Club Sale | It’s done!

[Rooney24]

It's not a massive difference at all. They haven't taken dividends out in a while and debt repayments amount to the price of an average fullback, ie. they are very small in the grand scheme of things.

Are you winding me up here or completely missed the point to the opposition to the Glazers ?

it’s widely reported that they have taken more than £1bn out of the club over the years to pay dividends and interest repayments.

An amount that could have been invested into transfer kitty or infrastructure improvement and all in line with FFP

the debt repayments have been about £750m. That’s one hell of a full back!

This really shouldn’t need to be explained.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

But what if it's his rich dad?

If his rich dad is among the - say - 30 richest people in the world (which he clearly isn't officially, but let's say he is for the sake of argument), he still isn't going to just spunk a significant portion of his money to buy a football club.

Also, his rich dad is from Qatar. The likelihood of some kind of "rogue" Qatari businessman (who has no ties to the state/the Emir) buying what has been called the most famous football club in the world is...yes, what? Zero? Pretty close to zero? It sure as feck ain't great.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

To be fair to Doc, he just wants to be kept aBrest of the latest information.

Heh. Well met @Rhyme Animal

 

[Rood]

As an aside, I find it fascinating that people actually peddle the "it's not Qatar, it's a rich dude from Qatar/it's a dude from Qatar with a rich dad/it's a consortium of rich dudes from Qatar" narrative.

I find it fascinating that you (and others) are convinced it's a state bid when there is no evidence of this.

For the record, I have not at any point claimed any of the things you mention but I certainly think all are possible

I will remind you of the following:
1. Officially this is a private bid from the Nine Two Foundation headed by Sheikh Jassim
2. His father is one of the richest men on the planet and he himself has high level connections to several financial institutions (so no problem for them to buy us without state funds)
3. Several clubs are openly state owned and there are no rules against a state owning a PL football club

So on what basis are you so sure it's a state bid?

 

[Andy_Cole]

It's not a massive difference at all. They haven't taken dividends out in a while and debt repayments amount to the price of an average fullback, ie. they are very small in the grand scheme of things.

Can we all stop this civil war of Qatar vs Jim and unite against this poster and other Glazer sympathisers?

 

[JPRouve]

If his rich dad is among the - say - 30 richest people in the world (which he clearly isn't officially, but let's say he is for the sake of argument), he still isn't going to just spunk a significant portion of his money to buy a football club.

Also, his rich dad is from Qatar. The likelihood of some kind of "rogue" Qatari businessman (who has no ties to the state/the Emir) buying what has been called the most famous football club in the world is...yes, what? Zero? Pretty close to zero? It sure as feck ain't great.

Surely you realize how many ifs and assumptions you have made in this post? You don't know and you are in fact talking about a man that is known to be one of the wealthiest but also known to be a big actor in tax heavens. You are also talking about a man that has no issue publicly buying London or owning a 300m yacht.

From the beginning I have assumed that QSI were involved but that's largely based on pure ignorance from my part, I have no idea and I know that you don't either. So for you to have a go at others is a bit strange.

 

[DOTA]

It's a state bid.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

So on what basis are you so sure it's a state bid?

Rather than going over this again (it has been done to death, and no: I can't provide with you undeniable, incontrovertible evidence that this is a state bid, you know this already), let me ask you this:

Are you against state ownership? If I could provide you with undeniable evidence that it's actually the state of Qatar bidding for Manchester United, would you then be against it?

 

[Chesterlestreet]

It's a state bid.

Of course it is.

 

[Pexbo]

As an aside, I find it fascinating that people actually peddle the "it's not Qatar, it's a rich dude from Qatar/it's a dude from Qatar with a rich dad/it's a consortium of rich dudes from Qatar" narrative.

Why not just defend the thing itself if you actually believe it's the best alternative? Yes, it's Qatar (it's the state, of course it is, everyone knows it is) but I prefer it to whatever the realistic alternative might be because [state your reasons].

What certain people engage in, or resort to, is called defensive intellectualization. Coming up with obvious bullshit points to make your stance more palatable. It's a form of bad faith argumentation, and it makes this debate (this thread) worse than it could be if people were just being honest.

