faut peut étre embaucher des millieux capable de faire des passes pour marquer des buts car a part ronaldo prsonne n´en ets capable . la difference peut étre la . .

mais ca va faire 1 an 1/2 qu´on le dit

quand au mauvais debut de saison , il ne correspond jamai qu´a notre saison minable de l´année derniére . ..

autre chose ce qui m´agace vraiment c´est les declarations des joueurs de MU . ..

quand t´ecoutes giggs dire qu´on a une meilleure equipe qu´arsenal et chelsea ca me fait marrer . .

arsenal c´est 26 en 8 , nous 9 but en 8 . ..

c´est 15 points de diff l´année derniére et 9 cette année . .

quand j´écoute fergie dire qu´on a la meilleur équipe quil n´y ait jamais eu a MU , ca me fairt peur . .

ou neville la semaine derniére qui dit que Mu va gagner le championnat avec la maniére faudrait déja gagner un match a old trafford . ..

il n´y a que keane qui se rends compte de la situation catastrophique de MU et la fin de gégen qui est la . .

Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho has stated that one of his midfielders will be sold during the January transfer window as he has too many stars.

The Portuguese tactician has a wealth of talent in the middle of the park with the likes of Claude Makelele, Alexei Smertin, Frank Lampard, Joe Cole, Damien Duff, Geremi, Arjen Robben, Scott Parker and Tiago Mendes all vying for places.

Dutch starlet Robben is yet to feature as he is on the mend from injury, however Parker, a £10 million acquisition from Charlton, is fit and out of the first-team picture.

Although the former Addicks´ star is favourite to be offloaded come the turn of the New Year, Mourinho is happy with the player.

" What I can say is that I have a lot of midfield players and no one is injured," said Mourinho.

" Somebody has to be out. But I stay happy because the player is not unhappy.

" If a player is not being used many times and he´s happy, it´s because he has no ambition.

" Scott is probably feeling unhappy because he is not playing but he is working every day and his chance will arrive."

c sur ke la defense ca va latake ossi mai le milieu c ronaldo rien dotre en gro pour le milieu defensif kean fe encore laffaire rooney peu pren la placede sholes donc il fo un ailier gauche et des renplacan potable

franchement,je pense que MU a une super equipe cette année.Il faut juste que les joueurs trouvent les automatismes, c pas compliqué et je pense(j´espere) que ca viendra bientot. C vrai qu´arsenal et chelsea avancent a grands pas,mais il juste donner un peu de temps a MU et ca viendra.Par contre c vrai que faire jouer oshea en milieu est une grosse ereur de fergusson, kleberson et miller peuvent assurer ce poste assez bien.et je pense que gary neville devrait laisser la releve a son frere qui joue beaucoup mieux.
je pense aussi que smith devrait avoir plus de temps de jeu car c le meilleur joueur de ce debut de saison, c un vrai battant, et il ne se laisse jamais faire.c vraiment un boss.
quand a ronaldo, il a eu enormement de dechets dans le match d´aujourd´hui,il choisit rarement la bonne solution, il devrait penser plus a ses coequipiers que tirer au but. voila, j´espere que manchester united reviendra vite au top. tchao les gars.

Oui il a jouer Rooney le match entier, et il a pas jouer trés bien même. En deuxième mi-temps on l´a vu une fois ou deux c´est tout. Mais bon il revient c´est normal.
Sinon Drogba c´est blessé ce soir, si il est absent pour les prochains matchs, Chelsea aura surement beaucoup plus de mal.

Manchester United PLC
04 October 2004

4 October 2004

MANCHESTER UNITED PLC ( the ´Company´)

Statement re possible offer

The Board of Manchester United PLC ( the ´Company´) notes the recent press
speculation. It confirms that it has received a preliminary approach regarding
a possible offer for the Company. This approach contains a number of
significant conditions.

The Company is seeking clarification of this proposal and at this stage it is
unclear whether any offer will be made.

The Board will make a further announcement if appropriate.

This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange

Plus qu´à attendre ^^

quelqun a le lien de l equipe svp ?

