Myths & Facts

MYTH: A takeover would be good for the club. It would bring in much needed cash and give us a boost in the transfer market.
FACT: No doubt as an initial PR exercise someone looking to takeover the club (maybe Malcolm Glazer?) would put some money up (money borrowed against our club!) for new players to buy off the most gullible fans. Ask yourself whether you are THAT gullible to fall for this ploy.
Because after he made his token gesture he'd obviously be looking to maximise his return on investment. How could a private owner make more money for themselves while also creating a bigger transfer fund? Where would the extra money come from? There is only one source - the same one as it has always been. One way or another, whether it be ticket prices, TV subscriptions, or merchandise) the supporters will pay. Do you think the PLC is not screwing as much as they can out of fans already? Is there a margin left to squeeze fans more? Glazer appears to think so.
In the end all United's profits come from one source - us - the supporters. So ask yourself: how in the world does it make sense to have a middleman like Malcolm Glazer creaming off the profits before the residue goes into the Football Club?
The current big shareholders (Malcolm Glazer, John Magnier, JP McManus) have made no secret of the fact that they want to keep a tight reign on transfers. They have made this clear to the board. We also know with certainty that they have also been pushing the board to maximise ticket revenue (i.e. push the prices up just to the point where sales start to fall). We have also been told that the big shareholders also asked for increased dividends and special dividends taking yet more money out of the club.
If Glazer or any other investor-shareholder took the club private they would be able to take as much money as they liked (and they do like it) out of the club. This would most likely happen after a splurge on transfers for a season or two to buy off the really gullible fans. Don’t forget that money would be “our” money anyway because it would be borrowed against future earnings of Manchester United.
So let’s see: Manchester United gets taken over by men who have already demonstrated utter contempt for supporters who are only interested screwing as much out of fans on ticket prices, merchandise, and dividends as they can. DOES THIS SOUND LIKE A GOOD THING TO YOU?
After that they could screw us all and there would be nothing we could do about it. What choice would you have left? Pay up or go and support City?
The only shareholders who were against the increased dividend were the supporter-shareholders like Shareholders United. SU voted against the increased dividend on the basis of keeping the money in the club for spending on players and keeping ticket prices at reasonable levels. Glazer, Magnier etc all voted in favour of an increased dividend. If they are happy to take more money out of the club (and they have never put a penny in) when its public knowledge imagine how much they'd be secretly siphoning out if they took the club private and no longer had to publish public accounts or hold AGMs where people could call them to account?
So why add in a middle man who screws the supporters even more and then creams off his profit before the residue goes into transfer funds etc? It makes more sense to cut out the middle man and for supporters to own the club (or a sizeable portion) themselves. That way a professional board could run the club as an efficient business and keep all the profit (if that's what the supporter-shareholders wanted) in the club to spend on players/stadium/reduced ticket prices.
The bottom line is this: a takeover will not put a single penny of NEW money into Manchester United. They are just buying shares off other shareholders. The only thing that will result is the new owner taking increased profits from YOUR wallet.
If we do need an injection of cash why don't we could simply suspend the dividend - the millions that Glazer etc have insisted on taking out of the club every season? Excess profits are already being generated its just that the cash is flowing out in dividends. And if we do need more money we could easily raise this without selling the soul of the club. A new issue of shares for supporters would bring NEW money into the club and would give supporters greater ownership in return. That is far better than being screwed with increased ticket prices which simply serve to make someone else richer and give us nothing back in return.

MYTH: What’s so wrong with Malcolm Glazer? The Tampa Bay Buccaneers won a Super Bowl under him.
FACT: When Malcolm Glazer took over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers they were a lacklustre club with a miserable history. Even Tampa fans will agree this fact.
So Malcolm Glazer took them to the Super Bowl. Has he taken them to EVERY Super Bowl since he took over? No. Only one. Has he made it to the postseason playoffs in EVERY season since he took over? No. In fact the Buccaneers haven’t been all that good in recent years. If you are going to give Malcolm Glazer credit for winning, you must give it to him for losing too.
One thing is for sure though. Malcolm Glazer has in fact TREBLED his profits since his ownership began. Where has that money come from? Directly from the Tampa Bay fans – and it went straight into his pockets.
Consider that in the comparable time period, the Green Bay Packers – a club owned ENTIRELY by supporters – has had a BETTER record than Tampa Bay. They have won a Super Bowl and had better results. It’s proof positive that investors like Malcolm Glazer are no saviours.
We all know that there are no guarantees when it comes to silverware. Further, one must recognise that when Malcolm Glazer took over the Tampa Bay Buccaneers they were a lacklustre club with a miserable history. Put this in contrast with Manchester United. We had a ‘bad’ season in 2003-2004 and we STILL took home a major honour.
So if there are no guarantees in terms of glory, what’s an investor like Malcolm Glazer going to do for us except siphon money out of the club?

