Dazzmondo
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2013
- Messages
- 9,361
Says Ratcliffe wants sporting control but makes no mention of how this would be guaranteed. Sounds the equivalent of a gentleman's agreementAthletic article here: https://archive.ph/nuH5i
Says Ratcliffe wants sporting control but makes no mention of how this would be guaranteed. Sounds the equivalent of a gentleman's agreementAthletic article here: https://archive.ph/nuH5i
Very fair and balanced post. Although not convinced Qatar will be back in - i imagine the INEOS/Ratcliffe ownership will be a longer term one.I’ve calmed down and settled.
Ultimately the glamour of the Qatar bid was alluring. The idea of it was so promising and spectacular that it was definitely too good to be true.
I don’t think their involvement is dead, they will be back soon enough to invest or buy the club off Jim.
Now the sporting control aspect of Jim’s bid is interesting not too long ago he mentioned how it was frustrating how the club is being run and he thinks structural change is needed.
If Qatar hadn’t been involved and before they were we were all VERY excited about Jim buying the club.
It’s hard not to go mad and think we’ve sounded it all up the wall for a decade but the sporting control aspect is promising IF true,
However does Arnold vote this through knowing he may be chopped? Maybe he’s above “sporting decisions” weird and interesting times ahead..
Preach. Honestly some of the meltdowns have been genuinely pathetic.All those pining for Qatar should just go and support City. Seriously.
he’ll get full control of the club once those leeches have sucked every pound out of the club and not before. Don’t believe the spin that comes out of the club whenever an announcement is made the glazer propaganda machine will be right behind it.I didn’t want to be a state owned club from the start, so I’m happy with that. But I also want the Glazers out, so disappointed with that. Let’s wait and see what the deal with Ratcliffe is, what sort of control he gets and when he can get full control.
Why would the guys who still own 75% of the club give full control to anyone else? I could see the Glazers rejecting his proposal in their board meeting.I mean, you can believe it or not but all the reports say that Ineos want full control and that there's a route to 100% ownership in their bid.
Why would you have faith in a man that wants to keep the Glazers around.Sporting control, that is good news.
Jim'll fix it.
All those celebrating the Brexit hypocrite taking over in some undefined future period should got do one with Johnson.All those pining for Qatar should just go and support City. Seriously.
I don't know where the poster got 5-10yrs; most I've seen reported is majority control in as early as 1 yr and 100% in 3-6 yrsWhere has 5-10 years come from? I doubt it's that long. The man would be 80 before he gets a majority. I don't buy that time line.
The rival fan chants are going to write themselves with this one.lifelong apart from the few years supporting chelsea
Sounds like some on here, actually some of the Caf are worse when City winlifelong apart from the few years supporting chelsea
Do you fully understand his brexit stance? Or do you just mindlessly put all brexiteers into one basket when you struggle to make a point.All those celebrating the Brexit hypocrite taking over in some undefined future period should got do one with Johnson.
ITS A BUSINESS DEAL NOT A HANDSHAKE AGREEMENT FROM SOME LADS IN A PUB ffsBecause that part is clouded with if/maybe/one day/. Classic PR bs from Jim's camp.
Reality is; somebody bought 25% of shares which allows Glazers to stay in club for years now. Will they sell in future? Maybe. Maybe not. And when is that future? In 2 years? 5? 10? Who knows?
Yeah the Glazers definitely want to stop Ratcliffe increasing the value of the club through investment.Why would the guys who still own 75% of the club give full control to anyone else? I could see the Glazers rejecting his proposal in their board meeting.
That's what the Chelsea, Leeds, Derby County, Portsmouth, Fiorentina fans thought too.People saying this is the death of Man Utd need to get a grip. You’re one of the biggest clubs in the world regardless, you’re not going to go into administration.
