Would you be okay with state or state-backed ownership?

[RedSky]

I feel like I can disassociate them from what the club is about. I don't feel owners ever represent a club or that a club represents it's owner. Players are far closer to that. You go to the stands, you support the team and the players on the pitch.

Yes the owners have more impact in the hand scheme but they are just separate business side of things people. You can remove them/change them/eliminate the need for them and the game will still be played on the pitch and people will still watch the team. People come to watch the players and coaching staff. Nobody goes to watch the owner or because of the owner.

I feel like the owners don't change what the club is about while if the team actively started playing someone like Greenwood when it is public, then it would change it more. I just can't get on board with the idea that a club represents it's owner, as then it is the idea that football is only representing some rich ass who wants a plaything rather than about players who are very talented at a sport we all love to play and watch.

I can understand that view.

I just can't separate the owners from the club, they're one and the same for me. I walk around Old Trafford and I'm in awe looking at the history and thinking of the players that had been there. But then when I see the conditions of it, I can't help but think of how shit the Glazers are. Likewise if the Stadium was completely rebuilt, I would forever associate that building with Qatar. If we signed Mbappe, again it would always be a Qatar funded signing. I wish football was as easy as just following the players and staff, but the money involved in football these days and the people pushing it imo in the wrong direction makes that impossible for me. As someone said in the other thread, it would just make me feel hollow.

 

[Wumminator]

I thought they'd done loads for the community. I've only ever read positive things about what they've done to the area.

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/managem...ty-management-school-and-university-sheffield

They’ve redeveloped the area. It’s a lot nicer.
The lane they built on was sold to them a lot lower than what would be expected.

they have paid 4p tax on every 100.00 profit.

none of the houses built were for lower income households. People have been priced out from their own communities.
At a basic superficial level - the area is nicer. When you dig down, Manchester has lost our massively.
Basically, more tapas bars. Less affordable houses and tax revenue.

 

[Tommy79]

https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/managem...ty-management-school-and-university-sheffield

They’ve redeveloped the area. It’s a lot nicer.
The lane they built on was sold to them a lot lower than what would be expected.

they have paid 4p tax on every 100.00 profit.

none of the houses built were for lower income households. People have been priced out from their own communities.
At a basic superficial level - the area is nicer. When you dig down, Manchester has lost our massively.
Basically, more tapas bars. Less affordable houses and tax revenue.

Nothing new in that really, as look at Guinness owners, take a one-room flat in Dublin (dive) and to rent the average price is 1300 euros a month, Guinness paid 52 euros a year for 4 acres of land and will do for the next 8 and a half thousand years to rent out the massive amount of land they use for their brewery in Dublin.

 

[Mockney]

Even aside from the moral objection to an actual fecking country owning a football club, it’s just as weird to see PSG being run like a shit show that hasn’t won anything significant, and City being hit with 100 charges for breaking financial rules that have cast a shadow on all their successes, and still have people claiming that any moral quandaries can be excused because being run by such a state would inevitably lead to a new glorious period of unblemished sporting glory…

If that’s all the matters it still seems like far more magical thinking than the idea we just need to be run competently with our own proceeds..

 

[croadyman]

I don't want any state to own the club. I definitely don't want an ultra-conservative fascist dictatorship owning the club.

It's going to be a shitshow.

Like I just said in the other thread only non state who can comfortably fund either new stadium or rebuild,infrastructure and training facilities is a tech giant and they aren't interested. They are also the only party who could outbid a Qatar as well.

 

[Nicoseth]

I think that regardless of whether one is in favor of it or not, the reality is that this is where football is heading. Clubs are becoming so commercially valuable that it will be a rarity for them to be owned by individuals. Maybe the question goes beyond this takeover of our club, but is more about where the game is headed in general.

 

[MTF]

Even aside from the moral objection to an actual fecking country owning a football club, it’s just as weird to see PSG being run like a shit show that hasn’t won anything significant, and City being hit with 100 charges for breaking financial rules that have cast a shadow on all their successes, and still have people claiming that any moral quandaries can be excused because being run by such a state would inevitably lead to a new glorious period of unblemished sporting glory…

If that’s all the matters it still seems like far more magical thinking than the idea we just need to be run competently with our own proceeds..

