Good posts, something the "Qataris are lowballing!" crowd need to consider pondering over. Jassim is committing large investment into the club in addition to a sizeable payoff to the glazers.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
INEOS are trying to diversify to consumer goods, to take away from the focus on petrochemicals. Man utd will be another key for their greenwashing, yet people are so braindead to realise this. You think you will be in the spotlight all the time from Qatar's moral and political ideologies? Wait until climate change really impacts your life in the next 10/20 years, man utd will be associated with climate change, toxic waste and the end of human civilisation (hyperbolic...maybe).
Imagine the scenes if the Glazers remain at the helm? i hope the protests ( if the Glazers stay on) remain non-violent.
Agreed. Problem is, I suspect there’s a sizeable portion of our fan base who don’t believe climate change is actually an existential threat.
Both bidders have loads of dirty laundry
That's not what I am arguing here. I am arguing most of them understood it could get shaky for some time before any rewards would come by to reap. 3 years is a very short time. It's slightly more than half a term for the Government. I said 30 years is needed to judge the success or failure of Brexit as short term there are too many short term impacts
Can't argue against the NI part. I don't think anyone thought of that until after the referendum. It will hopefully be solved with a bit of time. Something that was very throughly debated however was trade deals. Remainers were very emphatic about leaving the single market and it was very clear that a Brexit would mean leaving the single market of the EU. This serves my argument above that people knew that Brexit could for example potentially be without any deal with the EU, which could be very shaky.
diluteinev
Bolded is perfectly put imo. I would argue that it's a road to disaster to outsource the ruling of your own and your family's life to bureaucrats without accountability. Especially federal bureaucrats from and in different countries who's agenda it is impossible to anticipate and control.
I think it's important to remember that the referendum was not about either doing nothing or leaving. It was the referendum that never took place in the first place. The UK never voted to enter a union. The vote before was to enter a trade zone. Staying IMO had much more profound implications for the UK society long term but they would have been implemented slow enough for things not to get shaky.
This is what I said as well. While it's entirely true, it's important that realise that it doesn't mean that the inverse correlation exists. Many people who wanted to leave probably wanted restrictive, or at least more restrictive, immigration. But they wanted it to protect their own jobs from wage dumping and their access to public healthcare. This is maths and not xenophobia. If you dilute the labour market with immigration, wages will inevitably drop, and the NHS will have less money in but more patients to serve. UK is as far as I am aware officially one of the least racist and most diverse countries in the world, possibly competing only with some of the scandinavian countries. I don't think that the suggestion that this small minority managed to dupe an entire nation into leaving the EU is plausible.
Sure you are right, we can leave it here. I want to thank you for your posts. Feel free to answer if you want to, as I did in fact respond quite extensively here. I will read it but I will not answer any more Brexit arguments then. Thanks.
Andy Mittens comments on UWS are pretty interesting. Mentions that a source believes the entire sale process has been immoral and borderline illegal. The source says it would have never been allowed under the UK Stock exchange rules.
They probably went in to this with a budget. Every country budgets things. This isn't the only sportswashing opportunity. Even if it is the biggest, that doesn't make it worth 50%+ more than other opportunities.
They also just lost billions on the Credit Suisse collapse, where Qatar was the 2nd biggest shareholder, and had just dumped additional billions into the bank in January of this year. The Times reported this had an affect. Furthermore, Jassim's daddy got them involved with Credit Suisse in a big way when he was head of the Qatari Investment Authority, and Jassim himself was put on the board to oversee Qatar's interests. Jassim left there a few years ago of course, but whether the Qatari government blames them at all for getting them involved in the first place, it's still a huge loss that the state took less than 2 months ago. They may not want to drop another 6bn, especially with the promise of investing more billions, all when they may never see a return on that.
Preparing a bid - 2 weeks
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Ogden reads this forum and writes triggering articles.
He’s done it time and time again.
Did it expand on which aspects?
Worth noting that a couple of months ago, on the UWS podcast, Mitten had a 45 minute or so interview with Jim O'Neill (the leading "Red Knight" in 2010). Not saying that's his source, but could be.
Haven’t read it myself sorry. I just stole that from the discord. Be interesting to see exactly what he says.
"When Raine Group finally announces a preferred bidder, that will trigger a month-long period of exclusive access to United's financial accounts and enable the potential new owners to undertake due diligence -- an appraisal of United's assets and liabilities and commercial potential. If that process begins this week, it would be mid-June before any likelihood of a deal being completed and that is an optimistic scenario"
Thought that had already been completed with the two parties
It has according to the ‘reliable’ sources. The due diligence deadline was before the final bid deadline. Anything from Ogden and Delaney is just plucked from their arse and based around whatever narrative they want to spin whilst we all await actual news.
Last edited:
Even the Qatari state has a cost/benefit analysis going on. And that's something people overlook with the Qatar bid, they're not doing it for the good of the club, they're doing it for the good of Qatar.