Who is doing that? Can’t actually think of anyone doing it in this thread.

EDIT - read the next page. Rood is.

 

[strandty]

Genuinely is Groundhog Day entering this thread

 

[Mmm-Qatarian]

This is giving me strong "No, the PIF has nothing to do with the Saudi state" vibes.

 

[DOTA]

Genuinely is Groundhog Day entering this thread

Nice are 10th in Ligue 1 and you're laughing.

 

[JPRouve]

Nice are 10th in Ligue 1 and you're laughing.

Ineos team UK also got the brakes beaten out of them in the Americas Cup.

 

[DOTA]

Ineos team UK also got the brakes beaten out of them in the Americas Cup.

I don't know what an Americas Cup is but a harrowing vision of things to come definitely.

 

[Sly1]

The 6 bil the glazers want? That would mean 1.) they would need to raise their bid substantially, which was reported at or just under 5, and 2.) a total loss of face by dropping their pants and bending over for the glazers.

Question is, are they really that desperate for us.

Not as desperate as Ratchcliffe who wants to maintain the Glazers.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

You are also talking about a man that has no issue publicly buying London or owning a 300m yacht.

He's bought London? That's impressive.

Sorry (for that, cheap shot): Look, we both know what we're actually talking about here. Is this is an individual businessman from a certain country who has no significant ties to the government of that country...or is it what many of us suspect (and you know very well what that is, I don't have to spell that out for you, you're an intelligent person)?

Do you think Jassim's daddy (it's ridiculous that we're talking about him in the first place, because he isn't the official bidder in the first place) is comparable to Ratcliffe in terms of, let's say, political status? How close they are to the actual decision makers of their respective countries? Most would say that Ratcliffe is just a business man. He may or may not support the government, and the government may or may not act favourably towards him. That's how it works in the UK. Do you think the same sort of thing is true for Jassim's daddy in Qatar?

 

[Dan_F]

Even if you’re covering your ears and squinting your eyes, pretending that this isn’t directly state funded, where did his dad, or the Al Thani family more specifically because his dad’s net worth isn’t big enough to cover it, get their wealth from?

 

[JPRouve]

I don't know what an Americas Cup is but a harrowing vision of things to come definitely.

It's a sailing competition. While I wouldn't us it make any strong statement about United, it's amazing how none of Ineos sports investments are good.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Who is doing that? Can’t actually think of anyone doing it in this thread.

EDIT - read the next page. Rood is.

Not just him. There are multiple examples over these pages (I would not recommend checking out all...1348 of them, but if you're crazy enough to do that, you will find 'em).

And in general (beyond the Caf), it's very much a thing.

 

[Berbaclass]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[HarryP]

Are you winding me up here or completely missed the point to the opposition to the Glazers ?

it’s widely reported that they have taken more than £1bn out of the club over the years to pay dividends and interest repayments.

An amount that could have been invested into transfer kitty or infrastructure improvement and all in line with FFP

the debt repayments have been about £750m. That’s one hell of a full back!

This really shouldn’t need to be explained.

You're completely misunderstanding my point.

I never said the Glazers haven't taken x amount of money out over the years, what I said is that recently the debt repayments aren't massively eating into the transfer budget. They're around £30m a year which generally will only get you an average player in today's market.

 

[Berbaclass]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[JPRouve]

He's bought London? That's impressive.

Sorry (for that, cheap shot): Look, we both know what we're actually talking about here. Is this is an individual businessman from a certain country who has no significant ties to the government of that country...or is it what many of us suspect (and you know very well what that is, I don't have to spell that out for you, you're an intelligent person)?

Do you think Jassim's daddy (it's ridiculous that we're talking about him in the first place, because he isn't the official bidder in the first place) is comparable to Ratcliffe in terms of, let's say, political status? How close they are to the actual decision makers of their respective countries? Most would say that Ratcliffe is just a business man. He may or may not support the government, and the government may or may not act favourably towards him. That's how it works in the UK. Do you think the same sort of thing is true for Jassim's daddy in Qatar?

