Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
61,758
There's more drivel than that too, over the years. He's clearly anti British, so his hatred for SJR didn't surprise me one bit. If I had to guess one poster who would be against him, it would have been devilish. Easiest call ever made.
If criticising a country whose wealth is mostly made up of exploiting other countries and who keeps messing up causing thousands of deaths (ex war in Iraq) without being bothered to take those responsible to court while concurrently expecting others to pick the tab regarding asylum seekers makes me anti British then by all means I am. I doubt it though. I lived in the UK, I paid taxes there and unlike some patriots who claim to love the country while avoiding tax I still do.

I brought my arguments forward as of why I don't want SJR owning the club. You might disagree with them but there are listed and they make sense.
 

Rojofiam

Full Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
3,560
As time goes on I am encouraged by how many fans don’t want Qatar. I have seen and spoke to many people who couldn’t stomach it.

It is very obvious there’s a lot of people who are constantly online who don’t feel that way. However, a lot of them aren’t exactly die hards.
We are in the minority (at least among online fans), but I've believed we were in the right 100% throughout this process so I'll be very happy (and probably insufferable) if Qatar loses out.
 

stw2022

New Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
3,687
@stw2022 are you saying that it's entirely inconceivable that a SJR takeover could mean that more is spent on the stadium and less is taken out of the club then? If so, why?
It isn't inconvenience at all but it'll be the same way the Glazers would do it. Through financing and borrowing. What is inconceivable is being added on as a second account holder on Ineos's credit card with the monthly repayment bills dropping on their door mat rather than ours.

The only difference between how we are run now under the Glazers is that the current owners actually have a better track record in sports team ownership
 

justsomebloke

Full Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2020
Messages
5,985
Right now, my main gripe is actually the process, whatever the outcome is. Can this be settled soon please, one way or another? Before we hit the transfer window?

I'm sure someone must have mentioned this already somewhere in this 1482-page thread, but this is beginning to feel like Waystar after Ken and Rome has taken over, with Connor and Shiv sniping from the sidelines.
 

Blackbeard

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 24, 2022
Messages
431
Supports
Bristol City
Because they are ridiculously rich and a couple billion is like spending a couple hundred to you or I. This is probably their one chance to own arguably the most followed, biggest club in the world. A sportwashers wet dream. The chance to compete and overtake other gulf states in the prem. You really think they are going to back down and give up all of that for a, relatively speaking, few quid?
 

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
61,758
You're comparing an individual or a few individuals to a billion pound corporate entity.
The Glazers's business is pretty much like SJR's business. Sure its a business but its owned by a handful of people which makes the distinction between the people and their business very small
 

stw2022

New Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
3,687
The elephant in the room is the lack of an answer to the question of why Ineos would significantly increase their own debt burden by borrowing money to buy an asset yet not expect the money generated by the asset to contribute towards the costs of purchasing it.
 

Rojofiam

Full Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
3,560
Why all of a sudden majority are convinced that Ratcliffe has won it?
My personal view on the last few weeks and why I think Ineos are still ahead:

-Jassim's 4th bid, apparently his last one (take it or leave it) is still worse than Ratcliffe's offer

-Brief from a few days ago that the Qataris haven't heard back from Raine or the Glazers

-Last night's article from the Financial Times sharing new details from the Ineos bid and it seems that all 6 Glazers might be interested in letting a small stake keep growing without them having to lift a finger

-The Glazers seemingly waiting for the season to end before any kind of announcement signals that they are going with the less popular choice among fans: Ineos.
 

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
61,758
The elephant in the room is the lack of an answer to the question of why Ineos would significantly increase their own debt burden by borrowing money to buy an asset yet not expect the money generated by the asset to contribute towards the costs of purchasing it.
that's not that difficult to answer

a- sport washing doesn't apply only to Qatar. INEOS has its dirty linen to wash as well.
b- Manchester United lie in its brand rather then the dividends its generate
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
4,970
So, INEOS went from no Glazers, to two Glazers, to all the Glazers.

Cool. What's going to be the next little nugget to come out?
 

TrebleChamp99

Supports Liverpool
Joined
Dec 27, 2021
Messages
1,093
So this report last night from
Financial Times how are we taking it? Seems the word “could” is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
 

Mr Anderson

Eats, shoots, leaves
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
24,302
Location
Ireland
Again, complete uproar over a nothing burger, calling Ratcliffe a rat and just another Glazer. DOTA is right I think a load of you just are refusing to understand or see what's going on.

So basically, Ratcliffe/INEOS takes over control of the club and the Glazers get to keep a small stake of shares that will eventually be bought out by Ratcliffe/INEOS in order to own all the shares?


How is he "getting into bed with the Glazers" I don't know why you all think he actually wants to get into "bed with the Glazers" Why don't you use your brains and stop getting all emotional over nothing, this means the Glazers will lose control over the club and eventually be gone forever. It's clear as day they do not want to leave just yet and so this might be our only way of actually wrestling the club from their hands, did you ever think of that? For some reason you are all extremely salty and mad that the Glazers won't undersell to SJ.

