Just remember folks; any money for transfers will be generated by re-mortgaging the club. Glazer does not plan to make Utd richer, he doesn't have the funds to buy the club outright. The Leeds Utd debt will look like an ant hill, when compared to the debt-mountain that Glazer intends to accumulate. From the worlds richest independent club to debt ridden over night. Fight it.

We dont need to 'spend big'. Look what happened when we did - Veron, Ferdinand (10 million over going rate). The board said it did not have the money for Rooney but found it when the crunch came. At the moment, we are debt free, able to compete on transfers if SAF wants the player - ronaldino went to barca for the weather and the night clubs, not the money. The weather we cannot change - unless Glazer wants to move 'the franchise' (sic) to Florida or LA.
Fight the carpetbagger! Yanks go home.

I don't know much about high finance but as I understand it people who control plcs want their companies to increase their profitability and for the share price to go up and not down. The share price is decided by professionals who speculate on a company's short and long term profitability. The last thing that Glazer wants is for the share price to fall and if he does mean to provide funds for the club it will come out of the fans' pockets and not his. To remove that money from the fans' pockets he has to provide a successful team and if he is serious about this bid then I'm sure that he has a plan to make that happen. I'm all for a detailed explanation as to what his intentions are and I am against being steamrollered by fellow fans into action without any information either. The club is a public company and not independent, it belongs to the shareholders and if there is a group who hold more than 50% of the shares then they can dictate how the club is run. The only thing that we as fans can do is stop supporting the club and we will never do that, surely if there is going to be a controlling group then it would be far more sensible to try and develop a good relationship with the owners than a confrontational one. Painting cars or shouting disagreement will not stop them, the only thing that can stop them is if you have more shares than they do.

The club is careful with its money, but it does spend big. The club sells players, but it is not a 'selling' club. The club is having on pitch difficulties, but is not some zero to turn to hero. So in what way is Glazer promising to do more than the plc already do?

Frank, If Glazer gets our club there will be no shares, no share prices, no shareholders, just an owner doing what he likes, in secret, answerable to no one except his financiers. We would be at the mercy of an American businessman in it for the money and with no roots in our town or country or sense of community. If Osmin Bin Laden offers you a good price for your church, your wife, your daughter or whatever is precious to to you do you sigh and take the money or do you try to fight back? ManU is our very culture, our hopes and our dreams and if some without billions to borrow have the passion to fight back with a can of red paint because that is the only thing they can afford, then I am not one to condemn them.

Frank,

If Glazer takes over it won't be a PLC anymore. That's the point.

Once he has a certain %age of the shareholding he can force the remainng shareholders (the fans) to sell up. There will no longer be acountability so he can cream off all the profits and send them home to the US.

He doesn't have to run the club well because he'll have no one to answer to. As long as he's putting money in his own pockets why would he care?

We're fine as we are thanks.

Frank of Old Trafford you got it in one - you dont know much about high finance. If Glazer gets control, and if he gets enough shares he can apply for a compulsory purchase of all share, he can then de-list the company and there will be no shares to trade so no share price as such to go up or down. Then it is up to him to sweat the company to get as much money out of it as he likes it is up to him. It will be a milch cow. The only reason united every went the plc route was someone convinced Martin Edwards it was the best way for him to make money. And he sure did. Dont forget Edwards was happy to accept just a few million from spivs like Maxwell and cant remember his name but he now owns or did own carlise utd. His dad Louise hoovered up shares on the cheap after Munich to gain control. M Edwards eventually made hundreds of millions!
The building societies threw a few bones to its members and the ones behind those floats made big money far outweighing the 'bones'. Glazer is in it for one thing only -money. If he does gain control and eventually offers to sell it back to the fans, you can bet it would be for a very very very big profit for him. Fight fight fight to repel him and his ilk

This is the kind of soundbite we should expect and the posturing is inevitable. We are sceptical because we assume his intentions of financing transfer funds will be from increased ticket revenues - we need to see his business plan and how transfer capacity is maintained against servicing debts of acquiring control.

Another issue is, what do the Cubic stable make of this situation? I do not see them as white knights but guys out to make a killing on their investment.

Let's face facts - the moment we were a quoted company, the writing was on the wall - we are now a financial institution and for sale on the open market - these protests will only harm the image of the club - face the reality.

