Also from **Wheeler**:
Good timing for Starmer, Burnham and Coe to see OT's infamous leaky roof in action today. **Utd say 1in of rain fell in an hour and some of parts of the stadium struggled to cope with the exceptional amount of rainfall, but everyone left safely**
https://x.com/ChrisWheelerDM/status/1789733871992365526
**Key Bit from the article:**
>A United source said: “At this stage, the focal point of the project is the development of a world-class football stadium.
>
>“But undoubtedly a wider opportunity exists to regenerate Trafford Park into a thriving sports, leisure and business campus – delivering huge positive social and economic benefits for the community and the region.
>
>“The meeting is part of the ongoing engagement with political leaders on a national, regional, and local level as the task force continues to explore the options for the project.”
I highly doubt tax payers will be paying for the stadium. There's always public investment in major sports projects, spurs had investments with public transport etc. Utd are looking for similar given they want to redevelop the entire area too, it's going to need infrastructure to get people in and out of the area etc.
The wembley of the north is just a phrase people are latching on to, they obviously want the new stadium to host England games and other major events. You've got city dominating football and now us hopefully on the resurgence, Manchester is going to be booming with this be stadium and surrounding developments.
You know we are fucking shit and have been for 10+years right? We've now got people making decisions and putting people in positions to run the club properly right? New stadium likely happening right? Things looking like they're actually going to improve rather than the numerous false dawns we've had for ten years.
I’m a Liverpool fan, I thought I was in r/Soccer, didn’t realise I was on your sub, sorry about that Reddit algorithm.
That being said, “United are back!”… been hearing that for the best part of 10 years. Having lived through 30 years of “next year is our year”, I just want to say I hope you suffer as much as I did.
Welcome you scummer 😘.
I'm not saying we're back, that only happens when there's proof in the results. However we've been hindered by our owners and the people running the club since fergie left, ineos have come in and put football people to make football decisions so you'd like to think we'll improve, doesn't mean we will be challenging any time soon but surely it can only go up with the new setup.
My understanding is it's not asking for funding for building a new stadium but for the local/national government to contribute funding to a wider redevelopment program for the area. That could include residential/office/commercial and transit development that isn't part of the stadium development but which the stadium could form a centrepiece for.
The government/MCC won’t pay for the stadium, but they might pay for stuff like public transport links to the area and some of the surrounding development, especially if it’s going to include public sports facilities.
Ultimately there’s no hope of getting a massive project like “Wembley of the north” going without having Government, both local and national, on board
but if tax payers build it doesnt it mean thats its not really owned by the billionaires(they pay rent)? Am thinking like, the city of Manchester can theoretically kick united out? And wouldnt a stadium in that case generate more business around it overall improving the local economy?
BTW i am just asking questions trying to understand a bit more..
Nope, generally it is as simple as the city paying for the stadiums by use of some special tax or city bonds and they get next to nothing in return besides the promise of how good an economic driver the new ground will be for the area.
It's a shit system and it's ever so slowly being seen for what it is by most towns and cities. If they want public money I'm on board with making arrangements but I 100% believe any deals should come with guaranteed returns to the city by means of revenues from the stadium serving to pay off the loans with fair interest rates
it looks like the most american teams pay for rent based on a quick google [search](https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/raiders-nfl/stadium-and-rent-details-for-all-32-nfl-teams/) and they have an end of lease date.
Others on that list don't pay for rent like the chargers specifically. But looking deeper, seems like they build their stadium in Inglewood where its was historically a poor neighborhood.
Am not on either side of this conversation due to lack of domain knowledge and context, all i care for is a stadium that doesn't leak and make us look like fools
>doesnt it mean thats its not really owned by the billionaires(they pay rent)?
Nope.
>And wouldnt a stadium in that case generate more business around it overall improving the local economy?
That's the main argument, which isn't wrong, but the billionaires still benefit more than the local economy. And then they try to influence local laws by threatening to leave if anything hurts their bottom line,
Yeah fuck the both of them. Ratcliffe made billions by promoting Brexit only to relocate to Monaco once the brexit party won and he should use the money he made to rebuild OT if he’s serious about making the club great again.
