This is where Utd hold the upper hand, our revenue an turnover is really high (consistently so) the only thing holding the club back is the debt and up until INEOS very poor senior management, INEOS are trying to make the whole club efficient, without bucket loads of cash being thrown into the team Utd can pretty much outspend any other club if we an just jettison the debt, add in the revenue from the new development and not only the investors but also the club will be streets ahead financially, just got to get through to that part and those are the hard yards
Club ownership | Senior management team talk
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
-
In the latest edition of the United Hour Podcast, Imran (@Annihilate Now!) & Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to discuss disappointed FA Cup exit at the hands of Brighton - confirming our shortest season in over 100 years. They also discuss the news that Michael Carrick is set to be United's manager until the end of the season.
"Making extranous staff redundant"
I mustve missed that. Genuine question when did it happen?
Ooh It seems the only one who overlooked crimes here is you. Saying the US is more preferable as long as Trump isnt there like saying Taco was the reason the US committing crimes worldwide.
Seriously are we going into this route again?
All i want is the owner who wipe the debt off, treat employee and supporters with respect. Lets stick with football talks else we are having endless nuclear debate here.
I was under the impression that the cap was related to the earnings of the lowest team in the league, or something to that effect?
Personally I want these sports washing nations nowhere near United. They’re trying to buy culture and heritage but United should have nothing to do with them. We’ve built ourselves to where we are in the right way, it would tarnish everything going forward if we are cooking the books and being propped up by some nation a million miles away.
yeah it is based on 5x the lowest club earnings from broadcast revenue.... but that will probably not actually make that big of an impact, think Southampton this year was £109.2m so still talking £550m, but lets be clear this has to be voted on by the clubs to be accepted at least 14 clubs must vote in favour for it to pass, fair to assume that if it is going to make it harder for the big teams to spend Utd, City, Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal will vote against it, I doubt Newcastle or Spurs will vote for it so chances are it will not pass if it is not going to be advantageous over the current scheme
What you really have argued here is if Trump bought United, wiped out all the debt and made United great again, that'll help you overlook his 'worldwide crimes'.
I'm up for honest debate, not whataboutery or its associated ignorance (false equivalences etc.)
If you don't want the football turning political, maybe start by not promoting sportswashing and pretending it isn't political.
It's part of the grift.
Last edited:
Off the pitch, the staff turnover at city was ridiculous for a few years with loads of staff routinely being binned. Billionaires gonna be Billionaires I guess.
And I obviously agree with you. I just don't agree with fans twerking for some state backed bllionaires. Both are equally shite.
I’m with you. I pretty much despise everything we’ve become. Shallow, gauche, tacky and run down. But state ownership is a red line, and I’m sure for many others.
I love United, they will always be my first true love, but I pretty much hate her without state ownership, so I’d definitely file for divorce.
I’m sure you’re aware of what the US was involved in, right before Trump got elected, so why would you prefer them hosting it?
Without doubt. Not sure it's even debatable.
Fair enough. From what I read the other day it was looking like a majority in favour, including some of the big clubs like Liverpool, Arsenal etc.
Not really sure why it's 'beyond doubt'.
Both are controversial choices.
The states would nick it for me due to stadia not needing to be built so controversially, the tournament being in summer and the possibility of regime change in governance.
See the 'No Kings' protests yesterday.
That would be illegal and severely punishable in Qatar.
Jamie Jackson and his hawaiian shirt now reporting the Cantona/Beckham stuff. Quotes from the Guardian.
Interesting, he is mates with Cantona, and was the one Cantona got to cover the FC United "ownership"/publicity stunt Cantona did in protest of the Ratcliffe ownership and his treatment of staff.
Interesting, he is mates with Cantona, and was the one Cantona got to cover the FC United "ownership"/publicity stunt Cantona did in protest of the Ratcliffe ownership and his treatment of staff.
Can someone explain in simple terms what on earth is happening - or allegedly happening.
Obviously a lot of this could be clickbait because yah why not. Ultimately is this supposed to be a full buy-out or is this meant to replace glazers and thus retaining ineos as minority shareholders.
In the later scenario, the Glazers have done amazing to screw over Ineos no ?
