What kind of ownership would impact your fandom or make you lose interest in the club?

[arnie_ni]

We've sort of hand these thread before and my answer would be city's owners. Well not thr owners exactly but how they've ran the club, disguising their money as sponsorship, paying wages through owner mediums etc to gain a competitive advantage.

I'd be massively critical of that.

Look I wouldn't particularly be overjoyed with state owners, espeicslly ones with extremely dodgy history, but if they don't involve us in illegal (in footballing sense) activities I'll still continue to support united.

I have the ability to separate the two.

 

[Abdullah7]

In the US, as in many other countries, an immigrant has recourse to the regular judicial system for any abuses of state or federal labor law that is perpetrated against them, same as a citizen would. That is the main difference.

I'm an immigrant to the US, I've had both study and work visas here. There were always restrictions on what I could do as far as work, but I've never been at risk of abuses like those that are widely reported under kafala systems. Immigrants have successfully sued the US government itself on several occasions.

it is not legally permissible for the sponsor to seize the rights of his sponsored person, and if this happens, the resident must resort to the judiciary to preserve his right, and the law has guaranteed many provisions that preserve the right of the expatriate if the sponsor abused him. Which forms a committee to reserve the company or resolve the dispute between them. Preserving the rights of investors.

If the criminal part is found through a false report or other means that represent a means of pressure on the sponsored person, the civil party can resort to proving his right, and in all cases it is not legal for the sponsor to exploit his influence on the sponsored person and seize his right.

 

[Dan_F]

I don’t think the Boehly model is palatable either.

In fairness you let him off light there, the obviously difference is that Boehly isn’t a serving deputy prime minister.

 

[Abdullah7]

I don’t think the Boehly model is palatable either.

I'm referring to the part where you oppose a state owning a club as I see no difference between them at all.

 

[NLunited]

They didn't invest anything. It was the clubs money that was used in the summer, or more specifically, they approved taking more debt towards transfers presumably as they knew they were selling so it didn't matter to them.

If the Glazers remain, the debt remains, so we still pay interest payments on that and are at risk of getting fecked as a club due to the size of the debt, and then we also still pay them dividends, and we are still run by idiots who just don't know how to run a football club smartly.

We can‘t spend more than comes in, right? How much could we spend in a window without running into ffp rules?

Maybe you sre right, but we did spend a buttload this summer.

 

[Raoul]

I'm referring to the part where you oppose a state owning a club as I see no difference between them at all.

Is Boehly a state actor like Mansoor ?

 

[Raoul]

In fairness you let him off light there, the obviously difference is that Boehly isn’t a serving deputy prime minister.

Yeah, I thought that bit was obvious, but perhaps it needed to be stated.

 

[bosnian_red]

We can‘t spend more than comes in, right? How much could we spend in a window without running into ffp rules?

Maybe you sre right, but we did spend a buttload this summer.

There's a certain amount that is owner financed that is allowed. Not sure exactly. Something like 130m but not sure if that's over a period.

Most important would be to eliminate the debt (no more losing profits to interest payments), no more dividends, have infrastructure funded for... The club would be in a very healthy position if that happened. Also we have a lot of transfer debt currently. No idea how that would be dealt with.

Whoever the owner it's the same basic requirement and we'd be in a great spot. Clear the debt, help fund the infrastructure renovations and hire smart people who know what they're doing. The rest will take care of itself.

 

[shamans]

This is a quote from an article I read today, all seems fair and above board of course

"The latest depressing despatch is a painstaking report by the Josimar website. It relates how World Cup security guards who worked at the tournament’s Stadium 974 last November have received no pay and are being asked to leave Doha."

I checked the sources for this and there is nothing concrete.

Apparently 2 security guards are complaining they haven't been paid in time. Fifa has responded they are looking into it. FYI, security for the world cup was outsourced to security firms that are official FIFA partners.

I think this is the sort of stuff people read and then point out bias in reporting. This sort of negligence would be pretty common in most non western nations but to go from this to tyrannical N Korea state is a far jump.

