The cheek of Man Utd

[dylanisabaddog 5,089]

https://www.football365.com/news/man-utd-ratcliffe-old-trafford-wembley-north-government

The new part owner of United is to seek Government funding to build a Wembley of the north in Manchester. It could be used to host England games and, surprise surprise, would replace the crumbling Old Trafford. 

Anyone wishing to tell him to f*** off should form an orderly queue on the M62, A1, A17 and A47. 

[The Raptor 1,265]

It's a bit cheeky but he's seen it work for west ham so probably thought it was worth a try.

[Fen Canary 917]

27 minutes ago, The Raptor said:

It's a bit cheeky but he's seen it work for west ham so probably thought it was worth a try.

Wasn’t Man City’s the Commonwealth Games stadium as well? Manchester has already had it’s government funded stadium in that case 

[BSEYELLOW 36]

The difference being, Man City's and West Ham's were built as the centerpiece stadiums for international events and then converted so as not to waste them.  I havent seen this story in detail, but is Ratcliffe just expecting it to be built without a specific event attached?  Will surely be a no go for Gov funding if so.

[Old Shuck 194]

Ratcliffe is, at least if you believe all the interminable* media reports that are bubbling up around him, making his presence felt in Manchester and football in general....whilst, att the same time, coming across as a bit of an entitled prima donna.

He wants Ashworth, he wants a new, publicly funded stadium, he wants, echoing Ferguson's original quote, to knock Liverpool and Man City off their perches again.

Me me me me me. Making Manchester United great again.

I guess he thinks money really can buy him love. In Monaco.

*The game was once all about the players. Now as much mileage is given to owners, CEO's, agents and Directors of Football. 

[Commonsense 681]

18 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

Wasn’t Man City’s the Commonwealth Games stadium as well? Manchester has already had it’s government funded stadium in that case 

Yes it was. I think their situation and that of West Ham are different though. They were stadiums built for specific events which would otherwise have remained unused or underused. ( one of Brazil’s World Cup stadiums is now used as a bus station!) Ratcliffe wants to government to specifically build one of the country’s richest clubs a new stadium-and is using the regional card ‘ National stadium of the North’ to try and garner support. To make matters worse he is a multi billionaire who is tax resident in Monaco, so basically we can pay for it and he won’t!

[king canary 7,714]

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

https://www.football365.com/news/man-utd-ratcliffe-old-trafford-wembley-north-government

The new part owner of United is to seek Government funding to build a Wembley of the north in Manchester. It could be used to host England games and, surprise surprise, would replace the crumbling Old Trafford. 

Anyone wishing to tell him to f*** off should form an orderly queue on the M62, A1, A17 and A47. 

This is weirdly the norm in American sports so maybe he got the idea from the Glazers? I've never understood tax payer money going on stadiums for multi billion dollar sports teams.

[Canary73 170]

 

[dylanisabaddog 5,089]

What I neglected to say in my original post is that Ratcliffe claims Manchester United is the biggest club in the world. Nonsense. 

Real Madrid 14

Man Utd 3

[Thirsty Lizard 3,187]

36 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

Yes it was. I think their situation and that of West Ham are different though. They were stadiums built for specific events which would otherwise have remained unused or underused. ( one of Brazil’s World Cup stadiums is now used as a bus station!) Ratcliffe wants to government to specifically build one of the country’s richest clubs a new stadium-and is using the regional card ‘ National stadium of the North’ to try and garner support. To make matters worse he is a multi billionaire who is tax resident in Monaco, so basically we can pay for it and he won’t!

Apparently it's owned by Jose Mourinho - he parks a lot of the buses that he owns there....................................

[Capt. Pants 4,336]

Attanasio should be proposing a national stadium of the east ☺️😉

 

[dylanisabaddog 5,089]

7 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

Attanasio should be proposing a national stadium of the east ☺️😉

 

In Norfolk obviously 

[JonnyJonnyRowe 562]

A fair alternative to this proposal is to seek a contractual agreement with the FA to host a certain percentage of England home fixtures at the ground in return for them rubber stamping the design proposal, say 35 or 40 percent.

I actually like the idea of having a secondary location for England games in the North, the economy is too London-centric, and would enable a degree of pragmatism. 

