Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tincanalley

Turns player names into a crappy conversation
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
10,153
Location
Ireland
I’m pointing out what it was that made Manchester United a household name in the first place, i.e. what happened during the Busby era. That’s where the history, heritage, tradition, culture of the club that people often mention principally stems from. And state ownership conflicts with this. It will alter the identity of the club.

The sad thing about it all is that it’s completely unnecessary - United doesn’t need state ownership!
I agree with you. And this footballing heritage is a proud element of wider culture, both regionally, nationally and internationally. It’s epitomised by the pride and emotional connections between club, staff, players, ex players like Evra and Rio, Keano etc, and fans far and near. Do not sell out Manchester United.
 

Tincanalley

Turns player names into a crappy conversation
Joined
Apr 12, 2011
Messages
10,153
Location
Ireland
You are wrong about that, I know season ticket holders who have been going for decades who would be happy with Sheikh Jassim taking over. Because why would it impact any of our history in any way?

Many would also strongly agree with you on the point that the Glazers haven't 'sullied' the club

I also don't really understand what about a Qatari owner is so much worse for you than the current US owners who the vast majority of fans want to see out of the club ASAP - you keep saying it's terrible but haven't explained why.
It’s a nation state. It’s sportswashing. It’s an embarrassment. It’s City, Newcastle and PSG and wanting to stay out of that company. Did you see the closing ceremony of the WC? Lionel Messi being treated like a cake decoration?
 

Greck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
7,099
What are the fine print terms for when the Glazers inevitably default? They get to repo the entire club? Of all the actors this has to by far be the worst. Glazers are looking for cash injection not more credit. They are too broke to meet the ones they already have. Elliott must already know this.
 

Rightnr

Wants players fined for winning away.
Joined
Jan 25, 2015
Messages
14,648
What are the fine print terms for when the Glazers inevitably default? They get to repo the entire club? Of all the actors this has to by far be the worst. Glazers are looking for cash injection not more loans. They are too broke to meet the ones they already have.
Didn't this happen with AC Milan where they got ownership because the previous owners couldn't pay up?

And some say Qatar bid would kill us...
 

sglowrider

Thinks the caf is 'wokeish'.
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
25,238
Location
Hell on Earth
What are the fine print terms for when the Glazers inevitably default? They get to repo the entire club? Of all the actors this has to by far be the worst. Glazers are looking for cash injection not more credit. They are too broke to meet the ones they already have. Elliott must already know this.
If AC Millan is anything to go by, yes.
 

Miro Karhan

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 27, 2023
Messages
33
Supports
One touch footie
I personally can’t wait to be state owned, just so all this chatter can go and die in agony, western buffoons making moral mental gymnastics, just showing that they are kinda xenophobic. Who cares who owns us, be feking real, most of clubs are owned by the local mobster. But since he’s a local and not some foreign unknown entity, thats fine, he just killed a few people for legit reasons.

If anyone here started supporting a club because of its owners or even took it into account please do the society a solid and just stop following football.

p.s. I wanted Sir Jim for a long time, but if he can’t do it without a bank then rather someone who can.
Leaving for a night shift feckin bored after reading pages of bollox about state backed or state funded.
Get back home this morning. Same shit, about whether 17% is enough... Then I stumble on this "gem" post.

Mate, just focus on football. Write about footie. Feck politics. And if you find some balcan players for transfer thread nerds, just do it. They will love you. I have one. Azeez Osenni. He is a Kante clone. Coming from Spartak Trnava. Will do a report about this midfielder shortly.
 

Grande

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
6,474
Location
The Land of Do-What-You-Will
You seem sharp. Do you think that while derailing it is likely impossible for fans with the present conditions (low class consciousness and learned helplessness, even after Murdoch), focusing on a key ethical demand or 2 in exchange for a non-boycott or whatever leverage can be organized is probably unlikely, but a more achievable ambition for the fans in here looking to organized in response to it?

That's my thinking, but I haven't really engaged a ton with this, it's too depressing to think about United in the same way I have to think about doing anti-poverty organizing, would rather think about football.
Don’t know about sharp. I remember the black banners in 2005. Glazers didn’t give a toss about it. They won’t give a toss about any reactions this time around either. It’s different with Al Thani and Radcliffe. Al Thani is out to conquer England by the pound, Radcliff is maybe after a memorial. I think a problem is that so many have longed for ousting the Glazers so long, it’s difficult to muster up a reaction about any potential bidders. Getting used to City winning the league every Year on 100 points must also have worn quite a few out. There is a big trend going on about ‘being moral’ and the polar opposite ‘not being moralistic’, which weakens people’s sense of what is moral to do, I think.