 

[shamans]

And for what it's worth I agree no club should be "state owned" that's silly.

 

[Someone]

It'll be different from one person to another. For me almost all billionaires are terrible if not all, you could tell when Trump was in power he was envious of dictators who get to do what they want. So in all likelihood we'll end up with a terrible owner anyway, and it's not like it's new to us.

Then there's the question of state ownership. My initial concerns are:

1. The motive: While with greedy businessmen you understand their end game, you don't get that with state ownership. Sportswashing is real, we've seen a lot of Chelsea fans develop loyalty and love for Roman, and most of the fanbase defended him when the war started. Now I don't want to imagine a scenario where we're bought by Saudi Arabia and they're about to face sanctions for bombing another helpless country just for our fans to jump in their defense online. This would make me sick to my stomach. Obviously the fanbase is not united on any issues, but one would hope that while we can't choose who owns the club, we could at least keep our loyalty to the club.
2. How we'll succeed: I feel that football is too competitive for us to dominate, but if it gets too easy it might get boring. We've all tried a cheat code in a game and we know it's not the same.

 

[croadyman]

We've sort of hand these thread before and my answer would be city's owners. Well not thr owners exactly but how they've ran the club, disguising their money as sponsorship, paying wages through owner mediums etc to gain a competitive advantage.

I'd be massively critical of that.

Look I wouldn't particularly be overjoyed with state owners, espeicslly ones with extremely dodgy history, but if they don't involve us in illegal (in footballing sense) activities I'll still continue to support united.

I have the ability to separate the two.

Feel confident to say that we that huge revenue streams compared to City/PSG and won't need to get involved with shady fake sponsorships

 

[gulli_G]

10. don't give a feck about the owners

This

 

[Abdullah7]

Is Boehly a state actor like Mansoor ?

He's not an Actor. It's his wealth and he's leading the project just like Boehly.

 

[gregwar]

I think I'm past losing interest.

Weird one, I'm glad ten Hag is turning things around and it's good to see the club having a bit of cohesion again.

But I don't know whether it's the ownership options, getting older or being more involved in non-league/grassroots now - I don't really have it in me to care too much anymore.

How is Musk evil?

He's an arsehole. Can't stand the prick, but evil is a stretch. Very questionable about where his family's money came from, but arsehole doesn't equal evil.

 

[alexthelion]

I don't think there is a right answer to satisfy the OP. According to him, basically anyone who has money is evil or bad for the club as options 1-9 are all billionaires. Even if the club could be owned by supporters/shareholders, the millionaire/billionaire supporters would gain influence and be in charge. Sorry, but you have to be a capitalist at the very least to buy United, bc United isn't selling to the average member of the Caf who has 20 quid in their pocket. Just 6 billion quid short of the asking price.

According to OP, his interest in United would drop if Musk took over and would prefer the Glazers keep ownership as the Glazers seem to fall to #8 on his list under capitalists. I would disagree that.

I'm for anyone who takes over that has money, will hire intelligent people and will make sure that United is well run on and off the pitch. Added bonus if they reinvest all profits back into the club.

Really, I think this is a useless topic as it was really a way for the OP to criticize people who don't agree with him on the political spectrum. Anyone who puts Musk ahead of Kim Jong-Un is comically laughable.Kim Jong is the man who denies freedom for his nation, has caused millions of North Koreans to die through starvation and executes his own citizens. Clearly he is in a race for worst Tyrant of the 21st century. But according to OP- he's 3rd on the list behind Smart Evil and Chaotic Evil. I didn't realize Musk, who has spent the last 10 years trying to improve the environment with his electric cars and solar panels was Chaotic Evil and worse than Bloodmoney, Sportswashers and Chinese corps. Oh wait-- that's right, he believes in Free Speech, and after he mentioned he believes in Free Speech, the far left Media in the USA and around the world started losing their minds and now Musk is bad. If you are against Free Speech, the problem isn't Musk, it's you. You are evil if you don't believe in Freedom of Speech.

