Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
LordSpud said:
Agreed, the real danger is investment to keep the Glazers at the club. Its a very real possibility.
Click to expand...
Yes agreed, also lets not forget reliable reports suggested a SECOND Qatari Bid was expected, no one knows where from or from who.
I wouldnt be so sure that another one of those 3000 members would be involved in another bid that IS connected to the current Qatari gov.
 
Mickeza said:
The article suggests the funding could be coming from his dad who is worth an absolute shed ton due to linking himself personally (sounds a lot like corruption…) into any deals he made on behalf of Qatar as PM - Barclays for example back in 2008. He also half-owned Qatar airways when it was sold in 2014. Nobody has a scooby how much he’s worth but the 2bn listed in the times rich list is thought to be “very conservative”.
Click to expand...

If one were to believe this bid is truly not linked to the state then the vagueness of it all is starting to sound a bit shady.
 


This is getting pathetic now. So the rich of America don’t get subsidies and tax breaks?

I had muted Miguel from 5 years ago because of the amount of transfer predications he got horribly wrong! How did he become the chief writer for independent?!
 
Sky1981 said:
Qatar would beat Ratcliff for 101 reason

but alas, it comes with the price of our soul. Winning stuff under Glazer meant something, spending 500 million every year and winning things using oil money feels hollow.

Between Ratcliff and Qatar, I'd prefer Glazer. We're on the right track with ETH and with another 200-300M we could really win the league without having to resort to being a Sheikh plaything.
Click to expand...
I hear you, but that's of course, assuming they would be pumping in oil money with little to no respect for FFP.

I would hope/think that United's "big" enough to spend their own money, if their owner would just allow them, and rather, if the Qatari's would like to invest into the club some of their own money, they rather spend on infrastructure, upgrading/redoing the stadium, benefitting the community etc. That gives us a big lift instead of our owners paying off debt, dividends etc, with our earnings.

We're not PSG or City, who has/had little to no global following/revenue, so no tampering with inflated sponsorships or pumping unnecessary oil money into the project.
 
Rightnr said:
We won't forget the women, tacked on the end, as if you're talking about a pet. This is where United fans need to be vocal and demand support for all parts of the club if we do get bought.
Click to expand...

What makes you worried about that? The womens team are clearly being supported well at the moment and I can't imagine that would change. I'm more surprised that they bothered mentioning the womens team because its such a tiny part of buying United. You should be pleased they mentioned it rather than having a dig because of some weird interpretation of a perfecly normal comment.
 
Rightnr said:
As much as I want Qatar for the possibilities of their resources, that bit about the women not being forgotten is hilarious.

We won't forget the women, tacked on the end, as if you're talking about a pet. This is where United fans need to be vocal and demand support for all parts of the club if we do get bought.
Click to expand...
I think this is only in your head.
 
villain said:
What happens when the current Emir leaves his position?
Click to expand...

villain said:
The guy buying us is 42, yes but he’s not the Emir of Qatar.
Click to expand...

You were asking about the Emir. The guy who's buying us Sheikh Jassim is only 40. Sheikh Tamim the Emir of Qatar is 42, so unless he is deposed or dies young he'll be in the position for a long time to come.
 
Mickeza said:
His dad is the guy who bribed Prince Charles with cash in tesco carrier bags - he’s proper shady :lol:
Click to expand...

I hope when they deliver the bid to the Glazers they at least have a bit of class and use M&S bags this time.
 
DownRiver said:


This is getting pathetic now. So the rich of America don’t get subsidies and tax breaks?

I had muted Miguel from 5 years ago because of the amount of transfer predications he got horribly wrong! How did he become the chief writer for independent?!
Click to expand...

This casual way he posts as if it’s a statement of fact is what gets to me.
 
Bert_ said:
It's a massive PR project, so for a basic example, buying big name players that they can use as ambassadors for Qatar. Stick them in adverts and have them promote Qatar and Qatari companies across the world. If the manager doesn't want or need these players then tough luck. He has to take them. The image is more import than reality.
Click to expand...
Just think of Ed Woodward on steroids. Think Di Maria multiplied. Here’s the thing: the Quataris and Saudis will be in a direct schlong-measuring contest.
 
I don't think either side is wrong here. Or right.

Both bidders come with their baggage, their issues. Go with Qatari, you've got the human rights issues. Go with Ineos and you have lesser moral issues but still issues re the tax dodging and fracking support. Bit on top of that there's the debt issue still.

Both bids would come under scrutiny, and they should. Myself I'm narrowly leaning towards Qatari ownership due to the debt situation mainly, but I'm not exactly rolling out the red carpet over it. And I totally see the side of those who want SJR. I just don't really have time for anyone who champions either side like they're the savior.
 
The scenes on here when we keep the Glazers with extra US debt and the Qatari bloke moves onto Liverpool instead.
 
Rightnr said:
As much as I want Qatar for the possibilities of their resources, that bit about the women not being forgotten is hilarious.

We won't forget the women, tacked on the end, as if you're talking about a pet. This is where United fans need to be vocal and demand support for all parts of the club if we do get bought.
Click to expand...