Supporters joining up with Amnesty International to make joint black banners with concise criticism of the Al Thani rulership, I could join in on that. We have proud traditions at the club of loving United and hating the ownership. There is no reason to change that tune just now.
 

Greck

Full Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
7,099
Glazers probably think a partial owner is going to front them 1-2 billion and simply let them go back to running the club. In reality anyone putting up that much will want extensive decisionmaking powers. Any random person can see how the Glazers run the club and can already tell they didn't buy the club with their own money.
 
Last edited:

AneRu

Full Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
3,196
If true, does this mean that all of the advocates for a state takeover of United (because that's apparently the only way to compete with City and Newcastle long term) are no longer backing Jassim's bid?

While Jassim's father is a very wealthy man (net worth generally estimated between £1.3bn and £2bn), Jassim is one of fifteen children and has no significant net worth of his own, so it seems that even with his father's backing, a Jassim-led United will have no chance of matching the spending power of City/Newcastle/PSG. Does this not worry the Mbappe fans? Jim Ratcliffe is significantly wealthier than Jassim or his father, but will seemingly need to add debt to Ineos's balance sheet to help finance the United takeover.
The Financial Times cant even confirm how much his dad is worth but here we have @Infra-red on Redcafe confidently giving a range that has been stated to very very conservative or his actual worth to many multiple times the reported figure.

The man was a Foreign Minister, Prime Minister and Chairman of the QIA for a period spanning 18 years where Qatar started, under his direction, to branch out and start investing in the West. He obviously corruptly linked his country's investments with his and not many people actually know the extent of his holdings.

The interesting thing is that you have been hiding behind the 'obviously its a state backed bid' to now oh his father or himself couldn't be rich enough. When are you going to admit that you don't like these bidders because of where they come from and nothing is ever going to bring you around.

Its possible they are state funded but its also possible this is an entirely independent bid funded by a very rich family looking to branch out of Qatar and buy some visibility that would make them politically untouchable or too exposed to mess around with for their cousins in power.
 

UDontMessWith24

Full Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2011
Messages
4,023
What has that got to do with the question I answered?
Because you went on a sanctimonious rant and then asked an obvious question. Everyone understands what and who they are, but this line in the sand you're drawing is completely imaginary. Also for what its worth, the people who have died at the hand of the Qatari regime in the entirety of its reign are about a week's worth of Iraqi citizens killed in the U.S invasion. A life is a life regardless of if the regime sanctioning the killings is authoritarian or democratic. Scary buzzwords like "dictators" or "authoritarian" don't make their human rights violations worse than those of the U.S or Britain.
 

Himannv

Full Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2017
Messages
5,814
Location
Somewhere in the draft forum
I hope the Glazers don’t stay on as owners with some investors supporting them. That’s clearly the worst outcome - they’ll bleed us dry and continue to take out dividends as usual.
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,432
Interesting, seems to imply this is an independent bid. I guess we'll find out more in due time, but for now, people may reconsider their strong objection to this bid due to the perception that it's state backed
 

alexthelion

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
3,630
The directors/board control a company, not the shareholders. A large shareholder with x% may do certain things sometimes (like call motions for vote, even appoint a director), but they cannot usually exercise direct control without >50%
Thak you, I've put him on ignore.
 

alexthelion

Full Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
3,630
If true, does this mean that all of the advocates for a state takeover of United (because that's apparently the only way to compete with City and Newcastle long term) are no longer backing Jassim's bid?

While Jassim's father is a very wealthy man (net worth generally estimated between £1.3bn and £2bn), Jassim is one of fifteen children and has no significant net worth of his own, so it seems that even with his father's backing, a Jassim-led United will have no chance of matching the spending power of City/Newcastle/PSG. Does this not worry the Mbappe fans? Jim Ratcliffe is significantly wealthier than Jassim or his father, but will seemingly need to add debt to Ineos's balance sheet to help finance the United takeover.
As long as he/his father have enough to buy the club, clear all debts and improve the infrastructure that's fine, we can live on our own after that.

The debt must be removed with no new debt.
 

DevilsOwn

Full Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Messages
1,419
Location
Maxiumum City
Essentially they want to give someone - anyone - a Massive loan. Being it for a majority stake or for redevelopment etc.

The parasites will then eat us up. And for some reason, my instinct says, the Glazers would be happiest with this arrangement.
 

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
61,784
Essentially they want to give someone - anyone - a Massive loan. Being it for a majority stake or for redevelopment etc.

