the 15 per cent was Milan, we dont know what this instance would be do we, especially in this climate
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
- Status
Fair enough.
What do you think are the chances that the Glazers keep the club or that Elliott get their filthy hands on us?
We haven’t spent what we could theoretically under FFP every season. Unless it’s saying next year we will regardless of owners.
Who knows what Ducker asked his sources though. It's a heavy media-driven campaign to make it out that it's direct State of Qatar ownership (could or could not be true as of yet) so presumably they responded to that. Not everyone that mentioned Qatar said the sovereign wealth fund or the Emir himself would be involved, but it sure does generate more clicks (happened alot back when DIC wanted to buy Liverpool - even if it's way likelier in this instance).
Quite a few rumours swirling that Qatar are ready to up their bid...which i`m guessing means they didn`t match the asking price. If true it also means Al Thani is serious and if that is true people may as well start getting used to it because I doubt anyone will be able to outbid him.
its worrying timing. Glazers are desperate for money to keep the club going forward, now ST prices go up.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Money is much more expensive now than it was then.
There is no scenario that Manchester United could support the loan cost necessary for joel glazer to maintain ownership, and certainly not with funding from Elliot.
That 2 billion would be buying out his family. We haven;t even got to the cost of a stadium, paying off the current debt or the need to invest in the teams yet.
im in no way saying its acceptable, it shows the staggering lack of respect they have for the club, even after the superleague stunt they tried to pull
The Glazers maintaining ownership with MORE money they don’t have is the ironic ending to this farce.
Because a lot of our fans are sanctimonious weirdos who want to appear morally superior to fans of other clubs. Name another fanbase that would have tolerated Ole for so long.
You have to wonder if everything journos have posted in their usual desperate arms race to appear relevant despite not knowing much, is actually true. Beyond the official statements of the two bidders, its hard to believe anything.
For this story journos don't know much I think. This isn't your 80 million player transfer it's a deal worth billions and these sort of things don't get leaked like transfer rumors. And then to have transfer/sports analysts comment on what is a financial deal makes it more likely they are all bluffing
how did you choose our club anyways? Feels like such a chore supporting this weirdo club with weirdo values.It also doesnt hurt he is British educated, can speak fluent English and is a self proclaimed Manchester United fan. A young face for the new owners to present to the fans.
They really thought this one through.
I also don't believe for a second that this part of the family coming forward to be the public face, wasn't at the behest of the Emir. At least they are trying to prove/show seperation from other football clubs and entities.
Can the Premier League stop Elliot from investing? The proposal sounds like unfit and unproper ownership.
While Qatar and Ineos come with flaws I don't think either is unfit to own the club from a financial perspective.
This might get me in trouble but if the Glazers don't sell I hope they die without being able to cash in on the club.
While Qatar and Ineos come with flaws I don't think either is unfit to own the club from a financial perspective.
This might get me in trouble but if the Glazers don't sell I hope they die without being able to cash in on the club.
[QUOTE="romufc, post: 30185192, member: 117242"]
His dad was, just because he is a sheik means he ha access to all the money? Are you trying to say all 3000 members of the royal family have access to the money?
I love how if its "sponsored" its fine, yet if a Qatari national comes in, its tainted money
P.S so you would be fine if Qatar sponsored a UK national to buy the club, because it would be a sponsor?
[/QUOTE]
The Qatari bid for Manchester United is fronted by Sheik Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani. He is the son of HBJ (one of 15 kids by 2 wives) - HBJ is the former prime minister of Qatar and former head of the QIA. There’s your first link to the state.
Sheik Jassim is the chairman of Qatar Islamic Bank. It conducts its domestic business through 31 branches spread throughout the country, in addition to private centers for ladies (Just to make them feel special, presumably) and dedicated lounges for affluent customers (no riff Ralf allowed).
The single largest shareholder of QIB is the Qatar Investment Authority, Qatars state run sovereign wealth fund. There is your second link to the state. Sheik Jassim was also formerly employed by Credit Suisse. The QIA holds a stake in Credit Suisse.
The QIA's structure and decision-making procedures have been characterized as non-transparent. Spending decisions regarding the fund have been linked to the emir and the prime minister (regardless of whether they sit on the board of the fund).
The QIA was widely reported to have an interest in purchasing Manchester United but due to its involvement in QSI (QSi is subsidiary of QIA) who own PSG they would be barred from doing so, or at least one of the two clubs would be unable to compete in UEFA competitions for fear of the teams being drawn to play each other thus calling into question the integrity of the competition (presumably the Champions League).
Interestingly should any club wish to complain about Utd and PSG being owned by the same people, their first port of call would be the European Clubs' Association, which is chaired by Nasser Al-Khelifa, president of PSG, chairman of Qatar Sports Investment and a member of QIA and UEFA's executive committee.
All roads lead to this being a state buyout of United, funded by state money with Sheik Jassim being the ‘acceptably distanced’ face of the cover up operation, because nobody knows anything much about him - even his spokespeople who could say how old he is, or whether he is married with kids or not.
Here is a visual aid courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Sorry for the long post, but is that thourough enough? Got to be seen to be being fair to both bids. And not a meme of emoji in sight.
His dad was, just because he is a sheik means he ha access to all the money? Are you trying to say all 3000 members of the royal family have access to the money?
I love how if its "sponsored" its fine, yet if a Qatari national comes in, its tainted money
P.S so you would be fine if Qatar sponsored a UK national to buy the club, because it would be a sponsor?
[/QUOTE]
Ok, gents I’ll try once more.