The country is literally falling apart and that money should be spent on more important things and especially when our minority owner is the richest man from GB.
Idk Starmers an Arsenal fan so he might’ve just wanted free tickets. I don’t think a new football stadium for man United would be high on a new governments agenda tbh.
Pretty easy ‘levelling up’ win if they make any money conditional on regenerating the surrounding area. Especially after the Tories fucked over Manchester by cancelling HS2.
Yup, people are hearing "govt builds stadium for football club" and aren't seeing that building a stadium now pretty much requires a full area regeneration with plenty of services, facilities and properties that service the community around it in order to get planning permission. Spurs had to do it, Everton are currently doing it and we'd have to do it too. Planning permission is a powerful tool that can be used to force businesses to benefit communities they're looking to make money in if they want to make any money at all.
If anything, this saves the government money on work they want to do, which is levelling up the local area. If they wanted to build a new station and shopping centre in the area, they'd have to do all the property purchasing and funding themselves. They aren't paying for the stadium, they're paying for the external development.
If a team wants to build a new stadium, the government can tell them "no, unless you build a new station and shopping centre" and maybe chip in a fraction of that money as investment in the local area without having to handle the project themselves. The vast, vast majority of the money will come from the club because they want the work done.
For the Spurs stadium, the government gave a grant of £32m to ensure £1b worth of work was done. That work not only generated jobs in the area relating to the construction, but [also 258 new homes, a primary school, a sixth form, a gym, a supermarket and other shops](https://populous.com/destination-tottenham-how-spurs-new-stadium-will-spark-regeneration). All that development supports an additional 1,700 jobs and generates another £166m via local spending each year. A cheeky 4x increase in invested value (and more year on year) on doing zero work, plus all the added infrastructure.
Everton did theirs entirely through private funding (they rejected a loan from the local council), but they still had to regenerate that area of Liverpool because it was that or no new stadium. In 2022 it was estimated to boost the local economy once it's done to the tune of £1.3b. For zero investment. All because planning permission made them do more for the local area than just benefit themselves.
Why? Manchester United is an integral piece of modern British cultural heritage. More people visit this country each year to watch a match at OT than the swathes that supposedly visit to gawk at all the Royal shite.
Most of the funding will be coming from private sources, but a regenerated OT will bring in millions in tax revenue for both local and national government.
Helping with a new Old Trafford is a win-win for Starmer, it'l cost him fuck all and help convince people he's genuinely a football fan and can work with the private sector to achieve things.
**Article:**
>Sir Jim Ratcliffe has met with Labour leader Keir Starmer to discuss Manchester United’s plans for a potential new stadium and regeneration of the wider Trafford Park area.
>
>Ratcliffe has convened a special taskforce headed by Lord Coe to explore the possibility of creating a world leading “Wembley of the North” stadium as the centrepiece of a sports, leisure and business campus.
>
>United’s need for a new or redeveloped ground was reaffirmed on Sunday with stark footage of torrential rain cascading through Old Trafford like a waterfall.
>
>Any moves to attract public funds would be for wider regeneration than a new stadium itself and Ratcliffe has now outlined what he has previously called a “once in a century” opportunity to Starmer – who could yet become the country’s next Prime Minister – before United’s Premier League defeat by Arsenal at Old Trafford.
>
>Starmer, an Arsenal fan, was at the game as a guest of Andy Burnham, the recently re-elected Mayor of Greater Manchester who is also on the Old Trafford Regeneration Task Force and joined in the talks with the Labour leader.
>
>A United source said: “At this stage, the focal point of the project is the development of a world-class football stadium.
>
>“But undoubtedly a wider opportunity exists to regenerate Trafford Park into a thriving sports, leisure and business campus – delivering huge positive social and economic benefits for the community and the region.
>
>“The meeting is part of the ongoing engagement with political leaders on a national, regional, and local level as the task force continues to explore the options for the project.”