The parasites will then eat us up. And for some reason, my instinct says, the Glazers would be happiest with this arrangement.
Nah.

Our infrastructure is in shambles and the club is losing money. Meanwhile Chelsea are spending big money, Newcastle are set to do the same and we all know that if Qatar doesn't sign us then it will set its sight on someone else. We can't compete against that. Financially its time for the Glazers to go. They will probably threaten this nuclear option not to make them look as desperate sellers but that is all.

I am more worried about some new bidder whose stupid enough to sleep with Elliott just to make up the money needed to buy the club/rebuild the stadium. Which is why Qatari bid with its unlimited money is the most desirable.
 

sglowrider

Thinks the caf is 'wokeish'.
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
25,238
Location
Hell on Earth
Essentially they want to give someone - anyone - a Massive loan. Being it for a majority stake or for redevelopment etc.

The parasites will then eat us up. And for some reason, my instinct says, the Glazers would be happiest with this arrangement.
I wonder if these guys were involved in the sub-prime mortgage crisis back in the day?
 

DevilsOwn

Full Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Messages
1,419
Location
Maxiumum City
Nah.

Our infrastructure is in shambles and the club is losing money. Meanwhile Chelsea are spending big money, Newcastle are set to do the same and we all know that if Qatar doesn't sign us then it will set its sight on someone else. We can't compete against that. Financially its time for the Glazers to go. They will probably threaten this nuclear option not to make them look as desperate sellers but that is all.

I am more worried about some new bidder whose stupid enough to sleep with Elliott just to make up the money needed to buy the club/rebuild the stadium. Which is why Qatari bid with its unlimited money is the most desirable.
I completely agree that it is time for Glazers to go.
My worry is that with this option of taking Elliott's money on(more debt!), they will jump.on it. Maybe, Joel and Avaram to buy out the other Glazers and keep control on the club.
The f@-ed up thing about the situation is that no one ( fans, UK government, financial markets) have any mechanism to prevent this.
 

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
61,784
I completely agree that it is time for Glazers to go.
My worry is that with this option of taking Elliott's money ol(more debt!), they will jump.on it. Maybe, Joel and Avaram to buy out the other Glazers and keep control on the club.
The f@-ed up thing about the situation is that no one ( fans, UK government, financial markets) have any mechanism to prevent this.
Joel and Avram can't afford losing control over their asset to Elliott else their money will be tied to something they have no control off. Thus the Glazers can only sell a minority stake that will keep their control over the asset. In such circumstances United do not generate enough money to keep itself competitive. Things will get sillier if they try to address the infrastructure issues as well. Arnold himself said that there's no guarantee that we'll have the money needed to spend in the summer.

This is a negotiating tactic from their part. Sellers don't want to look desperate when selling an asset else they risk to be lowballed.

I am more afraid of a consortium being desperate enough to go in bed with Elliott so they could gather the necessary funds to buy United.
 

sglowrider

Thinks the caf is 'wokeish'.
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
25,238
Location
Hell on Earth
I completely agree that it is time for Glazers to go.
My worry is that with this option of taking Elliott's money on(more debt!), they will jump.on it. Maybe, Joel and Avaram to buy out the other Glazers and keep control on the club.
The f@-ed up thing about the situation is that no one ( fans, UK government, financial markets) have any mechanism to prevent this.
The only option is to give them a price that they can't refuse. Something that makes no investment sense.
 

DevilsOwn

Full Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2005
Messages
1,419
Location
Maxiumum City
Joel and Avram can't afford losing control over their asset to Elliott else their money will be tied to something they have no control off. Thus the Glazers can only sell a minority stake that will keep their control over the asset. In such circumstances United do not generate enough money to keep itself competitive. Things will get sillier if they try to address the infrastructure issues as well. Arnold himself said that there's no guarantee that we'll have the money needed to spend in the summer.

This is a negotiating tactic from their part. Sellers don't want to look desperate when selling an asset else they risk to be lowballed.

I am more afraid of a consortium being desperate enough to go in bed with Elliott so they could gather the necessary funds to buy United.
Anyone in bed with Elliott and the likes is really bad news for us going ahead. As you say, may not make sense for Glazers, but someone else might take it up.
Which is also the reason why i cant fully get behind the SJR/Ineos bid. Unless, they come out clearly as to what happens to our existing debt repayments and the new debt that Goldman sachs/JPM lends to INEOS for this.



The only option is to give them a price that they can't refuse. Something that makes no investment sense.
We are caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place, arent we? No one who puts up 5Bn upfront will do it for the love of the club, but for some returns. Other than people with questionable wealth to pursue a hobby/agenda!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.