-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Circus ManUnitus - Erik's At The Wheel
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
Denmark Spur
Edgar Davids
Given the new regulations on seating pitch and spacing, they'd have to use a huge amount more footprint just to keep their current seat numbers if they rebuilt.
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
Regulations?
Clearly they haven’t applied any new refs at Klanfield. Seats are so close your arm falls on the person next to you
When did they last rebuild a stand?
Also not sure if the regs apply to a whole stadium or individual stands. Would be a fairly large loophole if clubs could just build stands separately.
Bedfordspurs
Martin Peters
They have done 2 extensions
We be been in one and that was recent
Worse than old WHL
jts1882
Dean Richards
Only existing stands that are kept are exempt. When they built their new main stand, Liverpool kept the lower tier seating and built the new larger part behind. My understanding is they kept the seats in the lower tier at the old standards, while need to apply the new ones to the expansion.
Completely. Its why some of the flak which the Glaziers get I think is unfair. They're allowed the club to spend fortunes. I'm not sure what or how much they've taken out of the club but it certainly seems that they've been re-investing a large chunk of profits. Comrade Neville and others in the media dont seem to mention this thoug
Gazza Dazzla
Chris Perry
Similar to us in the Sugar years, it wasn’t the amount being spent, but rather what it was spent on and who was spending it.
The problem was when they first took over they didn't spend. As they had to pay off the loan. Then they launched on th us stock exchange and started spending. Fergie had gone by then and the rot had set in, they then spent badly.
Baleforce
Ron Henry
It’s a sustainable model, for which they should be applauded.
It’s how they bought it in the first place where criticism is valid.
Fans should be careful what they wish for, the next lot might be worse, and even if they do get someone willing to financially dope them with their own money that would be a step back morally.
Makes me think of Saudi Sportswashing Machine, they hounded out Ashley, but they were financially stable and he’s a saint compared to the new owners.
jts1882
Dean Richards
They never did pay off the loan. It's bigger now than the initial loan. The net cost of the Glazer takeover stands at £1.6 billion according to Swiss Ramble, more than enough to build a world class new stadium.
Of course they haven't been starved of funds compare to anyone else and have spent that badly. But the Glazers are the ones who set the club structure.
I know. But at the beginning they had massive short term loans they had to pay. Which massively limited their spending.
Even now they pay more interest on their loans than we do.
Am i missing something? These 2 keep talking of a hostile takeover and that being the reason they are spending money. The glazers own 69% of utd as far as i'm aware. So there can't be a hostile takeover. Someone may buy a minority share from other shareholders, but can't buy shares from the glazers unless they want to sell.
thfcsteff
Terry Dyson
So help me I laughed a lot!!!!