Ah, okay. I'm pretty sure that that still remained the same, in regards to spend on infrastructure.
@Messier1994 can no doubt tell me otherwise.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
@Messier1994 can no doubt tell me otherwise.
What's to stop a company building the stadium and then renting it to us for a cut price though?
No he needs more than 50% to make most business decisions, he has somewhere between 51% and 75%, my guess is over 66% which means he can do whatever he wants.
Regarding PSG, their domestic performances are the absolute minimum to be expected given the level of investment and the weakness of the league. They still look disjointed against top sides in the CL and have been a bit of a circus in terms of player power and haphazard recruitment.
Nice finished 7th and 8th in the two years before the INEOS takeover. They’ve since finished 5th, 9th and 5th. Not impressive either, but I’m not seeing any massive difference in terms of performance when considering the respective investment.
There is also the case of Qatari ownership at Malaga, which doesn’t seem to have worked out.
I’m just not seeing a case for Qatari ownership based on sound management and exceeded expectations in performances of a football club.
Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani
Net worth: £1.08bn
Chairman of Qatar Islamic Bank - annual revenues: £1.49bn
Sir Jim Ratcliffe
Net worth: £12.62bn
Founder, Chairman and majority owner of Ineos - annual revenues: £16.75bn (£53.97bn including equity share of revenues generated by joint ventures).
Yeah this is my guess, all the facilites and stadiums and the like would be built through a third party company then leased to the club at a low rate. There's always ways around these regulations with enough money.
that's a bit misleading though as we all know who is backing the SheikhSheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani
Net worth: £1.08bn
Chairman of Qatar Islamic Bank - annual revenues: £1.49bn
Sir Jim Ratcliffe
Net worth: £12.62bn
Founder, Chairman and majority owner of Ineos - annual revenues: £16.75bn (£53.97bn including equity share of revenues generated by joint ventures).
It doesn't work like that, over 50% he can make most business decisions, over 66% he can all the decisions, buying and investing in Unite will just require over 50% which he has.
18b euro turnover company.
To be fair he isn't the second richest owner in Ligue 1. That would be Pinault, the owner of the Stade Rennais. He could be third but I'm not sure.
Interest rates are very high right now. I don’t imagine the debt will be paid off any time in the next 2-3 decades. But you raise a good point, we also don’t know what Goldman Sachs and the other investors will want. Doubt they be doing it for standard interest rate only.
Initially I was totally pro-Jim, but the Ineos statement has me rattled.
I mean, even if Ratcliffe is a diehard fan (questionable) and he is looking to just clear the debt, appoint the right people on the sporting side, and stand back and let the club flourish without intervention (dream scenario), he is an old dude. There is no guarantee that in a few years the club will get run into the ground again by someone who has no sentimental attachment- or worse, the club gets put up for sale again at a much higher price that only the Saudi's can afford (shudder).
I'd still prefer it to the Qatari bid, but I'd love if we could get further assurances.
I mean, even if Ratcliffe is a diehard fan (questionable) and he is looking to just clear the debt, appoint the right people on the sporting side, and stand back and let the club flourish without intervention (dream scenario), he is an old dude. There is no guarantee that in a few years the club will get run into the ground again by someone who has no sentimental attachment- or worse, the club gets put up for sale again at a much higher price that only the Saudi's can afford (shudder).
I'd still prefer it to the Qatari bid, but I'd love if we could get further assurances.
No, you want to do it 'on the books'. The more investment you make in infrastructure the more you can spend on transfers, thats how the UEFA regs work.
Also people don’t realise how dependent they are on 1) crude oil prices 2) demand / acceptability for their products. Income can drastically change, their best year coincided with the pandemic when oil prices were at historic lows.
How dare you! The Qataris have given us assurances - his bid is using private funds and is entirely independent of the state!
And the two seasons before that nice finished 3rd and 4th. Ita not a strong league, not much spending should be needed to make them the 2nd team in the league.
