Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ronaldo's ego said:
Can you please explain how it’s a ‘cheat code’? We’re not a fecking nothing club like City or PSG that need to break rules, make shady deals and work around the clock to convince everyone we’re a big club.

Most of the money that needs to be spent is off-field on stadium and facilities. We’ve got the right manager finally and without leeches bleeding the club we can target top players well within FFP and whatever other rules exist. We’ve spent ridiculous money in the last decade anyway, just really poorly. We need owners who want United to be the best club in the world without expecting a financial return. Playing football manger and spending £200M every transfer window is not necessary and won't be the case anyway.
Click to expand...
Why? Everything from the way PSG and City have been run points to exactly this. Maybe not every window but enormous spending that is disproportionate to the money they actually make.

Quite honestly, if you can't see what about state ownership is cheat code-esque I think you're living on a different planet. It's exactly what we've looked down at city for these last years but suddenly, when it happens to us, it's ok.
 
Champ said:
I don't think anyone is looking 'down' upon the middle east.

A genuine question would be has anyone asked the woman's team about the potential of being brought out by a consortium with links to the rulers of a country where you can't be yourself and instead have to live in fear if you fancy the same sex?

Only ask as there isn't the same cloak and daggers attitude to being gay in woman's football generally. So would be interesting to get their perspective.

Your post is languishing in the 'you have to tolerate other people's values' without realising that the values you are aiming to tolerate do not abide by the same tolerations.

We aren't going to change a regime as a football team.
Click to expand...

It might seem like they are looking down on the ME, probably mostly due to only getting their news on these countries from Western journalists, which come across as lazy when reading their articles. The general attitude seems to be that it's a homogenous region who all are regressive, which is quite far from the truth.

Sadly, what the woman's team are saying wouldn't matter very much in this instance and I bet they are not stupid to not realize that, so doubt we will be hearing from that end on the matter. But the PSG woman's team seems to be thriving under the ownership, but I don't know how involved the owners are in that project.

Think what he means is you have to see it from their point of view also. Their laws and beliefs are deeply-rooted in religion and for generations not being involved in the global community. It's only in the past few decades where massive wealth was discovered that catapulted them into being significant members on the International stage. This means that it takes time to change and most certainly boycotts and the likes would achieve nothing at all. Also, as history has showed us, is not that long ago where the issues currently raised by Western media was evident in their countries as well. For instance, in perhaps the most liberal country in the world where it comes to sexual orientation, Norway, same sex marriage wasn't allowed until as recently as 2009. Gay and LGBT rights didn't start to improve before the 1980's in general. It's not that long ago.

Ownership of Manchester United will not alone change things, but it most certainly can and will help towards it. Change has already started there.
 
adkb said:
So here are my two cents:

Obviously being backed by oil state is a terrible thing as most clubs who do not have the financial backing will be left out of the race and all this becomes a show off between a few super powers. But if my beloved club is being taken over by a oil state I would expect least of the following things:

1. Clear separation between club and the owners. The club should be functioning free of any vested interests that would hamper its social standing. Support of LGBTQ+, respecting of traditions and cultures and overall being a beacon of hope in these torrid times is a must.
2. No financial irregularities. Adherence to FFP rules, and any other laws that govern the land are a must. No payments under the table, no benami accounts and bull shit like that. This club is above that and although might have fallen in the trap sometimes, I hope the new owners are committed to the cause.
3. As long as a consortium is created and the people responsible to run it have a clean record and adhere to ensure a clean record, I am fine. All of us have skeletons in our closet, but if you are putting yourself up there for the world to see, ensure you are someone who everyone can look up to.

The club will be used to promote the country, its obvious. It will be used to bring sporting events to the land, thats obvious as well. Players will be visiting middle east for friendlies mid season that is also a given, but every owner is entitled to this. I doubt anyone can have an issue with this.

As far as slavery, labour abuse is concerned, well I am from India and most of the abused people in Qatar are from my country. It is horrible how this is allowed. But please understand that now they will be more in limelight. Owning Man utd will bring more light on their day to day functioning. It may not end very well in the long run, but when there is abuse it should be rightly called out.
Click to expand...

I respect your views. But we are a football club bro. Not a political vehicle.
 
stw2022 said:
Gay people, women and migrant workers. It's Britain in 2023. There isn't a forum or indeed Wetherspoon anywhere in the land where human rights abuses against these three categories of people aren't routinely rationalised
Click to expand...
So you don't see a difference between human rights abuses being carried out and human rights abuses being rationalized (but not actually carried out?) Or was that just a pointless false equivalency?
 
stw2022 said:
Gay people, women and migrant workers. It's Britain in 2023. There isn't a forum or indeed Wetherspoon anywhere in the land where human rights abuses against these three categories of people aren't routinely rationalised
Click to expand...