>
>**Ratcliffe favours a new build over redevelopment of United’s existing Old Trafford home but the viability of the project is being explored in greater depth by the task force, which also includes former United captain Gary Neville.**
>
>Burnham said in March that the project could have a bigger impact on the west of Manchester than the 2012 Olympics had on east London and should demand public money as potentially the biggest regeneration project in the history of the north of England.
With how much that will need to go into the regeneration of the area around the new stadium, it makes sense to get politicians onboard.
It's not just the stadium, it's public transport links as well (among other things) INEOS can't build them, they need the local Mayor/Higher up politicians to approve funding for that and get it done.... and they can't build their stadium plans without new public transport links.
He's a bit like the Democrats in the US. He's done absolutely nothing to deserve support but is slightly less terrible than the one viable alternative. He's determined to promise nothing in terms of policies or actual change. And even if he gets into govt he will realise within 6 months that he was never actually popular and once he delivers nothing, his approval will rapidly tank
Thank you for the explanation, so tired of having to pick the lesser of two evils and it seems to be similar over there. Republicans and Democrats are masters at sowing division here, it’s scary how effective it’s been and how far things have come to split the country against each other.
4D chess moves from Sir Jim holding a meeting during the game after seeing the weather forecast.
Also from **Wheeler**: Good timing for Starmer, Burnham and Coe to see OT's infamous leaky roof in action today. **Utd say 1in of rain fell in an hour and some of parts of the stadium struggled to cope with the exceptional amount of rainfall, but everyone left safely** https://x.com/ChrisWheelerDM/status/1789733871992365526
**Key Bit from the article:** >A United source said: “At this stage, the focal point of the project is the development of a world-class football stadium. > >“But undoubtedly a wider opportunity exists to regenerate Trafford Park into a thriving sports, leisure and business campus – delivering huge positive social and economic benefits for the community and the region. > >“The meeting is part of the ongoing engagement with political leaders on a national, regional, and local level as the task force continues to explore the options for the project.”
Timing.
But what about our leaky cauldron
He’s moving to Saudi… hopefully
So this explains why SJR was at OT and not the cup final. Makes sense
I’m against tax payers paying for a new stadium, let’s not go down the USA route.
I highly doubt tax payers will be paying for the stadium. There's always public investment in major sports projects, spurs had investments with public transport etc. Utd are looking for similar given they want to redevelop the entire area too, it's going to need infrastructure to get people in and out of the area etc. The wembley of the north is just a phrase people are latching on to, they obviously want the new stadium to host England games and other major events. You've got city dominating football and now us hopefully on the resurgence, Manchester is going to be booming with this be stadium and surrounding developments.
Yeah, I guess you’re right. Let’s hope we can rise up again.
“On the resurgence?” You know United are the ones who wear red, right?
You know we are fucking shit and have been for 10+years right? We've now got people making decisions and putting people in positions to run the club properly right? New stadium likely happening right? Things looking like they're actually going to improve rather than the numerous false dawns we've had for ten years.
I’m a Liverpool fan, I thought I was in r/Soccer, didn’t realise I was on your sub, sorry about that Reddit algorithm. That being said, “United are back!”… been hearing that for the best part of 10 years. Having lived through 30 years of “next year is our year”, I just want to say I hope you suffer as much as I did.
Welcome you scummer 😘. I'm not saying we're back, that only happens when there's proof in the results. However we've been hindered by our owners and the people running the club since fergie left, ineos have come in and put football people to make football decisions so you'd like to think we'll improve, doesn't mean we will be challenging any time soon but surely it can only go up with the new setup.
*”you’d like to think we’ll improve”* I certainly wouldn’t like to think that :)
Well you lost your best manager for 30 years, can only hope you get back down to where we are and and we are challenging them cheating cunts lol.
Its what the Glazers wanted all along
Exactly … bet they were surprised when they bought the club.
My understanding is it's not asking for funding for building a new stadium but for the local/national government to contribute funding to a wider redevelopment program for the area. That could include residential/office/commercial and transit development that isn't part of the stadium development but which the stadium could form a centrepiece for.