Like I said we need massive investment in various areas, above the value of the club, and we're in a very competitive league. 100m for nice wasn't a bad price, they're likely to recoup that fairly easily. 6bn for us (including investment) is not and they'll need to take a lot of profit out of the club to recoup it
In an ideal world we’d get bought by Apple. But that’s not going to happen, the bid by this Qatari guy is the best we can get.
That's excluding the shares in JVs, including them its £60bn
That’s because they had to give more detail, due to the bizarre nature of the sale.
And mate, how many times does it need mentioning that holding seasonal
executive facilities at a football club isn’t the same as being a “season ticket holder”, in the way you’re making out. Lots of none Arsenal and none Chelsea CEO’s entertain clients and associates at the Emirates and Stamford Bridge.
You always post it as though he’s in the middle of the Matthew Harding chanting We all follow the Chelsea
You can almost see the bits that they've crossed out and gone over in red pen when you compare.
Doesn’t make much sense considering the Sheikh has tabled a £4.5bn bidSheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani
Net worth: £1.08bn
Chairman of Qatar Islamic Bank - annual revenues: £1.49bn
Sir Jim Ratcliffe
Net worth: £12.62bn
Founder, Chairman and majority owner of Ineos - annual revenues: £16.75bn (£53.97bn including equity share of revenues generated by joint ventures).
United have received two good opening bids. It remains to be seen if the 2 main Glazer bros are too greedy to cash in. I think its 50/50.
Well I haven't heard that. But the point stands if someone gifts United £2b for a stadium that'll result in United having way more money available for transfers than we would funding a development from profits.
have you been living under a rock since 2003? that's exactly what we and other non-muppet football fans around the world think and have been complaining about with respect to chelsea.
'hollow hollow hollow...'
and spurs are paying for their stadium themselves. completely missing my point...
INEOS is making the right comments but we do need more information. What about debt? New stadium? Qatar made it fairly obvious at all points here while Sir Jim Ratcliffe is yet to address key points.
I agree; while i criticised the INEOS bid, I must say their reported revenue growths, on paper, looks good. The level of debt they're carrying is quite interesting, it's grown to 7b , with united who knows.. 8,9,10,11b or more? It was also interesting to see the div payouts, i wonder how that will change.
We know that the guy for the Qatar bid is just a frontman though, don’t we?Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani
Net worth: £1.08bn
Chairman of Qatar Islamic Bank - annual revenues: £1.49bn
Sir Jim Ratcliffe
Net worth: £12.62bn
Founder, Chairman and majority owner of Ineos - annual revenues: £16.75bn (£53.97bn including equity share of revenues generated by joint ventures).
The money is coming from Qatar Investment Authority ultimately
I don't know where you're from, but I live amongst a lot of Chelsea fans, and trust me they've been very happy over the last 20 years!
They certainly don't feel like it's hollow.
People need not be worried. They eat up debt like Pacman. It makes them stronger.
We need more concrete information from both on their plans. Simply stating “we’ll invest in this and that” tells us next to nothing.
Much more interesting will be the bids and proposed plans after the bidders get to the next stage.
I'm well aware about equity share in JVs, that doesn't change INEOS revenue, and revenue is not contribution to reported surplus. Why people are living in this fantasy world of revenue is beyond me.
most of their debt is inactive. They can afford it. that said, adding a 6bn+ albatross around their necks may not be the perfect definition of fiduciary responsibility.
Exactly. So this guy having ‘just’ 1B bet worth means nothing considering that rhe people behind him essentially is a fund with 300B assets to invest.
Because 60B looks a lot. Saying 700m in profits on the other hand does not look a lot, and it makes clear that the debt taken to buy the club won’t be exactly ‘free’.
I agree. Interesting times ahead.
Yeah, well some of the fanbase have, said well we're not gay so bye bye. So I'm not sure it's fair to expect people who might feel betrayed by the club they supported and abandoned by their fellow fans to be able to be so detached.
Last edited:
That's the opposite to the post I replied to. And Swiss ramble are usually bang on the money with these things.
Fair enough. I don't think I could be that philosophical about it.
It's just going to be sad having United fans having to make those decisions and have to think about such things if we are owned by the Qatari state.
- Status