United ´takeover´ held up
Malcolm Glazer´s takeover bid for Manchester United is being held up because the club´s leading shareholders - JP McManus and John Magnier - are holding out for a massive £3 per share. Glazer wants to bring a new era of success to United, with domination of the Champions League his target - not just the Premiership. He also wants United to make far more money from commercial activities in the USA. The Irish connection are seeking £3 a share, which would yield a formidable £300m profit from their purchase of shares. However, Glazer will not pay such a high premium, and that stand-off is blocking his progress. A potential alternative for Glazer would be to raise funds through securitisation deals, effectively mortgaging against future season ticket sales and revenue streams.
Harry Harris, Daily Express

United fans warn Glazer they´ll fight takeover bid
Manchester United supporters´ groups warned US tycoon Malcolm Glazer that they will fight dirty to stop any takeover at Old Trafford. Glazer´s advisor Mehmet Dalman confirmed over the weekend that the owner of NFL franchise Tampa Bay Buccaneers - who owns a 19 per cent stake in United - is considering a takeover bid for the Premiership club. Last night Jules Spencer, of the Independent Manchester United Supporters Association, said: " We sent Murdoch packing and Magnier and McManus a bloody nose. If Glazer wants a fight, we will give him one. We want to make it clear that he is not welcome or wanted as owner of Manchester United."

< <<< de tout de facon les supporteurs de Mu ne veulent pas que glazer rachetent le ckub . donc il ne le fera pas . Pas sur que ce soit la meilleure facon car MU n´a plus les moyens de lutter vraiment dans le marche des transferts. On verra bien si c´est une erreur ou pas parce que vu que sportivemen Mu est en train de s´ecrouler

http://lequipe.servicesalacarte.wanadoo.fr/Quotidien/quoti.html

Summary
1. A takeover would not bring in a single penny of NEW money into the football club. It is a transaction between shareholders ? one buying shares off another.
2. Supporters are being asked to lend the money for someone to take over our own club. He intends to borrow against future earnings. OUR EARNINGS. Leeds did this and look where it left them.
3. We already make excess profits but big shareholders like Glazer cream them off in dividends. Imagine how much more would go out if he owned the club himself.
4. If we need a cash injection we could suspend the dividend that Glazer has been only to happy to take. And if we need more money a new issue of shares would bring NEW money into the club and give supporters the chance to get something in return instead of just paying through increased ticket prices

The first thing we need to do is address the constant ? Gold Trafford? spin which emerges every time a bid is rumoured. No doubt as an initial PR exercise Glazer would put some money up ( money borrowed against our club!) for new players to buy off the most gullible fans ( are you that gullible?). After that he´d obviously be looking to maximise his return on investment. In the end all United´s profits come from one source - us - the supporters. Whether its tickets, TV subscriptions, merchandise it all comes from us. So why have a middle man like Glazer creaming off the profits before the residue goes into the Football Club.

The current big shareholders ( Glazer, Magnier, McManus) have made no secret of the fact that they want to keep a tight reign on transfers ( and have made this clear to the board) while screwing as much out of supporters on ticket prices etc. as they can. We know they have 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. Most likely 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. After that they could screw us all and there would be nothing we could do about it. Pay up or go and support city?

The only shareholders who were against the increased dividend were the supporter-shareholders like Shareholders United who actually 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?

Why do people believe the PR spin that Glazer could bring money into the club? 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 ( ticket prices) or another ( TV subscriptions, 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.

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.

A takeover will not put a single penny of NEW money into Manchester United. They are just buying shares off other shareholders. 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.

For the sake of your club don´t be fooled into selling out 126 years of history and tradition.

For your own sake don´t be fooled into higher ticket prices and siphoning off of United´s huge future earnings. Money that should be going into the Football Club, not Glazer´s pocket.

Stand up for your club and join more than 10,000 United supporters who?ve already signed up to Shareholders United ? The Manchester United Supporters? Trust.

vu le bordel que c´est cette année encore je crois qu´on peut mettre une croix sur cette saison une fois de plus . ..

c´est la merde en coulisse , fergie devient gateux enfaisant jouero´shea et en ne mettant pas kleberson , sportivement on est pas au niveau . ..

et en plus c´est la fronde des supporteurs eton ne connait méme pas l´aenir du club . ..

c´est reparti pour une année de misére

This is a tale of three different sorts of people. They all have some sort of relationship with Manchester United. Given that you are reading this, you will be one of these people. What I´m going to suggest is that you are really important, and that you really matter. I´m going to suggest that Manchester United depends on you, possibly more right now than ever before. What I´m going to say is nothing that hasn´t been said before, but it´s really important - because you´re really important - that you give this a lot of thought at this time. Why not find a quiet comfy chair before you read on?