Yeah that was my understanding. It’s more likely we get a ‘deal agreement’ announced
Give me your reason? I'm not sure who you think you are to take that tone but there are a 1000 plus pages on the rival bids to read through if you want.
My conversation with @Cantona in disguise was about how people will feel if their own first preference loses, and I gave my own, hopefully positive, opinion on that. If you want to join in tell us how you would feel if Qatar won the bid.
I think you might want to look at where Qatar gets it's money from if you think people who want INEOS aren't also going for the "least impact on the environment" bidder too. The Qatari state sells more 'emissions' in a day through the sale of oil and gas than INEOS have produced in their entire lifetime.
Because Ratcliffe's interest in sport, from cycling to F1 to football, are his personal interests. Links to Ineos are tenuous. Its his company and he does pretty much waht he wants.
.
Last edited:
Climate change is not officially recognised as an existential threat, high threat yes, existential no. I was listening to a podcast on this yesterday, which was very interesting.
Where do you think the main wealth of Qatar came from, and continues to come from? Just because their environmental impacts are mainly realised overseas doesn't mean they don't count. Too many people in this thread level the "greenwashing" accusation at Ineos, while failing to do the same for the Jassim group. It's misleading and will do nothing to bring the fanbase together. Same as many other accusations leveled one way or the other.
Now we are onto how it damages the transfer plans, its just lazy writing. Do they really think that no one has bothered mentioning that when they are buying a club for 5-6bn?
We he’s not is he, he’s made an offer that isn’t going to be accepted because it values the club less than INEOS, and any investment into the club and infrastructure is pointless until he has won the bid.
Agree - feels like Ogden is writing fear mongering BS right now
Yeh tone it down for someone like me and you. Would I pay £100 for a tshirt? No chance. At most I’d pay £50. Yes I can easily afford £100 but I still don’t want to be ripped off.
Whereas, i heard he said he doesn't get involved with Marketing investments, but the investment /bid is Jassim's, and he could change his mind and invest. Which is a very different from what you've written...
Jassim had pledged to clear the debt if he buys the club.
But has one person actually asked the question as to whether anyone can hold him to account for this? He can say it, but is there any way of ensuring it'd be followed through on?
He also says he wants to buy 100% of the club but obviously can only buy the Glazer's 69% right now. But if he bought the 69%, is there anything stopping him from reneging on the pledge to buy 100%?
The only way I'd be reasonably confident that he'd follow through on these promises is if he was state funded. But he claims he isn't and wants to buy the club as a private individual. If that's to be taken at face value and has even a small chance of being true, then surely his 'pledges' need to be questioned rather than taken for granted?
Imo too many people are twerking for this bid without giving it the scrutiny it deserves.
But has one person actually asked the question as to whether anyone can hold him to account for this? He can say it, but is there any way of ensuring it'd be followed through on?
He also says he wants to buy 100% of the club but obviously can only buy the Glazer's 69% right now. But if he bought the 69%, is there anything stopping him from reneging on the pledge to buy 100%?
The only way I'd be reasonably confident that he'd follow through on these promises is if he was state funded. But he claims he isn't and wants to buy the club as a private individual. If that's to be taken at face value and has even a small chance of being true, then surely his 'pledges' need to be questioned rather than taken for granted?
Imo too many people are twerking for this bid without giving it the scrutiny it deserves.
They are also diversifying in EV manufacturing and Hydrogen fuel production for green public transport across Europe, so are demonstrating that they are aware of the direction of travel and are prepared to adapt for the future but don’t let that ruin your little eco rant.
Ogden puts a negative spin on anything Utd related. Absolute weapon.
Oh and Qatars attempts to change goes unnoticed? Shame on you for over looking what Qatar are doing.
6 billion is not chump change for anyone.
Is that the latest (post Wolves) pod?
1. Why would he say it if he’s not going to do it? It’s not helping his bid in any way. It’s a pledge to the fans, why would he start off on such a bad foot?
2. That’s up to him and will affect the club and fans alike in absolutely no way whatsoever. It’s the most likely scenario though because it means far less scrutiny and transparency if it’s 100% privately owned.
I hope they burn OT down. The Glazers won't stay on if they have to finance a new stadium.
Isn't that part of his job though?
Panic over everybody - Richie Rich over here is buying us
Of course. I’m just pointing it out so he’s not taken seriously.
Sure is. Come on Leicester!
I don't know. Maybe it's a wheeze to create positive PR and if he was in a 50:50 race with a rival bidder, it could be used as a tie breaker. Who knows? My point is not many people have been scrutinising his bid properly.
From what I see, people are taking for granted what he's pledging because they think he's almost certainly a puppet for the state even though he himself says he's bidding in the capacity of a private individual and isn't state funded. So if he's right about that then surely his pledges need more scrutiny?
- Status