Have you seen the board members? Do a bit of research. They are mostly distant family members.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Just as it was for the Glazers, so I guess they are no really so bad and we should keep them around, yeah?
Prolapsism is already making a comeback. See 21/02/2023, post code L4 0TH.
Any Mancunian happy if the Qatari's buy the club? I'm yet to meet one.
Great post.
We can all have opinions though and nobody is right or wrong. It's just how you personally feel about being a propaganda machine.
And ultimately the Glazers will take the highest offer not the most moral one. We all already know that.
Absolutely. Blinded by the wealth.
Honestly it's nothing about greed or big signings (we have always broken British transfer records in the past.) Its about long-term financial sustainability.
I just don't think Ratcliffe can afford to do the deal without borrowing more than he can afford. Only 70% of the ownership. That means he is scraping the barrel or the upper limits of what he can afford.
As it is he has said that he/INEOS will only cover the new debt incurred. And he will not be buying out the outstanding shares on the NYSE. That means the Glazer debt will not be untouched and the club will still have to service that debt, and in all likelihood, at a higher interest rate, going forward.
I just want to get back onto financial terra firma .. and back to the days where we don't have such a financial obligation that stops us from doing what we want including upgrading the infra. I didn't care about who the owners were in the past and in all likelihood, wont in the future.
I just want us to be competitive. We all know that we are fecked financially at the moment and on a downward trajectory.
If the Qataris can offer us that chance to get back to where we were a decade ago, why not.
Manchester Welded
United City of Manchester FC. Red and blue stripes like Barca/Palace.
I don't think people are ignoring the cons, simply that for them the cons of the Qatar bid don't seem to be sporting. I was always under the assumption that PSG & City etc. were called plastic as they had no significant history and then spawned into serial winners out of nowhere thanks to huge injections of foreign wealth. So the history and tradition that would usually accompany their current success isn't present. That obviously wouldn't be the case with United, with the history and tradition already present in abundance.
For me the Qatari bid will allow United to stand on its own two feet, whilst also providing an immediate injection to make up for what was stolen by the Glazers over the course of their ownership. I'm not expecting that cash flow to be a constant thing and see it being a more measured approach more akin to City now rather than when they were first taken over. It's a relevelling out to undo the mistakes of the Glazer regime and allow United to unleash its own potential.
We're about to become anti-competitive.
How about you doing a bit of research? You continue to claim stuff but when confronted you either ignore the responses or do a "I don't want to talk about the political side of things". Which is ironic considering you posted the by far most bonkers political claim in this thread.
Good post. if I recall correctly net debt was 6.2b, cash was 2.6b and leverage 50% or so. (I look at lots of numbers so memory may be bad) [numbers in euros]
Your headline is still correct in essence - Especially given Ineos is in the business of acquisitions, they need a healthy cash balance and more debt leveraged on a not very profitable venture probably isn't a great idea for them. I don't think it's particularly viable, though it's certainly 'doable.' You'd expect they keep cash above 1.5 and wouldn't buy out the non Glazer shares, but it doesn't make a huge amount of sense. Assume net debt to rise to 10, and cash drops to 1.5, they are not looking like a great bet if they need to borrow more for the next acquisition. (For perspective, Musk spent around 40 or 20% of net worth, and ineos would be spending 4-5, or 20-25% of net worth on us. It's really impacted him and his ability, and just like Twitter we have a lot of value but don't really turn a profit and require even more investment)
That said, and in part due to these numbers, I still believe Ratcliffe is a charlatan and it's far from a serious bid. He'd only buy at a steep discount leveraging fan discontent of Glazers if regulatory stuff barred other buyers. Meanwhile the chancer keeps harvesting PR from the news cycles.
Last edited:
Is this where we discover that you own SIG or something?
I do a lot of quant work: finding lists of index funds and sorting by fee.
Erm…. I did research hence I know the board at QIB is mostly family of the ruling family. I’m not prone to making stuff up - I like to know what I’m talking about.
So what ‘bonkers political claim’ would that be then?
I don’t need anymore debt or profits taken out of the club…Significant investment to upgrade the stadium and training facilities which doesn’t come under FFP… again without any loans towards the club…
Initial investment for the players and with CL revenue and success on pitch we are fully self sustainable…
now if anyone apart from Qataris can do it, bring it on…
I am not opposed to Qataris at all, there are worse regimes out there …
Initial investment for the players and with CL revenue and success on pitch we are fully self sustainable…
now if anyone apart from Qataris can do it, bring it on…
I am not opposed to Qataris at all, there are worse regimes out there …
Why are you soo desperately trying to prove that QIA controls QIB?. They may control or they may not, but on paper and As part of how corporate governance and accounting standards considers the definition of control, they are not controlled my QIA.
