Not sure why anyone doubted them. When the Athletic and Tele run the exact same quote...verbatim from "insiders" , it was always going to be his cringe one liner for the deal.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
The article is terrible because it's myopic and senseless, hypocrisy isn't even an issue. If you use the same logic with Liverpool, you end up with the idea that US based owners like FSG are a disaster, hiring a manager like Klopp is a disaster. What he did in his article can be done for literally any type of ownership because in sport success is rarely constant or guaranteed.
considering who is selling us, yes
From that previous Ben Jacobs tweet, I think they're bidding for 100% but are open to just "majority" with others.
More important than that. They need to keep the same jacuzzi for the next 20 years so they know how we feel.
It's a completely pointless comparison, one is before a takeover has happened and one is after a league title win. Do you think if the Qataris take over and we win stuff that the articles about us winning will be mostly about the ownership and note the success as a footnote at the end? The time to call state ownership out and to oppose it is before it happens because eventually once they're in the football journalists will have to report on the football.
When I grow up I want to own man Utd, I want to make them big and strong, red is my favourite color, I want all the best players, and a stadium so big you can see it from space.
That INEOS statement is giving me Ed Woodward vibes similar to the below:
“We can do things in the transfer market that other clubs can only dream of. Watch this space”
“We can do things in the transfer market that other clubs can only dream of. Watch this space”
Makes sense. I'm pretty sure the leeches aren't going to turn down a huge Qatari bid. To be honest, I'm not thrilled about either bids, but I'd rather just have Glazers gone completely
reminds me of 'putting the great back into Great Britain'. alarmingly shit
Some people really despite the Athletic
'Putting the Man back in Manchester' doesn't sit well with me.
The town centre is but there are some nicer places. I used to go out with a girl from uppermill. It’s lovely there.
both are a shit show to be honest.
Ratcliffe/Glaziers comb is defiantly the worse of 2 evils
Uppermill is nice but a bit boring don't you think?
I would argue one of the best times to call out the ownership of a club is after a title win. Rather than bask in the supposed glory, if you feel dead set against it, as a proper journalist as Ronay deems himself to be, best to call it out.
Instead he wrapped himself around the City and Guardiola story and doesn’t want other clubs to go down their route.
I’m boring so it suites me.
[Insert:vomit smiley]
Because it is. It's also a subtle dig at the Qataris and Americans if they bid. Manchester United to be owned by a Manc born billionaire and not foreigners. Its definitely a a racist statement.
What is a "modern, progressive, fan-centred approach to ownership"?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Think Ineos would be the wrong choice. Looking at their track record with Nice doesn’t inspire any confidence. And the Qatari statement was much more detailed.
I really hope you're wumming, because this is so cringe.
No one is going to allow them to stay on with 20% or anything at all most likely. Whoever comes is going to be investing money so they aren’t going to allow the Glazers to have same type of shares, put no money in but reap the rewards of the investment.
The Glazers have nothing to offer and being associated with them is a negative.
fecking too right this needs qualifying. Just when you thought a takeover couldn't get any worse for the club
not liking the sound of the INEOS bid AT ALL
The Glazers might prefer retaining some share under the Ineos bid
Aye, the Middle East are great for the environment also.
Ratcliffe's bid is allowing Glazers a minority stake?
Well they own the club so they get to say which offer they accept, and if that's what Jim has offered then that's what we get if they accept it. INEOS haven't specified in their PR release who will own the minority stake, which sounds to me like they don't know or they do know and they just don't want to say it.
INEOS really don’t strike me as serious, which is a bit strange considering their previous investments across other sports.
At least with the Qataris you know it’s smelly and there’s no real incentive to dress it up. I also feel some folk are happy to give INEOS a bit of a free pass on the basis that they aren’t Qatari. I get that, especially given the obvious issues around state-driven ownership, but they really need more scrutiny themselves, as it’s more than a little whiffy.
At least with the Qataris you know it’s smelly and there’s no real incentive to dress it up. I also feel some folk are happy to give INEOS a bit of a free pass on the basis that they aren’t Qatari. I get that, especially given the obvious issues around state-driven ownership, but they really need more scrutiny themselves, as it’s more than a little whiffy.
US investors
Someone yes, might not be the Glazers but all things suggest it might be.
You want us to get rid of the Middle East in order to save the environment?Aye, the Middle East are great for the environment also.
So INEOS’ ‘majority ownership’ means the Glazers will stick around? Feck right off with that.
"Putting the Manchester back in Manchester United"
Sorry, but when did it leave?
Sorry, but when did it leave?
So SJR will be getting protests from the fans from the getgo if he allows that? Fans want the glazers out, not sticking around
Probably doesn't want to be involved in the early stages as no need to get the fans onside till the bid reaches the final stages? Someone else may well end up buying us after all.
Using nine two as the foundation name is what makes me think one or more from that group of players is involved and Becks has previous of association with Qatar.
This is just delusional wishful thinking, sorry to say. Guy fronting the bid is a private citizen and Chairman of a bank so there is a clear distinction between the state and him. We all know that the state is somehow involved and are probably funding it but this guy is as 'fit and proper' as they come.
If the PL couldn't cite human rights issue when the Saudis were coming in I doubt they would do the same here. The only hope for the Anti-Qatar faction is the Glazer greed but if the Qataris are willing to match, indications today are that this isnt a take it or leave it offer its subject to adjustment, then this is done. Having seen Avram Glazer in Qatar in the post world cup period one would assumethat the agreement has been reached and this is just its consummation.
Remember SJR said the Glazers were "the nicest people' and 'proper gentlemen'. Was he preparing to go in with them? Weird as hell
- Status