Who would you choose to own Manchester United?

pacifictheme

Full Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
7,665
The saudi group could be a good option, filthy rich (They threw 400 billion just to get new weapons from the USA not so long ago) and they wouldn't be interested to turn the club into a cash-cow like the Glazers. The problem is the perception of the saudi regime or saudi prince, this might reflect badly in early stages but if we want to compete at City's level, we need to have more funds to get things done.
What the absolute feck is wrong with people? "The problem is their perception". No, the problem is they're vile fecking cnuts running a dictatorship where human rights are ignored. Anyone advocating them having anything to do with united need to have a long hard look at the state they've become. feck me.
 

Aouer-United

Full Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
270
Would be amazing for the fans to have stakes in the club like we see at Bayern,unfortunately don't think we will ever see that kind of ownership here
Personally I think the German 50+1 system looks like a good idea. Not going to happen though.

I think Labour is proposing the new law that every supporter trust's fan must have a say in how their club is running and the right to appoint, and sack, at least two members of a club’s board of directors

Labour also would legislate that every fan has the right to buy shares in their club. Potentially toward German model of 50+1

Labour needs a big mandate for this to happen so they can force the wealthy owner to sell their own shares to supporter trusts.

it's just a start, I guess.
 

RUCK4444

New Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,553
Location
$¥$¥$¥$¥$
They don’t technically have an owner per se, but I like the boardroom structure of Real Madrid + Florentino Perez.

They invest all the money the club makes back into the club (as far as I know), they always go after the best, and don’t tolerate mediocrity be it from players or managers.
Bingo, this is what I was talking about in my previous posts.

Like the clubs you mention, a club of our size needs an owner that isn’t chasing a financial return.

The problem is that leaves you mostly with potential owners that aren’t favourable to fans that have strong opinions on human rights.
 

Florida Man

Cartoon expert and crap superhero
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
13,863
Location
Florida, man
Somehow I get the feeling that people who ideally wants the fans to shell out money to buy and collectively own the club, are the same people who only wants to hire managers who 'understands' the club, and sign players who would 'die' for the shirt.
I think we're doing a little too much dying and not enough killing for the shirt.
 

Madzik_92

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 24, 2019
Messages
134
Anyone tbh, but i think the only possibility is the Arabs. I'm pretty sure they want their club be run by serious people who know about football. They won't tolerate people like Ed imo.
 

tenpoless

Full Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
16,180
Location
Fabinho's forehead
Tesla.

We badly need a self-driving, anti-stupid car to drive Ed Woodward away while We appoint Van Der Sar as the new CEO. Tell him it's a gift for doing his job magnificently and urge him to drive it home (after the car's system has been altered, of course).

While He's strapped in the automated wanker mobile all the way to Egypt, sack him due to work ethics violation (To disappear without letting anyone know and because He won't turn up to work for 69 days straight). He will survive by eating hummus and drinking his own piss.
 

pacifictheme

Full Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
7,665
Bingo, this is what I was talking about in my previous posts.

Like the clubs you mention, a club of our size needs an owner that isn’t chasing a financial return.

The problem is that leaves you mostly with potential owners that aren’t favourable to fans that have strong opinions on human rights.
Heaven forbid.
 

RUCK4444

New Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,553
Location
$¥$¥$¥$¥$
Heaven forbid.
Don’t get me wrong it’s a disgrace what goes on over there.

However I believe it would do more good than harm if they became our owners. The spotlight would be on them even more being the owners of the biggest club name in the world.

If anything we could more effectively get the message through to them as vocal fans. It gets a lot of press if fans turn on the owners, especially at United and if human rights were the issue it would be a big deal in the press.

I see no down side to them being the owners. Ultimately I don’t attribute any meaning to the word ‘owners’ when it comes to who owns United.
The club is owned by the fans and huge following, at the end of the day the club disappears without that. I just see ‘owners’ as custodians who will (or won’t as the case may be) let you operate to your fullest potential.
 

