Club Sale | It’s done!

[amolbhatia50k]

I hope Sir Jim wins. I should read up more on both parties but having our great club’s reputation constantly being dragged through the mud due to actions of a government / country will be hugely annoying. We don’t even need the money - we’re an extremely wealthy football club that just needs competent people at the helm.

If fact the thing I’m most against is external funding. We don’t need any short cuts.

 

[Judas]

Can they decide to pull out like FSG?

They haven’t pulled out. Liverpool was never for sale.

 

[Dazzmondo]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Has to happen for this if for no other reason

 

[Cassidy]

Whatever discourse has been driven hadn't resulted in openly transphobic material being published by popular United supporters groups until now. You must acknowledge that's tremendously harmful to our LGBTQ+ supporters and cannot simply be handwaved away by some vague statement about "discourse happening for a long time"?

I think you are missing the point really.
Yes people were banned here, it still happened though and people still read it.

It is not good that tranphobic material (I have not and do not read stretty news) be posted anywhere. That doesn’t distract from the fact that overall middle eastern investment in the west has had a positive impact in LQBTQ conversation and agenda in the middle east. Not as much as some would want but its been a net positive also in other areas too. Which was the point I was making.

When participating is this type of culture and ideology challenging there will always be counter arguement made, we have to be able to see that its better to challenge than to leave something and let it fester. Thats just my opinion though. Im happy that positive strides have been made over the past 2 decades and I hope it continues

 

[Berbaclass]

They haven’t pulled out. Liverpool was never for sale.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Raoul]

Just dipping into this “debate” now and again. The decision on who buys will come down to the sellers and the highest bid but it’s depressing to see how many of my fellow fans see Qatar as attractive, even desirable owners.

For me, the debate can’t get past gay and trans rights. If we truly believe we are a club for everyone then how are we so welcoming of this lot and their medieval views?

Because a significant swath of supporters, particularly people who are from outside the west, don't particularly care about these issues. They see this through a transactional lens of purchasing glory through unlimited funds.

 

[Spoony]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Not sure if the translation is correct…

My Arabic is a bit sketchy, but what's he saying?

 

[Berbaclass]

My Arabic is a bit sketchy, but what's he saying?

Lads… it’s Tottenham

 

[Cassidy]

People should also not pretend that there is a viable source of wealth for this takeover that isn't directly from the state and the inherent ownership dynamic that creates.

No one is pretending.

 

[Cassidy]

Then why aren't people asking where it's coming from then? If INEOS can be correctly scrutinised in detail for where they're getting the money, where they're loaning it from, whose going to benefit, what the debt will be etc etc... Why is a guy whose personal wealth is less than Ratcliffe's by about £4b, and even the 'Private fund he has access to' is less than what INEOS can access, not being scrutinised at all, despite promising to do waaaay more? - Clear the debt completely, invest in everything, give us all magic rainbows shooting out of our arses!

I've been asking this all day and yet to have a single good answer. It's perfectly fair to assume it's coming from the state if absolutely no one else is willing to tell us where it is coming from, or ever ask!... Despite spending huge walls of text telling us it's definitely better than the other guy, who definitely doesn't have same amounts needed. No? Surely? Otherwise it just looks like obfuscation

Sorry but who said no one asked?
There is a difference between asking and stating something as fact without evidence

 

[Mickeza]

My Arabic is a bit sketchy, but what's he saying?

Supposedly that it’s done. But after English I can only speak pigeon Welsh which doesn’t help here so I don’t know if that’s true.

 

[Sweet Square]

No of course not, I didn't buy our kids Christmas presents either. Santa made them.

 

[Cassidy]

Just dipping into this “debate” now and again. The decision on who buys will come down to the sellers and the highest bid but it’s depressing to see how many of my fellow fans see Qatar as attractive, even desirable owners.

For me, the debate can’t get past gay and trans rights. If we truly believe we are a club for everyone then how are we so welcoming of this lot and their medieval views?

How are we welcoming of Muslims?

 

[Judas]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Fair enough, very different situation then, people actually want to buy us

 

[dav7d becks]

My Arabic is a bit sketchy, but what's he saying?

