Didn't think Qatar could get involved due to their ownership of PSG,mind you thought the same about Saudi's and Newcastle
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
They were rumoured to be after Roma not long ago so I’m sure there’s ways around it.
I wonder if Saudi are regretting the Newcastle purchase. I always thought they’d hold out to own the biggest of them all.
Yeah nothing would surprise me anymore
They probably never thought Glazers would sell for the foreseeable and got tired of waiting
I think the Glazer's regret not talking to them before/the ball dropping sooner
Maybe they still have the receipt
Surely they could see the writing on the wall though with the Super League etc though. This was always coming sooner rather than later. Annoying from our point of view as well because Newcastle are going to be a massive irritant that we just don’t need alongside all the other irritants.
Yeah they will spend big sooner or later
So right now the 4 options seem to be
American investment firm/coalition
Dubai
Radcliffe
Beckham and his mystery backers
American investment firm/coalition
Dubai
Radcliffe
Beckham and his mystery backers
All any new ownership will do is drive up the costs to support United even further.
The PL is just a playground for rich people.
The PL is just a playground for rich people.
Their sports minister said they’ll be pushing the private sector to make bids for United, essentially saying they’ll help out
The realistic options are American or Middle Eastern. Everything else is a dream on their behalf.
How is Beckham going to have any sway on making the Glazers sell?
The Raine Group received around 150 inquiries from individuals or groups claiming to be interested in the purchase of Chelsea. There will be a lot of people coming forward with interest in owning part/all of United.
This isn't quite true. There are three state-backed clubs in football. None of them have won the Champions League and non-state-owned clubs like Bayern, Liverpool, Madrid etc (and currently Arsenal!) have managed to compete with them in recent years. United's transfer spending since 2013 is on par with City's and our wage bill is the largest in the history of the Premier League.
United's biggest problem isn't a lack of revenues, it's a lack of infrastructure spending and a lack of competence at senior management levels across the club. Those two issues would definitely be addressed by any perspective new owner, including US-based consortiums/PE houses. As long as we have a proper strategy and good people in key roles, we can compete in future with City/PSG/Newcastle, even without a nation state backer.
If we are going down the oil money route then I’d be more comfortable having Beckham involved if he also receives some shareholding rights and decision making capacity at board level. He’s a football man and knows the club so it might soften the blow.
Accio Bellingham!
I was 90% joking when I said Beckham could be involved but Rio must have read what I wrote! Meanwhile The Daily/Sunday Vomit (I mean Express) is saying:
"Sir Jim Ratcliffe has reportedly rejected an offer to buy Liverpool as he hopes to make an offer for Manchester United instead"
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1702180/Man-Utd-Liverpool-Sir-Jim-Ratcliffe-takeover-latest
"Sir Jim Ratcliffe has reportedly rejected an offer to buy Liverpool as he hopes to make an offer for Manchester United instead"
https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1702180/Man-Utd-Liverpool-Sir-Jim-Ratcliffe-takeover-latest
Maybe the Glazers will give the new guys a Black Friday discount ($5, knowing the vampires)
I agree with this, especially the bolded part. The club averages 500M in annual revenues, with proper planning, the club can be competitive on the pitch with the right investment on the the playing squad, as well as investment on infrastructure, it doesn't have to happen overnight but with proper planning and competent leadership, it can be achieved.
Very true.
Personally, the reason I'd be comfortable having Middle Eastern buyers is because I've been so tired of the way the Glazers have run us. Not spending a penny of their own money and just leveraging everything on us. I believe that would be the case with Middle Eastern owners.
And the second part is, I feel Middle Eastern owners would be more lavish in their build of the stadium, training facilities, youth/women's stadium, etc. Of course, I have nothing factual to back this up, however, I just feel money spent would be less of a concern compared to a consortium.
But agree with your post, the main tbing at first is get the best in class running the club first and foremost, which doesn't need crazy spend.
Great post, spot on! (although the wage bill doesn’t say much)
To put it like this, the last 17 years we have underinvested in our infrastructure. I think 1bn probably is a number that isn’t that far of.
To catch up with that, we are probably 1.5bn short in investing — just in our infrastructure. If you brought in the Red Knights, it’s tough for them to make up for that. It’s not just about running the club properly, it’s the salvage of an underinvested entity that is the challenge. We are basically 3.5bn in debt, 1.5bn owed to the stadium and Carrington, 1.5bn to the squad over 10 years and 500bn to the banks.
If run properly — of course we could have and should have competed. But it’s not getting easier. And for anyone to come in with a 3.5bn deficit to handle, they need to be prepared to invest at least that sum.
Last edited:
I don't think that's what he's being approached for?
a lot of that is just operating costs which we can handle, especially if we remove the yearly divs from the equation
Yeah, Becks will be used as a way to appease the fans of the new owners. He'd be the face really. How much power he'd have? That would be questionable, however, his main aim would be to appease us, the fans.
Not the Glazers. The goal of his involvement would be to make the new ownership easier to swallow for those would have trouble doing so. If it's Qatar or Saudi Arabia, for example. In return, he gets paid or is somehow included into the ownership.
Cali cartel but we will never know since he is the face in front of some Caribbean shell company
Yeah but his also a total moron. He could only ever be the front. But in an actual decision-making capacity oh my god
This, Becks is the face of a takeover we're going to find hard to stomach, he's not a white knight riding in to save the day.
Not sure if already posted. PSG are planning to sell a stake at valuation of about £3.5bn, which is more than what Chelsea were sold for. No wonder glazers are looking at £6bn+
https://www.ft.com/content/5fc68e1a-769f-4b55-b6f7-ffceb31f23e9
I think he'd be great PR. Any bid with Becks being the face would keep the naysayers in check.
Honestly, if Becks had any involvement in a takeover I'd support it. I know he'd be getting a bunch of cash but I highly doubt he would put his name and face behind something that would end in tears.
If beckhams group offer the most money they wont give a feck.Especially after this
I suspect the man knows a bit more about business than you. I also suspect he would defer to experts. Lastly no guarantee that he would be involved at that level, if at all
You do realise he owns and runs a football club currently in America? Put your CV on the table, let's compare.
You know him personally, do you? Comparing side by side his life is a touch more successful than most, what with his famous successful wife, famous successful kids, multi top club country captaining playing career, multi million pound business interests, MLS team ownership and all. He can’t be all that dim - doesn’t say much for the rest of us. Maybe don’t believe everything you read on the news, eh?
United's biggest problem is the price tag.
The people buying United would expect an ROI of at least 4% annually on their investment if it were invested elsewhere.
That number is not realistic if the price of the club is over 4 billion.
The Glazer family got 1.2 billion over 17 years. About 70 million a year.
To get 4% of 4 billion, you need 160 million a year.
The numbers obviously get worse the more expensive the club gets.
This is why it is not realistic to get business people to buy United. The numbers just don't work as an investment.
Even if they doubled the net income, it wouldn't work at 4 billion.
I'm not a financial analyst and the numbers is not entirely accurate because it will likely be more money going out
towards the end of their ownership. I think it would be a hard buy for most investors.
Edit: This is also assuming no loans are taken to buy United.
Qatari's bought a club in the wrong league, as for their commercial revenue!! We think City are taking advantage, their next level.
- Status