I find it ironic-- a ton of people here hate Musk because he believes in Free speech, yet we are all allowed to freely speak our opinions on this message board. I guess for some-- they only want Free Speech if they agree with your opinion. If they don't agree with you, you are no longer allowed freedom of speech.

Musk only believes in free speach if it's what he himself believes.

 

[Wibble]

I'm guessing that Radcliffe is the least worst option. If, as may be likely, Qatar or Saudi end up buying us it will be yet another nail in the coffin of my love for United. And there are quite a few banged in already.

 

[Raoul]

He's not an Actor. It's his wealth and he's leading the project just like Boehly.

He’s the deputy PM of the UAE, a member of its royal family, and his source of wealth originated in the royal family. That’s a state actor.

 

[Alonzo]

Call it out when it is present, but stop using racism as a stick to beat people who don‘t agree with you.

Good luck with that in here!

in 2023, you cannot separate politics from football. Qatar doesn’t, Saudi (the new host of the club World Cup btw) doesnt, Abu Dhabi doesnt, UEFA doesnt, FIFA doesnt, Roman Abramovich and Chelsea didnt, Marcus Rashford doesnt, Jason Sancho and bukayo saka don’t, every player that takes the knee doesnt, Megan Rapinoe doesnt, any female player pushing to close the gender pay gap doesn’t, any player that wears a rainbow band/laces/etc doesnt, every player club and league that showed support for Ukraine doesnt, every league that was allowed to continue while the rest of us were locked in our houses doesnt.. the list goes on. It’s 2023, football is political. Sorry to break it to anyone.

That said, anyone who just says “i don’t care about human rights abuses my teams owners commit, i just want my team to win” , that’s up to them. But don’t dress it up any other way, own your wilful ignorance.

 

[NLunited]

Good luck with that in here!

in 2023, you cannot separate politics from football. Qatar doesn’t, Saudi (the new host of the club World Cup btw) doesnt, Abu Dhabi doesnt, UEFA doesnt, FIFA doesnt, Roman Abramovich and Chelsea didnt, Marcus Rashford doesnt, Jason Sancho and bukayo saka don’t, every player that takes the knee doesnt, Megan Rapinoe doesnt, any female player pushing to close the gender pay gap doesn’t, any player that wears a rainbow band/laces/etc doesnt, every player club and league that showed support for Ukraine doesnt, every league that was allowed to continue while the rest of us were locked in our houses doesnt.. the list goes on. It’s 2023, football is political. Sorry to break it to anyone.

That said, anyone who just says “i don’t care about human rights abuses my teams owners commit, i just want my team to win” , that’s up to them. But don’t dress it up any other way, own your wilful ignorance.

100% that.

 

[Tyrion]

Pretty much my feelings.

I don't care about 1 though.

Fair. I'd probably get used to that too as long as they kept politics out of it.

 

[Kaos]

Good luck with that in here!

in 2023, you cannot separate politics from football. Qatar doesn’t, Saudi (the new host of the club World Cup btw) doesnt, Abu Dhabi doesnt, UEFA doesnt, FIFA doesnt, Roman Abramovich and Chelsea didnt, Marcus Rashford doesnt, Jason Sancho and bukayo saka don’t, every player that takes the knee doesnt, Megan Rapinoe doesnt, any female player pushing to close the gender pay gap doesn’t, any player that wears a rainbow band/laces/etc doesnt, every player club and league that showed support for Ukraine doesnt, every league that was allowed to continue while the rest of us were locked in our houses doesnt.. the list goes on. It’s 2023, football is political. Sorry to break it to anyone.

That said, anyone who just says “i don’t care about human rights abuses my teams owners commit, i just want my team to win” , that’s up to them. But don’t dress it up any other way, own your wilful ignorance.

And to reiterate from the other thread. I take it you've never filled up your car, never owned a smartphone (don't want to be enabling minority genocide now do we), have never shopped at a supermarket that imports goods from occupied territories.