This is the issue, you read that and came up with this. That's not what the statement said.
 
cyberman said:
How is leaving the Glazers debt on the club simply a furore? Fans have every right to be concerned about that and it’s ridiculous to write off their worries as being oil cash hungry.
You’re being the other side of the same coin with this
Click to expand...
He simply isn’t going to do that. It makes no sense. It’s a furore based around a PR puff piece that has very little specific detail driven by twitter. It’s an assumption by the journo/fan base because he hasn’t stated specifically he would clear it. Look at the nonsense because they used the word ‘majority’. Criticism of both bids is welcomed, but it’s not balanced or based on reality. We simply don’t know!
 
villain said:
So he’s the son of someone who used to be involved in the Qatari Government, there’s no evidence to suggest that he is still tied in anyway, in fact his father’s involvement ended when the current Emir took reign?

We don’t know rich he actually is, because these ‘Rich List’ things are never accurate, but in any case his father is seemingly rich enough anyway and therefore wouldn’t need State funds.

What am I missing here? This doesn’t marry up with the other reports of this being the Qatar State owning us in all but name.
Click to expand...

Because they Qataris and ME royals in general are notoriously coy on their financial data and inner circle. The evidence being that he is still an Al Thani and while he doesn't belong to the key branch of the Al Thani family (with the Emir), they still are a significant branch of it. I think the poster who mentioned that it is a possibility that the state via it's sovereign fund will take over eventually when the situation with PSG is resolved, is a solid theory. Owning Manchester United is too big for them to let a "non-important" member of the Al Thani family owning it all by himself, so they are most likely using him as a proxy. In the short term though, it fixes the public issue with links to the PSG ownership.
 
I've not really seen or want 'ambassadors' involved. It would seem horrendously gimmicky. If someone approves or otherwise with the prospect of someone else buying us based on whether David Beckham is paid to endorse them, then I don't care about their opinion
 
stevoc said:
Liverpool aren't for sale though.
Click to expand...

They will be eventually. Liverpool are currently on the same boat as we were last year, where Glazers tried investment from outside which failed. Because nobody with money wants to own a minority share without any say except hedge funds.

Since all their competitors are improving and spending and them imploding this year and hopefully with a poor transfer window in the summer, there will be fan pressure and protests (like us) and the owners will give in, and what do you think will happen if we are already bought by SJR, Qataris will turn their attention towards pool.
 
stevoc said:
You were asking about the Emir. The guy who's buying us Sheikh Jassim is only 40. Sheikh Tamim the Emir of Qatar is 42, so unless he is deposed or dies young he'll be in the position for a long time to come.
Click to expand...

well damn I didn’t know that, that’s interesting.
My question remains though - what would then happen after he owns us? If this guy is just a prop, how do the actual decisions get made? And what would owning us achieve that owning other property in the UK & elsewhere not achieve?

BarstoolProphet said:
Because they Qataris and ME royals in general are notoriously coy on their financial data and inner circle. The evidence being that he is still an Al Thani and while he doesn't belong to the key branch of the Al Thani family (with the Emir), they still are a significant branch of it. I think the poster who mentioned that it is a possibility that the state via it's sovereign fund will take over eventually when the situation with PSG is resolved, is a solid theory. Owning Manchester United is too big for them to let a "non-important" member of the Al Thani family owning it all by himself. In the short term though, it fixes the public issue with links to the PSG ownership.
Click to expand...

Is it impossible that this guy has agency to buy United on his own accord and not linked to the Qatar government?
 
Fahad Jawaid said:
They will be eventually. Liverpool are currently on the same boat as we were last year, where Glazers tried investment from outside which failed. Because nobody with money wants to own a minority share without any say except hedge funds.

Since all their competitors are improving and spending and them imploding this year and hopefully with a poor transfer window in the summer, there will be fan pressure and protests (like us) and the owners will give in, and what do you think will happen if we are already bought by SJR, Qataris will turn their attention towards pool.
Click to expand...

Who knows what the future holds. Until it happens I wouldn't worry about it.
 
villain said:
well damn I didn’t know that, that’s interesting.
My question remains though - what would then happen after he owns us? If this guy is just a prop, how do the actual decisions get made? And what would owning us achieve that owning other property in the UK & elsewhere not achieve?
Click to expand...

I'll preface this as 'Hypothetically' so I don't upset anyone, seeing as we're now pretending this isn't a state backed bid. But hypothetically if United are owned by the Qatari state then they will likely just put a team in charge and it will operate fairly independently much like PSG. I doubt the Emir or whoever would be hands in the day to day running.

As to what owning United would achieve, well it's an investment in itself I imagine it might also open doors in terms of property development in Manchester. I remember reading recently that Liverpool and as a result Salford got Freeport status from the government. So who knows if that's tied in somehow. The guys behind this bid may well be United fans but the takeover will have other aims as well no doubt.
 
Whilst I appreciate the tweets from experts in their fields lets just cut the BS

The Qatar bid is state funded and will be state owned, any appearance that it is not will be manufactured... we know it, UEFA knows it, the FA and Premier league know it... but it all comes down to what can be documented, the appearance of propriety.