It would also mean that both play off semis could be played on the same day, one at Wembley and one at New Trafford or whatever it will be called.

If you end up with say Leeds versus West Brom and Ipswich v Norwich in these seasons play offs then it would make sense to host the Leeds game up north and the Norwich game down south.

Man Utd can then generate a forecast for expected revenue from these additional fixtures and use it to help find private financing.

Obviously I can't support tax money being used to help fund while bankrupt local authorities are cutting budgets for critical social services and our roads are unusable for all the potholes, but if there was means for the FA to commit to utilising the ground for xx years to assist with the task of financing, then that's good common ground. And Man Utd fixtures are important to the local economy in Manchester, loads fly in from Ireland and beyond, and Asian tourists buy tickets, Manchester hotels get booked out for Utd home games. So we should be overall supportive of the idea of England having a Northern base.

Edited February 22 by JonnyJonnyRowe

[......and Smith must score. 1,369]

This guy’s got more front than Selfridges.

Allegedly worth £20-odd billion. Saves billions by living in tax exile in Monaco then suggests using public money on his vanity project.

He can **** right off.

 

[Fen Canary 917]

9 minutes ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

A fair alternative to this proposal is to seek a contractual agreement with the FA to host a certain percentage of England home fixtures at the ground in return for them rubber stamping the design proposal, say 35 or 40 percent.

I actually like the idea of having a secondary location for England games in the North, the economy is too London-centric, and would enable a degree of pragmatism. 

It would also mean that both play off semis could be played on the same day, one at Wembley and one at New Trafford or whatever it will be called.

If you end up with say Leeds versus West Brom and Ipswich v Norwich in these seasons play offs then it would make sense to host the Leeds game up north and the Norwich game down south.

Man Utd can then generate a forecast for expected revenue from these additional fixtures and use it to help find private financing.

Obviously I can't support tax money being used to help fund while bankrupt local authorities are cutting budgets for critical social services and our roads are unusable for all the potholes, but if there was means for the FA to commit to utilising the ground for xx years to assist with the task of financing, then that's good common ground. And Man Utd fixtures are important to the local economy in Manchester, loads fly in from Ireland and beyond, and Asian tourists buy tickets, Manchester hotels get booked out for Utd home games. So we should be overall supportive of the idea of England having a Northern base.

The playoffs are home and away, so apart from the telly there’s no reason they can’t be played at the same time now.

This is just a billionaire trying to get the government to build something that he would benefit from. Socialise the cost and privatise the profit 

[Capt. Pants 4,336]

If you can get your head around how it can be a revenue stream for the 'UK Government' going forward then it might work.

Ratcliffe would need to become a UK tax payer though, otherwise it's hardly a vote winner!

 

[......and Smith must score. 1,369]

15 minutes ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

I actually like the idea of having a secondary location for England games in the North, the economy is too London-centric, and would enable a degree of pragmatism. 

………..It would also mean that both play off semis could be played on the same day, one at Wembley and one at New Trafford or whatever it will be called.

If you end up with say Leeds versus West Brom and Ipswich v Norwich in these seasons play offs then it would make sense to host the Leeds game up north and the Norwich game down south.

Am I missing something here ?

The Play-Off semis are played over two legs home and away. It’s only the Final that’s played at a neutral venue. 

 

[......and Smith must score. 1,369]

12 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

This is just a billionaire trying to get the government to build something that he would benefit from. Socialise the cost and privatise the profit 

With Labour being a shoo-in at the General Election they’ll soon knock Sunny Jim’s idea right on the head

[shefcanary 2,504]

1 hour ago, Capt. Pants said:

Attanasio should be proposing a national stadium of the east ☺️😉

I'd absolutely support him on that. I think the plans should also include looking at the major indoor arena for the East on the Carrow Road footprint as well. From a political point of view as soon as he gets control he needs to open such conversations.

42 minutes ago, ......and Smith must score. said:

With Labour being a shoo-in at the General Election they’ll soon knock Sunny Jim’s idea right on the head

Hmm, maintaining the red wall intact in the north will potentially make them open to such a plan. It will also keep them in with the major industrialist from the UK as well. I am absolutely certain Ratcliffe would not have floated the idea without having discrete chats with Tory and Labour central office's, but probably more important in his meeting with Andy Burnham who would ulitmately hold the governments purse strings. Burnham has been quite vocal about moving the national stadium further North in the past so I would expect further announcements after the election.

