Are the papers basically assuming this simply because we look to be spending a fair bit of cash this summer? Seems a bit of a case of 2 + 2 = 5 to me.
Qatar Bollocks (AKA Qatar consider MUFC takeover?)
- Thread starter Q80
- Start date
Sounds to me like the media are beginning to believe their own ficticious propaganda.
United spend £60m+ — But, they're skint, the Glazers have ruined the club; we said so, remember! — Hmmm, it must be the Qataris funding the transfers!
They've added two and two, and a couple of made-up numbers that don't exist, and come up with a googolplex.
Waste of time.
United spend £60m+ — But, they're skint, the Glazers have ruined the club; we said so, remember! — Hmmm, it must be the Qataris funding the transfers!
They've added two and two, and a couple of made-up numbers that don't exist, and come up with a googolplex.
Waste of time.
Cool - I've been on holiday all week, who have we bought?
Isn't that a good thing, especially if we finance a good chunk of our outgoings by selling players we can afford to lose?
1. Is the grapevine really buzzing?
2. Are we really intending to spend £125m?
3. Has Giggsy not got caught fecking anyone this week or something?
This-ish
With VDS, Scholes, Neville, Hargo gone and Wes, Oshea, Gibson, Koosh likely to go, we will be saving ~500k a week on wages. That should easily cover the wages for the new signings (all of them) and then some
We have money in the bank for this exact moment, we can spend a lot more than we reportedly have, without it affecting the debt in any way.
And we'll probably recoup around 20m from player sales this summer as well.
The whole 'United have no money to spend' argument is ridiculous and the fact that people have convinced themselves its true is slightly annoying
this is not pro-glazer. the debt is still an issue. don't be hatin
The media are just following the City trend of a few years back.
Very original.
Very original.
Yes it is.
Up to now it's probably somewhere around £30,000. By the end of the season it'll be around £50m at a guess, minus the players we've sold.
Not exactly a spending spree, especially considering what we earn.
Yes basically!
I dont know why they need to come up theories of there the money has come from, you only need to look at our accounts to see a large wad of cash in the club bank account
Can't remember what the terms were, but I'm sure my money's safe!
I fancy you've been having a few sleepless nights lately over our ''net spend'' wager.
Seriously though, Cider's got another thread going on about how we've got De Gea and Young... I presume if we'd actually signed them, I'd have found out by now, having been back online for two days?
hmm I just got back from Mexico for a week and there was a fair few brits in the resort, a couple of fat blokes dicussing the quality of beckfords goal against chelsea though in some sort of mangled language...which I imagine was scouse.
was this you A1dan....
I win if our net transfer spend is £75m or higher between 01 July 2010 (so including the signing of Bebe) and June 30 2012. You win if it's lower. We agreed on the terms just after the close of the January 2011 transfer window IIRC.Can't remember what the terms were, but I'm sure my money's safe!
Seriously though, Cider's got another thread going on about how we've got De Gea and Young... I presume if we'd actually signed them, I'd have found out by now, having been back online for two days?
Everything that we've heard points to the Young and De Gea deals being completed and officially confirmed at some point during the next two to three weeks. Nothing wrong with waiting for that confirmation before drawing conclusions though, I agree.
Qatar Holdings making £2 billion takeover plans for Manchester United
Qatar Holdings making £2 billion takeover plans for Manchester United > Manchester United > Sport | Click Manchester
Qatar Holdings are reportedly planning a £2 billion takeover of Manchester United.
The People claims Qatar Holdings, the business arm of the country’s ruling royal family, are financing United’s summer spending which is expected to be around £125 million.
It is argued that United’s owners, the Glazer family, who bought the club for nearly £800 million in 2005, do not have the financial capability to fund that level of transfer spending.
Qatar Holdings, a division of the Qatar Investment Authority, is believed to have had a £1.5 billion offer turned down last year.
Rumours in the financial world suggest that a third party – thought to be the Qataris – may have in any event provided a £250 million loan to the Glazers late last year.
That move, if believed, could be the forerunner to a full-blown takeover bid, which may be £2 billion, the figure at which the Glazers are reckoned to value the club.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Qatar Holdings making £2 billion takeover plans for Manchester United > Manchester United > Sport | Click Manchester
Qatar Holdings are reportedly planning a £2 billion takeover of Manchester United.
The People claims Qatar Holdings, the business arm of the country’s ruling royal family, are financing United’s summer spending which is expected to be around £125 million.
It is argued that United’s owners, the Glazer family, who bought the club for nearly £800 million in 2005, do not have the financial capability to fund that level of transfer spending.
Qatar Holdings, a division of the Qatar Investment Authority, is believed to have had a £1.5 billion offer turned down last year.
Rumours in the financial world suggest that a third party – thought to be the Qataris – may have in any event provided a £250 million loan to the Glazers late last year.
That move, if believed, could be the forerunner to a full-blown takeover bid, which may be £2 billion, the figure at which the Glazers are reckoned to value the club.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
some news until the next transfer
Sounds like bollocks, to be fair, Dreamsy.
I smelt summat when I read about teh transfer funds bit..
well at least the scousers will have their excuses ready for why they cannot compete.
That's a load of bull to be fair.
2 billion is not enough
The fact that the story just won't go away is actually an indicator that the Qataris interest might be genuine. And make not mistake: If they want to buy the club - and that's a big if - they will get it.