Once upon a time, many years ago, I tried to buy some shares in Manchester United. This was a long time before Manchester United FC became Manchester United plc, and so shares in the club were not traded in the way they are today. Why did I want to buy some shares? Well, because I just did. I was bonkers about United, and I just wanted to have a share certificate on my wall - just one share would have done me nicely. I can only explain it by saying that I wanted to feel as close as I possibly could to my football team - it had become apparent to me by then, you see, that I was unlikely to inherit the right to wear Denis Law´s shirt. I gave no thought to how much a share would cost, and I knew that once I had it I would never sell it. A share in Manchester United could not be expressed as a monetary value.

To cut a long story short, I never did get my share. Stocks and shares were things I didn´t much understand, and when I spoke to a stockbroker, it was as though we were speaking totally different languages. We understood the words we were saying to each other, but the concept of someone wanting to buy a tiny number of shares, worth a fraction of the broker´s commission, and with no regard to any financial value, was a bit alien to him. He was very nice, patronised me a bit, promised to get back to me, and never did.

In 1991, when United went public, I finally got my small number of shares. Again the stockbroker ( a different one!) thought I was nutty, but the transaction went ahead. I got my share certificate, and it was mine forever - at least that was what I thought.

By doing what I did, I put myself in the first group of people that I want to describe. I am a United supporter who has a few shares in the club. Sometimes you hear people like me referred to as supporter-shareholders - it´s a horrible phrase, but I can live with it for the time being. If I could generalise, I´d say that supporter-shareholders have a few things in common. They tend to have small ( even minuscule) numbers of shares, and often they are totally uninterested in share dividend payments. Many such people have taken advantage of a scheme that reinvests their tiny dividends into a new share or two. More than anything, though, these people have shares in United because they love United - and for no other reason at all.

If we have supporter-shareholders, it follows that we also have supporters who are not shareholders. This is my second group of people. There are thousands of these among United´s traditional support among the people of Manchester. There are thousands more across the UK, and ( if we believe what we are told about the overseas ´fan-base´ - another horrible phrase) around the world. For many of these people, United is a way of life, a passion. There is no disputing this, and there is no problem with them not being shareholders - at least not in terms of the respect they deserve. What I´m going to suggest, in fact, is that non-shareholding fans have got a major role in defining the future of our club. Bear with me for a minute.

We need to mention our third group of people. These are shareholders in Manchester United whose ´investment´ is purely financial. They own shares in United because they see the ´company´ as a good investment. They consider that the value of their shares is likely to rise over time, and they are attracted by the dividends that are paid on their shareholding. Because they are financially motivated, these people are called investor-shareholders - yet another horrible phrase, but again it´ll do for now. Let me say that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with being an investor-shareholder, and there is nothing wrong with people wanting to make a profit. It´s the world we live in. Most of us have got pension plans, and we expect our pension fund managers to invest wisely on our behalf. As long as they do so ethically, we tend to be happy. I´ve often wondered, incidentally, if Leeds supporters instruct their fund managers that investment in Manchester United is unethical, or whether they are content to take the money.

There is one characteristic of investor-shareholders, however, that causes a problem from the point of view of supporter-shareholders. It is simply that investor-shareholders are awash with dosh. The amounts that they invest, and the shareholding that they obtain, render minuscule the shareholding of many thousands of small supporter-shareholders. The upshot is that the voice of supporter-shareholders can be drowned out, even ridiculed. It could be argued, for example, that at the time of the proposed BSkyB take-over of United in 1998 the big players simply disregarded the views of the supporter-shareholders and the non-shareholding supporters. The response of the little people, however, was to get organised - to be united for United - and we saw how successful we were.

There is a vast distinction between investor-shareholders ( such as fund managers, or even wealthy individuals) who are passive players, content to reap their dividends, and those who become investors with an eye on assuming control. There are very few in this latter group - BSkyB was such a player, now departed - but in recent months their significance may have grown. You don´t need me to tell you who has been active in acquiring extremely large proportions of the shareholding in Manchester United - we´ve all read the papers. What is not clear, partly because it is in no one´s interest to make it clear, is what the intentions of these new heavy investors are. It´s hard to tell who´s in it for the profit and who - if anyone - is looking to profit from control. And what they would do to United if ever such control were achieved.