I think the same. There's A LOT of projection of people thinking what they think the best outcome would be, and stating with high confidence (I've even seen certainty) that it's what prospective Qatari owners would do. Meanwhile as you say, PSG is right there as an example of how they've actually managed a club.

 

[Wumminator]

Okay, so let me ask you, you are against Qatar because?

@romufc let me answer your 2023 post with a post from three years ago.

It's just a name now FFP. It is clear to see how it works, the top level of football is so corrupt as well.
You don't have to look much further than Qatar world cup bid and the events since then, no regard for human life, climate or anything, yet the Qatari sports minister is there unveiling Messi and no one bats an eye lid.

 

[Carlsen19]

This makes no sense. You would be ok being owned by a whole country that abuses women but not allow 1 footballer to do it?

As @bosnian_red says further down, it’s easier to separate the owners from the club than it is an active player. I can block out whatever atrocities the owners get up to and concentrate on the team whereas I can’t forget about what MG has done when I see him turning out for us week in, week out. Just my opinion.

 

[RuudTom83]

Sadly our opinions mean very little when it comes to who owns the club.

I honestly can't see an outcome that I would be totally happy with, so at this stage I just want the club to be debt free and have owners who let the club run itself in a sensible manner.

 

[romufc]

@romufc let me answer your 2023 post with a post from three years ago.

Agreed, I have issues with how they conduct human rights, climate. I agree that top level football is corrupt, I agree that the workers were not treated right. I also think it is a joke to have a country that had no infrastructure to host a WC.

If we are all crying about the climate, we then tell a country to build stadiums, etc, there is alot of carbon emissions used to do that.

If you ask me, there is issues everywhere, America with its gun laws etc... No country, no government is innocent.

 

[Wumminator]

Agreed, I have issues with how they conduct human rights, climate. I agree that top level football is corrupt, I agree that the workers were not treated right. I also think it is a joke to have a country that had no infrastructure to host a WC.

If we are all crying about the climate, we then tell a country to build stadiums, etc, there is alot of carbon emissions used to do that.

If you ask me, there is issues everywhere, America with its gun laws etc... No country, no government is innocent.

So… let’s not be owned by a country? You’re agreeing that’s a bad idea?

 

[romufc]

So… let’s not be owned by a country? You’re agreeing that’s a bad idea?

What difference does it make? Their laws are for their country. They are buying a club that follows UK laws.

I guarantee, if Qatar owned United and decided to build a new stadium, they would have to follow UK human rights, UK legislation and laws.

 

[Wumminator]

What difference does it make? Their laws are for their country. They are buying a club that follows UK laws.

I guarantee, if Qatar owned United and decided to build a new stadium, they would have to follow UK human rights, UK legislation and laws.

Because - we don’t want people with no regard for human life (your words) funding our club?

 

[Dan_F]

Like I just said in the other thread only non state who can comfortably fund either new stadium or rebuild,infrastructure and training facilities is a tech giant and they aren't interested. They are also the only party who could outbid a Qatar as well.

That’s simply not true. It has been explained plenty of times how the loan for a stadium would be different to our current debt. Even Spurs have built a new stadium and manage to spend £100-£150 million a year.

People are really underestimating how much money has been wasted by the Glazers, not only on debt and interest, but in the playing squad - both buying and selling.

 

[croadyman]

That’s simply not true. It has been explained plenty of times how the loan for a stadium would be different to our current debt. Even Spurs have built a new stadium and manage to spend £100-£150 million a year.

People are really underestimating how much money has been wasted by the Glazers, not only on debt and interest, but in the playing squad - both buying and selling.

I just can't trust any American consortium's looking for ROI after all these leeches have put us through these last 18 years. Yes I know the Qatari’s have human rights issues but still want to give it a chance.

 

[Siorac]

Even aside from the moral objection to an actual fecking country owning a football club, it’s just as weird to see PSG being run like a shit show that hasn’t won anything significant, and City being hit with 100 charges for breaking financial rules that have cast a shadow on all their successes, and still have people claiming that any moral quandaries can be excused because being run by such a state would inevitably lead to a new glorious period of unblemished sporting glory…

If that’s all the matters it still seems like far more magical thinking than the idea we just need to be run competently with our own proceeds..

