I don’t think they started this whole process with the intention of staying. My gut feeling is that they see an opportunity in this bid to remain shareholders and make more money out of the plans to grow the club
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
We need to discuss the 'we have spent as much as City' thing as well cause I feel that the devil is in the details.
A- While United had no choice but to rely on Woodward (ie the littlefinger of football whose capable to bring money out of thin air), City could afford hiring the best people in the job. After SAF's departure we should have learnt how important that is
B- United and City strategy differ greatly. City focus on trophies while we focus on clicks and in attracting as many sponsors as possible. Which means that every transfer is dragged until the end of time and we have a tendency to aim for the flashy players with the most social media audience.
C- City had invested heavily on the scouting department, the academy, people negotiating transfers etc while we diverted everything on transfers (read B). Which meant that they have an effective football machine something we lack greatly.
A- While United had no choice but to rely on Woodward (ie the littlefinger of football whose capable to bring money out of thin air), City could afford hiring the best people in the job. After SAF's departure we should have learnt how important that is
B- United and City strategy differ greatly. City focus on trophies while we focus on clicks and in attracting as many sponsors as possible. Which means that every transfer is dragged until the end of time and we have a tendency to aim for the flashy players with the most social media audience.
C- City had invested heavily on the scouting department, the academy, people negotiating transfers etc while we diverted everything on transfers (read B). Which meant that they have an effective football machine something we lack greatly.
How long will that take? Likely years
They have crippled us with debt and taken enough money out of the club for their own profit, infact they have taken more than they have spent. Enough infact, to have build a new stadium and invested in the infrastructure. They have taken Manchester Uniteds money. Our money, the fans money. How much of their own money have they spent on the club? 0. And that includes buying it. They should never of been allowed to buy us because they cannot afford it! They have ruined us and that’s a fact. Yes they have spent money but it’s united money to buy players with! Them spending it badly shows how clueless they are. That’s all it shows.
Yet you can trust Qatar and Jassim even though you know he's not really the actual money behind their bid?
Hahaha.
I agree with a lot of that. Still doesn't make what you said true. We have been able to compete with them. We haven't managed it because we've had Muppets in charge.
Exactly
I trust no one really. I analysed the two bids and their previous record in football and gave my opinion on it.
The Glazers are only, and have only ever been about benefitting themselves. United has been a vehicle by which to do that. If you can’t see/accept that then I don’t know what to tell you.
But without control.
This all or nothing mentality some people have is really silly. It just increases the likelihood that you end up with nothing.
And they don’t have responsibility in that?
Not gonna lie, it’s put me off supporting the SJR bid.
Hahahaha!!! Where does Russia figure into this? For someone who critiques other people’s quality of posts you yourself post some absolute bollocks.
Throughout this entire process we’ve been told repeatedly that 4 want to sell and Avram/Joel are reluctant to do so. We all need to calm down and not let perfection be the enemy of good here. INEOS will own the club. They will make the decisions. The other two will just freeload their way to a bigger pay off further down the line.
There is more to spending than just buying players. Have you been to Old Trafford lately?
Absolutely they do. But they are going. Even if they stay as minority shareholders they won't get a say on anything anymore except when to cash in their shares.
That's all that matters. Them losing control.
then let it be nothing. The club will be sold eventually as the Glazers can't afford it. I'd rather wait for better owners
How have you ‘analysed’ a guy who has no existing links to football? How have you ‘analysed’ somebody who even his spokes people don’t know how old he is or if he has kids? Someone who hasn’t been seen in public throughout this whole process and may not even be real? What a load of rubbish.
What you did was look at Qatar sovereign wealth and compare it to SJR net worth, saw the Qatari megabucks and sold your soul for cash. Am I right?!
I have a ST yeah mate. Been going since 91 with my dad and brother.
That’s just speculation on your part.
Remember too that this is just the part of the process related to bids concerned with full ownership and control.
There’s potentially another to come concerned with minority investment.
Take a visit to Old Trafford and then tell me that the 1bn that’s gone to debt payments wouldn’t have been better spent on a new stadium. Meanwhile Abu Dhabi is expanding City’s stadium and they can’t even fill it.
There’s also the reports that they now simply want a clean break and don’t want to be become a toxic brand.
Imo the Glazers in idea is floated because it’s 20 percent less shares Jim has to buy so can afford to spend more on the other 4. None of these reports have said the two actually want to stay on now or the minority investment groups would have a bigger say.
