Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chesterlestreet

Man of the crowd
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
19,635
In respects of the 2 clubs, Red Bull own two clubs that play in the CL.
Yes, true.

It's fishy as feck, of course, but in the case of those two clubs, UEFA ruled that one and the same "entity" didn't have "decisive influence" over both clubs. They (both clubs) made numerous changes to their structure (getting rid of executives that were on the books for both clubs and so forth). I imagine that Qatar could do something similar with United/PSG - but then again the basic idea that they just don't want that kind of attention (we're talking about a completely different level here in terms of media attention) is hardly outlandish.

ETA To be clear, it's easier/more convenient for Qatar to present the United bid as coming from an "entity " that is seemingly independent of the the QIA.
 

Quagmire Maguire

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 5, 2022
Messages
312
Location
Old Trafford
Its quite funny to see the Anti Qatar bid in full force.

As a United fan, what were the priorities ?

Glazers out, Clear the debt, stadium improvements?

Jassim, is doing all 3 and SJR is doing none of those 3.
Exactly this mate.

Brexit Jim is just another Glazer in my opinion. Very little.. if anything, would change under him. I don't particularly want state ownership/oil money BUT out of the 3 choices we currently have, Glazers staying, Brexit Jim with the glazers or SJ, then SJ is by FAR the most exciting option as a fan.
 

pocco

loco
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
22,935
Location
Keep a clean shit tomorrow, United is my final bus
So you have no idea about the SJR bid?

What bid do you favour?
I do, but from what I've seen he's only keeping the Glazers round because he thinks that's what it will take to buy the club and become the majority owner. With a view to buying them out fully further down the line when they are ready. Is that correct?

I've also seen nothing from SJR saying he won't be investing in the infastructure. But, in my opinion, it would be madness not to when you've invested so much in the club.

I also don't know what his intentions are regarding the debt. I know his company could pay it off with about one month's worth of their turnover.

But I haven't seen anything saying he'll not do any of that. Hence asking for your source.
 

BarstoolProphet

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
6,682
I'm not sure I am, I understand what you're are saying but the point is flawed in any context.

Sorry mate I don't mean to sound like a dick, but I just hate that argument.
Why is it flawed, though?

And I can understand why you hate that argument - it's provocative and divisive, not exactly healthy ingredients to keep a nice message board climate. But the exact same thing can be said for those that dictate what people should feel by acting patronising to devaluate their opinions. And that goes for both sides of the spectre.

As an example - I enjoy reading the opinions of posters such as Wibble, who is an staunch anti-Qatar poster by the looks of it, but at the same time is trying to educate others on why he holds that opinion. He also has knowledge of the life in the region based on him (like me) having ties there through work and despite us holding a different view of the situation.
 

NotThatSoph

lemons are annoying
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
3,846
I dont get the relevance of a house? I didnt know that USA has a royal family... wow, I need to type what you typed in google for that.

Can you let me know what I need to type in google to find out the USA royal family ?
Why would that be relevant? Royals can have private possessions. Here's Anmer Hall, privately owned by Prince William:

 

GreatDane

Full Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
1,670
Pep had £500m in his first two years. ETH had over £200 in his first year. So they might not end up too fast apart in terms of backing, and that's with the Glazers.
Tbf £500m went further when Pep took over than it does now.
 

TheNewEra

Knows Kroos' mentality
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
8,328
Why would that be relevant? Royals can have private possessions. Here's Anmer Hall, privately owned by Prince William:

The thing is though, the money doesn't come from them washing dishes in a soup kitchen, it comes from sponsorships or commercial ventures because of their position in society.

Same with Meghan and Harry now "we want nothing to do with the royal family, but we will sign a deal with netflix for $50m+ on "our story", leveraging our position as "not-royals"".
 

putzmcgee123

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 30, 2023
Messages
475
Its quite funny to see the Anti Qatar bid in full force.

As a United fan, what were the priorities ?

Glazers out, Clear the debt, stadium improvements?