I think the fantasy is that on the sporting side they will be every bit as efficient and competent as the Manchester City owners but without the dodgy underhanded dealings because a debt-free United can flash the cash without breaking FFP.

Of course, it's just as likely that we'll end up with three superstar attackers, no midfield, and a succession of undermined managers.

 

[Wumminator]

I just can't trust any American consortium's after all these leeches have put us through these last 18 years. Yes I know the Qatari’s have human rights issues but still want to give it a chance.

I absolutely love that you’ve just come out and said it. At least you’re not trying to hide your priorities.

 

[croadyman]

I think the fantasy is that on the sporting side they will be every bit as efficient and competent as the Manchester City owners but without the dodgy underhanded dealings because a debt-free United can flash the cash without breaking FFP.

Of course, it's just as likely that we'll end up with three superstar attackers, no midfield, and a succession of undermined managers.

Yeah that first paragraph is my exact hope,however when you look at PSG's galacticos like Neymar,Mbappe,Messi then can understand your point in second one.

 

[romufc]

Because - we don’t want people with no regard for human life (your words) funding our club?

I mean if you are going to go that far, then we should not enter the FA cup because it is funded by Emirates, (state funding), we should stop all middle east sponsors, every company associated with middle east and China. That means Nike, Addidas, etc..

If you have the same energy for those then yes, right now, all I see is hypocritical views.

 

[Bosws87]

I think the fantasy is that on the sporting side they will be every bit as efficient and competent as the Manchester City owners but without the dodgy underhanded dealings because a debt-free United can flash the cash without breaking FFP.

Of course, it's just as likely that we'll end up with three superstar attackers, no midfield, and a succession of undermined managers.

We managed 15 years without a right winger don't be so pessimistic.

 

[croadyman]

I absolutely love that you’ve just come out and said it. At least you’re not trying to hide your priorities.

Yes alright I want to see what they can do to improve our infrastructure,training facilities and stadium. I want to see how Erik could perform when he hasn't got a budget so restricted by debt payments and dividends.

 

[MTF]

I'd argue that it's likely that if Qatar comes to own the club at some point FFP rules will be violated. All it will take will be for 2+ years of transfer business done within FFP parameters to be disappointing, leave us with some underwhelming players and results, and the temptation to blow a few more hundred million to rectify the squad issues will be there.

 

[croadyman]

I'd argue that it's likely that if Qatar comes to own the club at some point FFP rules will be violated. All it will take will be for 2+ years of transfer business done within FFP parameters to be disappointing, leave us with some underwhelming players and results, and the temptation to blow a few more hundred million to rectify the squad issues will be there.

Personally think we finally have a manager where there doesn't have to be Boehly like spending. I'm confident these owners would provide Erik with all the necessary funds to succeed

 

[romufc]

I just can't trust any American consortium's looking for ROI after all these leeches have put us through these last 18 years. Yes I know the Qatari’s have human rights issues but still want to give it a chance.

This is it.

The Qatar issues are in the media, which is why people are against them, I get it.

I remember the Chelsea fans raging that the Riketts were in line to buy their club, the only reason because things were leaked. They had racist allegations against them, yet people will come on here and be like I rather have an American ownership, with no clue of who they are, how they acquired their wealth or any idea of their beliefs.

Politics will always divide people, I want what is best for Manutd.

 

[Bosws87]

I'd argue that it's likely that if Qatar comes to own the club at some point FFP rules will be violated. All it will take will be for 2+ years of transfer business done within FFP parameters to be disappointing, leave us with some underwhelming players and results, and the temptation to blow a few more hundred million to rectify the squad issues will be there.

Can't see it they can just generate more money with self sponsorship they wouldn't be likely to fall foul of above market sponsorship deals like city just because of the size and reach of united.

 

[Wumminator]

I mean if you are going to go that far, then we should not enter the FA cup because it is funded by Emirates, (state funding), we should stop all middle east sponsors, every company associated with middle east and China. That means Nike, Addidas, etc..

If you have the same energy for those then yes, right now, all I see is hypocritical views.