RoyH1

Full Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
5,888
Location
DKNY
The kind of money required to buy United can only be obtained by loans, which leaves us in the same situation we are in now. And if there is someone with the liquidity to buy without loaning, we're probably not going to like who it is.
The big American corporations (Apple, Google) are not going into the sports franchise business.
 

Johan07

Full Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Messages
1,936
Don’t get me wrong it’s a disgrace what goes on over there.

However I believe it would do more good than harm if they became our owners. The spotlight would be on them even more being the owners of the biggest club name in the world.

If anything we could more effectively get the message through to them as vocal fans. It gets a lot of press if fans turn on the owners, especially at United and if human rights were the issue it would be a big deal in the press.

I see no down side to them being the owners. Ultimately I don’t attribute any meaning to the word ‘owners’ when it comes to who owns United.
The club is owned by the fans and huge following, at the end of the day the club disappears without that. I just see ‘owners’ as custodians who will (or won’t as the case may be) let you operate to your fullest potential.
Jeez..
Do you think the Saudis would buy us just to be "custodians"?
They would buy us and then make United one of their propaganda vehicles in the Middle East and globally as well. For that despicable regime.
"Custodians"? Really?
May it never happen, its probably the only thing that would make me stop supporting the club.
 

Madzik_92

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 24, 2019
Messages
134
What's right with having Saudi owners?
Super rich, strict, want their club to be top beating other Arabs owners, won't suck money from the club. The won't rest until they get what they want. So what's the harm compare to our owner now?
 

matt10000

Full Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
1,326
Location
Salford UK
3. Kim Jong Un

It was revealed a couple of years ago that he's a huge United fan so this could be promising. Now I know some people say he killed a few people in his country, but who's keeping count these days? At least he never said a curse word on live television or flashed a nipple. How many of us have been crying out for a hard man who will whip our social media-obsessed team of overgrown kids into shape? Well you can't get harder than a literal hard man (politically, not physically). If he wants a deal done, he'll get it done. If he wants a manager to perform, he'll demand it. If he wants a player to give 110%, he'll ensure it. Failure to do any of the above will result in an immediate sacking and subsequently thrown over a bridge.
Immediate execution.
 

tenpoless

Full Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
16,180
Location
Fabinho's forehead
You have seen how bad a job Tesla have done on the driverless car so far? Search on youtube for Smart Summon... they make Woodward look competent
That's the point, We'll never summon Woodward back once He's off to Egypt. The man is the epitome of current Manchester United. Failure, pretentiousness, loadsamoneybutstupid, gambles.
 
Last edited:

RUCK4444

New Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
9,553
Location
$¥$¥$¥$¥$
Jeez..
Do you think the Saudis would buy us just to be "custodians"?
They would buy us and then make United one of their propaganda vehicles in the Middle East and globally as well. For that despicable regime.
"Custodians"? Really?
May it never happen, its probably the only thing that would make me stop supporting the club.
This is such a dramatic stance. ‘Propaganda’

You think they are going to buy United as a propaganda tool so they can say “It’s all ok folks, we own Manchester United” and then all of a sudden, as if by magic the world will forget the atrocities.

At worst they are looking for ‘soft power’ that regimes in the Middle East have been accused of chasing with their interest in European football.

As I’ve said I don’t see such a dramatic down side, you can’t erase what they’ve done, if the spotlight is on them even more as the owners of United any further atrocities will negatively impact any ‘soft power’ or indeed ‘Propaganda’ benefits.

IMO It’s better if they have stronger links with the Western culture where we can then actually scrutinise with a little leverage. Better than shouting from across the pond wagging our fingers.
 

MisterLupus

New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
505
Location
Bollocking about fluently.
Don’t get me wrong it’s a disgrace what goes on over there.

However I believe it would do more good than harm if they became our owners. The spotlight would be on them even more being the owners of the biggest club name in the world.

If anything we could more effectively get the message through to them as vocal fans. It gets a lot of press if fans turn on the owners, especially at United and if human rights were the issue it would be a big deal in the press.

I see no down side to them being the owners. Ultimately I don’t attribute any meaning to the word ‘owners’ when it comes to who owns United.
The club is owned by the fans and huge following, at the end of the day the club disappears without that. I just see ‘owners’ as custodians who will (or won’t as the case may be) let you operate to your fullest potential.
They don't give two flying fecks about how vocal people are - no tyrant in the history of this planet has ever cared about such things they're blatant psychopaths the more you scream the harder they cream themselves. Best case scenario they'll just invite us all to their embassy then choke us and chop us into pieces before dissolving us all in acid and when the world asks them "what the feck happened to all the United supporters" they'll just pretend to be as deaf, blind and dumb as someone can possible get while at the same time grinning in satisfaction. The only thing anyone's ever achieved by bedding themselves with violent dictatorships is to legitimize them - protests don't work the only thing that can change such a regime is a bullet through it's skull and a hangman's noose.

If Manchester United goes to the Saudis - that's pretty much the one thing - bar perhaps Kim Jong-un becoming our next manager or the Taliban being granted use of Old Trafford for mass execitions of school girls at least - that will cause me to no longer support the club. What's next? Dig up Ted Bundy and have him coach our women's team perhaps? Nuts.
 

Johan07

Full Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Messages
1,936
This is such a dramatic stance. ‘Propaganda’

You think they are going to buy United as a propaganda tool so they can say “It’s all ok folks, we own Manchester United” and then all of a sudden, as if by magic the world will forget the atrocities.

At worst they are looking for ‘soft power’ that regimes in the Middle East have been accused of chasing with their interest in European football.

As I’ve said I don’t see such a dramatic down side, you can’t erase what they’ve done, if the spotlight is on them even more as the owners of United any further atrocities will negatively impact any ‘soft power’ or indeed ‘Propaganda’ benefits.

IMO It’s better if they have stronger links with the Western culture where we can then actually scrutinise with a little leverage. Better than shouting from across the pond wagging our fingers.
Thats exactly why they would buy United. They would use United as a propaganda tool, have us playing all our pre-season games in stadiums where women are not even allowed in.
We would have photos of United-players with their leaders and it would be used as PR.
They would also use the ownership of United to nestle themselves in UEFA, and FIFA, just like PSGs and Citys owners have done.
They would use the ownership to try to make their regime legit on other levels than diplomatic ones. Qatar-WC anyone?
Its called sportswashing and the purposes of it should not be new to people anymore. Why do you think they would be buying United otherwise?
Dramatic stance?
This is a regime that killed a journalist at an embassy in a foreign country.
Do you think they care one feck about "the spotlight" of owning United other than to promote their own interests and promote their own interests?
The Caf sometimes.... I sincerely hope this never happens.
 

pascell

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Messages
14,113
Location
Sir Alex Ferguson Stand
Super rich, strict, want their club to be top beating other Arabs owners, won't suck money from the club. The won't rest until they get what they want. So what's the harm compare to our owner now?
Super rich so we'd throw money at it like we belittled City for doing and effectively buying history?

Well our current owner doesn't rule a regime that involves the murders of innocent civilians. I'd rather we kept languishing in the position we're in under the Glazers, than be the positive PR machine of a Saudi who rules such a regime. We'd effectively be selling our soul of the club to the devil if we had an owner like that.
 

NinjaZombie

Punched the air when Liverpool beat City
Joined
Dec 7, 2011
Messages
10,119
I think Labour is proposing the new law that every supporter trust's fan must have a say in how their club is running and the right to appoint, and sack, at least two members of a club’s board of directors

Labour also would legislate that every fan has the right to buy shares in their club. Potentially toward German model of 50+1

Labour needs a big mandate for this to happen so they can force the wealthy owner to sell their own shares to supporter trusts.

it's just a start, I guess.
How do you define "fans" though? What stops some rich guy planting his people as "fans" to take advantage?
 

Johan07

Full Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Messages
1,936
Super rich, strict, want their club to be top beating other Arabs owners, won't suck money from the club. The won't rest until they get what they want. So what's the harm compare to our owner now?
Its a myth that even the Saudis could suddenly put in billions in the club. Owners contributions are limited to 30m a year according to FFP. That gets you Pogbas left leg or something.
 