In the same way that everybody knows that City have flagrantly breached FFP for years, and not even subtly, but it comes down to what a lawyer can evidence, this has very little to do with the truth.
 
villain said:
well damn I didn’t know that, that’s interesting.
My question remains though - what would then happen after he owns us? If this guy is just a prop, how do the actual decisions get made? And what would owning us achieve that owning other property in the UK & elsewhere not achieve?



Is it impossible that this guy has agency to buy United on his own accord and not linked to the Qatar government?
Click to expand...

Is it possible that Fredo buys a grand hotel casino in Las Vegas on his own accord and not linked to Don Corleone?
 
Zed 101 said:
Whilst I appreciate the tweets from experts in their fields lets just cut the BS

The Qatar bid is state funded and will be state owned, any appearance that it is not will be manufactured... we know it, UEFA knows it, the FA and Premier league know it... but it all comes down to what can be documented, the appearance of propriety.

In the same way that everybody knows that City have flagrantly breached FFP for years, and not even subtly, but it comes down to what a lawyer can evidence, this has very little to do with the truth.
Click to expand...
It will be state funded but not state owned. Sheikh Jassim will likely be influenced by the Qatari state but that's still a significant difference to being state owned.
 
Green Arrow said:
It doesn't fit the narrative for them, they are trying so hard to push all anti Qatari news.
Click to expand...
Lucky then that no one is pushing Pro-Quatar propaganda. So…
  • He is not just a cut-out, he’s loved the club since before he was born.
  • Greenwashing is as bad as sportswashing (though it’s not sportswashing). Ratcliffe is evil, too.
  • Ratcliffe is/was a Chelsea fan
  • We want Mbappe
  • Anyone who questions the Quatari bid is being racist
  • Buying United will help civil rights in Quatar.
  • The devil himself would be better than the Glazers.
  • PSG are not a circus
  • PSG might be a circus, but Quatar (or cut out) will treat United differently
 
Plant0x84 said:
He simply isn’t going to do that. It makes no sense. It’s a furore based around a PR puff piece that has very little specific detail driven by twitter. It’s an assumption by the journo/fan base because he hasn’t stated specifically he would clear it. Look at the nonsense because they used the word ‘majority’. Criticism of both bids is welcomed, but it’s not balanced or based on reality. We simply don’t know!
Click to expand...
It’s all we have to go on. Same way you can say Jim is the only answer when all you have go on is the very same puff piece.
What criticism has Jim received? Are you saying he’s been under the spotlight more than Qatar?!
 
webbthepostie said:
Significant or semantic?
Click to expand...
I'd say significant, because of the level of separation between Sheikh Jassim and Qatari state entities from a governance perspective. He will get the money from state sources but they will not have any enforceable equity in the club from a legal perspective. Qatari influence relies purely on personal relationships that are loose to begin with.
 
stevoc said:
Indeed if he isn't state backed then people should be more worried about his bid than Ratcliffe's. Because he'd have to have access to tens of billions to comfortably accomplish what he is promising.

If he isn't state backed then the question must be asked could he be borrowing it all?
Click to expand...
People want to have their cake and eat it too. They want the funds of the Qatar state while also claiming it has nothing to do with the Qatar state.


villain said:
Also just because his wealth isn’t known to Forbes/The Times doesn’t mean his wealth is unknown to the appropriate people in Qatar, that seems a bit of a stretch.
Click to expand...
If it’s all his private wealth then it’s a incredibly worrying deal.

The guy is claiming massive changes at United, and the best answer we’ve got(Apart from him as a proxy for state ownership)is that he might be hiding billions and that his dad is loaded.
 
stevoc said:
Pretty much every business they inherited has been run into the ground.
Click to expand...

To be fair to them, retail complexes going down aren't exactly their fault. I can visit the trafford centre in peace these days; when they inherited it the place was packed.
 
Prodigal7 said:
It will be state funded but not state owned. Sheikh Jassim will likely be influenced by the Qatari state but that's still a significant difference to being state owned.
Click to expand...

I think that's pretty much what most people think. Legally it won't be state owned but the state are bank rolling the endeavour.
 
Plant0x84 said:
He simply isn’t going to do that. It makes no sense. It’s a furore based around a PR puff piece that has very little specific detail driven by twitter. It’s an assumption by the journo/fan base because he hasn’t stated specifically he would clear it. Look at the nonsense because they used the word ‘majority’. Criticism of both bids is welcomed, but it’s not balanced or based on reality. We simply don’t know!
Click to expand...

I love how with SJR everyone is like "we simply don't know" but with Qatar its "get your head out the sand" the money is 100% coming from the state.
 
So many on here willing to believe that this isn’t state ownership.

What individual has accumulated the sort of wealth needed to buy United, rebuild the stadium and invest in the manner being talked about?

Can we just be honest with ourselves and acknowledge that the bid is by the Qatari state no matter how it is dressed up?

We are sounding more and more like City fans every time I read this thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.