You're desperate to hugely conflate the political ramifications in football, yet I'd wager you're blissfully ignorant of these same ramifications in core aspects of your day to day life.

 

[Alonzo]

And to reiterate from the other thread. I take it you've never filled up your car, never owned a smartphone (don't want to be enabling minority genocide now do we), have never shopped at a supermarket that imports goods from occupied territories.

You're desperate to hugely conflate the political ramifications in football, yet I'd wager you're blissfully ignorant of these same ramifications in core aspects of your day to day life.

following me from thread to thread i see. Nice. Sorry I’ve hit a nerve.

im not desperate for that at all. I simply want you and everyone else to own their wilful ignorance. “I don’t care about human rights abuses, i just want my team to win”. Why is it so difficult for you to say it? I know why, i think you do as well

As for your other points, they are all valid in isolation. But you know the difference between necessities for existing, and the politics surrounding a state buying a football club, and the cheerleading around that. It’s a false equivalence, but whatever. If that helps you feel comfortable, go for it.

 

[Kaos]

following me from thread to thread i see. Nice. Sorry I’ve hit a nerve.

im not desperate for that at all. I simply want you and everyone else to own their wilful ignorance. “I don’t care about human rights abuses, i just want my team to win”. Why is it so difficult for you to say it? I know why, i think you do as well

As for your other points, they are all valid in isolation. But you know the difference between necessities for existing, and the politics surrounding a state buying a football club, and the cheerleading around that. It’s a false equivalence, but whatever. If that helps you feel comfortable, go for it.

Don't flatter yourself sweetheart, I stumbled upon this thread and noticed you were posting the same copypasta'd drivel about some of us being in denial when it comes to our personal morals.

But please humour me, why is it you feel its supposedly difficult for me to say what I allegedly really feel?

 

[fallengt]

How is Musk evil?

He's deep-rooted in politic, scammed millions people with crypto pyramid scheme, bought twitter when he was drunk, surprised that the company was full of agendas, is having buyer-remorse. Still mad that gov forcing lockdown & restrictions on his factories during covid & keep throwing shades at them even to this day.
That was just last year...You want this man to be owner of a football club? How many shit-posts would United get after a loss then?

He's Thomas Edison of this era, despite of the name of his company.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Asian billionaires is an evil now. Ambanis sure but I like the generalisation

Personally I won’t stop supporting the club but for me one big thing is not having owners pump shitloads of money of their own in. That feels wrong to me but I do think is inevitable sadly. The other would be a moron like Musk using us as a tool.

 

[Oluwaplumpie]

I don't think I'm capable of losing interest in United. I've tried it in the past... It was an exercise in futility.

 

[ForeverRed1]

What? You don’t like the Al Thani - Harrods - Old Trafford stadium?

it has a certain ring to it I guess.

hold up, he owns Harrods?

 

[DevilRed]

it has a certain ring to it I guess.

hold up, he owns Harrods?

They own far more than Harrods, but people weren't exactly up in arms about it then.

 

[JohnnyLaw]

And to reiterate from the other thread. I take it you've never filled up your car, never owned a smartphone (don't want to be enabling minority genocide now do we), have never shopped at a supermarket that imports goods from occupied territories.

You're desperate to hugely conflate the political ramifications in football, yet I'd wager you're blissfully ignorant of these same ramifications in core aspects of your day to day life.

Using ME oil shouldn’t be a such a forgone conclusion that it is. In 2021 73% of oil used in Sweden is produced in Norway, no ME state was even a large enough importer to be worthy of being mentioned.
People need food, clothes and phones in society., we don’t need Manchester United, much as we may feel that way. To be buy fairly produced goods is largely a priviledge of the upper classes of society that can afford them.
No one can fight every wrong in society but if your interest is football and Manchester United then maybe that should be your fight.

 

[Varun1]

One that interferes with the football side and shoves players dow our throat. We don't need the Neymars of this world if it will disrupt squad harmony.
Also one that will play FM - we don't need a squad of superstars.

