event of total bankruptcy will only result in even more Billionaires queuing to buy the club .

Fans don't OWN the club. Fans are customers. While they are stakeholders, it is the owners of the look that need to look after their investment.

Glazer did not stop anyone from buying the club. Not sure why people are complaining about how he is running his business empire. If the club crumbles, he will lose his investment.Glazer

With the debt, United has won more trophies than Pool and Arsenal combined. So the fans pf those clubs should be worried about their own clubs lol.

The post shows how daft and clueless u can be....

In football, esp in England fans are not just customers. Neither is it simply about Glazer losing his investment...

2nd, and maybe its a lame attempt at humour, but MnU hasn't 'won more titles than Arsenal & LFC combined.

I will not trade insult with you. It basically shows who you are. Soon you will claim never to have insulted anyone. What a pity.

Maybe you should find out the difference between shateholders and stakeholders.

If fans are not customers/stakeholders what are they?

Man U has won more titles than Arsenal and Pool combined since the Glazers took over.

The owners of a business can decide on the vision and mission of the business and run it as they like for as long as they do not contravene the law of the land.

There is no law against using debt to buy stocks or any asset for that matter.

If the fans wanrnto own the club then they should buy the shares.

It shows who u are and how uninformed u can be that u have said two different things on the subject of titles in practically one breath!

Fans are co-owners of a football club, though not in the legal sense. They are not customers and not simply stakeholders. They can run an owner out of town as the case of LFC clearly demonstrated.

And the Glazers are in trouble here, and they know it!

Mr well informed, what do fans own in a club?

Just like a community ad stakeholders can make life unbearable for companies operating in their environs same way fans as stakeholders can make life unbearable for owners of the club. Government, FA and other stakeholders can frustrate the owners. That does not make those stakeholders owners of the club.

Maybe you can explain how fans became owners of the club.

Again I encourage you to learn the difference between shareholders and stakeholders so that you can save yourself from embarassment. Throwing insults will not help you.

The nature of association football, esp wrt to the 'tribal' nature of its followership, and even moreso in england, make the fans more than stakeholders.. If u do not understand that then I cannot help u...

[soma]

Wanjo you have taken you aloof argument to another level.. How can you easily discount the fans? The honest truth if if all fans decide not to attend all home games this season andnot renew their season ticket, Glazers would have no option but to sell fast as the club will be bankrupt in quick time.

Also Fergie is the pillar holding all this big grammer "Leverage, shareholders, stakeholders, stock market" etc together. The minute he walks, not even mourinho and Pep together can hold Man Utd crumbling like a pack of cards.

[wanaj0]

Wanjo you have taken you aloof argument to another level.. How can you easily discount the fans? The honest truth if if all fans decide not to attend all home games this season andnot renew their season ticket, Glazers would have no option but to sell fast as the club will be bankrupt in quick time.

Also Fergie is the pillar holding all this big grammer "Leverage, shareholders, stakeholders, stock market" etc together. The minute he walks, not even mourinho and Pep together can hold Man Utd crumbling like a pack of cards.

Fans boycotting games will not make them to become owners.

Glazers can decide to liquidate the club and wind it up.

Fans are important as STAKEHOLDERS but that will never make them owners. Fans are like customers that the clubs provide service to. Yes they can boycott the product But That will still not make them to become owners.

If you know anything about asset stripping you may be surprised that Glazers may not be bothered if Fergie walks away. They are investors not fans. They are out to make money nothing more! The fans are important and relevant because they help in fulfilling the objective of making money!

[wanaj0]

The nature of association football, esp wrt to the 'tribal' nature of its followership, and even moreso in england, make the fans more than stakeholders.. If u do not understand that then I cannot help u...

Since you said they are more than stakeholders, so what are they? OWNERS????? Customers????

Don't need your help. Just state what you know since you are well informed.

[felarey]

Can someone dumb down this talk of Man Utd being 'highly leveraged' for me? What exactly is going on?

That was 7 yrs ago. A club is valued at 1.43B and has a debt of 425m. When the Glazers took over, it was worth 800m, today it is the most valuable club in sport at 1.43B. I think the Glazers have done well with record deals and on pitch success. Their plan has worked out. If the Glazers were going down, like every savvy businessman, they will try to sell the business first, but why will they sell something that's doubling in value?

