Oh farg, that’s the day of the wedding! What time?
Ouch! Sucks being you my friend! 
3 o/c kick-off i think - normally is anyway.
No problems then. First wedding activity isn’t until 2 pm, and 3 pm your time means 10 am for us, if I’ve got it right. Of course my wife’s relatives may be a bit concerned when I show up for the ceremony early afternoon smelling of pub ale. Now I just have to figure out where I can watch the game. Since that will soon be your neighborhood I guess I’ll be scouting your local for you.
Cool. If you find anywhere that looks likely to show Arsenal games let me know.
From the Fox Soccer Channel location listings, this one looks promising:
Kennedy’s Pub & Restaurant
327 W. 57th Street
New York
212-759-4242
Fox Soccer Channel subscriber. Arsenal stronghold
Also, I’ve not been to but heard of:
Nevada Smiths
74 Third Ave
New York
212-982-2591
2002 U.S. Soccer Association nominee for best soccer pub in the country.
And there’s another at 1672 Third Ave called The Kinsale Tavern which looks promising.
In fact, there are a slew of possibilities.
Oy, on a bit of a tangent, I will be attending a wedding next summer (2006) in Manchester. But it wil be in July, no Premier League to watch! Bah, this is the second time this has happened to me, when I attended a wedding in London a few years ago…in June! When will I ever get to go to England when I can see a game in person??
Have you considered that they plan the wedding so that guests do not need to decide which event to attend?
Manchester? July? There’s only one Old Trafford at that time of year…but I don’t think we’re allowed to talk about cricket in this thread…
Should the trip to Cardiff at the end of the month be on the cards (probably not, we’ll screw up at home to the east London scum as usual), I’m going to be setting off straight from a wedding reception. Hmmm. Not ideal, but could be worse.
I am certain of it.
Manchester United taken over by American Football Club owner Malcom Glazer …
This will rock the soccer world for sure. I must say, I’m impressed, and somewhat gleeful, because I think this serves the commercial development of professional soccer clubs. Those soccer fans complaining about ‘hurt to the heart of the club’, the heart disappeared when sports turned commercial interests over sports interests.
I don’t quite follow what you’re saying. It’s going to hurt Man U as a company, because a previously-profitable and debt-free business has suddenly been saddled with a whole load of loans. It’s bad for fans, because they’re one of the few sources of income. And, crucially, it’s very bad for English football in general, because the only way the books will balance will be if Glazer decides to unilaterally negotiate TV rights (the other significant source of income, merchandise, being something that MUFC plc has already exploited mercilessly).
Individual TV rights are good for Man U, good for Chelsea, and perhaps Arsenal…but for most Premiership teams, let alone anyone else - and most importantly for competitiveness of the game as a whole - this is disastrous.
“You reap what you sow” and all that.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer club.
Um… by owning 100% of the club, Glazer no longer has to pay shareholder dividends.
That means a saving of £15 million a year, which is more than enough to service the interest on the debt.
Problem solved.
We’ve heard this “it’s the end of football” nonsense before… remember the outcry when squad numbers and names on shirts were introduced?
£100 says in two years time the Stretford End will be singing Glazer’s praises.
All a storm in a teacup IMO.
Plus it’s been generally agreed that Glazer won’t be able to negotiate separate TV rights for Man Utd unless 14 or so other clubs follow suit, which is v. unlikely to happen.
Does he own 100%? I thought he would have stopped at 70-75%, whatever mandated controlling interest was. Also, at least in the USA, there is no requirement to pay dividends, it’s a decision by the board. But even if it’s required and he only owns 70% then he’ll still save about £10 million since those dividends would just come back to him, anyway. If that’s enough to cover his debt service then he’s golden.
He’s aiming at 75% which would give him overall control.
Then he’ll aim to get up to 90%… once he has that the remaining 10% of shares have to be sold to him (ie. the remaining shareholders have no choice but to sell up).
Exactly - this doesn’t signal the end of English football as we know it - the continued antics of Roman and his Money Launderers ar emore of a risk to that than the take over of Manchester United.
If anything, this is just ManUre returning (albeit unwillingly) to the same ownership system as the majority of other clubs in England.
That doesn’t, of course, stop me from enjoying immensely the frustration of the same fans who, a few years back, were droning on about how floating on the stock exchange was the best thing the club did.
It might be difficult for Glazer to get 90% since the supporters own about 18%. I love the signs that the supporters like to put up which read “Not for Sale”. Ummm, a publicly traded company is pretty much always for sale, eh?
Although I don’t really doubt it, I find it weird that Glazer would go with trying to negotiate a separate TV deal considering his NFL experience which just signed a huge TV contract for the entire league. I also think it is a bunch of hyperbole.
Are all 18% owned by a single supporters block?
I would imagine that if a lot of small shareholders are offered a decent price they might sell up - the crucial figure will be if 11% of shares are held by a single entity, thus preventing the 90% target being reached.
He’s probably looking more at the New York Yankee’s model (or even Notre Dame’s football contract). The NFL deal is good for the NFL, but it is a balanced proposition so at least somewhat subsidizes smaller markets, like Green Bay and Cincinnati, over large market’s like New York, Philadelphia and Washington.
I believe all 18% are held by Shareholders United.
Anyway, not paying dividend still isn’t going to be that much to offset the debt. Reports say that on 500 million pounds of debt (more or less), the annual interest payment would be 25 million pounds. Add to that paying off the principal! This year ManU will be clearing 25 million pounds… though the year before they made 50 million pounds (25 million pounds this year was spent on Rooney).
One thing is certain. ManU has a TON of debt and they won’t be able to spend to get another Wayne Rooney anytime soon. This is bad news since their squad is old. Giggs, Scholes, Keane will all have to be replaced soon and with top level talent, or else there could be some hard times at Old Trafford.