Escobar
Shameless Musketeer
They need to invest in a new medical team
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()); } });
Ah yes. Malcolm Glazer's offspring are business geniuses and are playing 4d chess to ultimatley sell thier shares to some phantom state bidder down the line. Whereas the ruthless, self-made billionaire cnut that is worth more than all of them combined is a moron and thrown a billion or two down the drain as part of the Glazers siblings masterplan to get [fill in blank] to buy them out.The club that was in a mess, yes. A smart buyer would wait for a sucker like Ratcliffe to clean up the mess, and then buy out a well oiled machine winning trophies.
I am only guessing, but I presume the terms of the contract he has with the Glazers (there's something about a potential buy out in 18 months, isn't there?) has an agreed share price if he buys.I don't get it, so Sir Jim invests all this money into the club, and then the club value increases, so doesn't this mean he will have to pay more to buy the rest of the club off the Glazer's? Some one help me out with this.
It’s not 4d chess, it’s literally built into the docs, they’re available publicly to read. The Glazers are being advised by some of the best investment banks in the business, they don’t need to be geniuses.Ah yes. Malcolm Glazer's offspring are business geniuses and are playing 4d chess to ultimatley sell thier shares to some phantom state bidder down the line. Whereas the ruthless, self-made billionaire cnut that is worth more than all of them combined is a moron and thrown a billion or two down the drain as part of the Glazers siblings masterplan to get [fill in blank] to buy them out.
He'll likely provide the funding for more shares. So he'll increase his equity that way rather than just giving the club money. It's already the case with the 300M he's investing this year that it raises his share percentage towards 29.9% I believe.I don't get it, so Sir Jim invests all this money into the club, and then the club value increases, so doesn't this mean he will have to pay more to buy the rest of the club off the Glazer's? Some one help me out with this.
What's built into the documents that supports your theory? Radclife also has access to the same investment banks/advisers the Glazers have. Better quality ones most likely considering his wealth and connections.It’s not 4d chess, it’s literally built into the docs, they’re available publicly to read. The Glazers are being advised by some of the best investment banks in the business, they don’t need to be geniuses.
There is zero reference to a limit on shares the club can generate in lieu of investment. The deal clearly states that the club will generate class A and B shares at $33 in the event of such investment.No, it won’t work like that. The Glazers and their lawyers aren’t stupid enough to allow someone to effectively take over the club through dilution. Ratcliffes maximum stake is something like 30% based on the docs, he can’t force further issue of shares to himself without the majority shareholder (Glazers) approving it. He’s free to put money into the club but it’ll effectively be a loan and won’t dilute the Glazers.
redNATION said:Fully support the Qatar takeover, we need 3-4 world class players and ain’t getting them with glazers staying or poor ass Jim. Today’s display shows just how lacking we are.
redNATION said:Those who were dead set against Qatar will see just how bad it can get, they’ll be begging for Qatar this time next year. I actually think Ratcliffe will be worse than the Glazers, at least the latter clowns generally stayed out of club interference albeit appointed incompetent people to run it. Ratcliffe looks like someone like Ted Boehly at Chelsea, thinks he can just come and be a big swinging dick and screw things up even more. Sad times.
redNATION said:I just want us to be the dominant force in a way Real are, with 10 European cups at least, only Qatar can make it happen
redNATION said:It’s actually gas me up, as Qatar is gas rich not oil rich, but anyway
redNATION said:Here we go, Qatar flags at the ready boys Too much smoke now for it to be lies.
redNATION said:Can I finally hang my Qatar flags in the garden and on my windows? I’d be furious if they went to waste
redNATION said:Is it too soon to buy my split Utd /Qatar top?
redNATION said:When can I unfurl my Qatar flag in my front garden? I’ve been waiting months for this moment
redNATION said:Especially for those of us that stocked up on Qatar flags
redNATION said:How much are second hand/ after market Qatar flags going for
redNATION said:If Qatar buy us, I expected Mbappe to join us, no brainer to bring your prized player to your new crown jewel asset club. He’s not happy at PSG.
redNATION said:He's Qatars crown jewel, a bit like Haaland for Abu Dhabi but better, they’ll make sure he moves to a club they control, and it’d basically be a free transfer for them.
They couldn't get anyone to buy them out for 5 billion. They're not going to get someone coming in with 7 or 8 or 9.It’s not 4d chess, it’s literally built into the docs, they’re available publicly to read. The Glazers are being advised by some of the best investment banks in the business, they don’t need to be geniuses.
Plus even if they got someone to come in with a £100bn offer guess who is getting the biggest cut!They couldn't get anyone to buy them out for 5 billion. They're not going to get someone coming in with 7 or 8 or 9.
None of us know for sure but I think Ratcliffe is not taking a solely hard-nosed business approach to this as say he would buying a company to fit in with INEOSWhat's built into the documents that supports your theory? Radclife also has access to the same investment banks/advisers the Glazers have. Better quality ones most likely considering his wealth and connections.
What’s this?Anyone been keeping eye on the South East Diamond Castles , I asked you all to keep a close eye on it. Those who are watching will understand soon.
I agree, which is why it seems even less likely that he's being used as a patsy to instigate a takeover from a middle east sovereign wealth fund as @redNATION seems to think is going to happen.None of us know for sure but I think Ratcliffe is not taking a solely hard-nosed business approach to this as say he would buying a company to fit in with INEOS
He's not buying in to United with the aim of making tons of money, he seems to want a legacy of some sort, I suspect there's an element of truth in the giving the fans some stake in the club, probably in the form of a trust set up in such a way that fans have some say in the future when he dies
More than likely Dougie Freedman from Palace.What’s this?