This is where you come in.

Whether you are a supporter with shares or a supporter without shares, it is the future of your football club that is at stake. Remember this football club belongs to the people of Manchester, who have sustained it for a century and a quarter. We embrace fellow supporters from across the country or around the world, where their interest in United is genuine. Many of these supporters will have Manchester origins anyway. Remember too that we are talking about our precious Manchester United here, not some media-mutant called ´ManU´. Remember that there is no such thing as ManU.

Think about what would happen if someone came along, without any knowledge of United, without any interest in our history, and without any regard whatsoever for us and for our heritage. Think about what would happen if such a person came from some far-off land, and simply because he was so very rich was able to buy our football club and own it. Think about what you could do about it if he wanted to milk it for all the cash it was worth. Think about your season ticket price being doubled. Think about how you would feel if he decided to ´re-brand´ the club - to change the name on the badge to ManU, and to change the colour of the team´s shorts to black - because it looked better in a catalogue. Just think about all that for a minute. Could none of it happen? Are you sure? Do you care?

Maybe you´ve read too much about Chelsea. Maybe you are enticed by the ´Gold Trafford´ headlines that appear whenever a potential buyer appears on the scene. Maybe you did believe that the £600m that BSkyB was going to pay for control of United would have gone into a transfer kitty, and not - as is the case - simply into the pockets of the existing shareholders in exchange for their shares.

But don´t think about Chelsea at all. They are irrelevant here. Remember they were in dire straits when the Russian arrived, United are not. United are sitting on a £39m profit, and we don´t need a new owner to get us off the hook. Leeds might, we don´t. And don´t forget that Chelsea were charging £49 for a match ticket the other week.

Don´t think about Jack Walker either. Nor Sir Jack Hayward at Wolves. These were unique people, who were passionate about their local clubs, and who were prepared to give away fortunes acquired over a lifetime to help their clubs. Not a penny did they take. There are no Jack Walkers looking to give all their money to United for the sheer thrill and a share in the glory.

Instead think about what happens when someone comes along and buys your house. He might even let you continue to live in it - pay him rent - but it´s not your house any more. Would you sell your house to someone because you thought they might put a few PVC windows in and buy you a new living room carpet? Or would you prefer not to take the chance?

And this is why you are really important, and why you can do something now to help United to remain an independent club with a significant supporter ownership. Did you know that if 10% of United´s shares were owned by people who would reject a private take-over it would be much more difficult for a potential buyer to gain total control? The buyer would not be able to force the 10% to sell their shares to him. The 10% could also strongly resist any attempt to have the company delisted from the Stock Exchange. In other words, if 10% of United´s shares were in the hands of people who were committed to United remaining independent, and with a strong supporters´ voice, then there would be a good chance that that would happen. But if fewer than 10% of shares were with such supporters the buyer would be able to assume control of the club - and those supporters with shares would be forced to sell their shares to him.

That is staggering, so let´s pause to think about it. Yes, someone who is really rich could come along and demand that you hand over the shares in the club you have loved since you were born. It would be easier than stealing a first-former´s pocket money, and you wouldn´t be able to run to the teacher to complain. From that moment on, your club would be in his hands - a club that he might have no feeling for whatsoever, and might never have paid to see play.

But here´s the good bit. You can make a difference. A huge difference. Because, like I said, you are really important. Here is all you need to do, and it really isn´t much:

If you have shares in United, if you want United to stay independent, if you don´t want United to fall into private hands, and if you want the supporters to retain a voice, just join Shareholders United. Simple as that. It´ll cost you just £10, and you´ll get yourself an extra share as part of the deal. Alternatively, just contact Shareholders United to tell them that you´d like to pledge your shares towards the aim of keeping United independent. Either way, you´ll still own your own shares ( of course), but your shares will count against any predator that may come along. If all supporter-shareholders were to do this then we´d be well on the way to having 10% of shares in the possession of people whose only interest is their love of the club. And then no one could come and snatch your shares away.

If you don´t have shares in United then you are important too. In fact you are so important I can hardly tell you how much. Because if each one of you were to buy just a single share then the voice of the supporter-shareholders would become irresistible. Do you care enough about United to do this? If so, I´ve got some more good news. You don´t have to go through my experience of all those years ago. You don´t have to talk to a stockbroker or do anything difficult at all. All you need to do is to join Shareholders United - yes, even if you don´t currently own any shares. Remember that by joining Shareholders United you get a share in return. You´ll finally own a piece of your very own football club. And you´ll even get free coffee and biscuits at the club´s annual general meeting.