All this is why I would certainly support Attanasio campaigning for a national stadium for the East. 

[Conrad 179]

1 hour ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

A fair alternative to this proposal is to seek a contractual agreement with the FA to host a certain percentage of England home fixtures at the ground in return for them rubber stamping the design proposal, say 35 or 40 percent.

I actually like the idea of having a secondary location for England games in the North, the economy is too London-centric, and would enable a degree of pragmatism. 

It would also mean that both play off semis could be played on the same day, one at Wembley and one at New Trafford or whatever it will be called.

If you end up with say Leeds versus West Brom and Ipswich v Norwich in these seasons play offs then it would make sense to host the Leeds game up north and the Norwich game down south.

Man Utd can then generate a forecast for expected revenue from these additional fixtures and use it to help find private financing.

Obviously I can't support tax money being used to help fund while bankrupt local authorities are cutting budgets for critical social services and our roads are unusable for all the potholes, but if there was means for the FA to commit to utilising the ground for xx years to assist with the task of financing, then that's good common ground. And Man Utd fixtures are important to the local economy in Manchester, loads fly in from Ireland and beyond, and Asian tourists buy tickets, Manchester hotels get booked out for Utd home games. So we should be overall supportive of the idea of England having a Northern base.

Northern base, yes. But why should Manchester United be the only club involved or as tenants? 

[Haus 260]

1 hour ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

A fair alternative to this proposal is to seek a contractual agreement with the FA to host a certain percentage of England home fixtures at the ground in return for them rubber stamping the design proposal, say 35 or 40 percent.

I actually like the idea of having a secondary location for England games in the North, the economy is too London-centric, and would enable a degree of pragmatism. 

It would also mean that both play off semis could be played on the same day, one at Wembley and one at New Trafford or whatever it will be called.

If you end up with say Leeds versus West Brom and Ipswich v Norwich in these seasons play offs then it would make sense to host the Leeds game up north and the Norwich game down south.

Man Utd can then generate a forecast for expected revenue from these additional fixtures and use it to help find private financing.

Obviously I can't support tax money being used to help fund while bankrupt local authorities are cutting budgets for critical social services and our roads are unusable for all the potholes, but if there was means for the FA to commit to utilising the ground for xx years to assist with the task of financing, then that's good common ground. And Man Utd fixtures are important to the local economy in Manchester, loads fly in from Ireland and beyond, and Asian tourists buy tickets, Manchester hotels get booked out for Utd home games. So we should be overall supportive of the idea of England having a Northern base.

If tax payers pay for it, all concert revenue and other sporting events revenue should go back to the national treasury.  (any naming rights too)

[Fen Canary 917]

4 minutes ago, Haus said:

If tax payers pay for it, all concert revenue and other sporting events revenue should go back to the national treasury.  (any naming rights too)

And United charged significant rent to play there 

[JonnyJonnyRowe 562]

1 hour ago, Fen Canary said:

The playoffs are home and away

Ah yeah silly me! 

I was thinking about FA Cup Semi's! 

[JonnyJonnyRowe 562]

1 hour ago, ......and Smith must score. said:

Am I missing something here ?

The Play-Off semis are played over two legs home and away. It’s only the Final that’s played at a neutral venue. 

 

You aren't missing anything, although you also weren't the first to point it out.

That teaches me to post before my first coffee of the day.

[JonnyJonnyRowe 562]

1 hour ago, Conrad said:

Northern base, yes. But why should Manchester United be the only club involved or as tenants? 

You could also have England as a 'touring team', however when you look at the stadiums which are big enough and worthy it wouldn't be much of a tour.

Arsenal, Spurs, West Ham are all in London near Wembley, and Anfield is a 40 minute drive from Old Trafford.

Suppose Newcastle could feel a bit aggrieved. Every other ground is below 50,000 capacity.

The new Man Utd stadium will have a capacity of 90,000 to match Wembley. Next biggest stadium outside of London is Anfield which holds 61,015. 

