I'm sure there was money there, but there was something off every step of the way with the Jassim "bid".
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
You're right about that but you can also leave things out.
Sheikh Jassims party openly said they were stepping away from negeotiations months ago and would only deal with the Glazer family directly.
Assuming thats the case, these would be private discussions, off the record etc.
Things like that are not official, or in filings so do not tell the whole story.
(blatantly copied from people who seem to understand the txn/rules. Regarding the monies he’s putting in (subscription) for the second lot of shares, to go from 25% to 29%)….
“the subscription is an allowable form of capital contribution under PL/UEFA rules. Ordinarily, a club is only allowed to take 5M in reportable losses/season (this is, losses arising out of transfers, wages, etc) for the 3 year reporting period, for a total of 15M in losses. However, a club may take up to 35M in losses/yr, if 30M/yr of these losses are covered by an owner's capital injection. Unsurprisingly, the glazers have never done this. As such, on literally the first day of SJR's ownership, we will be able to maximize our FFP potential.”
Yeah but using that logic I can say there was a third bid that would’ve been for 20bn but they left that out as it wasn’t official. We can only base it on what we’re actually seeing in these filings as anything else is just pointless speculation.
Its a customary requirement not a necessary one. At all stages- from the first bid to the last- the Qatar bid was allowed access to diligence material even though they hadn't provided "customary financing commitment letters".
The Qatar bid always seemed a bit suspect. Not that I’m saying it wasn’t serious, but if the Qataris really wanted to buy, they easily have enough weight to do it.
How many of the posters in this thread are having to delete the Qatari flag from their profiles and quietly hoping this won’t be used to mock them for years?
He sure didn't do much blowing out of the water.
To me its a simple as that.
People who openly supported the Glazers for years have got away with it. Some are still talking cobblers in this thread.
Who?
They're gonna be publicly flogging Murtough outside OT
I think the Qatar bid would have run into too much legal trouble with the PSG situation to be honest. It was obviously a state bid, therefore we would have had the same owners as PSG.
You’re overthinking it
I'm sure they know who they are!
So you are saying the Glazers/club/Raine have falsified a legal document?
Approx. 2.5k pages of it to be fair!
Plenty of blowing hot air though it seems!
Move on, lads. Ffs.
I'm looking forward to seeing Ratcliffe give a detailed interview and answer all questions rather than hide away under any clauses.
Willing to bid more, but pulled out because they felt they were being fleeced/played, that's contradictory to say the least.
The amount of people flat out disbelieving the truth that’s in front of them & calling BS, should be astounding. But it’s not.
Direct quote from the Form TO (for reference, Jassim is described as “Bidder A” in the document):
“Raine indicated to Bidder A that it needed to provide details of its intended financing sources in connection with its acquisition proposal and that its acquisition proposal DID NOT provide the shareholders with sufficient value… Bidder A’s proposal did not provide customary financing commitment letter”
On 3 occasions, Jassim was asked to provide proof of financing. He never did. He also was unwilling to offer parity in price for A and B shares— which the club considered an essential element of any deal
“Raine indicated to Bidder A that it needed to provide details of its intended financing sources in connection with its acquisition proposal and that its acquisition proposal DID NOT provide the shareholders with sufficient value… Bidder A’s proposal did not provide customary financing commitment letter”
On 3 occasions, Jassim was asked to provide proof of financing. He never did. He also was unwilling to offer parity in price for A and B shares— which the club considered an essential element of any deal
No no. We need to re-discuss things that were discussed and argued upon, about 1500 pages back.
Is "trust me bro" not good enough?
Forget Scooby Doo, this whole the last few pages have a distinct wacko / QAnon vibe.
Next folks will be trying to tell me birds are real
Next folks will be trying to tell me birds are real
"Desperately" is a tad strong but the big takeaway from the Sec filings is that their original ambition was for a complete sale of the club. The bid you mention would have yielded them (the Glazers) close to what they required but agreeing such a deal as directors would have inevitably invited A shareholder lawsuits (against them as directors) on the grounds that A shareholders were hugely disadvantaged in the deal. The difference in share price is simply too big.
Looking at these filings in tandem with those issued recently (in particular the governance agreement in the JR deal) you get to see what JR's ambition is wrt to ownership; he wants majority control (50+% voting power) through the purchase of the Glazer's B shares.
The governance agreement speaks to his rights and obligations as both a minority shareholder and as a majority shareholder and the mechanism by which he could become the latter (having first call on Glazer B shares) is also detailed. It's not a clear pathway as neither party needs to get on board.
People have constantly made themselves look like fools and posted nonsense for thousands of page and now have been irrevocably and forever made to reflect on this fact. However, instead of doing this they are literally having to double down on their nonsense.
It’s actually really interesting,
Jassim’s proof of funding: “Trust me, bro.”
It’s a really hard read though!!
"you know I'm good for it mate"
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Looks like the bid team has been called to the embassy to talk about the media reports, bringing shame to Qatar.
Which legal trouble? They have managed to portray it that officially QSI and QIA are now two completely separate entities so they could even have used QIA as the front for the bid if they really wanted to. NAK even sits on the UEFA board. Look how easy Ratcliffe has managed to circumvent the ownership rule, by just creating a proxy company.
Clowns… quoting Ben Jacobs.
It’s easy to prove. I await the official SEC letter inviting United to comment on their mistakes and then be punished.
OR… they’re talking sh!t.
One or the other
Literally a criminal offence if they’ve not fully disclosed to the SEC or willingly lied. Definitely Qatar trying to save face…or Jacobs just spouting shite.
One of the few positives of this season has been the successful introduction of academy players into the first team. Surely separating the youngsters’ training facilities from the first team’s would be a retrograde step?
It would make it a lot harder to maintain a consistent footballing “philosophy” across all levels for a start, as the different groups of coaches would be physically separated.
What are people really doing here?
On one end, a few months ago, Jassim has unlimited money and now, it was all fake and was skint.
You can’t have it both ways, boys.
On one end, a few months ago, Jassim has unlimited money and now, it was all fake and was skint.
You can’t have it both ways, boys.
Absolutely. People should get lives.
I’ve read some utter bollox in my time but this might just take the biscuit.
I’ll see you in the flat Earth thread pal.
- Status