Islamic loans still cost money
the lender buys the asset and sells it back to you in chunks, with the total overall cost being similar than just paying interest
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
the lender buys the asset and sells it back to you in chunks, with the total overall cost being similar than just paying interest
That's really not how it works, Islamic banks are not charities. They charge interest in all but name.
There's an increasing possibility that the Qatari bid is coming from a private entity so who knows if they can afford the Glazers' ridiculous asking price on top of all the investment needed in infrastructure also.
Price, location, also Chelsea were 100% for sale. With United it could be a lot of people/groups don’t want to waste time with the uncertainty. Some might also be waiting to see how it develops before playing their hand.
Jim Ratcliffe had a personal wealth of 15bn. That's a lot more than the entire Glazer family combined. Not only that he also has a huge company with revenues of 60bn a year behind him too.
To say he doesn't have the finances required is absolutely not true. It's quite frankly ridiculous actually.
It comes nowhere close to interest rates some places charge. Really doubt the Glazers £600m loan would have equalled £1b over 17 years with the loans still at the same amount. Also fact they own the bank or are major shareholders is a pretty big advantage don’t you think?
But but but he has got to borrow the money and debt is bad and he isn’t paying off the debt and just like the glazers and hasn’t mentioned the stadium and just wants a profit…… and round and round we go!
thought there were some other private bidders too?
like many billionaires he is a stingy bugger. Look at how after promoting Brexit and promising to build a factory in wales to build his car he did a 180 and instead started building the cars in France.
His history in business & sports is not hard to find. Even the newspapers despised him up until November.
We're more expensive, have a ton of debt and lots of investment needed in infrastructure. It doesn't make much business sense to buy us right now.
Not only does it come close, it's exactly the same. "Interest" on loans from Islamic banking vary based on risk, just like all other forms of lending. If you buy a house with a 30 % downpayment you get one rate, for credit cards a much higher one. Again, Islamic banks are not charities.
One mans stingey bugger is another man prudent investor. I for one don’t want any owner to throw money around aimlessly and endlessly like Boehly has. All he has done is cause disharmony in the squad and undermine the manager. Potter is on an absolute hiding to nothing - we don’t need that here and we don’t need to waste cash like the Glazers and Woodward did.
Chelsea was a distressed fire sale - I’m sure plenty of bidders saw a potential bargain to print money the way the Glazers have. We don’t have that now.
No one said they were. For example when buying property people usually use either Ijara or Murabaha.
I agree. Which is what attracted me to the leaks about the Qatar bid in regards to transfers. “Spending will be significant but not reckless” most of the talk of money was about stadium, training and the women’s team.
The current United are not a public company, the shares that the Glazer's sold are listed but the rest are not, I'm no expert but the shares listed ae basically non-voting (or limited) and don't carry any weight in the decision making process so therefore don't need to be acquired to control the company, that said there can, and probably will, be an offer to buy them but I don't think it can be forced
Twitter was different because it was a publicly listed company, the shareholders agreed to sell to Musk, 98% voted to apparently though I'm not sure if the had to
Nonsense!
We are competing this season, as are Arsenal, Liverpool managed to compete for three of the last four years too.
If Qatar were happy just to take over any old club, how come they didn't just do this when they were unable to buy the club ten years ago?
Not sure how they could borrow billions from QIB to spend on United, given that QIB is a small bank with annual operating income of £1.37bn and annual net profits of £814m (2021).
Paying off the debt on the club is the absolute bare minimum any new owner should be doing.
Why the Sir Jim bid is a non-starter to me
Saudi Media was one I believe that went in for Chelsea and when this whole process started I really thought they would be in for us, maybe they are and just haven’t gone public.
Fair enough. It’s certainly an exciting prospect, I get that.
Any concerns about the league or FA blocking a Qatari takeover in response to the Newcastle situation? Especially given the PSG complication? (Which I guess would be less of an issue for domestic governance)
Sir Jim Ratcliffe doesn't have the money...
Would comfortably be the 3rd richest owner, the richest individual owner and the most successful person by a country mile who wasn't just the PR face of some despotic hell regime.
Honestly, where on earth do people get this absolute nonsense?
Would comfortably be the 3rd richest owner, the richest individual owner and the most successful person by a country mile who wasn't just the PR face of some despotic hell regime.
Honestly, where on earth do people get this absolute nonsense?
We can only hope.
Not really - it's public knowledge that the club is for sale and they have brokers making sure anyone who might be interested is aware
Anyway I think it was more the public statements of intent that they didn't like as both suggested they would be a vast improvement on the Glazers
It's not nonsense . In the current situation, we aren't competing with Chelsea or City. Newcastle would soon be added as soon as they have the Europe (they added Woods, Botman, Isak,Trippier,Bruno while fighting for relegation. Imagine what can they do when they actually get Europe). That leaves us ,Liverpool Spurs and Arsenal. One of them will soon be acquired by another billionaire soon too.
Basically we can either go with the flow and get us upgraded with the state money or change to someone who would be similar to the current owners but with same problems.
Yes, it is possible, and probably Ratcliffe's best chance of buying the club (assuming the Glazers do indeed decide to sell, which is obviously far from guaranteed at this point).
The PSG thing is a matter for UEFA not the FA.
And INEOS have the same conflict issue with Nice anyway.
I'm sure they both know they will get round it - Red Bull set the precedent long ago with Salzburg and Leipzig who did end up playing in the same competition
Bare minimum for me is no state ownership or affiliation.
To each their own I guess. Let's see how will the new ownership affect the number of United fans globally.
Neville and The Overlap discuss United's ownership
Once all the vetting took place, there were only two that could afford it. Many of the others refused to share their financial information and were removed from the process. It is possible that many people that would waste your time learned from that sale that you either have the funds or why would you put yourself through the process? We had Middle East parties too. Once they had to show where their money was coming from, they refused to share that information and they were out.
That matters little to me as it appears that the more global the fan base becomes, the less meaning there is attached to the club’s history and heritage.
It’s more about brand ‘Manchester United’…with Middle Eastern proxy battles thrown into the mix. What a prospect!
I understand why we're getting no updates. But it stinks. 2 weeks with not a single known development. We deserve to have an idea what is going on with OUR club.
Because a Qatar ownership is involved and Britains richest man. Not many people can actually buy this, when the opening bid is 5 billion. Its like saying comparing having a ferrari in the showroom and a 500 quid Reliant Regal.
To each their own. Global times, global fanbase thus tv rights payments which are the primary source of income for clubs and footballers.
If you try reading his 'proposal' (to be generous to that flyer he submitted as his marketing material), you might understand why.
This whole thing richest this and richest that means the sum of feck all if he doesn't have the cash to buy and invest in us and will need to take on more debt burden to get us away from the leeches.
The shares being no voting is exactly the point. Once a voting majority is taken, they can simply vote to buy back the non voting shares issued.
TBF, you're being a bit OTT, IMHO
- Status