This makes sense to me, it's best to view him as an extra Glazer kid who is actually in control of football operations on a day to basis than someone fully in-charge of the club. We've established that Joel is useless and the rest of them don't give a feck as long as they get their share. Hopefully Ratcliffe can talk some sense into Joel Glazer. It can't be too hard given they spent about a 1bn on transfers so far.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik @Rood and Imran @Annihilate Now! start with the good news by celebrating Manchester United Women's emphatic FA Cup win over Spurs at Wembley and the future of manager Marc Skinner.
Then it's the bad news and the ever worsening form of our Men with losses to Arsenal and Palace.
Finally the main debate - ETH Out now or keep him until the end of the season - if not longer. Are you Team Nik or Team Imran?
- Status
The times they are a-changin'.
I like the timing. As we all know, Santa is a Red and he'll have a proper spring in his step as he does his rounds this morning.
I like the timing. As we all know, Santa is a Red and he'll have a proper spring in his step as he does his rounds this morning.
Not really forced but a few years out of the CL finishing 8th or so would've done it I reckon. Do you want to endure that though?never gets old. Glazers would then be forced to sell.
But that is assuming he will have control on the funds needed for a lot of this. Glazers still control the purse strings. I cannot believe people are fine with this arrangement!
I am not fine with this arrangement,just want to see them appoint a proper CEO also ideally Director of Football AND Head of Recruitment.
When it comes to players the Glazers have always spent money. I’d be surprised if we aren’t in the top 3 spenders in the world over the last decade. Ok it’s not their money and never has been so it won’t be a problem to keep spending it. The problem since Fergie left was that the CEO was a business man not a football man, he didn’t prioritise football and we got left behind. The stadium and training ground sound like they will slowly get upgrades as part of each stage of the buyout. This can only be a good thing compared to where we are now.
Really mixed feelings on this one. While I'm glad that it is all finalized now, we haven't got rid of the major problem at the club. I really would have preferred for a proper takeover, but it wasn't to be. So I guess all I can hope for now, is that Jim can actually change the structure at the club in a manner that turns things around. Otherwise it is just going to be more of the same
I was a Qatar supporter because it was the only way to rid ourselves of the Glazers. I didn’t think Sir Ratcliffe’s 25% would have done any good but it seems like it has since the Glazers have relinquished control of the football side. They were never poor at the commercial side (because they are bloodthirsty frothing-at-the-mouth predators), but were completely useless at the football side. Hopefully Ratcliffe and his team will be different and successful.
Getting the Glazers to sanction massive spending has never been a problem before this transaction, can't see it being a problem now with someone that's just rescued them financially and is willing to use his money to take them along for the ride. The only issue we are likely to encounter is the competence of the Ratcliffe/Ineos team and how serious their rumored 'buy British' policy was.
The Glazers know Jim has the finances to dig the club into and out of a hole. He seems willing to invest big money and they get to stay. They aren't people who were actively sabotaging the club, their methods and appointments just didn't work out so it's not like they will be plotting against Jim because they know the better we are on the pitch the easier it is to make money off it via commercial deals.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Oh this is going to be a wonderful relationship. Glazers made 500m to allow someone else to take the blame.
Can't wait for the leaks to move from the players to the boardroom when the Ineos side requests 150m for a window and the other half goes "it'll be 75m actually".
I wish I could make half a billion to shift blame.
Exactly.
I think some are so desperate for good news, they miss the top line. The Glazers remain in control and our crippling debt remains. We had a chance to shed the lot and have meaningful club investment with the Qataris. It didnt happen. I am preparing myself for more years of mediocrity. Ratcliffe = Glazers = Not messiah.