But as I said, I don't support any taxpayer funding for the build. Would have to be Manchester Uniteds stadium, with England leasing for X number of fixtures to be palatable. 

Edited February 22 by JonnyJonnyRowe

[dylanisabaddog 5,089]

Adrian Chiles is on Radio 5 at the moment and started his programme by asking who out there wants to pay for a new stadium for Manchester United. 

[......and Smith must score. 1,369]

1 hour ago, Capt. Pants said:

If you can get your head around how it can be a revenue stream for the 'UK Government' going forward then it might work.

Ratcliffe would need to become a UK tax payer though, otherwise it's hardly a vote winner!

 

Radcliffe’s hardly going to give up his tax free billions though. Man Utd are in this mess because the tight-a*se Glazers have bled the club dry for profit and let the stadium fall into disrepair. 

They want a new stadium ? They’re probably the most famous and one of the biggest clubs in the world. Let them pay for it.

[Commonsense 681]

2 hours ago, JonnyJonnyRowe said:

A fair alternative to this proposal is to seek a contractual agreement with the FA to host a certain percentage of England home fixtures at the ground in return for them rubber stamping the design proposal, say 35 or 40 percent.

I actually like the idea of having a secondary location for England games in the North, the economy is too London-centric, and would enable a degree of pragmatism. 

It would also mean that both play off semis could be played on the same day, one at Wembley and one at New Trafford or whatever it will be called.

If you end up with say Leeds versus West Brom and Ipswich v Norwich in these seasons play offs then it would make sense to host the Leeds game up north and the Norwich game down south.

Man Utd can then generate a forecast for expected revenue from these additional fixtures and use it to help find private financing.

Obviously I can't support tax money being used to help fund while bankrupt local authorities are cutting budgets for critical social services and our roads are unusable for all the potholes, but if there was means for the FA to commit to utilising the ground for xx years to assist with the task of financing, then that's good common ground. And Man Utd fixtures are important to the local economy in Manchester, loads fly in from Ireland and beyond, and Asian tourists buy tickets, Manchester hotels get booked out for Utd home games. So we should be overall supportive of the idea of England having a Northern base.

Why on earth should the fa  underwrite funding for Manchester United,when they already own their own stadium? Obviously ‘rentagob’ Burnham will support this but it doesn’t make it right. Even if you do believe that the economy is too London-centric ( though remember London is the one region that generates more tax revenue than it receives) Manchester is the one Northern City that has received huge amounts of spending compared to say Sheffield and Newcastle. Maybe he could ask the Monagasque government to fund it!

[Channon’s Windmill 344]

3 hours ago, BSEYELLOW said:

The difference being, Man City's and West Ham's were built as the centerpiece stadiums for international events and then converted so as not to waste them.  I havent seen this story in detail, but is Ratcliffe just expecting it to be built without a specific event attached?  Will surely be a no go for Gov funding if so.

Absolutely, the Gov are struggling to prop up the country- file under not happening.

[JonnyJonnyRowe 562]

38 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

Why on earth should the fa  underwrite funding for Manchester United,when they already own their own stadium? Obviously ‘rentagob’ Burnham will support this but it doesn’t make it right. Even if you do believe that the economy is too London-centric ( though remember London is the one region that generates more tax revenue than it receives) Manchester is the one Northern City that has received huge amounts of spending compared to say Sheffield and Newcastle. Maybe he could ask the Monagasque government to fund it!

You appear to have completely misread my post and become a bit gobby yourself. I clearly state that I don't support any tax money being spent on the build. Nada, zilch, nothing. Absolutely 100% against that.

I merely suggested that the FA could agree to play a certain number of fixtures at the stadium, if it was designed appropriately for their needs, which may have the knock on effect of assisting Manchester United in their quest to source private finance, much of which you'd expect to come from overseas.

If a single penny of taxpayers money is spent on New Old Trafford or whatever it will be called, then Everton and possibly the rest of the Premier League should sue. 

It is to all of our detriment that the country as a whole is so London-centric, Germany is perhaps the best example of a major developed country in Europe having multiple key economic centres.

Edited February 22 by JonnyJonnyRowe