You're spot on about the ineos Saudi investment. Those plants will be built by slave labour in much worse conditions and global attention than the ones that built the WC stadiums. It's a more direct moral quandary than fuelling your car etc.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
[]
I don’t trivialize your feelings, sorry if you feel it like that. I think you’re reacting very strong without knowing the deal or the outcome. A lot of people do this on the forum. We are not saved and we are not doomed. Let’s wait. I think a lot of the people who desperately wanted Jassim will never be happy with anything Jim will ever offer. I didn’t want Jassim because I don’t like state owned clubs but I also had/have big doubts about Jim. But maybe things can get better, let’s give it a chance. If it doesn’t just support the club and the team, you’re not a fan because of the owners and you’re not a fan because we won the PL almost every year with Sir Alex.
Why starting this weekend? Nothing has been agreed yet
Mine, too, but I still want rid of the Trump funding Glazer family.
Think out fanbase has had to choose between a shit sandwich and a bottle of piss. Qatar is worse than Ineos, however, executive political entities usually are.
A company like Ineos doesn't have to be run such, but dictatorships like Qatar do. They are equally objectionable, yes, but one is definitively worse than the other.
Last edited:
This seems quite an overreaction to me. How would we be used as a political tool here - Saudi want Ineos to have plants in Saudi? The cost of those plants is about 1 thirtieth of their yearly revenue, I don’t think what you are saying makes sense.
Every big corporate will have some political links given they will have global operations but it seems more than a stretch to say Saudi will have political influence on a company as powerful as Ineos. As I said, I’m not thrilled about Ineos but this isn’t a criticism that makes sense again them.
as a matter of interest, how would you buy my house if I don't want to sell it? I have some faith that Ratcliffe is interested in the club, although I would have much preferred either party to have bought outright. I think we're can't move forward with this result
Feels like Sir Jim, if his offer is accepted, now becomes just another human shield, alongside the manager, for the glazers.
Until they are gone , we are f**ked
Until they are gone , we are f**ked
Actual, what matters is in effect there is very little change. The glazers are still here leaching of the club
You have absolutely no idea what the terms are so can't say that.
The Glazers couldn't lose if they sold it for a quid, they never paid a penny their dad did.
Another speaking as though Ratcliffe is being hired.... For the love of God.
The Chelsea sale was done in under three months from start to finish. The club was put up for sale early March, less than three weeks later the bids were in and after a couple rounds of talks with the numerous candidates the preferred bidder was chosen in the first week of May. By the end of May everything was officially completed.
Though it has to be said time was of the essence with the Chelsea sale following the sanctions placed on the club so every part of the process was accelerated whereas for the United sale there's been no rush. The sporting side will obviously suffer the longer it drags on but from a business POV it makes more sense for the current owners not to hurry things too much because this way they can milk as much as they possibly can out of the sale and get a deal that benefits them as individuals, not what benefits the club.
This makes literally no sense. Inherited wealth can’t be lost? What a load of nonsense.
Assuming SJR bid is board approved on Thursday I think the first shakes up will be boardroom/management structure and a DoF .Arnold and Murtough on thin ice.
All fair points. Cheers
There’s going to be bare minimal change, we’ll just plod on being fecking crap and failing on and off the field under this lot.
I think Sir Jim would want to make this his legacy, I can't see what's for him to gain aside the adoration of the fanbase from the sporting success he'll try to achieve. He's too old a man and too wealthy for him to be pursuing this deal for any other reason.
This could be good from a sporting aspect for the club, someone who would make sure there's accountability. We already spend more than enough to succeed, if we can combine that with competence and accountability we'll be back to the top.
This could be good from a sporting aspect for the club, someone who would make sure there's accountability. We already spend more than enough to succeed, if we can combine that with competence and accountability we'll be back to the top.
Don`t worry everyone, good old Kaveh has all the answered covered. AKA answering questions with questions.
https://www.skysports.com/football/...t-glazers-sir-jim-ratcliffe-and-sheikh-jassim
https://www.skysports.com/football/...t-glazers-sir-jim-ratcliffe-and-sheikh-jassim
I htink what he meant was that Malcolm was the one who took the risk initially buying United. The family got that initial 'investment' back years ago and have leeched hundreds of millions more out since. Whatever they sell for at this stage is pure profit.
No chance there will be minimal change. Jim is not stupid and knows that the club needs a proper shake up. If he is going to even come close to success here he needs to get the fans onside asap, and the first steps towards that will be big changes.
The long term commitment can be a legit concern, but Jimothy is going to come into this club all guns blazing at least.