[felarey]

Wanjo you have taken you aloof argument to another level.. How can you easily discount the fans? The honest truth if if all fans decide not to attend all home games this season andnot renew their season ticket, Glazers would have no option but to sell fast as the club will be bankrupt in quick time.

Also Fergie is the pillar holding all this big grammer "Leverage, shareholders, stakeholders, stock market" etc together. The minute he walks, not even mourinho and Pep together can hold Man Utd crumbling like a pack of cards.

How do you guys come up with this type of mama put analysis? So when Sir Alex leaves, they will turn Old Trafford into a restuarant and close shop? Each game brings in about 1-2m in ticket sales. Factor in the costs such as security, janitorial services, utility etc. and even you will see that what is left after all home games in a season does not bring in 300-400m the club makes. Problem is you guys are listening to the MUST, an opposition group of about a mere 4000 members. Even the green and gold movement have since seen the light and lost their influence.

The same fans you talk about were the ones that made a killing selling to Glazer and if u remember how fast it went, it didn't take them long to decide. These same people were the ones that put Man Utd as a PLC to start with before the likes of Glazer saw a business bouyant with cash (debt free) in it and offered a huge incentive for the shareholders to sell to him.

Big boys are exchanging big bucks but the naive are falling over themselves with uneducated mob mentality crying for nothing. I ask you how many still wear green and gold today compared to few years ago? When the Glazers start going underwater in their investment, they will sellup and pack their bags. Infact with their model of running an ACTUAL business, Utd is safer than if they had a sugar daddy. There's a lot more savvy business managers than billionaires out there. But if anyone believes that a bunch of traditional jewish billionaire businessmen that borrowed against all of their assets will watch their entity crumble just like that, then I have a bridge to sell you in London over river Thames.

The Sir Alex factor is a non issue, Assanal should be more worried about Wenger. Sir Alex has contributed to building the brand that's Utd very well all these years and that will not disappear overnight. He's part of a system that works and not the system. All this is common sense.

[YemiBrazil]

Felarey, Wanaj0 - teach them abeg, teach them. Txj's wriggles on this thread make me laugh. Typical jealous Liverpudlian. The great global franchise, eternal Manchester United, is going nowhere - deal with it! .

[kofi86]

Wanjo you have taken you aloof argument to another level.. How can you easily discount the fans? The honest truth if if all fans decide not to attend all home games this season andnot renew their season ticket, Glazers would have no option but to sell fast as the club will be bankrupt in quick time.

Also Fergie is the pillar holding all this big grammer "Leverage, shareholders, stakeholders, stock market" etc together. The minute he walks, not even mourinho and Pep together can hold Man Utd crumbling like a pack of cards.

That works for every company. If all customers decide to boycot a company it will go bankrupt. From McDonald's to Manchester United.

By the way, in Germany the clubs are really owned by the fans (with some Wolfsburg and Leverkusen being the exception though)

[txj]

There are times when being the manager -- or, more accurately, The Boss in (almost) every sense -- of the biggest Premier League club in the world calls for a bit of creative license.

Asked about the impact the ownership of the Glazer family has had upon Manchester United in its seven-plus years at the helm, Sir Alex Ferguson pulled no punches. "They have been great," he said. "They have always backed me whenever I have asked them. I have never faced any opposition.

"I think the majority of real fans will look at it realistically and say [the Glazers' ownership strategy] is not affecting the team," Ferguson added.

Now, it's almost too easy to blow holes in this argument. So let's get this part out of the way quickly. Manchester United currently has debts of around $650 million. It had virtually no debt when the Glazers acquired the club in 2005 and has made steady profits ever since. So how does it end up with so much debt? Easy. It's a result of the Glazers' leveraged buyout of the club. In other words, they borrowed money to acquire United and then slapped the debt on the club itself.

As anyone with a mortgage can tell you, debt costs money. You have to pay interest on it regularly. And this has proved to be very expensive. Every year, some $50 million to $80 million flows out of the club to the banks to service the debt via interest payments and other fees.

By most estimates, more than half a billion dollars generated by Manchester United has effectively gone up in smoke (or swallowed by a bank) because of the Glazers' acquisition and the way it was engineered. Put another way, United has paid more than half a billion dollars for the privilege of having the Glazers as owners. Was it worth it?