It's not really though.
Enlighten me!
It's a bullshit story, and repeating a bullshit story over and over and over doesn't make it any less bullshit.
The shitty papers are pissing in your pocket and telling you it's raining.
The shitty papers are pissing in your pocket and telling you it's raining.
Bullshit!
Can you give an example of other long running bullshit stories that had zero truth in them? Most get dropped after a short while.
Vidic to Madrid?
I do see where your coming from though tbf, just that it's not always the case.
I do see where your coming from though tbf, just that it's not always the case.
Transfer stories are a prime example, papers make shit up all the time.
The difference here, as was oft discussed the first time around, is that the Qataris will be happy with the speculation and so won't make much (any) effort to dismiss it.
The difference here, as was oft discussed the first time around, is that the Qataris will be happy with the speculation and so won't make much (any) effort to dismiss it.
Our next line.up
Casillas
D.Alves T.Silva Vidic Cole
Xavi Busquets Iniesta
Messi Rooney
Ronaldo
D.Alves T.Silva Vidic Cole
Xavi Busquets Iniesta
Messi Rooney
Ronaldo
t.silva really?Our next line.up
Casillas
D.Alves T.Silva Vidic Cole
Xavi Busquets Iniesta
Messi Rooney
Ronaldo
ColeOur next line.up
Casillas
D.Alves T.Silva Vidic Cole
Xavi Busquets Iniesta
Messi Rooney
Ronaldo
hah yeh. would have been more likely with Gary Fkn Cahil there.
Im not sure if i want this, but i do think there is something in the story. I've always maintained the Glazers 'bought' the club to sell, much like a property investment where the value only goes up with time (in the main) it was always a shrewd investment, and United with their global appeal are Mayfair.
Why would i not want this to happen? firstly and most importantly is the uncertainty, we can bicker all we want about our level of debt under the Glazers, they have in no way meddled with the managers decisions on the pitch. New owners, Arab owners and i dont wish to be stereotypical or generalize here, are very proud and in a sense arrogant in their dealings, will want to be hands on, perhaps maybe not when Fergie is around but certainly afterwards. I wouldnt want that.
Secondly, we'd be pretty much untouchable on and off the pitch if massive amounts of cash were piled in for the very best players. To be very crude but have you ever played FM with the money cheat? its feckn boring after you have got a team of 11 of the 11 best players. Youth policy would be virtually redundent, something which we have always striven upon. A takeover would go against our traditions so much that our 130yr history would be all fairly meaningless.
Having said that, Messi would be nice.......
Why would i not want this to happen? firstly and most importantly is the uncertainty, we can bicker all we want about our level of debt under the Glazers, they have in no way meddled with the managers decisions on the pitch. New owners, Arab owners and i dont wish to be stereotypical or generalize here, are very proud and in a sense arrogant in their dealings, will want to be hands on, perhaps maybe not when Fergie is around but certainly afterwards. I wouldnt want that.
Secondly, we'd be pretty much untouchable on and off the pitch if massive amounts of cash were piled in for the very best players. To be very crude but have you ever played FM with the money cheat? its feckn boring after you have got a team of 11 of the 11 best players. Youth policy would be virtually redundent, something which we have always striven upon. A takeover would go against our traditions so much that our 130yr history would be all fairly meaningless.
Having said that, Messi would be nice.......
good post sr.
Yeah, I kinda like things the way they are if this is the alternative. It's extra satisfying when us paupers continue to piss over mega rich Chelsea and City.
Things could end up getting a bit boring without the Glazers. If nothing else, they keep the fans together and our passion (for hating them) burning. Our success under them would be nothing short of phenomenal if it weren't for that pesky Messi and co.
Things could end up getting a bit boring without the Glazers. If nothing else, they keep the fans together and our passion (for hating them) burning. Our success under them would be nothing short of phenomenal if it weren't for that pesky Messi and co.
Both good points. Personally, though I'm in no way a fan of the Glazers, I would much prefer them than to be sold to Qatar, or any other sugar-daddy style owner.
Qatar Holding denies plans to buy Manchester United | Football | guardian.co.uk
Will this finally put an end to this rubbish? This whole thread has been nothing but bullshit from the beginning.
Agree with this.
Even though the Glazers have put the us under so much debt they haven't messed with the traditions of this club.
I mean they could have done a lot of things except rising ticket prices to make more profits like selling Stadium naming rights.
Maybe its because of the fans pressure but still.
While I agree with most of your points, the health of the club does come first and if our current ownership is a threat to the club's existence in the long term future I would obviously prefer the debt being wiped out. Of course we all want United's great traditions well and truly as part of its present and future, but not at the risk of the club's general health.
Key clause in bold there. In what way are we certain of how much the current owners may or may not meddle once Fergie is out of the picture?
Anybody, Glazer, Arab or PLC would just have to be feckin thick to start messing SAF around. A newcomer with less weight? Who can say, whoever the owners....
Totally agree with the sentiment, but am optimisitic the the Fair Play regs should limit our ability to do this even if an owner wanted to (and hence hopefully discourage an owner who wanted to do this form even bidding).
The "A takeover would go against our traditions..." bit is a little presumptious and a pretty null, given that we've already been through a take over, which depending on who you ask, may well have gone against our traditions.
Yes they do, but the one's with some substance are the one's that linger. There are few examples of long running gossip that has no truth to them.