You could ask me to elaborate instead of making a broad assumption on my comments. I have no doubt Jim has certain agreements in place to takeover at a certain point and wasn’t implying he’s a complete mug. Part of the reason rich people get rich is with a wickedly thick skin and self belief beyond reality. This leads them to great riches but also means they make big mistakes aswell (as nobody can talk sense to them when they are wrong)
But, if he does take over the football running of things and/or things get worse , he’s going to be just as much a target as the glazers. He will share the abuse regardless of whether it’s his fault or not.
can you imagine United still fumbling around in 2 years time, no closer to any clarity of the clubs future, stadium still leaking and erratic performance on field. Look at the hysteria if a player or manager has a few bad weeks, why would you think sir Jim will be immune from that?
Kaveh! The only bloke on TV who can turn a 30second sound bite into a 12 minute monologue, and still not tell you anything new.
There was a financial time article about INEOS’s sport washing. They’re a chemical company which if you follow what they do, they’re pretty fecking awful. Both environmentally and historically how they have treated their employees.
INEOS used to be known as “the biggest company you have never heard of” or words to that effect, until around 10 years ago when they started branding out into sport and aligning the INEOS name with certain sporting brands. That’s how the company wants their name associated - with sport rather than petrochemicals and plastics.
I have supported Manchester United for most of my life. I live in the States but I buy United jerseys every season. For now on, I won’t buy any official merchandises until the Glazers gone. Now it’s the local United fans to stop supporting United. That’s the only way to force the Glazers In my opinio.
If you inherited a £500k house would you think selling it for £5k is fine because “hey, anything is profit!”. It’s a ridiculous argument.
Too many folk were dazzled by the money. The problem is that money doesn't solve every problem, as shown by the Glazers not accepting the SJ offer. Meanwhile, Sir Jim worked on building a rapport with the sellers and tailoring a bid that would interest them. I'm not sure how confident I would be in an owner that just thinks "throw money at the problem" and then does the media briefing equivalent of a Taylor Swift breakup album tour after losing something.
It's rare to see billionaires, no matter how old, who aren't keen to make more money. And as Pexbo said, there's obvious benefit for the INEOS brand in being associated with United. While United may become INEOS' highest profile asset, we're far from their only one, and those others were pursued with clear business rationale too.
The key point is whether those objectives are at odds with the development of the football team, or (as they would appear at face value) aided by the football team doing well. So I would be far less interested in his motivations (which I would take as read are deeply self-serving and capitalist) than strategy for achieveing these goals.
Malcolm Glazer didn't buy United. He didn't have the money to by United, he borrowed money and secured the debt on assets he didn't actually own at the time, that is why it is called a leveraged buy out.
If you need the full details of the buy out, I'm sure they are here somewhere in the archives.
What you also have to look into is the background behind the purchase and how it came about, you might get a few surprises.
I dont mean political in sportwashing for Saudi, I meant to put of positive spin on Ineos..
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
INEOS are the third biggest sponsor of the Mercedes F1 team, that kind of sponsorship doesn't come cheap, the five year deal has cost INEOS in the region of £1bn
For me I never liked the idea of being a state-owned plaything. The way Qatar conducted the negotiations seemed desperate and unrealistic. Leaking all their ideas by social media, tapping up ex-players and refusing to find a way to negotiate a winning deal with the Glazers made them look amateurish.
As far as Sir Jim is concerned, He has experience in owning football clubs, He has concentrated on conducting negotiations sensibly and privately. He clearly wants the best for United and will understand the problems facing this club far better than Qatar.
Qatar seemed to think that the answer was bringing in Zidane as manager and Mbappe up front. We’d have ended up as PSG 2.0 under Qatar, except the Premier League is much tougher than the French league so we wouldn’t even win any titles!
Looks like Michael Edwards could be a real possibility.
Why?
On what basis would they vote it down?
Yes I should have said as much, but it is what I meant.
I really hope so. He was the true architect of Liverpool's recent success. Getting him would be massive.
quite embarrassing from us that our whole fan base is desperately willing to sell our whole club to a random guy from the middle east. we’re still the biggest club in the world and there shouldn’t be a need to sell at all. why is it that a club like bayern munich with 100% ownership stays at the top of europe with real madrid and we don’t ? we should go the bottom of the problem which clearly isn’t the lack of money.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I read an article a couple of days ago that said he’s in a new consultancy role and while he’s looking for another role alongside it he’s got no interest in being a sporting director like he was at Liverpool again.
- Status