It's true that United won four Premier League titles and a Champions League crown in the seven seasons that the Glazers have been around. But that's as many as the club won in the seven years before they came on board. And it's true that profits -- which were already high -- have generally risen under their ownership. Then again, the folks in charge at Old Trafford, Sir Alex and chief executive David Gill, were there before the Glazers' arrival.

Make up your own mind on that front. Suffice it to say that many United fans feel the Glazers' ownership has not been worth it, as evidenced by the hugely successful "green-and-gold" campaign and the nearly 200,000 strong membership of the club's supporters' trust.

What seems evident to most is that United's recent success has come in spite of the Glazers and not because of it. And it's not just about failing to spend big in the transfer market, the way Chelsea and Manchester City have done. (United is one of the few clubs in the world -- maybe the only club -- that could come close to that expenditure and still be profitable.) Sir Alex talks about "value" and doing things the right way in the transfer market and, given his track record, you tend to believe him.

Rather, you wonder if the Glazer effect isn't felt in other ways.

Cast your mind back to October 2010. Wayne Rooney's contract negotiations had been stalled for months. Suddenly, Sir Alex himself reveals at a press conference that his star striker "wants to leave." Forty-eight hours later, Rooney's people issue a statement in which he confirms that he wants out because the club can't "match his ambition" in terms of strengthening the squad. Then, another about-face: Rooney signs a five-year deal paying him some $15 million a year, and all is forgotten.

Fifteen million dollars a season for what Rooney represented to the club at the time (and based on what he has achieved since) is not a crazy salary. In a Glazer-less universe, might United and Rooney have reached the same deal without all the aggravation? Might Sir Alex have been spared the (indirect) public humiliation of being called unambitious by his star player? Might Rooney have looked less of an egotist?

With that extra half a billion dollars kicking around the club, the answer to all of the above would likely have been "yes."

And if all this still doesn't persuade you, ask the Glazers themselves. The prospectus for their upcoming IPO -- which, presumably, they approved -- includes the line "our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and competitive position."

But back to Sir Alex. Why defend the Glazers in this way?

It's not just the fact that they pay his salary. At age 70 and having achieved all that he has achieved, Sir Alex doesn't need them or their money. The answer is probably a lot simpler. He's a company man. And he's putting United first.

There was a time when he could have stood up to them, but that was in 2005. That ship has long since sailed. Now, for better or worse, his fate is aligned with the Glazers. Were he to cast even the slightest doubt on their stewardship of the club, were he to suggest that, without all those debt repayments, he might have done a better job and made the club more successful, it could damage the upcoming IPO. And with it the Glazers' attempt to reduce the club's debt.

And in the long run, that would be even more damaging. For United and for Sir Alex himself.


http://espn.go.com/sports/soccer/story/ ... e-marcotti

[Lager-back]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

[wanaj0]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

The owners of Man U can do what they like with their assets.

If they are selling some of their stakes definitely that money goes to them.

[txj]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

The owners of Man U can do what they like with their assets.

If they are selling some of their stakes definitely that money goes to them.

Again it is not that simple....

[wanaj0]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

The owners of Man U can do what they like with their assets.

If they are selling some of their stakes definitely that money goes to them.

Again it is not that simple....

What is not simple? No one dictates how you run your company. Worst case you lose money!

Issue is why the Glazers sees Man U as a business, the fans and other stakeholders likely think otherwise.

Irrespective of how they feel, the owners of the business will determine how to run the business.

[txj]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

The owners of Man U can do what they like with their assets.

If they are selling some of their stakes definitely that money goes to them.

Again it is not that simple....

What is not simple? No one dictates how you run your company. Worst case you lose money!

Issue is why the Glazers sees Man U as a business, the fans and other stakeholders likely think otherwise.

Irrespective of how they feel, the owners of the business will determine how to run the business.

Ur insularity on the issue does not change reality. The very fact they are looking at options for reducing the debt tells u how much pressure they are under from the supporters groups. Why for instance did they buckle under rather than play hardball with Rooney on his contract?

Surely the history of former LFC owners, Hicks and Gilette should have informed u that u cannot do whatever pleases u as an owner of a football club.

Its a different kind of business...