Jassim, is doing all 3 and SJR is doing none of those 3.
What I find rather irritating about that lot is the constant antagonism and condescension towards other fans who disagree. It's one thing if you want to attack the Qataris, but we all support the same club. I find the proponents of the Qatari bid will throw in their jabs at ol' Jimmy Rat, but the focus is on him and which bid we feel is better for the club. It's not about gloating or moral grandstanding and treating other fans of the club as your enemies. If 92F succeed in the takeover, the melodramatic, sanctimonious vitriol spewed from the bleeding hearts is going to be wild.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,788
I do, but from what I've seen he's only keeping the Glazers round because he thinks that's what it will take to buy the club and become the majority owner. With a view to buying them out fully further down the line when they are ready. Is that correct?

I've also seen nothing from SJR saying he won't be investing in the infastructure. But, in my opinion, it would be madness not to when you've invested so much in the club.

I also don't know what his intentions are regarding the debt. I know his company could pay it off with about one month's worth of their turnover.

But I haven't seen anything saying he'll not do any of that. Hence asking for your source.
Right, so you do realise that the 2 Glazers staying even at 20% would have more voting rights than 50% owner Ratcliffe?

Why? Their Class B shares hold 10 times the voting rights of Class A share. They are not selling their share.

I thought the Glazers were ready to sell in November? so we have a takeover but with the Glazers still there.

https://theathletic.com/4463364/2023/04/28/manchester-united-sale-news-glazers/

There has been nothing that says Ratcliffe will do anything with the stadium or infrastructure, Jassim has mentioned that.

Jassim has also said the debt will be cleared, whilst SJR has said no new debt will be added, which means the current debt remains. This was in his first bid.

So maybe the stadium is 50/50 they may, may not do it but the other 2, I have seen sources.
 

Vernon Philander

Full Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
908
Pages and pages of drivel and the same people making the same, tired arguments to support their view.

This takeover is more tedious than watching cricket.
who do you have as favourites for the ashes? Are you excited it’ll be broad and Anderson opening the bowling in the first test on Friday? It’ll be interesting to see the state of the pitch
 

Posh Red

Full Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2013
Messages
3,544
Location
Peterborough, England
What I find rather irritating about that lot is the constant antagonism and condescension towards other fans who disagree. It's one thing if you want to attack the Qataris, but we all support the same club. I find the proponents of the Qatari bid will throw in their jabs at ol' Jimmy Rat, but the focus is on him and which bid we feel is better for the club. It's not about gloating or moral grandstanding and treating other fans of the club as your enemies. If 92F succeed in the takeover, the melodramatic, sanctimonious vitriol spewed from the bleeding hearts is going to be wild.
You complain about antagonism and then end your post like that? This thread is a great read.
 

Chief123

Full Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
12,787
What does that even mean ? Pretty much all PL clubs is privately owned and they have full ownership.
Basically a purchase like the Glazers did wouldn’t be allowed if this goes through.

SJR and SJ bids would have no impact by this.
 

NotThatSoph

lemons are annoying
Joined
Sep 12, 2019
Messages
3,846
The thing is though, the money doesn't come from them washing dishes in a soup kitchen, it comes from sponsorships or commercial ventures because of their position in society.

Same with Meghan and Harry now "we want nothing to do with the royal family, but we will sign a deal with netflix for $50m+ on "our story", leveraging our position as "not-royals"".
Sure, but what @romufc was saying was that Abu Dhabi didn't pretend that it was a private bid when they bought City, so why would Qatar pretend now? The fact is that they did pretend, and still do. Of course whatever wealth royals hold they do because of their station, but they can still own things privately. Not all of their stuff belongs to the crown or the state. That is the official story with City and Sheikh Mansour, that he has used his own money to buy the club., and that the club is run totally independent from the state. It's not the truth, he used state money and the club is run by the state.
 

Andycoleno9

matchday malcontent
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
29,340
Location
Croatia
Its quite funny to see the Anti Qatar bid in full force.

As a United fan, what were the priorities ?

Glazers out, Clear the debt, stadium improvements?

Jassim, is doing all 3 and SJR is doing none of those 3.
As i said many times here; i understand anti Qatari people. I don't share their opinion but i respect and i accept their reasons (unlike them understanding us who want Jassim).

