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()); } });

Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
25,725
Location
Sydney
Who cares if Glazers dont have anything to say or any real power in the daily runnings of the club

Get in Jim
my worry is if they are getting in bed together maybe Sir Jim will have to give up some allowances (eg promise of dividends)
 

sglowrider

Thinks the caf is 'wokeish'.
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
25,242
Location
Hell on Earth
As a condition of the takeover agreement, it is understood that the pair would be granted options to sell their shares – at a premium to the current bid price – after year one and year two of Ineos' stewardship; or to retain their minority ownership indefinitely.

feck off with that
The Glazers are like feckin' herpes then.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,614
Location
Cooper Station
Wouldn't Sheikh Jassim be buying 69% of the club too? His promise of buying every single share and presumable take United private is something that would take years and might not even be achievable...so in reality, right now it's Ratcliffe offering more per share for 50.1% or more, than Qatar are offering for 69% of the shares.
Not sure why you're asking me. I obviously don't know do I?

No, Qatar offer is for 100%
 

Rojofiam

Full Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
3,610
He didn’t outbid them, he offered less but for 51%, SJ could have offered 5bn for 51% but he want 100%.
In reality that's 69% the Sheikh is going for. Buying up the remaining 31% is just a promise for the future, might take years and might not even be possible.
 

Bubz27

No I won’t change your tag line
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
21,612
Full sale only has been what they've said since before the Qatari's were even a bidder though? And at the start, Ratcliffe was after a full sale too?
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,614
Location
Cooper Station
Isnt that just Crafton’s interpretation though? The first march for selling the club hada big banner with Sir Jim’s face on it, so im not sure the 1958 is taking any sides really
Yeah, I was mainly quoting it for the interview the 1958 gave in the second tweet.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,614
Location
Cooper Station
In reality that's 69% the Sheikh is going for. Buying up the remaining 31% is just a promise for the future, might take years and might not even be possible.
That's not the way it works though. They both submitted offers for their valuation of the whole thing which gets ratioed. I don't think there will be a great deal in it (probably like £200-400 million in overall valuation). Ratcliffe will be proposing a little more and the incentive for J&A to stay in some capacity as a compromise to try and weasel his way in.
 

Rojofiam

Full Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
3,610
... By giving the Glazers more money for less shares.
So that the 2 brothers that are reluctant to leave can stick around and sell their shares in the future, as they predict it'll be worth significantly more in a few years.

They would however, lose control over the club.
 

redNATION

Full Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
1,397
Location
Near the Tannhäuser Gate
In reality that's 69% the Sheikh is going for. Buying up the remaining 31% is just a promise for the future, might take years and might not even be possible.
Cayman companies law has squeeze out provisions like the UK, meaning once an offeror holds enough shares it can buy out the minority on the same terms. Getting to 100% wouldn’t be difficult once you own 69% as the other shares are held by hundreds of people rather than one.
 

Rojofiam

Full Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
3,610
Cayman companies law has squeeze out provisions like the UK, meaning once an offeror holds enough shares it can buy out the minority on the same terms. Getting to 100% wouldn’t be difficult once you own 69% as the other shares are held by hundreds of people rather than one.
Thanks for the info. What if a lot of minority shareholders weren't interested in selling, though?
 

Kinsella

Copy & Paste Merchant
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
2,776
They have been clear from minute one that they want 100%
And that means nothing if the Glazer’s demands aren’t met.
That's not the way it works though. They both submitted offers for their valuation of the whole thing which gets ratioed. I don't think there will be a great deal in it (probably like £200-400 million in overall valuation). Ratcliffe will be proposing a little more and the incentive for J&A to stay in some capacity as a compromise to try and weasel his way in.
You’ve got in the wrong way around. The 50+1 offer contained within the bid just reflects the long rumoured reality that 2 of the siblings don’t want to sell or at least are very reluctant to. It’s not some trick Ratcliffe has pulled out of a hat.
 

Dve

Full Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2019
Messages
2,950
Hahahaha!!! Where does Russia figure into this? For someone who critiques other people’s quality of posts you yourself post some absolute bollocks.
Pardon me. Putin is white, I forgot. So difficult to raise the racism card then. Sort of.

You are in all seriousness equaling Ratcliffe to Al Thani, both being "business men", while you build your argument on some rubbish about racism and being anti Middel East - totally ignoring the fact that the Al Thani family have ruled Qatar since the late 19th century and been treating their countries resources as their own private property (yes, I know they were also a British protectorate for a long period). But for you he is just another business man?

And countries in the Middle East most be pretty anti Middle East themselves, btw, as Qatar in 2017 were blocked by Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Egypt, UAE and afterwards also Jordan + other countries such as Maldives, Mauritania, Djibouti, Senegal and Comoros. Why? Because of Qatar's close ties to Iran and their support of radical Islamist groups.

But hey, their are going to build us a new stadium.
 
Last edited:

croadyman

Full Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2018
Messages
35,140
Why do people keep saying this? Nobody knows his plan. The details haven't been released.