 

[Ole's screen]

10. don't give a feck about the owners

Can really complain about Glazers then.

 

[Lord SInister]

Who gives a fcuk?
Red cafe does have a great deal of virtuous, self righteous and uptight bunch.

Oh I don't like Musk, I don't like Middle East trillionaires, I don't like American Billionaires, I don't like Asian billionaires, I don't like XYZ.

No matter who buys us, we will always have a bunch of people crying over it.

 

[AndersB]

Who gives a fcuk?
Red cafe does have a great deal of virtuous, self righteous and uptight bunch.

Oh I don't like Musk, I don't like Middle East trillionaires, I don't like American Billionaires, I don't like Asian billionaires, I don't like XYZ.

No matter who buys us, we will always have a bunch of people crying over it.

This is a great and well thought out argument. I especially like how you erased the whole problem by simply referring to those that have a issue with Qatari ownership as self-righteous crybabies.

 

[adnando]

That was the act of saudi prince (allegedly). United isn't being bought by them.
But the stereotype that is "all Arab countries are the same " is racism, you know

You're the one who jumped to the conclusion that I was comparing Saudi Arabia with other Arab countries and concluded that I meant that they are all the same, that might be racist, you know.
But fully serious, I was comparing the quote " What owners do outside of their Man United time should not matter" with our hero kicking a racist Palace fan, thus taking the worst example I could think of at that moment, which was when the journalist was killed. Not once did I mention anything about stereotypes or generalizations, that's all on you. You should take a look at South Park, season 4 episode 7.

Because it's one of the historically great football clubs in the history of the sport that's been out of the limelight since our legendary manager retired? What kind of question is this?

I guess we'll share the league and the cups with Aston Villa, Sheffield Wednesday, Nottingham Forrest, Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton, Sunderland, and every other team with prior success. My point is, saying that we deserve to be brought back to glory sounds a tad entitled.

 

[redcucumber]

And to reiterate from the other thread. I take it you've never filled up your car, never owned a smartphone (don't want to be enabling minority genocide now do we), have never shopped at a supermarket that imports goods from occupied territories.

You're desperate to hugely conflate the political ramifications in football, yet I'd wager you're blissfully ignorant of these same ramifications in core aspects of your day to day life.

Are people seriously still trotting out the "well you have a smartphone and use petrol" argument? Christ.

 

[Spoony]

Are people seriously still trotting out the "well you have a smartphone and use petrol" argument? Christ.

Basically the the world is full of shit. And we're totally powerless. That said, fans that are more political could air their displeasure during games. Who knows it may have a positive effect on social conditions in Qatar.

 

[redcucumber]

Basically the the world is full of shit. And we're totally powerless. That said, fans that are more political could air their displeasure during games. Who knows it may have a positive effect on social conditions in Qatar.

I go to games but I can't imagine what sort of banner I'd need to promote positive change in Qatar - a fecking impressive one. It just feels fundamentally wrong that a royal family could own United.

 

[fallengt]

You're the one who jumped to the conclusion that I was comparing Saudi Arabia with other Arab countries and concluded that I meant that they are all the same, that might be racist, you know.
But fully serious, I was comparing the quote " What owners do outside of their Man United time should not matter" with our hero kicking a racist Palace fan, thus taking the worst example I could think of at that moment, which was when the journalist was killed. Not once did I mention anything about stereotypes or generalizations, that's all on you. You should take a look at South Park, season 4 episode 7.

You're the only one in this topic who brought up Jamal incident (I assumed, if I misunderstood it then apologies) out of nowhere, mate. Not me, not the guy you were quoting, not even OP mentioned Investment groups from Saudi Arabia.

 

[oates]

You're the only one in this topic who brought up Jamal incident (I assumed, if I misunderstood it then apologies) out of nowhere, mate. Not me, not the guy you were quoting, not even OP mentioned Investment groups from Saudi Arabia.

As I understood it other clubs and their owners have also been part of a pretty free flowing discussion as was the topic of your hero.