My mind is blown by a lot of the stupidity in this thread tonight
Absolutely spot on. The end goal here as a priority is to remove Glazers from a controlling stake, this is what that does. Ineos will want to do the same and remove the Glazers from the seats at the table, get them out of the boardroom, take enough for sole ownership, then work with those who want to keep a minority share. Ineos are not going to pump money in and let Glazers still make the calls ffs :lol:

no matter who takes over, the correct structure needs to be implemented at a football decision making capacity. That’s (hopefully) where the engagement with fans comes in.

Ineos need to learn from their other football ventures, just as Qatar need to learn from their PSG plaything.

The absolute main thing is Glazers as decision makers is gone, that is key as they are sucking the football out of us. Both bids do that - but Ineos are offering more up front in share value - Qatar need to stump up more, there is no tricks here.

By way - I’d also prefer a clean break and at this stage would welcome a Qatar takeover. But I also acknowledge Ineos would be a good 2nd option - both mean Glazers controlling stake is gone. So over to you Qatar, increase your bid or if not hopefully Ineos get it done.
 

stw2022

New Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
3,687
that's not that difficult to answer

a- sport washing doesn't apply only to Qatar. INEOS has its dirty linen to wash as well.
b- Manchester United lie in its brand rather then the dividends its generate
That's their motivation for buying. My question was aimed more at those who think their ownership would represent a new dawn and not even tighter spending controls due to the need to contribute to a debt burden significantly higher than it is today. And the debt today is one of the main reasons fans are so determined to get rid of the current owners.
 

stw2022

New Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
3,687
So this report last night from
Financial Times how are we taking it? Seems the word “could” is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Indeed. In my view the stories are clearly plants aimed at the Qatar's as a negotiating tactic.

"Top striker could be on his way to City, say sources close to the player" when a contract negotiation is ongoing isn't unheard of
 

LawCharltonBest

Enjoys watching fox porn
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
15,550
Location
Salford
So, INEOS went from no Glazers, to two Glazers, to all the Glazers.

Cool. What's going to be the next little nugget to come out?
They’ll let the Glazers keep United and give them Ineos too as a sorry for wasting their time
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,392
Nope, nope and fecking nope to the nopiest nope.

Keeping the Glazers like this is not guaranteed to come with no strings attached, literally no one has been able to reveal the inside details of the deal.

I don't get why it's so difficult to understand for some of you as well. A football club requires unified ownership, no diverging interests, be it public (NYSE) or of a private vermin variety (Glazers).

I would prefer no sale ahead of Jimmy Glazer's project because then we're guaranteed a full sale within the short term and everyone keeps telling we're apparently very rich and can run ourselves sustainably in the meantime.
100% this
 

ddg01

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
85
Correct me if I’m wrong but with the Ineos bid, this will mean the Glazers will remain but with less than 50% of the shares, thus allowing for an ordinary resolution to be passed by Ineos but not a special resolution (75%}.

The debt will increase initially from circa £1bn to approx £4bn (assuming £3bn for the share purchase plus £1bn existing debt). Although this is likely to be moved to a MUFC holding company.

There will be a guarantee for the purchase of the remaining shares over a pre agreed period of time, this will include a minimum purchase price per share but this could increase based on profitability or potential value of the club.
 

Andersons Dietician

Full Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
13,288
I honestly can’t believe this hasn’t been settled yet. I didn’t think it would be as quick as many seemed to think but I thought it would be done before the season was over. Surely now they are just waiting for the FA cup to be done with before we see some real movement.

Given our transfer buisness speed I probably shouldn’t be that shocked. As for who has won I honestly can’t see Qatar private ownership or not letting arguably the biggest sporting brand on earth slip through their fingers. If you’re goal is sports- washing then you’ll find few better clubs to do it with.
 

Pickle85

Full Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2021
Messages
6,646
That's their motivation for buying. My question was aimed more at those who think their ownership would represent a new dawn and not even tighter spending controls due to the need to contribute to a debt burden significantly higher than it is today. And the debt today is one of the main reasons fans are so determined to get rid of the current owners.
Is it confirmed that this would be the case then? Genuine question, I'm not clued up on it.
 

greenoffpearson

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 1, 2023
Messages
189
If the Glazer/s turn up today I can only assume it is a play to get Jassim to increase his bid.

No way Sir Jim etc, if he is doing a deal with the scum, want them to turn up and amp up the hatred and resentment,

You don't have to be a PR expert to know their presence makes it more difficult to sell the idea.

What Sir Jim has said publically, Glazers being nice and that bollocks, was only to engage them, he knows they are greedy bast RDS.

What is for sure is that Sir Jim does not have the money to buy out the Glazers today, at the inflated value he is proposing. He is relying on future finance and that uncertainty creates risk.
 
Last edited:

LawCharltonBest

Enjoys watching fox porn
Joined
May 17, 2012
Messages
15,550
Location
Salford
No, it's not. If SJR was to win it's already been said that United’s debt would be moved to Ineos effectively leaving us debt free.
That was said originally, but Ducker (I think) said after that it wasn’t true

Ultimately though nobody knows do they. Because the Glazers seem to think they have some sort of reputation to protect, they aren’t allowing PR
 

Blackbeard

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 24, 2022
Messages
431
Supports
Bristol City
No, it's not. If SJR was to win it's already been said that United’s debt would be moved to Ineos effectively leaving us debt free.
Oh did Sir Jim come out and state that? I missed that part.
 

