National Stadium in the North

[Preki]

I've only just calmed down about this after watching him on Sky Sports News talking about this. The Government should fund it under the ausopices of levelling up. No Jim, spend your own billions, it's your new toy. Levelling up is about housing, education, quality of life. All these billionaires seem to have a probelm spending their own money. Much like Richard Branson who will happily accept his train company profits but cry to the Government for a handout if he makes a loss.
Sir Jim is a massive Tory donor and is domiciled in Monaco - pays no British taxes. He, and the rest of his ilk, make me sick.

Agreed, how he can be allowed to co-own United when he doesn't pay any income tax is disgusting. We are all suffering because of his funding of the leave campaign as well. Arch Brexiter and anti workers rights.

 

[matty1878]

he’s a bilIonaire

but it yourself you scruff

 

[Brigadier2]

He couldn't look him in the eye when he said national stadium of the North, abramovic (Russian mafia boss) was probably the most honest premier league owner out of the sly 6.

 

[woodsyni]

Check Out Manchester United's Cayman Islands-Based Shell Corporation

www.businessinsider.com

Know nothing about this stuff, but if true, some cheek asking for tax payers money.

 

[Rita_Poon]

Check Out Manchester United's Cayman Islands-Based Shell Corporation

www.businessinsider.com

Know nothing about this stuff, but if true, some cheek asking for tax payers money.

A lot of other tory donors have had their turn...

 

[stony]

Is this a case of pot calling kettle black?

I take it you are referring to the Etihad? Not the same for a number of reasons. We gave them Main Rd in return, paid for all the conversion work ourselves and pay £4M per year in rent. We could have bought the stadium outright but the money would go to Sport England. By paying rent, the money goes to Manchester city council. By the time the lease is up, the club will have paid over double the cost of building it in rent alone. Good deal for the club, good deal for the city of Manchester. The tax payer actually sees a return, unlike the rags who just want to take.

 

[PITA]

I take it you are referring to the Etihad? Not the same for a number of reasons. We gave them Main Rd in return, paid for all the conversion work ourselves and pay £4M per year in rent. We could have bought the stadium outright but the money would go to Sport England. By paying rent, the money goes to Manchester city council. By the time the lease is up, the club will have paid over double the cost of building it in rent alone. Good deal for the club, good deal for the city of Manchester. The tax payer actually sees a return, unlike the rags who just want to take.

Might not be exactly the same but you still got a massive advantage that attracted the investment that you got. Let's not re-write history.

 

[varnish]

The government should agree and then build it in Leeds or York.

 

[Del-boy]

That’s the thing about billionaires. They become billionaires by spending other people’s money not theirs.

The exception to the rule is of course our billionaire. Who’s spewed his dough down the kermit.

 

[BullensRoad]

The government should agree and then build it in Leeds or York.

Brownfield site near the last district, strictly train or other green public transport.

Not a toxic industrial site near Manchester never mine Salford.

Sir Jim has done enough damage to the north west with his chemical plants the tax exile pass take.

 

[paultheblue]

I take it you are referring to the Etihad? Not the same for a number of reasons. We gave them Main Rd in return, paid for all the conversion work ourselves and pay £4M per year in rent. We could have bought the stadium outright but the money would go to Sport England. By paying rent, the money goes to Manchester city council. By the time the lease is up, the club will have paid over double the cost of building it in rent alone. Good deal for the club, good deal for the city of Manchester. The tax payer actually sees a return, unlike the rags who just want to take.

I am not knocking City as it seems a great deal all round.
Who pays for the upkeep and general repairs of the stadium as I would imagine that is not cheap ?

 

[stony]

I am not knocking City as it seems a great deal all round.
Who pays for the upkeep and general repairs of the stadium as I would imagine that is not cheap ?

City pay for everything. It's not like West Ham's deal, which is pretty ridiculous and needs investigating by the govt. West Ham don't even pay for stewards, it's all included in the dodgy deal they got.

 

[paultheblue]

City pay for everything. It's not like West Ham's deal, which is pretty ridiculous and needs investigating by the govt. West Ham don't even pay for stewards, it's all included in the dodgy deal they got.

Fair enough mate it was the West Ham situation that made me ask the question

 

[Tin-Tin]

Might not be exactly the same but you still got a massive advantage that attracted the investment that you got. Let's not re-write history.

But thats not the argument.

F*cking hate billionaires, biggest scumbags going and greedy beyond belief. 99% of them would happily see death, sickness, poverty and destructiin if it meant they earned another £10m.

They shouldnt be given a penny towards redevelopment.

 

[PITA]

But thats not the argument.

F*cking hate billionaires, biggest scumbags going and greedy beyond belief. 99% of them would happily see death, sickness, poverty and destructiin if it meant they earned another £10m.

They shouldnt be given a penny towards redevelopment.

Do you include City's owners in this group?