That makes a lot more sense.I don't know where the poster got 5-10yrs; most I've seen reported is majority control in 1 yrs at the earliest and 100% in 3-6 yrs
I had to google what that meant. True though.People losing their shit about corporation sale. Also, whole thread is filled with copium
Because what idiot pumps over a billion into a club without having a concrete route to a takeover? This won’t be ifs and buts, this will be a roadmap to a full takeover with a binding contract.Because that part is clouded with if/maybe/one day/. Classic PR bs from Jim's camp.
Reality is; somebody bought 25% of shares which allows Glazers to stay in club for years now. Will they sell in future? Maybe. Maybe not. And when is that future? In 2 years? 5? 10? Who knows?
I don't need to understand his 'stance' or any other clown supporting that shit show to know it's an absolute joke.Do you fully understand his brexit stance? Or do you just mindlessly put all brexiteers into one basket when you struggle to make a point.
It's explained in the Athletic article.Why would the guys who still own 75% of the club give full control to anyone else? I could see the Glazers rejecting his proposal in their board meeting.
"I don't need to know his brexit stance to insinuate hes in bed with Johnson"I don't need to understand his 'stance' or any other clown supporting that shit show to know it's an absolute joke.
The same way the moral police on here do not have a Scooby about why we need the Qatar money to actually thrive in the future but are happy to literally make fun of United fans and come out with the bullshit quoted.
I also don't need to work in the same building as him.
I had to google what that meant. True though.
What"Copium" is such an alt right online thing to say.
Are human rights abuses OK though because you seem to only speak about the bad actions of one party (ignoring the environmental damage done by INEOS which is much worse than the stupidity of Brexit) and then ignore the state bidding on the other hand.I don't need to understand his 'stance' or any other clown supporting that shit show to know it's an absolute joke.
The same way the moral police on here do not have a Scooby about why we need the Qatar money to actually thrive in the future but are happy to literally make fun of United fans and come out with the bullshit quoted.
I also don't need to work in the same building as him.
Ok, thanks for this clarification. We'll see what happens in the next few days.It's explained in the Athletic article.
Why would a minority stakeholder get sporting control?
Because that is the price Sir Jim Ratcliffe is demanding for his very generous — and completely out of character — offer to give the Glazers’ a premium price for what looks like a very mediocre slice of the pie.
And this
Those sources, who are not permitted to speak publicly due to confidentiality agreements, have told The Athletic that a deal with Ratcliffe has been agreed in principle, subject to board ratifications — with key club figures due to meet and vote on the proposed deal in the coming days.
"Board ratification" is a formality since the Glazers have 96% of the voting rights.
All i got was. . ."Copium" is such an alt right online thing to say.
Alt right and members of this forum doesn’t suprise me though.”Copium" is a slang term used on Twitch and other online platforms that refers to a coping mechanism or an optimistic outlook on a situation that may not be realistic.
To be honest, I don’t think any of them are the least bit gentlemen, and what’s more they’ll have no illusions about the other party being gentlemen either. If there is a long term intention, be sure it will be steeped in binding consequences both ways.Says Ratcliffe wants sporting control but makes no mention of how this would be guaranteed. Sounds the equivalent of a gentleman's agreement
I don't really care what you think."I don't need to know his brexit stance to insinuate hes in bed with Johnson"
Good work. You come across really intelligent.
ABOUT WHICH WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING SO FAR! FFS!ITS A BUSINESS DEAL NOT A HANDSHAKE AGREEMENT FROM SOME LADS IN A PUB ffs
Yeah I'm optimistic but ultimately we need to see what happens.Ok, thanks for this clarification. We'll see what happens in the next few days.
No one knows the bid details just yet but Athletic say there is routes to full ownership for him.How much will SJ R pay for his 25%? My concern is the Glaziers could change their mind about a full sale. Why else would they turn down one now? That's my concern. That said, it's still better than the Glaziers being in complete control.
Actually, the Athletic confirmed he will have a route to full ownership and immediate element of control on the sporting side.ABOUT WHICH WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING SO FAR! FFS!
All we "know" (sort of) is that he is buying 25%. Everything else is completely unknown.
The mods really need to enforce some quality control.What