Widow

Full Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
7,182
Location
Can't spell Mkhitaryan
That was said originally, but Ducker (I think) said after that it wasn’t true

Ultimately though nobody knows do they. Because the Glazers seem to think they have some sort of reputation to protect, they aren’t allowing PR
I guess we'll only know when it happens but I just don't see SJR allowing that sort of debt to stand knowing how damaging it is to the clubs plans. We'll see though.
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,392
Six new pages in the last four hours, after the thread has been practically dead for days. I hoped that this meant there was some late night news.

But there's feck all new news. You're all just regurgitating the same shite as before.

feck you. I love it, but also feck you.
You ok with your tagline changing to flying RatCliffe? :D
 

Marcelinho87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
7,260
Location
Barnsley
Absolutely spot on. The end goal here as a priority is to remove Glazers from a controlling stake, this is what that does. Ineos will want to do the same and remove the Glazers from the seats at the table, get them out of the boardroom, take enough for sole ownership, then work with those who want to keep a minority share. Ineos are not going to pump money in and let Glazers still make the calls ffs :lol:

no matter who takes over, the correct structure needs to be implemented at a football decision making capacity. That’s (hopefully) where the engagement with fans comes in.

Ineos need to learn from their other football ventures, just as Qatar need to learn from their PSG plaything.

The absolute main thing is Glazers as decision makers is gone, that is key as they are sucking the football out of us. Both bids do that - but Ineos are offering more up front in share value - Qatar need to stump up more, there is no tricks here.

By way - I’d also prefer a clean break and at this stage would welcome a Qatar takeover. But I also acknowledge Ineos would be a good 2nd option - both mean Glazers controlling stake is gone. So over to you Qatar, increase your bid or if not hopefully Ineos get it done.
Qatar need to learn from Malaga more so than PSG.
 

Godfather

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
30,070
Location
Austria
Makes sense to delay any announcment until after our game if this is the bid they are going with
 

Blackbeard

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 24, 2022
Messages
431
Supports
Bristol City
Was it not in one of the many press briefings? It was reported many times but we'll see if he wins the bid, I suppose.
It may have been but I don’t recall him saying he would make Utd debt free. I thought that was one of the big issues supporters had with his bid.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
None of us know what SJR has planned post takeover.

May be getting 51% control so that he can pay off debt and invest in team and stadium is the right approach and he can always buy back other shares accordingly over the next 5-10 years.
The buy out rumours only started when the backlash from the Glazers staying first broke. The Glazers won’t sell in 3 years because the value won’t have risen by that much and Jim has no incentive to buy.
The Glazers don’t want to fecking go, isn’t that obvious by now?
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
It may have been but I don’t recall him saying he would make Utd debt free. I thought that was one of the big issues supporters had with his bid.
Sources have said they won’t add more debt to the club, nothing about clearing the debt we have now
 

Widow

Full Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2020
Messages
7,182
Location
Can't spell Mkhitaryan
It may have been but I don’t recall him saying he would make Utd debt free. I thought that was one of the big issues supporters had with his bid.
I think the issue at the time was that Ineos wasn't going to sweep in and just pay it off. I've definitely read that the debt would be moved but I don't have the patience to go and look through the last 6 month to find it.
 

MDFC Manager

Full Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
24,392
At the moment Ratcliffe only seems like an upgrade on the Glazers due to this utterly ridiculous fantasy that it would mean we could spend Ineos's revenues on building a new stadium and buying players.

Ineos would, in this fairytale land, put servicing their own £8bn debt burden on hold in order to free us from ours.

There's no moral equivalent between ordinary business practices or even capitalism with all its ills and state funded persecution of gay people. But Jesus Christ the reality of life under Ratcliffe is going to be a real bad awakening for some people.
Exactly this. Take a loan to buy the initial controlling stake. Take a loan to buyout glazers later on (no idea when that is). Take a loan to build new stadium/renovate Old Trafford.

Like you said INEOS is already servicing £8bn debt, will they nearly double their debt and expect no component of that being serviced by United? :lol:
 

Mr Anderson

Eats, shoots, leaves
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
24,302
Location
Ireland
Qatar need to learn from Malaga more so than PSG.
Either way, they are not perfect. Any owner can make mistakes, problem we currently have is Glazers don’t give one ounce of shit about United football side. Qatar and Ineos would concentrate better on the footballing side as that protects their asset, Glazers relied on sponsorship deals that Woodie completed…

the common denominator here is Glazer control - need to get them out of the boardroom asap, Qatar and Ineos offer that and to me both are a step in right direction.
 

Telsim

Full Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2021
Messages
4,970
No, it's not. If SJR was to win it's already been said that United’s debt would be moved to Ineos effectively leaving us debt free.
INEOS have never said what will happen with the existing debt. They've deliberately and repeatedly danced around this particular issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.