On a political side I would say that people need to be extremely careful because there is an awful lot of naivety but I will answer the question first, Hamad Al Thani was one of the most influential politician in the middle east, so I would assume that globally he has more gravitas than Ratcliffe especially since I suspect that he also exfiltrated a fair amount of money. But people need to remember something that they seem to willingly ignore or brush aside, the most influential people outside of political leaders are men like Ratcliffe, leaders in the petrochemical, energy, pharmaceutical industries and banking those people are the main source of corruption, political manipulation, dubious laws and regulations making in the world and in particular in our western countries, someone like Ratcliffe has more political power than most members of any british/french government, he has more influence on the EU or similar organization than most members of parliaments or political boards.

He is of course not the only one, you can extend that to all the owners, CEOs of leading companies in similar fields but one of the most ridiculous thing that has been said in this thread and that people have generally ignored is the idea that x is only a businessman, that businessman has governments in his pockets, has entire political parties doing his biddings because he is among people that paid them, generally under the guise of nebulous consultancy jobs.

 

[Random Precision]

You've literally no idea what you're talking about.

What legal fall out? There is diddly squat City can do legally if they're found guilty. No appeal to CAS as they don't have jurisdiction and they've already exhausted all of their legal options in trying to halt the process reaching this far - and failed every single time.

If found guilty they can appeal but it only goes to another independent arbitration panel and then that's it - there's no more recourse available to City.

And in the event they are found guilty, the PL will have no choice but to throw the book at them. Otherwise they will be sending a message to every other PL club that it's ok to commit the most egregious offences and you'll only get a slap on the wrist if found guilty - which would destroy the credibility of their product.

There is a legal option….although it’s a nuclear option. City could decide to mount a legal challenge against FFP and even FMV. Both FFP and FMV if challenged could be ruled a restriction of trade. There is legal opinion out there that suggests if a legal challenge was made it stands a good chance of being successful.

 

[DOTA]

Not just him. There are multiple examples over these pages (I would not recommend checking out all...1348 of them, but if you're crazy enough to do that, you will find 'em).

And in general (beyond the Caf), it's very much a thing.

A remarkable amount of it is him, though. Many have given it a go but there's no one else who seems to have such an enduring passion.

 

[Rooney24]

You're completely misunderstanding my point.

I never said the Glazers haven't taken x amount of money out over the years, what I said is that recently the debt repayments aren't massively eating into the transfer budget. They're around £30m a year which generally will only get you an average player in today's market.

You can’t narrow down the impact to one year or “recently”. That’s just nonsense.

you have to look at the whole period they have been in charge. And the fact there is they have taken out more than £1bn much of which could have went into transfers

 

[Coops73]

It's a sailing competition. While I wouldn't us it make any strong statement about United, it's amazing how none of Ineos sports investments are good.

To be fair only teams from New Zealand, Australia and Switzerland have ever won it from the Americans and it had never been won by anyone but the Americans before ‘85

 

[Hoof the ball]

"What did Jassim say when you told him that Sir Jim Ratcliffe had won the deal?"
"He said he didn't like it, but he had to go along with it."
"You spoke to him in Arabic?"
".....yes....."
"What did he say?"
"He said he didn't like it, but he had to go along with it."
"In Arabic!"

 

[DownRiver]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

They have an open opportunity now, not wait a few years for another PL club to open its doors.

Also, QIA can buy out 92 foundation in the future. Also, UEFA president said they may change the rules for an entity to own multiple clubs.

 

[DOTA]

"What did Jassim say when you told him that Sir Jim Ratcliffe had won the deal?"
"He said he didn't like it, but he had to go along with it."
"You spoke to him in Arabic?"
".....yes....."
"What did he say?"
"He said he didn't like it, but he had to go along with it."
"In Arabic!"

I'm not inclined to try to come up with an Arabic version of 'Ich nichten lichten' either.

 

[Strootman's Finger]

Ineos team UK also got the brakes beaten out of them in the Americas Cup.

Mercedes is shitting the bed in F1 this season too

 

[JPRouve]

To be fair only teams from New Zealand, Australia and Switzerland have ever won it from the Americans and it had never been won by anyone but the Americans before ‘85

How is that fair? I don't really mind the fact that they haven't won it but how is that an argument that only certain countries won it? If Ratcliffe has money and expertise what is preventing him to have a top sailing team?