That’s not what hypocrisy is. Saying “I don’t want a nation with questionable values to own my club” is not the same as “united should leave the FA Cup because I don’t like the sponsor.”

 

[MTF]

Personally think we finally have a manager where there doesn't have to be Boehly like spending

So does City, and they still spent 100 million on Jack fecking Grealish. Efficient spend that is not.

 

[Wumminator]

Yes alright I want to see what they can do to improve our infrastructure,training facilities and stadium. I want to see how Erik could perform when he hasn't got a budget so restricted by debt payments and dividends.

If your argument is “I don’t care abouthuman rights issues as long as United are winning” I genuinely have no issue with that. I understand even though it’s not for me.

 

[romufc]

That’s not what hypocrisy is. Saying “I don’t want a nation with questionable values to own my club” is not the same as “united should leave the FA Cup because I don’t like the sponsor.”

Your words, I don't want the state funding my club, your words.

But you will celebrate a trophy funded by the state you didn't want to fund your club?

 

[Mockney]

I think the same. There's A LOT of projection of people thinking what they think the best outcome would be, and stating with high confidence (I've even seen certainty) that it's what prospective Qatari owners would do. Meanwhile as you say, PSG is right there as an example of how they've actually managed a club.

Not to mention that City DID try that approach initially… With Robinho, Tevez, trying to get Kaka etc… they just happened to luck out by buying the entire Barca hierarchy at the point they were available and the most fashionable thing going. There’s an argument it was just as knee jerk of a “buy the biggest thing!” it just happened to work out because those people were quite competent….

And as you say, the actual like-for-like Qatari model has been a complete galactico shit show, that also shows absolutely no inclincling of learning from their mistakes.. So it’s far more reasonable to assume it would be more similar than not. But hey, feck your principles for shiny toys… What can possibli go wrong

 

[mu4c_20le]

Politics will always divide people, I want what is best for Manutd.

Right, so the people that are opposed to Qatari ownership, don't?

 

[romufc]

I'd argue that it's likely that if Qatar comes to own the club at some point FFP rules will be violated. All it will take will be for 2+ years of transfer business done within FFP parameters to be disappointing, leave us with some underwhelming players and results, and the temptation to blow a few more hundred million to rectify the squad issues will be there.

This is the narrow minded thinking, City have violated FFP = any middle east owner will do the same.

So, all those clubs fined by FFP, who did not have Middle east owners, how did that happen?

So, because Glazers (American) are leeches, are all American leeches?

 

[Abizzz]

Your words, I don't want the state funding my club, your words.

But you will celebrate a trophy funded by the state you didn't want to fund your club?

Yeah because the FA CUP has only been around since it started getting funded by dodgy people

 

[Wumminator]

Your words, I don't want the state funding my club, your words.

But you will celebrate a trophy funded by the state you didn't want to fund your club?

Yes. Obviously there’s a massive difference there.

 

[Swedish_Plumber]

Yeah that first paragraph is my exact hope,however when you look at PSG's galacticos like Neymar,Mbappe,Messi then can understand your point in second one.

You’d have to hope that if we are taken over by them they’ll have at least learned the lessons from the PSG ownership.

 

[romufc]

Right, so the people that are opposed to Qatari ownership, don't?

No, I did not say that. Everyone has their opinion, I am just saying, Me, not speaking for anyone else, would not mind Middle east owners.

Its like when we talk about players, where you think one is better than the other, the end goal is what is best for United, you might think for example Bruno isnt good enough for United and want him out the club, whereas my opinion would differ. That does not mean you are wrong or I am wrong, its opinion.

 

[romufc]

Yeah because the FA CUP has only been around since it started getting funded by dodgy people

Oh so you know the Emir personally do you? Are you implying that Qataris are dodgie people?

 

[Wumminator]

Oh so you know the Emir personally do you? Are you implying that Qataris are dodgie people?

Your arguments are all over the shop.

 

[croadyman]

So does City, and they still spent 100 million on Jack fecking Grealish. Efficient spend that is not.

I want to believe we would adopt a more sensible approach than demonstrated at City or PSG. I look at how Newcastle have gone about this kind of ownership as more of a template.