This is what any well-adjusted adult should recognise.
6 months ago if we were offered this deal where Joel and Avram are no longer in charge and reduced to little more than the various hedge funds that bought our shares on the NYSE, everybody would’ve been over the moon. Now, it’s suddenly unacceptable because we need a ‘clean break’ (read: oil money). It’s baffling. Part of life is making compromises, essential, even.
It’s a means to an end if nothing else. I get the symbolism of them looming over the club still, but as long as they have no input in running the club then the change is real. It’s a step forwards.
6 months ago we wanted Glazers out, an owner who understand football and no debt. We still want the same thing. Why should we change that stance? Cause he is local?
.
Which begs the question how much SJR will be willing to invest to make sure the club can grow when there's a quite a lot of dividends going out to others. All seems very strange at this point. I'll not give up on the hope that we'll get rid of all the leeches at the end of this process
On the first team sure but City’s off field spend is in another world to ours. They have one of the best facilities in the PL which is only getting bigger and better, they have spent a good amount upgrading their youth setup and are producing regular PL quality players and then they’ve also invested into other foreign clubs (New York etc) and have a network of players and coaches which again we’re years behind because we haven’t invested
Its embarrassing to see former United players son’s at City because there just so far ahead in that department, shambolic in all honesty
What is this?
This thread is just something else.
Cool post
Effectively what you’re saying there is you don’t mind the Glazer’s remaining in control for an undefined period of time…it could be a decade or more.
If the Glazers and Ratcliffe are happy to agree a shared ownership then they must also agree they have shared objectives for the club. And as we know the Glazers are only interested in making money out of us that could only say the same for Ratcliffe too. Ratcliffe is big No from me.
They could have paid for a world class stadium and facilities with the money they have profited from the club. They could have paid for the best of the best in football, they haven’t. They buy shiny players with big names all while they pocket our money which could have been used to keep the club amongst the best in the world. No strategy or care or even long term plan. Just shut us up with big names. They’ve left us to rot and people excuse it because they buy players with OUR money. They have invested nothing of their own, just taken from us. Where would we be if they didn’t use us as a cash cow? It’s about more than just chucking money at signings, so much more.
Musk had to borrow £13bn to be Twitter despite his rumoured net worth and the value of his companies. This idea Ratcliffe can afford to fund £4bn to pay outright for United isn't living in the team world
Man who's "net worth" was $183bn had to borrow heavily to buy an asset for $44bn.
Someone who has a "net worth" of £13bn will definitely have to borrow to buy something anywhere near the £4bn mark
It's absurd to suggest otherwise. Else it's a huge misunderstanding of what 'net worth' actually means. It doesn't mean in the bank. And money tied up in other business likely will stay there. Why would be divest money from Ineos which is far more likely to be far more profitable than we'll ever be
I believe its the end of the line for them. So 12 months at best. Thus I prefer that option then seeing my club being sold to a richer version of them
City are currently under investigation for wrong doings. They aren't exactly a good example.
Thinks it's fairly sad how most of this fanbase has resigned themselves to joining them.
I'm sick of the moral arguments from the high and mighty top reds. Why shouldn't some of us want what's best for the club? We're yet again about to get another owner who can't really afford us and has to borrow lots of money just to get a takeover done, which will probably leave little remaining for signings and infrastructure investment. Wanting our club to be able to compete with the best, have amazing facilities and be free of debt doesn't mean we condone or support the actions of the Qatari government.
Of course it would, no sane person would argue against that. But the size and state of the stadium isn’t going to affect whether we compete on the pitch. That was the comparison. City and Newcastle will buy Haaland, Messi, Bellingham etc and we can’t compete with them. It’s simply not true.
Comparing OT and looking enviously at Etihad or Spurs is just keeping up with the Jones rubbish. Whoever gains control will improve the infrastructure, if the club has to pay its own way so be it. That’s completely normal for 97% of the other clubs in the league.
This will turn more toxic than when the Glazers had all the control and never looked like they were interested in selling? If INEOS wins, they'll tell us their plans and most people will calm down.
That may or may not be true but at this point it’s just wishful thinking on your part.
In any case the Qatari bid seemingly hasn’t met the Glazer’s demands. And there’s no reason to suppose it would do so in 12 months time either.
Yeah Glazers Out! Or Glazers In, whatever, just not as a minority shareholder.
- Status