He's not likely to want to see his huge investment fail is he? He's a Utd fan firstly and also he's the richest British person on the planet secondly.

The debt could well be being cleared for all we know. He hasn't said anything.
Yeah his constant bloody silence is the problem,he should have said there were plans to clear the debt and not keep those leeches either but nope he said nothing
 

ROFLUTION

Full Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
7,693
Location
Denmark
Well he can soon change that by flat out denying any desire to keep those leeches at club
who cares, if they have nothing to say and Jim/Ineos have the majority. They’ll have nothing to say in the daily runnings and Sir Jim can just say no to dividents. In the end they’ll do no harm that way.

its basically just a stake they own then, which they can cash more in on later if they can find a buyer. No one seems to be harmed.

we basically dont know many details, so 1958 being against Jim seems strange to me. Im not sure they are neither - they started out by having a big banner of him in the protests first time around.

Logically I cant fathom the 1958 wanting a hollow sheik club neither. Most are probably die hard fans, so an even more hollow move than the Glazers doesnt seem logical to me.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,614
Location
Cooper Station
And that means nothing if the Glazer’s demands aren’t met.

You’ve got in the wrong way around. The 50+1 offer contained within the bid just reflects the long rumoured reality that 2 of the siblings don’t want to sell or at least are very reluctant to. It’s not some trick Ratcliffe has pulled out of a hat.
Yes it is. It's him compromising to attempt to gain control. It's his only chance.
 

Giggsyking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
8,623
Digging a bigger hole. I guarantee you United fans would willingly choose to take ole back if it meant the glazers are out for good. You are completely misreading how much the glazers are hated. Every time something doesn’t go right for SJR the assumption will be that it’s because the glazers are still there. United need them gone so that we can move on. Not keeping leeches that have no interest other than how much they can make out of the club

frankly it’s disgusting that you’d position yourself as a glazer stooge
He is Avram or Joel undercover in the caf.
 

redNATION

Full Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2015
Messages
1,397
Location
Near the Tannhäuser Gate
Thanks for the info. What if a lot of minority shareholders weren't interested in selling, though?
It’s publicly traded, you and I can go buy shares today, likewise a bidder can build up an interest by hoovering up shares that are being sold everyday, I don’t know how the deal is structured on SJs side but it could be an offer to all shareholders, private and public, to make us if the squeeze out.
 

Giggsyking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2013
Messages
8,623
I love definitive stuff like this. What if he’s been told Avram and Joel won’t sell and keeping them on is the only way to get a controlling stake?
Then I would not put my hands in the hands of the most hated football club owners in the world.
 

James35

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 3, 2021
Messages
3,983
Location
Cardiff
If Glazers stay in any capacity I don’t want Sir Jim at all. I don’t really want him anyway as he doesn’t have the wealth needed to get us back to the top.

Unless we are going to be completely debt free we’ll never get back to the top when money has never been more powerful in football, morals left a long time ago.
 

Rojofiam

Full Member
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
3,610
Did you try ti buy crystal palace?
I love United, but football isn't life or death for me anymore like it used to be and I'm only in my 20s. Ratcliffe is 70 years old.

If I had unlimited money, but the club I support wasn't on the market (and 1 year ago it seemed like it would be years, if not decades before United was going to be sold), then yeah, I probably would've showed interest in buying Chelsea, maybe I would've even made a bid.

Does that make me a fake fan in your eyes? If he wanted to buy Liverpool or City, it would be different, though, I agree.
 

Kinsella

Copy & Paste Merchant
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
2,776
Yes it is. It's him compromising to attempt to gain control. It's his only chance.
Yeah…and?

The unfortunate reality is that it’s the Glazer’s club to sell, not someone else’s to buy. You also seem to continually gloss over the recently reported fact (assuming it’s accurate) that the Qatari bid falls short of both the Glazer’s demands and the INEOS bid.
 

Brophs

The One and Only
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
50,549
This always makes me chuckle. He's not a United fan because he had a Chelsea season ticket when living in London? Has it not occurred to anyone that his schedule and location makes it hard to be a season ticket holder at United?

I used to pool in with my mates and get a Palace season ticket just to watch some PL Football on ocasssion. We're all big Manchester United fans, what does that make us?
I’ve no dog in this fight and don’t think it matters whether the new owner is a United fan or not, but since JR has put it in issue, do we know roughly how often he has attended United games in that time? I had a quick search and couldn’t find any mention. The helicopter flight from London to Manchester is around an hour, from my vague memory of the reports around the time Mata choppered into the training ground. It’s not like it’d make a dent in his bank balance. Does he attend United away games in London? What about if they’re playing, say, Spurs on the same night as Chelsea are at home? Plenty of opportunities for a corporate, if that was his thing.

I presume he has been attended United games in that time, even if sporadically, but if not, it’s fair enough for people to at least ask the question. After all, he’s making a virtue of his support. Otherwise, it’s a very thin line to skirt to suggest that he’s too busy to attend United games because billionaire.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.