Come here to laugh at United

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
r-u-s-x said:
Still bad ownership not to have a structure in place to invest successfully. They have also spent nothing on the ground or training facilities, loads of spending but no long term thinking
Click to expand...
I think that was pretty much what Ronaldo said when he went back that they were still the same as when he left
 
All those Man U fans crying that the Glaziers aren't spending money don't deserve to have the REAL problems resolved.
 
A piece of good news for ManU fans, the club currently in bottom place of PL table,

They are only 2 points behind Liverpool :D :D

They play each other next so ManU could overtake them
 
Tomo said:
Is there a crapper owner than the Glazers? From where United where to where they are now hard to think of one.
Click to expand...

images
 
Tomo said:
Is there a crapper owner than the Glazers? From where United where to where they are now hard to think of one.
Click to expand...
Plenty worse I think, like the Oyston's of Blackpool, Vincent Tan of Cardif, the Everton lot. West Ham.

More needs to be said of West Ham's owners. Sold Upton Park and pocketed the money. Now they are forced to lease a stadium they get next to no revenue from. When the lease is up in another 80 years or if there is a break clause, if London decide they need the stadium for housing, they may have to end up doing an MK Dons. They will never get a stadium near London again.
 
punky said:
Plenty worse I think, like the Oyston's of Blackpool, Vincent Tan of Cardif, the Everton lot. West Ham.

More needs to be said of West Ham's owners. Sold Upton Park and pocketed the money. Now they are forced to lease a stadium they get next to no revenue from. When the lease is up in another 80 years or if there is a break clause, if London decide they need the stadium for housing, they may have to end up doing an MK Dons. They will never get a stadium near London again.
Click to expand...
No break clause, if they get rid of West ham there will be a huge fee to do so. Great deal signed between Brady and Boris
 
r-u-s-x said:
No break clause, if they get rid of West ham there will be a huge fee to do so. Great deal signed between Brady and Boris
Click to expand...
Not really. If you owned your house outright but sold it and moved into renting even on a very long term lease , you'd be stupid.

When the lease is up the City of London can charge what they want. What's West Ham going to do, move to Billericay? Seems a long way away but we've been around 140 years, most EPL clubs will be around 100 more, you'd think.
 
punky said:
Not really. If you owned your house outright but sold it and moved into renting even on a very long term lease , you'd be stupid.

When the lease is up the City of London can charge what they want. What's West Ham going to do, move to Billericay? Seems a long way away but we've been around 140 years, most EPL clubs will be around 100 more, you'd think.
Click to expand...

100 years time may never come.
 
Anybody who reads this thread and wants to defend the glazers (from a United fan perspective) needs a proper whack round the head, absolutely disgusting.

This is an amazing read. The word parasite sums up the entire Glazer tenure.

 
punky said:
Not really. If you owned your house outright but sold it and moved into renting even on a very long term lease , you'd be stupid.

When the lease is up the City of London can charge what they want. What's West Ham going to do, move to Billericay? Seems a long way away but we've been around 140 years, most EPL clubs will be around 100 more, you'd think.
Click to expand...
I said no break clause.

The lease they hold was 100 years with clear guidance of what is needed to be supplied. The lease is guaranteed* by the city of london so even if the the holding company goes bust they will still be able to insist on their contract. At the end of the 100 years they will have a problem but that's probably another stadium rebuild or so away (this one will be 30 years tops before it needs to be replaced)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom