His fellow countryman Pony Ma ain't too shabby either.Jack Ma.
He will make our club a capitalist machine!
I read that they have enough cash to buy disney so thats probably at least roughly accurate.Not sure how true this is btw.
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.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.
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.
Bingo, this is what I was talking about in my previous posts.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.
I think we're doing a little too much dying and not enough killing for the shirt.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.
Heaven forbid.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.
Don’t get me wrong it’s a disgrace what goes on over there.Heaven forbid.
What's right with having Saudi owners?What's wrong with having Saudi owners?
Jeez..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.
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?What's right with having Saudi owners?
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 competentTesla.
We badly need a self-driving, anti-stupid car to drive Ed Woodward away while We appoint Van Der Sar as the new CEO.
Immediate execution.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.
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.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
This is such a dramatic stance. ‘Propaganda’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.
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.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.
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.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.
Super rich so we'd throw money at it like we belittled City for doing and effectively buying history?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?
How do you define "fans" though? What stops some rich guy planting his people as "fans" to take advantage?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.
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.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?
Did not know that. Thanks.It does live NFL games on Thursday nights.
So who is that unicorn?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.
You forgot about the cocaine.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.
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.How do you define "fans" though? What stops some rich guy planting his people as "fans" to take advantage?
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.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.
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.What's michael knighton up to these days?
I laughed out loud.
What's up with Jim? It'd be a breath of fresh air, he's a United fan, savvy economically and wouldn't need to use United for financial gain.Any of them come, I'd fecking support something else.