This is you a few months ago criticising people who defended Qatar through pointing out other human rights issues.
stw2022 said:
Just trying to think of how many human rights abuses you'll defend simply by pointing out other human rights abuses exist

What about the persecuted Muslim population in China? Presumably you think that's way down the list of priorities and Westerners need to stop lecturing the Chinese? White people lecturing the Chinese over this issue is pure hypocrisy that presumably you'll object to.
Click to expand...
 
BarstoolProphet said:
It might seem like they are looking down on the ME, probably mostly due to only getting their news on these countries from Western journalists, which come across as lazy when reading their articles. The general attitude seems to be that it's a homogenous region who all are regressive, which is quite far from the truth.

Sadly, what the woman's team are saying wouldn't matter very much in this instance and I bet they are not stupid to not realize that, so doubt we will be hearing from that end on the matter. But the PSG woman's team seems to be thriving under the ownership, but I don't know how involved the owners are in that project.

Think what he means is you have to see it from their point of view also. Their laws and beliefs are deeply-rooted in religion and for generations not being involved in the global community. It's only in the past few decades where massive wealth was discovered that catapulted them into being significant members on the International stage. This means that it takes time to change and most certainly boycotts and the likes would achieve nothing at all. Also, as history has showed us, is not that long ago where the issues currently raised by Western media was evident in their countries as well. For instance, in perhaps the most liberal country in the world where it comes to sexual orientation, Norway, same sex marriage wasn't allowed until as recently as 2009. Gay and LGBT rights didn't start to improve before the 1980's in general. It's not that long ago.

Ownership of Manchester United will not alone change things, but it most certainly can and will help towards it. Change has already started there.
Click to expand...
So in the interim period, before Qatar decides to allow basic human rights, human thoughts and stop oppressive workers rights for immigrants, we are to tolerate these thought processes without batting an eyelid?

They haven't invested in the West to get ideas on how to change their regime, so not sure why United would be any different in that respect?

I get people are finding a way to justify this potential takeover, and I am sure they will be good for the club, but these issues can it be swept under the carpet in the hope that they eventually allow someone to live as they would like too.
 
Saudi have officially entered the bidding - rumours doing rounds on twitter based on a telegraph article - Confident they will outbid the Qataris
 
Wumminator said:
This is you a few months ago criticising people who defended Qatar through pointing out other human rights issues.
Click to expand...


Fail to see the point. I was attacking those who defend human rights abuses then by pointing to the fact others exist. I'm attacking those who defend human rights abuses by those who try and pass it off as simply a cultural quirk.

Struggling to see where you've identified any hypocrisy
 
stw2022 said:
Fail to see the point. I was attacking those who defend human rights abuses then by pointing to the fact others exist. I'm attacking those who defend human rights abuses by those who try and pass it off as simply a cultural quirk.

Struggling to see where you've identified any hypocrisy
Click to expand...

I might have taken your recent post in the wrong way. Seems like you were comparing human rights abuse in England to those in Qatar.

Might be a misreading on my part!
 
I’m excited and apprehensive at the same time. Whoever buys us there’ll be a fecking shitstorm because it’s United.

Can’t wait for the Glazers to go but it wouldn’t surprise me if the greedy cnuts decided not to sell because they didn’t get 8billion or whatever.

Fingers crossed we get the right owners.
 
Well, I guess we are now a national team for a state that likes to whip women when they get raped. How exciting.
 
There's only really two cats with the kinda money left to slug this out, isn't there? The gimps must be salivating. Couple of awkward moments in 17 years makes the pay day more than worth it.
 
TrebleChamp99 said:
Saudi have officially entered the bidding - rumours doing rounds on twitter based on a telegraph article - Confident they will outbid the Qataris
Click to expand...

Private investors? Otherwise their bid would be scrutinized more than a Qatar bid considering that their own the barcodes already.
 
Champ said:
So in the interim period, before Qatar decides to allow basic human rights, human thoughts and stop oppressive workers rights for immigrants, we are to tolerate these thought processes without batting an eyelid?

They haven't invested in the West to get ideas on how to change their regime, so not sure why United would be any different in that respect?

