g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });
I'm still expecting that Muppetiers dickhead to post a video where he says he knew all along.This being totally unknown to the press must mean that the usual leaker was bypassed by the decision makers at Ineos. That's a good sign, as we're usually aware of targets about 12 months before they happen...
I thought this too initially but apparently if the Glazers get an offer for the rest of their shares then SJR gets the first chance to buy them, and if he doesn't do it then he has to sell his as well.No more Glazer shit show. I have seen in the clause though if the Glazers sell up them SJR is forced to sell up too.
Which multi-billionaire businessman would ever agree to such a clause? Unless, of course, he is intent on buying their shares?I thought this too initially but apparently if the Glazers get an offer for the rest of their shares then SJR gets the first chance to buy them, and if he doesn't do it then he has to sell his as well.
“SJR has a right of first offer, if someone comes in to buyout the Glazers. So, let's say Jassim comes in a year after closing, and offers $45/share, and the Glazers agree. Well, SJR can simply jump in, say "I'll take that deal" and walk away with control of the club. The flip side of this coin, however, is that if SJR refuses to take the deal, the Glazers can drag him-- kicking and screaming-- into the sale of his shares.”No more Glazer shit show. I have seen in the clause though if the Glazers sell up them SJR is forced to sell up too.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
It certainly appears Ratcliffe's intention is to ultimately buy their shares, but it does mean if somebody else comes in and blows his offer out of the water then he'll get a significant profit on the shares that he already owns. So it's win-win for him, even if he does have a preference.Which multi-billionaire businessman would ever agree to such a clause? Unless, of course, he is intent on buying their shares?
Yes correct. But it's a very smart clause on Jim's part. Nobody could beat his offer now, and I personally don't think anyone in the future will offer enough money to glazers at the price that Jim can't or won't match.It certainly appears Ratcliffe's intention is to ultimately buy their shares, but it does mean if somebody else comes in and blows his offer out of the water then he'll get a significant profit on the shares that he already owns. So it's win-win for him, even if he does have a preference.
Yes it's not gonna happen regardless of how well we're performing. Guess the only realistic (way cheaper) opportunity for a third party to own us, is right now - by paying the $166mn break clause.No way Jassim (or any other state backed bid) is coming in for more than $33/share...unless Utd win the treble next season and the season after!
Well it's been shown that footballing performance doesn't really affect the financial position certainly in the short run and most likely medium term. Look how well we have done financially despite the below average football performance?!No way Jassim (or any other state backed bid) is coming in for more than $33/share...unless Utd win the treble next season and the season after!
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
What will this achieve? If they have a grudge then they’ll say bad things obviously.He's speaking to ex-staff to understand the size of the task
It's better he hears the badWhat will this achieve? If they have a grudge then they’ll say bad things obviously.
As with most situations the truth lies somewhere in the middle, you can’t make an informed decision just hearing one side , it’s the right way to go about thingsWhat will this achieve? If they have a grudge then they’ll say bad things obviously.
Potentially poaching a key figure from each of the state-owned PL clubs
The summer window might be a bit of a strange one for United, as the key appointments (CEO, DoF, Head of Recruitment) probably won't be in place until then. Berrada presumably has a six-month notice period (based on reports of him not being available until the summer). One presumes that Ashworth (or any other DoF currently in post) will have similar. It is also not clear who the manager will be beyond the end of the season (it's doubtful that Ten Hag can survive finishing outside the CL places, which now seems likely). As we know, the planning for the summer window will usually take place in the spring (if not earlier) - the fans may need to show a little bit of patience with the club this summer as it is likely to be something of a learning exercise for those involved since they will all be new to the club. United's new player recruitment team may not be fully up to speed until next season.Buzzing for the summer transfer window now. Ratcliffe seems like the type to do business under the spotlight just like he’s shown by getting in the guy from city. Not one rumour about him. We just got him in nice and smoothly. We should be aiming to do that with signings in the summer
If we can get Ashworth and Mitchell onboard as well then that would be a real statement of intent from INEOS.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Something about Agbonlahor and some Burna Boy lyrics?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
From the look of it, this isn't new news and she's been at the club since 2022. https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/...cester-city-designer-behind-expensive-7861160
Protect the valueYou would feel binning non performers was basic. The Glazers really are poison.
Love to hear it. Acknowledge failures quickly and move on instead of blindly hoping they'll eventually come good.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Strangely worded post, but my interpretation of what he's trying to say is that the Glazers' incompetence, along with conflicts in the Middle East heating up recently, mean they're unlikely to get a deal done with the Qataris.What's this about?
Yeah, I deleted my reply. I'll let the mods figure out whether its offensive or not.Strangely worded post, but my interpretation of what he's trying to say is that the Glazers' incompetence, along with conflicts in the Middle East heating up recently, mean they're unlikely to get a deal done with the Qataris.