A share in United, free coffee and biscuits and the knowledge that you are helping to safeguard the future of our football club. It seems like an awfully good deal for a tenner.

One final thought. If you don´t have a share you´ll not have a voice. If you have a share you have a tiny voice. But if all of us with tiny voices get together - become Shareholders United - then we´ll have a real voice, and we´ll be able to get ourselves heard. We owe it to the generations that gave us our club, and we owe it to the generations that will follow.

http://shareholdersunited.org/

Merci pour l equipe mais le lien est pas bon, j´ai reussi a le trouver sur un autre forum :

http://lequipe.servicesalacarte.wanadoo.fr/Quotidien/quoti.html?repQuoti=5269225d1aa56434d1539293b534a6da1c243b

c´est la merde mais grave de chez grave . ..

comment veux tu qu´on gagne des matchs comme ca ? ??

ras le bol de cette situation de merde . .

et méme si sportivement on y est plus du tout , méle si on a plus les moeyns de concurencer les grands clubs européens , méme si on est plus le grand Mu masi une équipe bonne sans plus je ne veux pas qu´on devienne le nouveau chelsea . ...

moi j´aimerais bien le quart du budget de chelsea a sainté ^^

Faut pas etre defaitiste, cette année MU finira dans les 3 premiers et ira en final de la ligue des champions contre le Barça s´il ne se recontre pas avant

on ira pas en final

en fait mles supporteurs anglais ne veulent pas que Mu n´appartiennent pas a un anglais . ..

A Yank to buy Manchester United?

A bunch of people want to own the U.K.´s most famous soccer team. One of them also owns an NFL team.

For more than 18 months now, a motley collection of rich men have been quietly building big stakes in the UK soccer club, fueling speculation of a takeover.

Manchester United recently said it had received a bid approach from an unidentified bidder. The UK football club said the approach contained a number of " significant conditions," and it was not definite that an offer would materialize.

Manchester United FC Tickets
The world´s finest ticket broker - Michael Cook´s Ticketfinders International....
www.ticket-finders.com
It´s not clear who is behind the approach now. But all bets seem to be on Malcolm Glazer, the American owner of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

Weekend reports said Glazer had hired JP Morgan to advise him on a £650 million bid. Glazer already has a 19.2 percent in Man Utd. Irish race horsing tycoons John Magnier and JP McManus own 28.9 percent.

Man Utd is certainly a mouthful, even for Glazer. The shares have more than doubled since bid speculation began, valuing the club at £670 million. That is an extraordinary 45 times 2005 consensus earnings, and way above any of the UK media sector´s top picks.

It also looks rich considering the piece of Man United´s income that allows it to be seen as a media stock -- the sale of the television rights to its matches -- has fallen this season on the back of poor performance on the pitch.

But even if any premium is small, Glazer may find it tricky to finance the bid. He may be able to sell his holding in the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, although this doesn´t look likely. Or he might raise some cash from selling part of his property portfolio in the United States, which has been on the block for some time. It isn´t clear how much equity he can raise.

Whatever shortfall would have to be debt-financed. Man United, unlike most football clubs is debt-free. Its revenues look somewhat more stable than rivals thanks to some pretty shrewd long-term contracts with merchandisers. But with just £45 million of forecast ebitda, it would struggle to raise much more than £150 million.

Man Utd´s property is worth around £270 million, and Glazer might be able to borrow against half of that. He may also be able to securitize some of Man United´s media contracts -- such as the 13-year deal with Nike.

Taken together and at a stretch, Glazer could probably muster £300 million - £400 million of debt.

That would mean Glazer would be buying into yet another heavily indebted UK football club, which is not exactly a distinguished hall of fame.

Shareholders in Leeds United -- another famous old club -- were wiped out when the team went bust. But given its strong brand, Manchester United probably looks a safer bet than most.

probléme on ne sait pas si glazer veut amener des titres a MU ou juste se faire du pognon

s´il achete le club on a 150 millions de livres de transfert l´année prochaine . ..

mais en méme temps il peut aussi detruire le club . ..

Pas une decision a prendre a la va vite