The other bid is to all intents and purposes state-backed, so it's very difficult to imagine a scenario where they'll be outbid by a group who aren't.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
- Status
Are you really pushing on with this after insisting the "put Manchester back into Manchester United" was made up?
Yeah the fans clamour for Rangnick on here worked out great. The much fan vaunted return of CR7 the prodigal son was a smash hit too. Feck the Qataris, let go for fan ownership. What can go wrong?
Suspiciously absolutely nothing about the debt, something which the Qatari made sure to emphasize. They also made sure to point out they are in for 100% ownership. In this one "majority" is vague. A rather weak boilerplate statement, to be honest.
feck off Jimbob
Shows he ain’t a liar like most of us.
What have you done for the human rights movement?
Oh well. This puts me in the Qatari camp which feels dirty
Yep. The amount of mental gymnastics required to justify Qatar or Saudi is beyond me though.
There isn't going to be a change in ownership that isn't going to isolate at least some section of the fans. People will find reasons to be pissed off.
We wouldn’t have big debt. INEOS would take the debt, hence the borrowing/refinancing talk. They would likely get tax incentives for holding the debt and could even turn the debt into equity. United would be debt free so it works for both parties.
Yeah, I don't think there'll be much protest against the bid because they won't want to undermine their ask of wanting the Glazers out ASAP. So it'll be difficult to protest a Qatar bid because of that.
What I suspect might happen is a display of banners supportive of the Ratcliffe bid.
Mind-boggling to see the amount of people who are perfectly happy to see the club become a sportswashing vehicle for human rights abusing cnuts.
If Sir Jim, keeps the Glazers around which seems to be preferred by them, he can feck right off
You are right. Maybe their cartoonist didn't get the brief.
If you believe the narrative being pedalled by those who wish to sell their souls (or more accurately the clubs) for untold oil wealth. Check your sources, there is a lot of agenda posting going on.
Ineos using the word majority ownership troubles me. Who owns the rest? Joel Glazer?
I like making up reasons to disagree with someone, so I have to applaud you for that one. Beautiful work.
it's an art.Bye bye then
Exactly - and without the awful debt repayments we have - we’d have the revenue to compete again - like we used too.
Either way feck that
Shockingly bad by Ronay, he's a greater writer but I've always felt he's had a chip on his shoulder regarding United.
So if the options are Jim 80%, Glazers 20% or the Qataris, who do we want after reading both PR's?
maybe the NYSE
Of course, but some prospective owners are worse than others. And some will most likely lead to demonstrative protests in the upcoming years as well which I think with Sir Jim will end up happening.
Not much different from the "fake quotes" apparently
Can we not simply choose death instead.
Not if the glazers are gone
I can't think of a worse combo than the Glazers + whoever else.
Now i pray that Ineos dont buy United.
First of all they look just as clueless as Glazers and Woodward when running Nice.
Second they are taking up loans to buy United. Sounds familiar?
First of all they look just as clueless as Glazers and Woodward when running Nice.
Second they are taking up loans to buy United. Sounds familiar?
So, you're happy with the environmental damage Ineos is doing, that's great, but it's not for me.feck me the whataboutism
Sir jimmy can feck right off. This would mean United still wouldn't be free of debt
Weak ass Ineos statement.
The kind that makes you think they dont actually want it, they just want a bit of free publicity.
The kind that makes you think they dont actually want it, they just want a bit of free publicity.
They also want majority stake, not full purchase, which means another party will be involved and that could be the Glazers.
Unless Ineos are buying 100% of the club debt free I don’t want at all. I have a feeling with Jim after that interview he is quite friendly with the Glazers. They need to 100% be nothing to do with the club any more.
So for someone like me, who doesn't understand how all this works, what does the next stage look like and how is the 'winner' determined? Is it literally highest bidder wins?
These statements all sound a bit school project level.
Ok that i did not know.... Makes this even worse!
Could you imagine if the Glazer chose them, they might just s**t themselves.
I'm not sure that's the case. If a decent alternative was offered, people would want it. I hear the reservations people have about Ineos, and to be honest, I am not qualified to judge their merits. Anyone who was interested saw all anyone needed to know about the values and priorities of the Quataris at the World Cup.
It doesn't necessarily mean that. I believe around a third of the shares are publicly distributed right now, they could buy all glazer shares and control the business without having 100% ownership.
That does mean there will be external shareholders, just not necessarily the glazers.
- Status