Doha Arabic Editor-in-Chief, familiar with El Nasarra

 

[horsechoker]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Has to happen for this if for no other reason

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

Judge for yourself

https://www.skysports.com/football/...will-stay-horse-has-bolted-on-state-ownership

Heard it earlier, and I know you're saying, and to be honest the thought of it scares the living daylights out of me..

But rational head on Neville speaks like this all the time, and he could just as easily be parroting the recent news, or be fearing this himself, rather than hearing a whisper.

And I'm still yet to hear a logical arguement for how a minority buyer, with just Avram and Joel staying stacks up finacially.

 

[pratyush_utd]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Ouch. So the reports that they couldnt find buyer because they were prepared to sell only some percentage wasn’t true

 

[RedDevil@84]

Because a significant swath of supporters, particularly people who are from outside the west, don't particularly care about these issues. They see this through a transactional lens of purchasing glory through unlimited funds.

Sounds like Bush saying "You're either with us or against us". It is not that black and white. To call everyone who is ok with Qatari owners as some greedy glory hunters is extremely childish and very narrow way of looking at other's opinions.

 

[Compton22]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

There are levels to this it seems

 

[horsechoker]

Hope Gim Ratcliffe wins

 

[Red in STL]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Has to happen for this if for no other reason

That's classic

 

[Raoul]

Heard it earlier, and I know you're saying, and to be honest the thought of it scares the living daylights out of me..

But rational head on Neville speaks like this all the time, and he could just as easily be parroting the recent news, or be fearing this himself, rather than hearing a whisper.

And I'm still yet to hear a logical arguement for how a minority buyer, with just Avram and Joel staying stacks up finacially.

Personally, I don't think Neville wouldn't raise the issue publicly unless he has heard murmurs about it privately. Not saying it will happen, but we can't discount it as a possibility.

 

[Escobar]

I hope Sir Jim wins. I should read up more on both parties but having our great club’s reputation constantly being dragged through the mud due to actions of a government / country will be hugely annoying. We don’t even need the money - we’re an extremely wealthy football club that just needs competent people at the helm.

If fact the thing I’m most against is external funding. We don’t need any short cuts.

Except we are not. Hence we cannot invest in the stadium or facilities

 

[Dion]

No one is pretending.

But making the spurious argument that a member of the royal family being given £5b to buy Man Utd by the state of Qatar is in any meaningful way different to state ownership is pretending. The problem with state ownership isn't that if it's proven legally then we're in trouble, the problem is it's ethically abhorrent and no amount of mental gymnastics changes the reality that ultimately Man Utd will be answerable and controlled by the state of Qatar if this takeover goes through.

 

[Berbaclass]

But making the spurious argument that a member of the royal family being given £5b to buy Man Utd by the state of Qatar is in any meaningful way different to state ownership is pretending. The problem with state ownership isn't that if it's proven legally then we're in trouble, the problem is it's ethically abhorrent and no amount of mental gymnastics changes the reality that ultimately Man Utd will be answerable and controlled by the state of Qatar if this takeover goes through.

Do you think it will be proven? No it absolutely won’t be.

 

[Raoul]

Sounds like Bush saying "You're either with us or against us". It is not that black and white. To call everyone who is ok with Qatari owners as some greedy glory hunters is extremely childish and very narrow way of looking at other's opinions.

That is basically the primary Qatari selling point. Buying the club outright, no debt incurred, and seemingly unlimited funds for players and investment.

 

[Dion]

I think you are missing the point really.
Yes people were banned here, it still happened though and people still read it.

It is not good that tranphobic material (I have not and do not read stretty news) be posted anywhere. That doesn’t distract from the fact that overall middle eastern investment in the west has had a positive impact in LQBTQ conversation and agenda in the middle east. Not as much as some would want but its been a net positive also in other areas too. Which was the point I was making.

When participating is this type of culture and ideology challenging there will always be counter arguement made, we have to be able to see that its better to challenge than to leave something and let it fester. Thats just my opinion though. Im happy that positive strides have been made over the past 2 decades and I hope it continues

I'm not missing the point, I'm highlighting that it's callous beyond belief to dismiss the damage caused to our LGBTQ+ community because of this takeover under the guise of some abstract argument that fossil fuel investment in the west from ME states is improving LGBTQ+ attitudes there. Especially when you've already acknowledged any takeover of United would be ultimately irrelevant to this process.