PS: Ratcliffe happens to own that team but I apply that to anyone, it's not a case against Ratcliffe.

 

[Mmm-Qatarian]

On a political side I would say that people need to be extremely careful because there is an awful lot of naivety but I will answer the question first, Hamad Al Thani was one of the most influential politician in the middle east, so I would assume that globally he has more gravitas than Ratcliffe especially since I suspect that he also exfiltrated a fair amount of money. But people need to remember something that they seem to willingly ignore or brush aside, the most influential people outside of political leaders are men like Ratcliffe, leaders in the petrochemical, energy, pharmaceutical industries and banking those people are the main source of corruption, political manipulation, dubious laws and regulations making in the world and in particular in our western countries, someone like Ratcliffe has more political power than most members of any british/french government, he has more influence on the EU or similar organization than most members of parliaments or political boards.

He is of course not the only one, you can extend that to all the owners, CEOs of leading companies in similar fields but one of the most ridiculous thing that has been said in this thread and that people have generally ignored is the idea that x is only a businessman, that businessman has governments in his pockets, has entire political parties doing his biddings because he is among people that paid them, generally under the guise of nebulous consultancy jobs.

I'd argue most of the people who want Ratcliffe rather than Jassim want him because of what he isn't rather than what he is. That's certainly the case for me, anyway.

Ratcliffe might well be a ruthless piece of shit businessman, but he isn't almost certainly a front for a sportswashing venture for an abhorrent regime. The same cannot be said for Jassim, and I'm afraid those who claim otherwise are simply hypocrites because they would not be this willing to give the benefit of the doubt if it were another club involved.

 

[cyberman]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

5k followed ffs! Caught again

 

[DOTA]

Beyond elite sport, INEOS supports The Daily Mile Foundation — a running initiative for school children to get them moving for 15 minutes a day.

Any news on how this is going? If he can't even get the little shits to run for 15 minutes a day, what hope do we have with Martial?

 

[Coops73]

How is that fair? I don't really mind the fact that they haven't won it but how is that an argument that only certain countries won it? If Ratcliffe has money and expertise what is preventing him to have a top sailing team?

PS: Ratcliffe happens to own that team but I apply that to anyone, it's not a case against Ratcliffe.

Calm down dear. I’m just pointing out it’s obviously a very difficult competition to win from the Americans, I know feck all about it really other than that.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

"What did Jassim say when you told him that Sir Jim Ratcliffe had won the deal?"
"He said he didn't like it, but he had to go along with it."
"You spoke to him in Arabic?"
".....yes....."
"What did he say?"
"He said he didn't like it, but he had to go along with it."
"In Arabic!"

I could imagine that sketch but with one of the Glazers in his place.

"It's still nil-nil, Chris!"
"You're at the game?"
"...Yes..."
"The game at Old Trafford?"
"...Indeed..."
"But United have just scored."
"...oh yes, Chris. Wow! The crowd are making the stadium around me shake. It's really quite something."
"Who scored the goal, Avram?"
"....I think the connection is a li-"
"Avram! Who scored the goal for United?"
".... Cristiano Ronaldo...?"
"You're not at the game are you, Avram? You're IN FLORIDA washing your ponytail aren't you?"
".....sorry, Chris."

 

[georgieworst]

watch yourself sunshine..you'll get a piping hot bramley apple pie in the face..

Superb.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Is that the only thing that make him morally better than the state of Qatar?
Absolutely insane claim.

No, it isn't literally the only thing depending on your perspective, or how you value particular aspects, or how you choose to present the thing.

It was a deliberately simplistic statement.

For instance, Jim has not (to my knowledge) implemented actual laws in a realm he controls that condemn homosexuals.

(But I would have thought that kinda went without saying.)

Alright, then, if you insist: there are huge "moral" reasons for objecting both Jim and Qatar.

(I'm not saying "moral" because I believe morality is bollocks but because the concept of morality is highly complex and the term "moral" will inevitably carry different meanings for different people.)

The point was simple: Jim may be a capitalist cnut who seems fine with raping the planet for profit and fecking up the future of our kids (the other guy is pretty much in that category too)...but at least he's got one thing going for him: he isn't a nation-state.

Okay? Is that fine?