But wanting Jim for owner i simply can't understand. Everything around him and his offer is a complete disaster. If he wins we are truly fecked.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,788
What I find rather irritating about that lot is the constant antagonism and condescension towards other fans who disagree. It's one thing if you want to attack the Qataris, but we all support the same club. I find the proponents of the Qatari bid will throw in their jabs at ol' Jimmy Rat, but the focus is on him and which bid we feel is better for the club. It's not about gloating or moral grandstanding and treating other fans of the club as your enemies. If 92F succeed in the takeover, the melodramatic, sanctimonious vitriol spewed from the bleeding hearts is going to be wild.
Exactly. We are talking about what is best for the football club.

Apparently to some on here, if you support a Qatari bid, you dont care about human life, but till this day, none of them have replied when I mention where SJR is getting his money from, the two banks that facilitated underage girls abuse.

I mean we can get into morals and what not but that is a completely different subject and a messy one.

Lets say, the bids were reversed, do you think any pro Qatari posters would be here saying that is the better bid? No, because getting the Glazers out and getting us debt free is the primary goal.
 

gajender

Full Member
Joined
May 7, 2016
Messages
4,005
Right, so you do realise that the 2 Glazers staying even at 20% would have more voting rights than 50% owner Ratcliffe?

Why? Their Class B shares hold 10 times the voting rights of Class A share. They are not selling their share.


I thought the Glazers were ready to sell in November? so we have a takeover but with the Glazers still there.

https://theathletic.com/4463364/2023/04/28/manchester-united-sale-news-glazers/

There has been nothing that says Ratcliffe will do anything with the stadium or infrastructure, Jassim has mentioned that.

Jassim has also said the debt will be cleared, whilst SJR has said no new debt will be added, which means the current debt remains. This was in his first bid.

So maybe the stadium is 50/50 they may, may not do it but the other 2, I have seen sources.
Mate this has been discussed to death already nobody is paying 3 billion for United and not have controlling stake it's beyond stupid .
 

BarstoolProphet

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
6,682
The the idea that integrating other countries into western society will somehow spark change within them hasn't really panned out with Russia or China to be fair. If anything the opposite has been true, the West turned a blind eye to Russian aggression for years to keep the Gas flowing and Western entertainment among other industries have been bending over backwards and bowing to China's demands to get access to their market.

And if the World Cup was any sort of indicator then Qatar doesn't seem interested or ready to progress as you put it.
The huge difference is that those countries you mention don't want to integrate with the West. Unlike many of the countries in the Gulf - led by UAE and Dubai specifically, whoare seeing it differently. They all want to diversify their economy to move towards a more sustainable future away from fossile energy sources.

Dubai has led charge by targeting Western money through finance and hospitality (the other sector they are focusing heavily on is renewable energy technology). This has led to significant changes which has them aligning more and more with Western society. The difference that only two decades has made (from the first time I went there) has been quite remarkable, even if they have some way to go on several areas.

Qatar has obviously seen that and wants a slice of the pie. Unlike Dubai, they have chosen sports investments as way to promote their country for tourism (a part of their vision to diversify the economy), hence the insane investment in the World Cup, PSG and potentially targeting United fits right in with that. They are now also opening up for external investment in the country. Even Amnesty has acknowledged that progress has been made, obviously with some way to go.

Funnily, even the heavily conservative KSA regime are/have been planning to build a Western-oriented city in the desert.
 

glazed

Eats diamonds to beat thermodynamics
Joined
Sep 30, 2012
Messages
7,872
If 92F succeed in the takeover, the melodramatic, sanctimonious vitriol spewed from the bleeding hearts is going to be wild.
They'll get over it. Sure the Qataris are pretty odious. But I don't suppose SJR and his petrochemical company is any better from an environment perspective. And the Glazers are the worst excess of American rentier capitalism. Chelsea was owned by the gangster crony of a mass murderer. There are very few billionaires who aren't awful so why pretend otherwise? I say enjoy the show since we can do nothing to affect the outcome.
 

spwd

likes: servals, breasts, rylan clark and zooey
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Messages
8,872
Location
Lyecestershyre
I have waited a while to express to opinion of this sale process to see if something may yet develop.

It has not and I now honestly believe this sale is nothing short of shambolic. I feel that three out of the four main parties involved have been incompetent and cumbersome in their actions.