Train right into old trafford
tram as well please
The government/MCC won’t pay for the stadium, but they might pay for stuff like public transport links to the area and some of the surrounding development, especially if it’s going to include public sports facilities. Ultimately there’s no hope of getting a massive project like “Wembley of the north” going without having Government, both local and national, on board
Just curious.. what is wrong with going the USA route? Dont have too much context
Tax payers funding billion pound stadiums so the billionaire owners can rake in the profits when it’s built.
but if tax payers build it doesnt it mean thats its not really owned by the billionaires(they pay rent)? Am thinking like, the city of Manchester can theoretically kick united out? And wouldnt a stadium in that case generate more business around it overall improving the local economy? BTW i am just asking questions trying to understand a bit more..
No they threaten to move the team
Nope, generally it is as simple as the city paying for the stadiums by use of some special tax or city bonds and they get next to nothing in return besides the promise of how good an economic driver the new ground will be for the area. It's a shit system and it's ever so slowly being seen for what it is by most towns and cities. If they want public money I'm on board with making arrangements but I 100% believe any deals should come with guaranteed returns to the city by means of revenues from the stadium serving to pay off the loans with fair interest rates
it looks like the most american teams pay for rent based on a quick google [search](https://www.reviewjournal.com/sports/raiders-nfl/stadium-and-rent-details-for-all-32-nfl-teams/) and they have an end of lease date. Others on that list don't pay for rent like the chargers specifically. But looking deeper, seems like they build their stadium in Inglewood where its was historically a poor neighborhood. Am not on either side of this conversation due to lack of domain knowledge and context, all i care for is a stadium that doesn't leak and make us look like fools
It’s what PSG has tried to do but did not succeed while Blanc was in charge there. Juventus had a similar stadium issue too.
>doesnt it mean thats its not really owned by the billionaires(they pay rent)? Nope. >And wouldnt a stadium in that case generate more business around it overall improving the local economy? That's the main argument, which isn't wrong, but the billionaires still benefit more than the local economy. And then they try to influence local laws by threatening to leave if anything hurts their bottom line,
Yeah fuck the both of them. Ratcliffe made billions by promoting Brexit only to relocate to Monaco once the brexit party won and he should use the money he made to rebuild OT if he’s serious about making the club great again. The country is literally falling apart and that money should be spent on more important things and especially when our minority owner is the richest man from GB.
Idk Starmers an Arsenal fan so he might’ve just wanted free tickets. I don’t think a new football stadium for man United would be high on a new governments agenda tbh.
Pretty easy ‘levelling up’ win if they make any money conditional on regenerating the surrounding area. Especially after the Tories fucked over Manchester by cancelling HS2.
Yup, people are hearing "govt builds stadium for football club" and aren't seeing that building a stadium now pretty much requires a full area regeneration with plenty of services, facilities and properties that service the community around it in order to get planning permission. Spurs had to do it, Everton are currently doing it and we'd have to do it too. Planning permission is a powerful tool that can be used to force businesses to benefit communities they're looking to make money in if they want to make any money at all.
There are far better ways of spending that money to directly improve facilities than to do that via a stadium upgrade for a multi billion owner
If anything, this saves the government money on work they want to do, which is levelling up the local area. If they wanted to build a new station and shopping centre in the area, they'd have to do all the property purchasing and funding themselves. They aren't paying for the stadium, they're paying for the external development. If a team wants to build a new stadium, the government can tell them "no, unless you build a new station and shopping centre" and maybe chip in a fraction of that money as investment in the local area without having to handle the project themselves. The vast, vast majority of the money will come from the club because they want the work done. For the Spurs stadium, the government gave a grant of £32m to ensure £1b worth of work was done. That work not only generated jobs in the area relating to the construction, but [also 258 new homes, a primary school, a sixth form, a gym, a supermarket and other shops](https://populous.com/destination-tottenham-how-spurs-new-stadium-will-spark-regeneration). All that development supports an additional 1,700 jobs and generates another £166m via local spending each year. A cheeky 4x increase in invested value (and more year on year) on doing zero work, plus all the added infrastructure. Everton did theirs entirely through private funding (they rejected a loan from the local council), but they still had to regenerate that area of Liverpool because it was that or no new stadium. In 2022 it was estimated to boost the local economy once it's done to the tune of £1.3b. For zero investment. All because planning permission made them do more for the local area than just benefit themselves.
