Do you want them?
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
I don’t know who I want, I’m undecided on all proposals but I just find it hilarious as to just how much some are so against either bid.
The source is a random Twitter account?Oh feck me
Come on peeps, defend this shite.
Hello Dove. How are you?
Qsi, saudi andAbu dhabi had never gone so far. So u doubt that its true
I have been a little out of the loop outside of reading the main titles. Knowing that Sheikh Jassim's group (without the man himself) came yesterday and that Sir Jim came in person with his team today, do you think that Jassim missed the opportunity to make a good impression by not being present? I know I would not exactly have the highest opinion if one of the bidders doesn't show up in person for a round of official talks.
I am pro Qatari bid but if SJR buy the club then I hope that he will be the best and the most successful custodian for our club ever. We ultimately want what's the best for united
qataris & fans will be buying every Sancho available
Absolutely
The only good impression Jassim needs is his final offer for the club.
This isn't like selling a house where if the buyer makes a good impression, the seller can choose to sell to a buyer with a lower bid.
The only thing the Glazers care about is money, not warm and fuzzy goodwill.
Announce Mbpop.
Qatar is the best. Not only because they have the requisite wealth to transform the club, but also the community around it.
Not to mention that if they fail in our bid, its likely they go and buy the dippers, which would be a monumental feck up on our part and could change the future trajectory of both clubs.
What a desperate attempt at acceptance that would be.
So we should definitely go with Qatar, because if we don't they may buy our rivals instead is it ?
The problem is that if Qatar buys United, they are never ever leaving, unless they run the club comically bad.
Part of the reason why we should.
Have you seen what middle east investment has done to mancity? newcastle?
We would be left behind. Indefinitely.
Yes, do you want to spend the next decade watching liverpool buy the best players in the world and win everything?
as long as the board and eth decide in the end its ok, otherwise it will be a circus
Sadly, I doubt any club allegiances take priority when it comes to deploying investor capital.Fans of a 30 year vintage don't simply go and buy our rivals
Unless it's Chelsea
If it didn't for Jim, then I don' think it would matter in the least bit for any Qatari owner.
Pretty sure we'd be able to buy some of the best players with Ratcliffe as well. I mean, on paper we've bought some of the most sought after, highly rated players under the Glazers.
Its an invented strawman since the Qataris have only bid for United.
The Qatari’s didn’t need all 10 hours to tour Old trafford.
Maybe they'd buy them to run them into the groundFans of a 30 year vintage don't simply go and buy our rivals
Unless it's Chelsea
SJR tried to buy Chelsea
That's what you spend your days worrying about?
SJR could sell his stake in INEOS if he wanted and the cost of United would be less than half of what he would get - he can afford it of he chooses
So basically, we should adopt a model of buying our way to success to win more trophies than the competition ?
Maybe it took so long due to having to fax Jassim the details of the meetings?
If he'd bothered to turn up, things would have gone quicker. Talk about bone idle!
Just point them to the CAF and they'll know that's a losing proposition the day it starts!Oh feck me
Come on peeps, defend this shite.
It's worked well the last 10 years
It's definitely not something we've tried before to very limited success.
Banter FC if true.
You don't know about that. I don't like this scorched earth tactic. We want our club to be successful irrespective of the owner
Maybe there's a comma missing between Human and Rights?
The whole concept of the Qataris being the better option because they'll be able to spend vast sums of money makes no sense at all.
City are not successful because they only spend huge sums of money but because they basically took the entire set up of the most successful side of the late 2000s and early 2010s.
PSG haven't been as successful (harder to win the PL than L1) because their set up is a shambles. As was United's for a decade. Liverpool got it right for a while and Madrid are just a machine.
So which clubs set up would United need to steal? Because throwing dollar bills around probably won't work on its own.
City are not successful because they only spend huge sums of money but because they basically took the entire set up of the most successful side of the late 2000s and early 2010s.
PSG haven't been as successful (harder to win the PL than L1) because their set up is a shambles. As was United's for a decade. Liverpool got it right for a while and Madrid are just a machine.
So which clubs set up would United need to steal? Because throwing dollar bills around probably won't work on its own.
Nah, "All animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others"
Lets be honest. We've been doing that since the inception of the premier league. We used to be the ones breaking transfer records each summer.
But the status quo has changed over the last 10 years.
Announce Football McFootballface
- Status