Bestietom

Full Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
8,021
Location
Ireland
We need someone that will put big money into this club, not take it out.
We need stadium improvements and even extended
We need money pumped into Rebuilding of Team/Squad

The Glazers will not put big money into this club as regards extending Old Trafford or the money needed for an instant rebuild. They will keep shoving down our throats all these promises year in year out about bringing in the best players, then give the manager 100million to spend. This is fine if we had a team/squad like our noisy neighbours or Liverpool, but we are just getting worse and falling further behind each year.
 

glazed

Eats diamonds to beat thermodynamics
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
7,526
It does live NFL games on Thursday nights.
Did not know that. Thanks.

Btw I have some degree of technical knowledge in this area. It's quite expensive to do mass scale live streaming - especially in 4K. The BBC trialed it during the World Cup with mixed results. The only people who can do easily are BT, because they own the network and the routers in the homes, and can therefore utilise technology that third party operators cannot.
 

Johan07

Full Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2017
Messages
1,936
We need someone that will put big money into this club, not take it out.
We need stadium improvements and even extended
We need money pumped into Rebuilding of Team/Squad

The Glazers will not put big money into this club as regards extending Old Trafford or the money needed for an instant rebuild. They will keep shoving down our throats all these promises year in year out about bringing in the best players, then give the manager 100million to spend. This is fine if we had a team/squad like our noisy neighbours or Liverpool, but we are just getting worse and falling further behind each year.
So who is that unicorn?
Does not exist.
I also want Mila Kunis to cuddle me to sleep and Margot Robbie to wake me up in the morning with some tea.
That will not happen either though. Sadly.
When it comes to OT it does not matter who the owner is; its not going to be expanded until a practical solution will be found to the railway issue and its financially viable. If its not going to happen anytime in the near future; the club should proceed with renovations though and probably will.
 

Dr. StrangeHate

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Messages
5,415
No thanks. He's a bellend of the highest order. Absolute eejit in person.

Would probably walk in, fire the manager and the squad after calling them all sacks of shit, then go the city dressing room waving piles of cash asking 'which of you cocksuckers wants to play for a real team then????'

Then post about it all on twitter, get sued by the existing squad he just fired, and use the club to litigate whilst walking around OT whistling with hus cock out managing to put us in more debt than we're already in.
You forgot about the cocaine.
 

Aouer-United

Full Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2019
Messages
270
How do you define "fans" though? What stops some rich guy planting his people as "fans" to take advantage?
I only can imagine kind of similar model to Barcelona, Real and Germans club's membership where they can get say on matters. We have like 150K+ membership, 53K out of 150K+ are season tickets.
 

ExecutionerWasp001

Full Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2019
Messages
439
Its a myth that even the Saudis could suddenly put in billions in the club. Owners contributions are limited to 30m a year according to FFP. That gets you Pogbas left leg or something.
Owners are allowed to top up sponsorship deals with their own money as long as they are market value. If the Saudi's take us over we would just do what City have done. We'd have lots of (small) sponsorship deals from Saudi Arabian companies. Our owners would then top these up to make them much bigger. As we are a marketers dream we could take the piss with this. There are no limits in infrastructure too. We could have a new state of the art stadium up in no time.

As it is i don't think they'll buy us & they shouldn't be allowed to anyway. Sports washing should never have been allowed in the first place. We should be finding ways to get these owners out rather than inviting them in.
 

Class of 63

Sourness
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
9,028
Location
Going through the Desert on a Horse with no Name
What's michael knighton up to these days?
He was supposed to be releasing a book last month - Visionary: Manchester United and Michael Knighton, detailing the truth about his failed takeover of United, i'm sure what he's been getting up to will be in there.

Be definitely worth a read once it's in the £1 or nearest offer basket.
 

momo83

Massive Snowflake
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
1,463
Jamie and Cersie should have never gone up North together
 

hp88

Full Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
17,379
Location
W3103
You can be a sheikh from Saudi or some guy called John from London but if you have got a billion to spunk on United you have probably done something shady in the past.

As long as they don't use as a cash cow I am good with them.