I get people are finding a way to justify this potential takeover, and I am sure they will be good for the club, but these issues can it be swept under the carpet in the hope that they eventually allow someone to live as they would like too.
Click to expand...

Nope, I am not saying that, but once again history has shown that reforms sadly means human sacrifices. It's not about tolerating them, but more about being open to dialogue instead of boycotting them - as it by all accounts is they way to achieve change. Saying feck you to them won't achieve anything.

They invested in the West because it is a safe option but probably mainly to get close to relevant decision makers. Investing in sports is more about promoting the country - most people didn't even knew what their property portfolio is in the West whereas owning Manchester United will leading to constant attention and scrutiny (unlike the temporary WC).

But change has already started in Qatar and the other members of GCC, but that is hardly reported on in the West.
 
Devil77 said:
Those would be the worst thinkable owners. Really hope the FA will stop that from going through.
Click to expand...

Not many options that would be worse, than Qatar...SA with MbS at the helm would definitely be one of them.
 
CallyRed said:




Click to expand...


It's strange how the multi club issue is mentioned with respect to Qatar potentially owning us, but not INEOS. Surely it's the same thing? Or if not immediately, I would imagine their goal with Nice is to have them in the CL regularly within a few years, so would it not be the same issue then?
 
Loon said:
There's only really two cats with the kinda money left to slug this out, isn't there? The gimps must be salivating. Couple of awkward moments in 17 years makes the pay day more than worth it.
Click to expand...
Yeah Saudi-Qatar bidding war is the dream scenario for them.
 
devilish said:
I can't speak about La Liga although from the little I heard its the same story as the Serie A. However I can speak alot about the Serie A

The only ones to blame for the Serie A downfall is the Italians themselves. When money was flowing in they could have easily invested on their infrastructure (ex Stadiums and improving their brand name etc). They chose to invest on players instead. At one point the situation grew so ridiculous that Manchester United couldn't afford the salary given to a Fiorentina player and a top Real Madrid player ended up moving to the Serie B. Its ridiculous that a club that at the time had won 5 CL, 4 of whom almost in a row, wouldn't even bother trying to increase its merchandizing footprint outside Italy. But back then, their owner was only concerned in making himself popular with the local audience with no care in the world on the long term sustainability of the club

Which leads us to the second point ie lack of accountability. Clubs were allowed to be owned by shady companies like Cirio and Parmalat which meant that once the latter fell the former would follow. Parma was one of the best run clubs in the world. They were a ridiculously small club who kept punching way above their weight by doing all the right things (ie promoting youths, buying and developing raw talent etc). That meant nothing because they were dragged through the mud with its parent company. Not to forget the many scandals that hit and still hits the Serie A. That's fascinating because only Juventus seem to end up punished by it with the rest ending with just a slap at the wrist.

But what is killing continental football is the disparity in terms of media money between those at the top end and the lower end. That benefited them at first but it hit them in the long term as no one could be arsed watching a league which is dominated by the same team again and again.

The ESL is a way to ratify that by creating the same competitive league they had ruined on their own turf. However I promise you that these people will eventually ruin it as well. We're talking about clubs like Barca and Real who sell their long term sustainability in favour of the new shiny player and I assure you that the Italian clubs aren't that better. I can't see how it would work as well. If the English, French and German clubs bail out then the ESL will see Barca/Real thrashing the Serie A ones again and again.
Click to expand...

As I remember it United couldn't match Batistuta's wages because of the wage structure at United. Who was the Real player?
 
Mainoldo said:
I respect your views. But we are a football club bro. Not a political vehicle.
Click to expand...

I think in this day and age, everything will be a political tool. Its a sad reality, but honestly as far as two things are clearly separated, I do not think we have a lot to complain about. They spending 5 billion man. They can tattoo the clubs logo on their dicks sadly.
 
Cloud7 said:
It's strange how the multi club issue is mentioned with respect to Qatar potentially owning us, but not INEOS. Surely it's the same thing? Or if not immediately, I would imagine their goal with Nice is to have them in the CL regularly within a few years, so would it not be the same issue then?
Click to expand...

It doesn’t actually matter because UEFA can’t block it. Only the EPL can.
Fair square needs a new legal department
 
Cloud7 said:
Had we given a ridiculous contract to Ronaldo in 2009 to stop him from going to Real, would you have felt the same way?
Click to expand...
To make a player bigger than the club. Yes, of course I would've felt the same.

It's not about the money, which is ridiculous in football anyway.

Do you know what power Mbappe now has at PSG?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.