Obviously a lot of this could be clickbait because yah why not. Ultimately is this supposed to be a full buy-out or is this meant to replace glazers and thus retaining ineos as minority shareholders.
In the later scenario, the Glazers have done amazing to screw over Ineos no ?
Go on, what have you conveniently decided to leave out of your analysis?
I think there is something in this. A large chunk of the debt matures in 2027, then another chunk in 2029. Refinancing that will be very difficult given current interest rates. It makes sense to sell now and let the new owner deal with the debt. Few have the money to both buy the equity and repay the debt, really only the ME investors do.
Surely ineos have an ace up their sleeve. They are hardly just going to let someone new buy out the glazers.
There’s no screwing over, the contract allows Glazers to sell the entire club, including “forcing” Ineos (through a contractual drag right), to a third party buyer. This right kicked in from August 2025, but the caveat is that the sale has to be at least the same valuation as Ineos paid (so Inoes don’t lose any money).
So the consortium hasn't even got the funds together to make a bid? I'm sure we've heard about these sort of takeovers before and they never seem to go anywhere.
Wouldn't be a surprise if this is just the Glazers trying to pressure Ratcliffe to stump up the cash for the full takeover, as I don't doubt for one second that they want out at the right price.
Wouldn't be a surprise if this is just the Glazers trying to pressure Ratcliffe to stump up the cash for the full takeover, as I don't doubt for one second that they want out at the right price.
I think INEOS have the option to match any bid, so maybe that is their strategy.
My guess is Jim will complete a majority take over once that drag along rights thing expires. My guess is the club will be too expensive before that so no other buyer will materialize. Jim hardly invested so much money and time, just to be an idiot minority owner for what, two years at this stage.
Can i ask, a majority take over, does that mean 51% of the club or something higher? If its the former all he needs is another 22%.
Am i onto something or just talking dog shit? I dont have a clue how these things work.
Can i ask, a majority take over, does that mean 51% of the club or something higher? If its the former all he needs is another 22%.
Am i onto something or just talking dog shit? I dont have a clue how these things work.
Nobody has funds initially when it comes to something as big as this, if this is a supposed State bid. You'd have to go with a proposal so they will free up the billions that will buy us. There has to be some guarantee you wont go in and embarrass yourself like that Sheikh Jasmin bloke did (if he existed.) Hence why these types of things always try and get the press and the ex-players onside first. If someone from the UAE is actually trying to buy Man United, funds will be no problem. That's IF they are, and this isnt some bullshit.
Maybe that's exactly what they want. Think about it. Currently INEOS are minority shareholders of a club that needs heavy investment, is still making losses and has a limit on how much money it can loan for a new stadium. The trouble is that our major shareholder is reluctant to put their hands into their pockets themselves which means that INEOS has the choice of either not investing at all or else they will be propping someone else's shares. If the Glazers are out of the equation then
- Scenario A - The Glazers sell at 33 dollars a share. The new owners do not want any partnership with INEOS thus INEOS get their money back and 2 years advertisement of being associated with Manchester United
- Scenario B - New owners come in and they keep INEOS as minority shareholders. Money start pouring into the club, the brand name and the share price soars and everyone benefits
- Scenario C - New owners buy all the club for more then 33 dollars a share. INEOS leave with a neat profit and 2 years of advertisement of being associated with Manchester United.
Valuations have been divorced from profit in this economy for many assets since the mid 2000's.
What is the profit in owning a rare Ferrari ?
Try finding another Manchester United if you miss out on the real one. The biggest global fanbase in the world. See how it works out for you.
Why don't you just state what you think this is?
Respectfully i cannot see why Jim would go to all this trouble, firing people and hiring different ones an getting the accounts in order, just to make a quick buck. I think he wants majority ownership or full ownership.
If i was omar berarda, the first question i would have had for INEOS when they reached out while he was still at City was, what is going to happen to the club? Are you in it for the long run or just two/three years. I doubt berarda and Wilcox would have joined knowing that there was going to be different people in charge in two or three years.
Just my opinion, i could wrong.