16 percent shareholding will normally give you a right to appoint a director at the board of QIB and they may be consulted or part of major decisions but will not be directing the company or has the veto to stop decisions.
And above all QIA will have shares of most of their major entities in QATAR, do you think they have enough time to dictate all major decisions taken in all of those organisations? For your information QIA has investment of over 30b in UK, 10b in France and 5b in Germany in various companies, do you think they take decision of all these companies?
You need to understand the concept of subsidiary and investment. Subsidiary is where you own significant interest which is more than 50 percent and actually control the entity.
Correct agree with all that, plus we can forget about INEOS clearing our existing debt of 500m. Looking at the financial structure of the entity.
How so? We have been trying to compete with an increasingly bigger ball & chain for the past decade or so. There is no way we can sustain this. It will only get worse.
Just think about it -- 3 loanees in a Jan window? And two of them will be starting against one of the biggest games of the season and probably in our cup final on Sunday.
When has that ever happened in the history of United? In fact, I am pretty sure that there will be no club ever in an English cup final that has TWO loanees starting. And we are supposed to be the biggest club in the UK and one of the biggest in the world.
Two feckin loanees starting for Manchester United in a cup final? That's being anti-competitive against United.
im not trying to prove anything, just replying to you weirdos who are getting upset about me stating a few facts about the ownership
I couldn’t give a feck
you are so clueless it’s embarrassing, stop quoting me ffs
Too late to stop it now and the fact we’ve openly traded with Russia/China in the past means I don’t have much issue with it. Besides, partnerships with can bring about positive change in other countries.
Post brexit the UK has to look at alternative strategic partnerships. There is already a hell of a lot of Middle Eastern money in the UK and if Qatar want to buy United and invest in infrastructure etc I’m all for it.
Its starting to feel that theres no "right owner" for Manchester United...
Can’t tell if sarcasm in some of these replies, but I certainly see it as a W in that I feel the ESL was the Glazers end game.
Ironically, whilst I despise the Tories, I also feel that we have a better chance of a Qatar takeover with them in power vs a Labour government.
Because 99.9% of other clubs will not be in a position to compete with us. We'll be the Ben Johnson of football and all success will be meaningless.
A lot of folks here don't seem to be focusing on that. We aren't any better off other than we have a highly leveraged new owner who is using jingoistic, populist signalling to win fans over.
I thought everyone’s perfect owner would be a Utd fan that wipes the debt clean, puts the club first, allows us to spend our own money and upgrades the stadium and training facilities…..as long as he’s not from Qatar.
You left out a pretty WAG.
It was always going to be a battle for 'the lesser of the evils,' bar some miracle.
What happened to criticize the post and not the poster or is it not relevant here anymore?
This one. But apparently we shouldn't discuss political side of things.
How much do you even know about the region your are constantly spewing out claims about? Claims of terrorism links is obviously taken at face value.
Come on, act way better than this.
Why should I care when none of you are sincerely debating here? There is no way any of you believe the shite your spewing. Either you’re lying or someone is paying you. Nobody is this stupid.
ill take the warning
Pages and pages of the same conversations, over and over again. 
Been mentioned before.Pages and pages of the same conversations, over and over again.
Yes but any future success will have no value if the Qataris take over and start pumping in millions for transfers.
We don't know that for sure, what if things don't work out with the team on the pitch and the owner (we don't know who will actually be the real owner, Sheikh Jaseem seems like an intermediary for Qatar to find a way to own both PSG and United) decides he has to pump in his(someone else's) money to fix the issue or do something shady because he doesn't have enough money. I don't want United to get in trouble like City.
Well, the Qatari bidder has connections to terrorists according to the video posted here, no one will care about the history and tradition that you talked about if blood money is used to take the club back to the top again. We will actually become worse than City or PSG.
As the name suggests, they look to facilitate acquiring controlling interests in private firms and exit at higher EV multiples.
Do you take that claim with links to terrorism at face value? There are many reasons for their rivals to wanting to associate Qatar with that. Not saying it's necessarily untrue, just you need to take it with a pinch of salt based on the sources of the claims.
But in typical Devilish fashion, it's dripping with anti-British sentiment. Never seen another United supporter rip apart everything British, including some of our best players/SAF.
- Status