What we should be lobbying for is a sustainable business plan that demonstrates capacity to build our worldwide networks, maintain a high performance in Europe to protect revenue streams and reduce the risk of exposure to the inevitable debts that a takeover will generate. If Glazer has a risible plan, then let us see it before we damage the image of the club further.

Whatever happens, we will always be a club that copes with adversity - let us get this into perspective, we know what disasters are - and this is not in our definition of one. I will always be proud of Man Utd and we will survive.

I think this piece of spun PT detracts from the truth of the situation. Firstly, spending money does not always win things. Secondly, United are already prepared to spend big. Glazer has been a large United shareholder for several years and in that time he has always voted to EXTRACT money from the club in dividends and not invest a penny. There is no reason whatsoever to suggest that he would suddenly change this policy once in control and no longer accountable. Tampa may have won ONE trophy under Glazer but they have collapsed and crumbled since, losing their stadium, best players and coach, and also seeing ticket prices soar.

Frank, don't be so naive. Glazer is motivated only by making money out of United. If that means mortgaging the club's future, he will do it without hesitation. We are in a financially healthy situation at the moment, we do not need to take on huge debts and become the next Leeds. Take off your blinkers and join Shareholders United and help us to stop this takeover.

While I'm against one person having control of our club, who is in control at the moment? 2 groups own 60%, the rest I don't know, but if there were 12 seats on the board, there would be two groups of four opposing each other, and then four singles, sitting there listening, each deciding which of the two influential groups to vote for on the current issue, leaving us with, realistically, two influential owners of our club at present. I understand that one all powerful owner is potentially disasterous, but how we are run at the moment is like a political pantomime, it keeps grabbing the headlines, with our narrator in chief David Gill keeping the audience amused with his satirical attempt to sound interested in football. Has anyone else noticed that we are sh*te ON the field at the moment? That's what I care about, so whatever the result of these corporate wars is, can we get back to concentrating, as a club, 100% on football please?

If Glazer wants to make money out of United then he had better make sure they win on the pitch. There is no money to be made with teams that lose every week. I believe it would be a good thing if he did take over. People criticised Edwards and Smith when they were in charge but does anyone think we have improved since the prsent board took over in 2001?

Frank whilst I understand and repect were you`re coming from on the issue of Glazer we need to be very worried. I have to agree that I`ve found no reasonable grounds to fear a takeover as long as everything is all above board, open and with the interests of United paramount. But on the issue of Glazer no-matter the media onslaught to put him in a favourable light with us fans, we have to be very careful and on guard at every moment. I can`t see how he can afford to buy United without putting us in debt, so how can this be in the interests of United. Also this Harris bid has also to be fought as he`s only jumping on the band wagon and has no interest in our club. Apparently by US law he can`t raise the money there by mortaging or using as security or collateral any of his business concerns, so again where is his funding for a takeover. Frank the only reasonable course of action on this bid is opposition, until Glazer explains how he`ll fund his bid. Live the dream!

Fair enough lads. As I said I didn't know the score and you've put me straight, sorted Sal. Still can't help feeling that there's bo-didley that we can do. Looks like the writing is on the wall and somebody is going to get control.

Nothing can guarantee that this takeover'll make team better or worse, but one thing that I would like to see is STUPID DECISION in transfer market TERMINATED.

Frank. I think you're also wrong on the diddly-squat we can do front as well. Alright, we can't prevent a takeover bid simply by buying up shares since way too much money is involved. But there are so many different thresholds for Glazer to pass to assume different degrees of control, 30% only forces him to launch a bid - it doesn't mean he has taken control, 50% to get his own way in the board room, something like 85% (?) to take United into private ownership and wind up the plc. There is an excellent chance that we can keep United as a plc and this would force Glazer to remain accountable, making it more difficult for him to siphon off money without anyone knowing, simply by the fans who own a few shares sticking together. SU have also had a few years know-how of lobbying large shareholders and institutions (even M&M) about what is in their interest - and selling up to Glazer may not be in their interest if they too see the scope for higher profits to be made. Each obstacle to Glazer makes it more likely that his bid will fail, or not materialise or that he will walk away. Simply by the fans being together, holding what few shares you can afford and helping in any way you can towards the effective campaigning by the various groups, we can make a difference, we're just not sure what that difference will be yet.