The other way of looking at it: spending £1.3billion for a full footballing control (core business) at a football club you're interested having a full ownership in, is cheap. Because United is huge and you can use it as a very accurate tester, to gauge whether a full purchase is a good idea or not. If it fails spectacularly you can simply skip the opportunity to buy more shares, slow down the spending and then sell the shares to someone else. Of course I don't want that to happen but the case with billionaires is that they won't mind losing some of their investments for a bigger slice in the future. 1.3b is only ~10% of Jimmy's reported wealth.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Oh this is going to be a wonderful relationship. Glazers made 500m to allow someone else to take the blame.
Can't wait for the leaks to move from the players to the boardroom when the Ineos side requests 150m for a window and the other half goes "it'll be 75m actually".
I wish I could make half a billion to shift blame.
The funds United have spent the past 10 years haven't been the issue. It has been how the money is spent, fees and wages.
My message to any Qatari supporters was please don't blame Ratcliffe,wasn't his fault Jassim wouldn't meet that £6bn figure. That says to me he didn't have the funds to pay whatever it took.
Indeed. You have no control if no control of the finances. This all coincides with Financial Fair Play concerns. So less money and blame shifts.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Oh this is going to be a wonderful relationship. Glazers made 500m to allow someone else to take the blame.
Can't wait for the leaks to move from the players to the boardroom when the Ineos side requests 150m for a window and the other half goes "it'll be 75m actually".
I wish I could make half a billion to shift blame.
I am aware the leeches remain in control and the debt remains,however surely a better structure is a tiny ray of light. From the tone of your post I guess that's not the case though.
Or maybe he didn't want to pay further over the odds. What he was offering was a whole lot. Glazers didn't want to lose their cash cow and wanted to make a namesake "deal". There was only one person willing to shake their sullied hands over such a useless trade.
It’s far from a perfect situation, goes without saying, and I think those who are enthused by this deal see it as a positive step forwards rather than a utopia. Kind of a better than nothing deal.
The budgets will be agreed between ineos and the Glazers, so yes they will obviously have a say (at least while Sir Jim only has a minority share) but don’t forget if he wants he can invest his own funds, and he has his own people in key positions of the hierarchy and on both FC and PLC boards. INEOS will be free to do whatever they want within this agreed budget, I don’t think the Glazers will stand in his way - it’s not in their interest to do so really.
It’s slightly different now. We have been in the red last 4 quarters. We have a squad full of players who are not good or past their sell by date. Plus there is the small issue of FFP.
We will need to circumvent around all of this and that will need a lot of capital. The Glazers are still in complete control of the club, with nothing on the horizon on if they will give that up.
Personally feel this was the worst possible outcome, barring being bought by a hedge fund and then asset stripped, when this process started more than a year back. Everyone on here wanted a full sale and full sale only. Now we have all sorts of mental gymnastics to justify as this being a good deal.
A terrible deal with no future ownership set in stone it just extends the struggle for years more a sad day.
Well at least this is done and it is important, as it represents a defining change in the clubs ownership structure. The Glazer's, it seems, retain majority ownership, but INEOS and partners have a significant stake and will influence the direction and administration of the club.
Good.
But, it would assist all stakeholders, fans, etc, to explain how the new structure will impact on the daily operations at Manchester United FC
Good.
But, it would assist all stakeholders, fans, etc, to explain how the new structure will impact on the daily operations at Manchester United FC
Given your support for Jassims bid that’s a very fair and reasonable stance. I hope a few others can adopt a similar outlook and give INEOS a fair chance.
Sadly as much as I would love this to be great news my pessimism because of the last 10 years or so leads me to wonder exactly how this is going to change anything
Sir Jim’s not stupid he wouldn’t invest billion with no way to 100% ownership.
Well, well, this was one of the most rabbited lines of the whole deal and backing for Jim.
Well, well, this was one of the most rabbited lines of the whole deal and backing for Jim.
At the end of the days he's in charge for seeing the players and "DECIDING" what's their best position and their potential. Failing to do so is a very big minus for any manager. You can't stay on top of the game without addressing the weakness and identifying the solution
1Bn on transfer is roughly 150m average per season? Going north of that would require capital investment (ilegally by bogus endorsement, which is what most oil club are doing). So Unless INEOS are puting their own money, it's all back to square one.