Roy Hodgson will be our new managerMore than likely Dougie Freedman from Palace.
South East Diamon Castles = Crystal Palace
Ahhh I see. Which role is he getting?More than likely Dougie Freedman from Palace.
South East Diamon Castles = Crystal Palace
Is that what they were called on pro Evo?More than likely Dougie Freedman from Palace.
South East Diamon Castles = Crystal Palace
I'm not sure, @TrebleChamp99 might be able to shed some light.Ahhh I see. Which role is he getting?
I'm not sure, I can just remember someone from Palace heading over.Is that what they were called on pro Evo?
I assumed he meant Duncan Castles, the SE diamond that he is!More than likely Dougie Freedman from Palace.
South East Diamon Castles = Crystal Palace
Damn you did him dirtyGuys, I'm sure @redNATION is being objective here...
Guys, I'm sure @redNATION is being objective here...
There’s an 18 month lock in following which Glazers can sell to anyone and drag Ratcliffe along, for a limited time that sale must happen at $33 per share that Ratcliffe paid but after that it’s a clear market for Glazers. I don’t know any reason why the Glazers would negotiate such a provision if they weren’t interested in selling to a third party who still retains an interest, and it’s not unreasonable to conclude it’s a sovereign as no one else was willing to meet their price.What's built into the documents that supports your theory? Radclife also has access to the same investment banks/advisers the Glazers have. Better quality ones most likely considering his wealth and connections.
To issue shares a company normally needs at least an ordinary resolution of the shareholders. It would be highly unusual for a minority shareholder to be able to dilute a majority shareholder.There is zero reference to a limit on shares the club can generate in lieu of investment. The deal clearly states that the club will generate class A and B shares at $33 in the event of such investment.
Surprised no one has responded to this
Because it might be good news? hahahahaha
Wait what is this “good news” stuff?
He has cherry picked those numbers because in 2019 our revenue was £627 million...Not really, the increase is revenue not profit and the profit will probably be needed to service the debt which will likely have gone up with higer interest rates
Along with my other point re: there being no 30% limit and the deal stating the club will generate shares as per investment at $33 a share you aren't really looking at it from a logical perspective.No, it won’t work like that. The Glazers and their lawyers aren’t stupid enough to allow someone to effectively take over the club through dilution. Ratcliffes maximum stake is something like 30% based on the docs, he can’t force further issue of shares to himself without the majority shareholder (Glazers) approving it. He’s free to put money into the club but it’ll effectively be a loan and won’t dilute the Glazers.
Radciffe also gets first refusal to purchase any shares they are selling after that period, if he hasn't already bought them by that point. Assuming the Glazers act as a collective and only are willing to sell thier stake as a single unit, a potential bidder has to offer more than Radcliffe would to get their stake and control of the club. I doubt they'll act as a collective though and Jim will siphon off shares from the siblings that have no interest in football and make him majority shareholder.There’s an 18 month lock in following which Glazers can sell to anyone and drag Ratcliffe along, for a limited time that sale must happen at $33 per share that Ratcliffe paid but after that it’s a clear market for Glazers. I don’t know any reason why the Glazers would negotiate such a provision if they weren’t interested in selling to a third party who still retains an interest, and it’s not unreasonable to conclude it’s a sovereign as no one else was willing to meet their price.
"Too much smoke for this to be lies"Guys, I'm sure @redNATION is being objective here...
As has already been pointed out, in such a situation, there’s a clause whereby Ratcliffe can say “you’ve accepted $xx per share offer? Fine, I’ll match it” and he gets first refusal.There’s an 18 month lock in following which Glazers can sell to anyone and drag Ratcliffe along, for a limited time that sale must happen at $33 per share that Ratcliffe paid but after that it’s a clear market for Glazers. I don’t know any reason why the Glazers would negotiate such a provision if they weren’t interested in selling to a third party who still retains an interest, and it’s not unreasonable to conclude it’s a sovereign as no one else was willing to meet their price.
It is a possibility that somebody else (probably a state) will come in and buy us outright later on. But it's more likely that Ratcliffe will be the one doing it. It'll cost him less than it would any state. He'll already have at least 29% of the club, and chances are it'll be higher than that as the Glazers will likely issue further shares to him for further investment. They won't allow him majority control by doing that, but it's likely they'll happily let him increase it a fair bit more yet (bearing in mind that if his investments increase the value of the club, it'll be increasing the value of their shares).Never going to happen, we’ll be under state ownership before Ratcliffe can buy the rest out. The Glazers put a drag right in the agreement with Ineos for this reason, they’re hoping Ineos can sort the mess they’ve made over the last 10 years and an EPL or Champions League trophy makes the Glazers desired price more achievable.
I'm pretty sure that redNation is actually right on this, and only the original 300m investment is guaranteed for that. It's then left open that future investment might be treated the same, but it would have to be agreed on by the Glazers in a separate discussion (and I presume it wouldn't necessarily be for $33 a share). What I'm not sure about is whether all the Glazers would have to agree, whether a majority of the Glazers would have to agree, or whether a majority of the owners (so Ratcliffe and two of the Glazers) would have to agree. I think it's either the first or second options, but not sure which.There is zero reference to a limit on shares the club can generate in lieu of investment. The deal clearly states that the club will generate class A and B shares at $33 in the event of such investment.
What's insane about wanting Erik sacked and Rashford fecked off to the french money grabbersBetter to stay in this thread. Only sane thread on the Caf at the moment.
That’s only short term. Everything good will be long term. So I can’t see the point in going mad at this match or even this season.What's insane about wanting Erik sacked and Rashford fecked off to the french money grabbers