MYTH: I could care less with this money business. It has nothing to do with football.
FACT: While we wish this were true, money is hardly a new influence in football. Football and money have been intertwined for years, back even to the days before Munich. It is one of those evils that is unlikely to go away.
The point to be made however is that the money must be made a servant of the football, and not the other way around.
When an Investors buy a club it becomes their own personal financial instrument. Because the stakes are high they are always looking at their wallets. Sure they arrive with tempting promises but most know little about football and make the fatal assumption that money will bring glory. Make no mistake: at the end of the day they are in it to make money and take money out of the club. When their wallets are threatened it is the club that will suffer, not them. Recent history bears this out.
When supporters have ownership, they do so as an emotional investment that expresses their love for their club. In the case of Manchester United, there are tens of thousands of supporters who already own shares. They aren’t looking at their wallets. They are looking at the club’s performance on the pitch. Their goal is to REINVEST in the club, to renew and rebuild and win. You probably know a lot of these people. You’ll find them in the stands at Old Trafford, at aways in Europe, on tour with United in the USA, and wherever True Reds gather.
In short, when supporters own shares, the football really does come first. We own shares because the alternative is simply unacceptable. By owning shares we preserve over 125 years of history and tradition.

MYTH: It’s already a done deal. A takeover is inevitable and there’s no way to stop it.
FACT: First, remember this. They said we’d never stop Murdoch. Yet a group of people much fewer in number – controlling fewer shares in the club – knocked him off his perch. It CAN be done.
Nobody said this would be an easy fight, but it’s one we MUST win. And we’ve already had some successes. Nearly 18% of the shares of Manchester United plc are presently owned by supporters. While only a small portion of those are members of Shareholders United we believe that they would strongly oppose a takeover. By having more than 10% of the outstanding shareholders against a takeover, we can stop the plc from being privatised, which would preserve the club’s legal, financial, and ethical accountability to the supporters. Even if you are already a shareholder you should join Shareholders United. You lose nothing by doing so and retain all your rights and privileges.
Finally, know this: by all accounts there are millions of Manchester United supporters across the globe. If every one of them owned shares we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

MYTH: Our club already is for sale. It has been since we became a plc and continues to be with the flogging of new kits and such every year.
FACT: The decision to become a plc decision was controversial to be sure. But regardless of your feelings there are a couple of major advantages to this corporate form. One of these is that supporters can own shares in the club. Equally important is the club’s legal, financial, and ethical accountability to the supporters.
Certainly there is no doubt that much of the focus in on merchandising as well. Why? Because a plc is run by a group of directors and managers who must do what the owners of that company want – and because the majority of our owners are investors who care about profit more than football.
You want to change this? Simple. Help us swing the balance in favor of supporters by joining Shareholders United today.

MYTH: It’s all BS. Fans have no say in anything the club does.
FACT: Both IMUSA and Shareholders United would beg to differ with you. Ticket prices are very reasonable in comparison to those of other clubs. There are also regular meetings that supporters have with club management that ensure the voices of supporters are heard.
But while there have been major strides forward, the fact remains. The management of a plc is beholden to its shareholders. In order for supporters to be taken as seriously as JP Magnier, John McManus, and Malcolm Glazer, supporters need to own a larger portion of the club.

bibliography:http://www.mufcnotforsale.com/thefacts.php#nosay

Glazer sucks big time.May all the fans and non-fans,whether you support Man U or you watch other leagues,shareholder or not,unite behind the great Man United.It doesn't matter how much we earn or lose.We shall keep all our traditions and heritage of Man U and not bow down to the great Satan of Glazer

Down with Malcolm Glazer the Great Satan of America
Down with Judas Magnier
Down with Judas P MacManus
Down with Harry Judas Dobson

Long live Shareholders United
Long live Fergie
Long live the fans

Shareholders and Fans Unite
and show the traitors who should die first

Manchester United FC IS NOT FOR SALE
God is Great
He shall strike Glazer down