The Glazer's-most people knew or anticipated that they were going to drag this out and slime ball the club even further. They were hoping for 5-6 major buyers to be be involved when the November announcement was made ( Bezos, Apple, Musk, Saudi/Dubai/ Bahrain groups on top of Ineos/ Qatar) to creat an unprecedented auction.

That did not come to fruition so they are scraping every last part to get everything they can.

Raine- Supposed to serve the needs and requirements of the Glazer's but also place the interests of the club in the best possible way. They aimed to achieve a sale by the end of March to mid April. They have failed. They have by ( reading a lot accounts) been slow in their communication to the prospective parties involved, thus creating a breakdown in communication with Jassim.

They have acted in an ambiguous or "cloak and dagger" manner with their lack of communication and although the process is meant to be confidential, it has been handled with no respect to the club, it's employees and of course the supporters. They need to start asserting themselves and show their financial expertise of getting decision from the Glazers.

Sheikh Jassim- I just wish some advisors of his (in metaphorical sense) would get hold a black board, a piece of chalk and him to emphasise that the Glazer's do not give toss about your plans once you have acquired the club. Stop concentrating on 100% the club. Instead focus on the Glazer share of 69% and then purchase the remaining stock exchange shares later!

His relationship with Raine has broken down and he is now resorted to increasing his bids by a small margin each time, potentially re writing business plans and going beyond the deadlines. He is now a major reason for the hold with his indecision.

Ineos-Now I am not saying that I want Ratcliffe to become the next custodian of Manchester United, but I have to say this. He is the only party to have demonstrated any sort of business acumen in terms of purchasing the club. He has tapped into what the Glazer's want and has flexible with his variety of offers. (A full purchase of the 69%, or buying 51 % and maintaining the Glazer presence, knowing full well he will have the power to make decisions and with the agreement to kick out Glazer's in 2 years time).

Yes, we do not know what his plans are in the immediate post take over or indeed how he will finance the the renovation to the stadium and the new training ground in the longer term. But he is clearly focused on acquiring the club and getting out of the Glazer's hands. Ratcliffe must have anticipated that this was going to be arduous and gruelling in itself.

Obviously, I do not know the ins and outs of this, but this process has lost it's logical flow and this has impacted on Ten Hag plans for next season. Also, the employees and supporters do not know where we stand.

:lol:

Their clients are the Glazers not Manchester United.
That's what I thought but saw this, which is why I posted what you quoted.‍♂
 

Chesterlestreet

Man of the crowd
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
19,635
Right, so you do realise that the 2 Glazers staying even at 20% would have more voting rights than 50% owner Ratcliffe?
Come on, dude.

He obviously wouldn't pay a shitload of money for that kind of ownership.

(This has been done to death and then to death again - it obviously won't happen, it's a silly idea that somehow refuses to die.)
 

Andycoleno9

matchday malcontent
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
29,340
Location
Croatia
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,926
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
Any news? One of my MUFC share alerts just went off $23.50. Nice little spike.

EDIT - something is happening, it’s pumping.
 

Dixieland Delight

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 3, 2023
Messages
38
Location
God's Country
What I find rather irritating about that lot is the constant antagonism and condescension towards other fans who disagree. It's one thing if you want to attack the Qataris, but we all support the same club. I find the proponents of the Qatari bid will throw in their jabs at ol' Jimmy Rat, but the focus is on him and which bid we feel is better for the club. It's not about gloating or moral grandstanding and treating other fans of the club as your enemies. If 92F succeed in the takeover, the melodramatic, sanctimonious vitriol spewed from the bleeding hearts is going to be wild.
As someone who isn't fussed between the two, as long as they turn out competent, I'm resigned to a future of sifting through repetitive bleating whoever wins. Blah blah blah human rights, blah blah blah environment, blah blah blah watch me clutch these pearls. Fun times.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
12,788
Come on, dude.

He obviously wouldn't pay a shitload of money for that kind of ownership.

(This has been done to death and then to death again - it obviously won't happen, it's a silly idea that somehow refuses to die.)
To get that through, the way the Glazers have set this up is alot more difficult than just buying them out.

Its such a messy process, which is why we all wanted a full takeover.

Now we have 40% happy for Glazers to stay on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.