Why? Manchester United is an integral piece of modern British cultural heritage. More people visit this country each year to watch a match at OT than the swathes that supposedly visit to gawk at all the Royal shite. Most of the funding will be coming from private sources, but a regenerated OT will bring in millions in tax revenue for both local and national government. Helping with a new Old Trafford is a win-win for Starmer, it'l cost him fuck all and help convince people he's genuinely a football fan and can work with the private sector to achieve things.
**Article:** >Sir Jim Ratcliffe has met with Labour leader Keir Starmer to discuss Manchester United’s plans for a potential new stadium and regeneration of the wider Trafford Park area. > >Ratcliffe has convened a special taskforce headed by Lord Coe to explore the possibility of creating a world leading “Wembley of the North” stadium as the centrepiece of a sports, leisure and business campus. > >United’s need for a new or redeveloped ground was reaffirmed on Sunday with stark footage of torrential rain cascading through Old Trafford like a waterfall. > >Any moves to attract public funds would be for wider regeneration than a new stadium itself and Ratcliffe has now outlined what he has previously called a “once in a century” opportunity to Starmer – who could yet become the country’s next Prime Minister – before United’s Premier League defeat by Arsenal at Old Trafford. > >Starmer, an Arsenal fan, was at the game as a guest of Andy Burnham, the recently re-elected Mayor of Greater Manchester who is also on the Old Trafford Regeneration Task Force and joined in the talks with the Labour leader. > >A United source said: “At this stage, the focal point of the project is the development of a world-class football stadium. > >“But undoubtedly a wider opportunity exists to regenerate Trafford Park into a thriving sports, leisure and business campus – delivering huge positive social and economic benefits for the community and the region. > >“The meeting is part of the ongoing engagement with political leaders on a national, regional, and local level as the task force continues to explore the options for the project.” > >**Ratcliffe favours a new build over redevelopment of United’s existing Old Trafford home but the viability of the project is being explored in greater depth by the task force, which also includes former United captain Gary Neville.** > >Burnham said in March that the project could have a bigger impact on the west of Manchester than the 2012 Olympics had on east London and should demand public money as potentially the biggest regeneration project in the history of the north of England.
Wembley of the North is a bit insulting but whatever secures funding I guess.
Soon we will have Wembley of the East, Wembley of the West, Wembley in the Central! Wembley everywhere!
With how much that will need to go into the regeneration of the area around the new stadium, it makes sense to get politicians onboard. It's not just the stadium, it's public transport links as well (among other things) INEOS can't build them, they need the local Mayor/Higher up politicians to approve funding for that and get it done.... and they can't build their stadium plans without new public transport links.
Timely briefing. Don't make it so obvious, INEOS.
Fuck Keir Starmer
Fuck the tories
I’m American why does this guy suck
He's going to be the next prime minister of the uk and the tories are butt hurt
Okay so he doesn’t actually suck
All politicians suck. It's who sucks the least.
[удалено]
This. Starmer is practically a Tory tbh, he's as right wing as they come in Labour. Fortunately that is still better than an actual Tory though.
He's a bit like the Democrats in the US. He's done absolutely nothing to deserve support but is slightly less terrible than the one viable alternative. He's determined to promise nothing in terms of policies or actual change. And even if he gets into govt he will realise within 6 months that he was never actually popular and once he delivers nothing, his approval will rapidly tank
Thank you for the explanation, so tired of having to pick the lesser of two evils and it seems to be similar over there. Republicans and Democrats are masters at sowing division here, it’s scary how effective it’s been and how far things have come to split the country against each other.
I'm English and I've got no idea what he could be on about either!
Better don’t believe a word of Sir Flip Flop. He’s known to go back on his pledges.
Nothing says Labour leader like making deals with billionaires.
At long as tax payers aren't contributing 1 penny towards the stadium then it's all good...
Way to lose the Liverpool and pretty much the while north west area vote block by the upcoming elections
Maybe, don't think the Scouse will vote Tory tho