[felarey]

dem dey finish manu oooo.
Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

I wish I can hit real money like the Glazers so I can find people to worry over my assets like this. All man dey hammer, it's the poor people that are making noise. The offshoot of the green and gold movement was a group of rich fans that sold their shares to Glazer wanting to buy it back at a reduced rate. Perhaps they were using the movement to put pressure on the Glazers, a lot is happening amongst the big boys but the uninformed are the pawns crying a river. Yet the club just closed on a 7yr Chevy deal starting 2014. Be mindful of pressure groups affiliated with the club that don't make it to the board room. Maybe it's when Utd is listed on the DOW that folks will finally burst a gut. The only thing you can do is decide where you'll put your money. You may buy a Chevy (GM) as your next car or pickup some no voting, no dividend stocks for $16 ea. They are raising money by capitalizing on Utd's huge fan base selling Class A shares to the public. To retain control, they're keeping Class B shares with 10 times the voting power of the Class A shares.

For me it could be worthwhile to own some of these as I smell these guys are up to something. I don't know many jewish american businesses that have gone bust and perhaps a consortium or the next rich arab prince looking to for some swag would offer a pretty penny for the shares in future.

[wanaj0]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

The owners of Man U can do what they like with their assets.

If they are selling some of their stakes definitely that money goes to them.

Again it is not that simple....

What is not simple? No one dictates how you run your company. Worst case you lose money!

Issue is why the Glazers sees Man U as a business, the fans and other stakeholders likely think otherwise.

Irrespective of how they feel, the owners of the business will determine how to run the business.

Ur insularity on the issue does not change reality. The very fact they are looking at options for reducing the debt tells u how much pressure they are under from the supporters groups. Why for instance did they buckle under rather than play hardball with Rooney on his contract?

Surely the history of former LFC owners, Hicks and Gilette should have informed u that u cannot do whatever pleases u as an owner of a football club.

Its a different kind of business...

All businesses are different but ownership is still understood!

Yes Liverpool owners left because they chose to. Mainly because they seem ignorant of the different rules for the US and England. Even then, if they decide not to leave nothing will happen. Worst case the club goes burst.

Have you thought that the GLAZERS can decide not to focus on football and make the club concentrate on something else? They can decide to use the real estate asset for something else.

While fans are important stakeholders or customers, they don't own the clubs and cannot be allowed to make decisions for the club. They can form a pressure group.

On a lighter note, the Liverpool fans and owners can be classified stupid based on happenings this past twenty years. When was the last epl trophy won again? Yeye people still living in ancient times.

[txj]

dem dey finish manu oooo.

Glazers are going to pocket half of IPO listing.
As per the IPO listing on NYSE, only £75m of capital raised will go to paying off the club's debt, while the rest will go to the Glazers.

The owners of Man U can do what they like with their assets.

If they are selling some of their stakes definitely that money goes to them.

Again it is not that simple....

What is not simple? No one dictates how you run your company. Worst case you lose money!

Issue is why the Glazers sees Man U as a business, the fans and other stakeholders likely think otherwise.

Irrespective of how they feel, the owners of the business will determine how to run the business.

Ur insularity on the issue does not change reality. The very fact they are looking at options for reducing the debt tells u how much pressure they are under from the supporters groups. Why for instance did they buckle under rather than play hardball with Rooney on his contract?

Surely the history of former LFC owners, Hicks and Gilette should have informed u that u cannot do whatever pleases u as an owner of a football club.

Its a different kind of business...

All businesses are different but ownership is still understood!

Yes Liverpool owners left because they chose to. Mainly because they seem ignorant of the different rules for the US and England. Even then, if they decide not to leave nothing will happen. Worst case the club goes burst.

Have you thought that the GLAZERS can decide not to focus on football and make the club concentrate on something else? They can decide to use the real estate asset for something else.

While fans are important stakeholders or customers, they don't own the clubs and cannot be allowed to make decisions for the club. They can form a pressure group.

On a lighter note, the Liverpool fans and owners can be classified stupid based on happenings this past twenty years. When was the last epl trophy won again? Yeye people still living in ancient times.

On a serious note it seems stupid some of the crap u are spewing here. The Glazers CANNOT decide not to focus on football. Its impossible...

Hicks and Gilette did not leave cus they were ignorant of the difference in rules between US and England. First, I wonder what the hell that means. What are these rules that are supposedly different?

More importantly, Hicks and Gilette did not leave Liverpool; they were forced out...

It would help if u made some effort to educate urself on issues u jump into instead of repeatedly dumbing down the discussion....