And yes, reading transphobic opinions from individuals is harmful, but not nearly as impactful as reading it in legitimate media. But we've already established this and you've acknowledged it, so it seems strange to repeat the fallacy.

 

[Dion]

Do you think it will be proven? No it absolutely won’t be.

Of course it won't be proven. The Qatari state doesn't spend £5b to not hire an army of legal professionals to make any challenge to it impossible.

That is of course meaningless to me. I don't think City didn't cheat just because they managed to get out of it on a technicality in CAS. I don't think OJ didn't kill anyone just because he was never convicted at criminal trial.

 

[BluesJr]

Liverpool

Ass club.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Except we are not. Hence we cannot invest in the stadium or facilities

Then we don’t spend on stadium or facilities until we can afford to. Or take a loan for it - at least it’ll be debt for the actual benefit of the club for once.

 

[Berbaclass]

Of course it won't be proven. The Qatari state doesn't spend £5b to not hire an army of legal professionals to make any challenge to it impossible.

That is of course meaningless to me. I don't think City didn't cheat just because they managed to get out of it on a technicality in CAS. I don't think OJ didn't kill anyone just because he was never convicted at criminal trial.

I agree but what’s the point of even stating it then. We won’t get in trouble for anything.

 

[Mockney]

Sorry but who said no one asked?
There is a difference between asking and stating something as fact without evidence

Oh I'm asking! I've been asking since about 2, and have yet to have a single decent reply. Absolutely no one claiming that the Qatar bid isn't state funded, seems remotely interested where the funds will be coming from instead - which seems like the most obvious, pertinent follow up... And yet if I were to ask why Ratcliffe's bid shouldn't be trusted, I will get multiple walls of text digging into his financials and previous purchases. All of which leads me to conclude it's being argued in incredibly bad faith..

Surely we should be massively distrustful of both - particularly the one promising the moon?

 

[Cassidy]

But making the spurious argument that a member of the royal family being given £5b to buy Man Utd by the state of Qatar is in any meaningful way different to state ownership is pretending. The problem with state ownership isn't that if it's proven legally then we're in trouble, the problem is it's ethically abhorrent and no amount of mental gymnastics changes the reality that ultimately Man Utd will be answerable and controlled by the state of Qatar if this takeover goes through.

I haven't made any spurious arguments about funds that I do not know the source off. Instead Ive state many times I’ll wait and see the evidence. Exhausting having to repeat myself on such a basic concept

 

[Tony247]

This is going to be a very very critical milestone in United history. We need a dedicated thread just to capture news and development without discussion.

 

[Nogbadthebad]

That is basically the primary Qatari selling point. Buying the club outright, no debt incurred, and seemingly unlimited funds for players and investment.

Maybe to some.

Personally, I think a firm stance on a new stadium, infrastructure and the women's team are what set their bid apart from ineos right now.

In a month or so, when there are more details about both bids, and possibly others, I may have a different opinion.

 

[Cassidy]

Oh I'm asking! I've been asking since about 2, and have yet to have a single decent reply. Absolutely no one claiming that the Qatar bid isn't state funded, seems remotely interested where the funds will be coming from instead - which seems like the most obvious.

Actually this isn’t true.

Ive seen some make the distinction between state and personal wealth of royal family which is a legitimate claim by the way.

Ive seen others (like myself) say we’ll wait for more information.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Whatever helps them sleep ar nights I suppose.

This part of it is - in a way - the worst for me.

I have mates who were 100% against...anything like City, yeah, feckin' state owning a football club, disgraceful, yada yada and so forth.

But now they're actually moving towards: yeah...but this guy is technically just a...(super rich) guy. It's not Qatar, it's just a Qatari businessman, I mean - who are we to...hypocrisy...and so forth.

Just own it - that's all I ask (from my mates). Don't give me this pathetic bullshit. Of course it is exactly what everyone with half a brain knows it is.

 

[crossy1686]

Lads… it’s Tottenham

 

[mu4c_20le]

Nobody is arguing there aren’t links but there is a difference in being state owned and the assumption of being state owned.

So do you believe we'll be state owned even if the paperwork doesn't say so?