NOw the question would be why would SJR wanted to invest hundreds of millions (beyond what's agreed) for no tangible increase in ownership. It's good to play good football but at the end of the day it's business
Glazers will be buzzing with this. They can now do what they’ve been doing for years but in a lot more peace. If things still don’t work out on the pitch then the glazers will know they can’t be blamed anymore, they can sit back and watch the blame go to Ratcliffe and his team. This suits them so much.
Didn’t they keep putting a bid in but then the glazers kept upping it as they was being greedy? Ratcliffe and his team deserve a fair chance to sort this mess out.
Glazers might be disinterested in the day to day running of the club or improving the infrastructure but there’s hardly been an occasion where United haven’t been able to afford to compete for a player’s signature owing to transfer fees or salary. Even last summer they okayed a fortune only to see Murtough and Ten Hag squander it in the worst way possible.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Oh this is going to be a wonderful relationship. Glazers made 500m to allow someone else to take the blame.
Can't wait for the leaks to move from the players to the boardroom when the Ineos side requests 150m for a window and the other half goes "it'll be 75m actually".
I wish I could make half a billion to shift blame.
It’s easy to create a boogeyman for all our failures but that only lets the real clowns like Murtough hide behind that facade. At least now, there’s more educated people asking the tough questions before they sanction the spending.
More like we needed/released some good news after the pathetic loss to West Ham
Last edited:
Ratcliffe will have two seats on the PLC board, therefore he'll be involved in setting those budgets along with other stakeholdersTweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Oh this is going to be a wonderful relationship. Glazers made 500m to allow someone else to take the blame.
Can't wait for the leaks to move from the players to the boardroom when the Ineos side requests 150m for a window and the other half goes "it'll be 75m actually".
I wish I could make half a billion to shift blame.
technically he has control of 25% of the finances, seeing as he owns that much of the club.
Anyhow for as bad as the Glazers are from a fans point of view many many people within the game including Sir Alex himself have called them “wonderful people” so I don’t see them and Ratcliffe having issues or clashes.
cnuts to us but we don’t know them on a personal level like what Sir Jim or Blanc etc will get to.
I know right? Everyone knows I have been the biggest Ratcliffe fan.
But I too, am hoping those sports-washing-loving fans will have an open mind when it comes to Sir Ratcliffe.
True, but how the money is spent is equally important. No more 90 million Antonys or 50 million sub par keepers.
Spending the budget wisely would make us so much richer than simply upping the budget. £100m spent on a couple players who genuinely improve us is worth a lot more than £200m on Sancho, Antony and Hojlund (and the list goes on)
The board will set the finances and they will be what they will be what they will be, spending on transfers the last 10 years hasn't been an issue it's how the money has been spent thats the issue
The perfect Christmas gift, only thing I want more is a long extension for ETH.
We've finally got some ownership stability, let's create some manager stability, too, and really build something!!
We've finally got some ownership stability, let's create some manager stability, too, and really build something!!
Merry Christmas everyone,
Just a reminder that the 300m being invested comes with more shares.
Jim knows the club needs more than 300m to turn it around and has a huge pot of gold.
As time goes on and they need more funds they can plug that into club for the exchange of more shares.
Its essentially a honey trap for the glazers,
“we need more budget for the transfer window so we’re investing 300m more, but that comes at a cost to shares”
Eventually they will have majority.
Merry Christmas one and all.
Just a reminder that the 300m being invested comes with more shares.
Jim knows the club needs more than 300m to turn it around and has a huge pot of gold.
As time goes on and they need more funds they can plug that into club for the exchange of more shares.
Its essentially a honey trap for the glazers,
“we need more budget for the transfer window so we’re investing 300m more, but that comes at a cost to shares”
Eventually they will have majority.
Merry Christmas one and all.
Exactly how it will go.
He’s not an idiot, much more about him than the Glazer idiots who inherited.
- Status