I might be stretching but considering there have been news reports on the UAE consortium wanting Rooney (among others) as ambassadors for their bid, seeing the latest ‘ The Wayne Rooney show’ on YouTube is intriguing. He seems to be in a room within the Jumeirah hotel in the UAE based in the TV in the background. It’s probably one of the most expensive hotels in the world.
Something is up.
Something is up.
Yeah I think he wants the club and his deal is coming in and turning the club around. Everyone from the outside including Jim have been very critical of how we were run and confident it just needed competent people to turn us around. Ineos would've been surprised just how much we've tanked since they took over and time is running out for the Glazers so Ineos will be in a battle as another group tries to buy the club.
The rumours of gathering legends on board, what for? Are they putting money in or just beng cheerleaders?
Probably to get the fans on-board with the project
It's owned by the Al Maktoum's, Dubai's royal family. There are loads of reasons why Rooney might be invited over on a jolly though.
I'd be shocked if Cantona got involved with this one given his political outlook
In a previous post I made all sort of scenarios were the UAE comes in and they would prove beneficial for SJR. The worst case scenario of it was that he'll get his money back. In reality even this 'worst scenario' have benefits that many seem to underestimate which I will go in detail in later on. The best case scenario on the other hand was that he remains at the club as a minority shareholder and together with IHC they'll pump enough money into the club for it to reach its full potential. At that point the share price would skyrocket, United's brand name would become the biggest in sports and it would drag both owners (INEOS and IHC) with it.
During the Jassim vs INEOS take over I made quite an extensive research about SJR and INEOS. I would go on absorbing every piece of information about him, watch every interview of his and read every article. Long story short SJR had made his money by buying struggling companies and then things around. He literally played an all in on his first business which he co-founded in 1992 to buy British Petroleum's (BP) chemicals division, mortgaging everything he had to do so. Back then I went through a rather long and boring interview of his and I assure you he's truly passionate in buying struggling companies and then turn them around. So who knows, maybe his aim at United is to take this sleeping giant whose losing money and turn it into another SJR project (ie a lean and profitable one). The difference here is that unlike th petro-chemical industry which is profitable and dull, United is one of the most followed companies in sports. It forces hundreds of thousands of people including myself to research INEOS and SJR, something none of us would have done if it wasn't for his involvement into Manchester United.
So let's return to the worst case scenario again. SJR would get his money back, he would be known as the man who saved United when they were at the brink and he turned it back into a club that could attract some serious investors and on top of that he had gotten free global advertisement for INEOS and himself. Snapdragon pays £60 million a year to have its name on our shirt and a couple of adverts on MUTV. I assure you the football world speaks far more about SJR and INEOS then they'll ever speak of any of our sponsors. Every news paper, sports talk show and United youtube channel speaks about INEOS and SJR. Its common to call United's ownership INEOS and its been imprinted on us that SJR is running the show even though its not case. I dare to say that Manchester United made SJR a celebrity and INEOS a popular business with the masses. How much is that free advertisement worth?
Regarding employees, unfortunately they are pawns in a game. I remember RVP complaining about SAF first luring him from Arsenal with promises of stability and great success only for him to retire after few months. I am sure that both Wilcox and Berrada had protected themselves with long term contracts on a good salary. If they are sacked then they''ll get severance pay and that they'll find good jobs elsewhere. I mean even Murtough fount a job in football which speaks volumes about how easy that is once you've been associated with this club
All very quiet here. So, can we just assume it was a fabrication as a lot of members suggested?
Yeah a possible sale in 2027 was most concrete
Wazza in the UAE this weekend. Him and Rio are always there at the minute.
Wazza in the UAE this weekend. Him and Rio are always there at the minute.
Rio moved there, didn't he?
Hardly related to our ownership...
Looks like Rooney lost weight.Wazza in the UAE this weekend. Him and Rio are always there at the minute.
Yep, best he's looked since he was about 28.
How much credit does Sir Jim deserve for stepping forward, publicly backing the manager, and pouring cold water on all the sack noise that was building?
It does feel like it was a clear message to the players and staff to say "we're not sacking this fella so you'd better suck it up and get in line", and it feels like there has been a response.
It does feel like it was a clear message to the players and staff to say "we're not sacking this fella so you'd better suck it up and get in line", and it feels like there has been a response.
Last edited:
Sane post