The Qatari bid for Manchester United is fronted by Sheik Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani. He is the son of HBJ (one of 15 kids by 2 wives) - HBJ is the former prime minister of Qatar and former head of the QIA. There’s your first link to the state.
Sheik Jassim is the chairman of Qatar Islamic Bank. It conducts its domestic business through 31 branches spread throughout the country, in addition to private centers for ladies (Just to make them feel special, presumably) and dedicated lounges for affluent customers (no riff Ralf allowed).
The single largest shareholder of QIB is the Qatar Investment Authority, Qatars state run sovereign wealth fund. There is your second link to the state. Sheik Jassim was also formerly employed by Credit Suisse. The QIA holds a stake in Credit Suisse.
The QIA's structure and decision-making procedures have been characterized as non-transparent. Spending decisions regarding the fund have been linked to the emir and the prime minister (regardless of whether they sit on the board of the fund).
The QIA was widely reported to have an interest in purchasing Manchester United but due to its involvement in QSI (QSi is subsidiary of QIA) who own PSG they would be barred from doing so, or at least one of the two clubs would be unable to compete in UEFA competitions for fear of the teams being drawn to play each other thus calling into question the integrity of the competition (presumably the Champions League).
Interestingly should any club wish to complain about Utd and PSG being owned by the same people, their first port of call would be the European Clubs' Association, which is chaired by Nasser Al-Khelifa, president of PSG, chairman of Qatar Sports Investment and a member of QIA and UEFA's executive committee.
All roads lead to this being a state buyout of United, funded by state money with Sheik Jassim being the ‘acceptably distanced’ face of the cover up operation, because nobody knows anything much about him - even his spokespeople who could say how old he is, or whether he is married with kids or not.
Here is a visual aid courtesy of the Daily Mail.
Sorry for the long post, but is that thourough enough? Got to be seen to be being fair to both bids. And not a meme of emoji in sight.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Why are people losing their shit over the increased ticket prices?
The business doesn’t just switch off whilst this process is ongoing. That would be stupid.
The business doesn’t just switch off whilst this process is ongoing. That would be stupid.
Religion and capitalism. Is that you Jassim?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Interesting to see sentiment shifting. If the talk the Glazers might hold on is a bluff, this could suggest its working.
Glazers could be staying (I am hoping it is a tactic to scare bidders into increasing their offer) however I don't think ticket increases have any relation to the Glazers staying or not. This will likely to have come from Finance and budgeting in order to imply with FFP.
He’s just putting two and two together to get 5. There’s literally nothing to suggest this sale has changed in any way
Well to be fair yes the reporting was very vague as to who was actually making the bid, that was either down to journalists playing the guessing game or the briefs being fed to them were purposely vague to gauge reactions.
More to do with how Qatar will buy floated share & how much they'll pay for it, based on the numbers. (smart money knowing from last few months that this was coming, bought & now exiting as well)
I don’t think so. It’s obvious that the market really thinks the Glazers are a problem.
That surely depends whether you think having the Glazers over Qatar is better. Personally I would rather have the Glazers.
Molde.
With the current rate hikes and inflation running wild, it’s no surprise ticket prices have increased after not increasing for 11 years or so. I don’t think people can be too surprised, it had to happen at some point.
To be honest there was tons of drama surrounding Newcastle and the same human rights groups raising issues.
There is only added drama here because you're watching, whereas Newcastle you wasn't.
Cant it just be coming down because it shot up so high in the first place?
Feels like a power battle for the future access to Manchester United in the media field.
Which companies will get preferential treatment.
Debt in any shape or form is from a financial standpoint worse than being debt free. 100% ownership is one million times better than 69% ownership.
A understandable and commited business plan is always preferable to a business plan who's vague and without definitive commitments.
That's why Ratcliffe's bid is unattractive and frankly directly bad. Any sane supporter has to be aware of that with an owner like him anything is possible.
I have had enough of bad owners. No more Glazers or anything close to them. No hedge funds. No JP Morgan and no Goldman Sachs. No more debt and dividends.
Finally we have a chance of being competitive for the next couple of decades. Free from shady business men.
The choice is simple and Ratcliffe is not part of my dreams.
A understandable and commited business plan is always preferable to a business plan who's vague and without definitive commitments.
That's why Ratcliffe's bid is unattractive and frankly directly bad. Any sane supporter has to be aware of that with an owner like him anything is possible.
I have had enough of bad owners. No more Glazers or anything close to them. No hedge funds. No JP Morgan and no Goldman Sachs. No more debt and dividends.
Finally we have a chance of being competitive for the next couple of decades. Free from shady business men.
The choice is simple and Ratcliffe is not part of my dreams.
Madness that.
When was the last time the UK or US government persecuted somebody for being homosexual or marginalised and maligned women? How many foreign migrant workers died when we rebuilt Wembley stadium?
This false equivalence needs to stop. There is no comparison between ME Islamic states and democratic western governments. Open your eyes.
Oh so if they own united, you think homosexuals or women will get marginalised?
Whilst ignoring any infrastructure improvement.
New debt maybe, they haven't said what they will do with the current debt. Will they really take loans of 6 8 bn to buy the club and build a new stadium? I very much doubt that, personally.
People are allowed to change their mind you know, based on what we currently know.
Hopefully you are correct.
I think the Glazer cnuts will have to go public with their definitive intention to either sell or not sell within the next couple weeks now that they've invited full takeover bids. At the moment it's still "exploring alternatives" which will leave wriggle room and encourage doubt.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
- Status