Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,811
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
Yeah bud weird he said that. It would also have to be disclosed to the SEC if the deal is agreed.
It’s not weird. He just says a bunch of wafty vaguisms and hopes it’s interpreted which ever way the cards fall.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,811
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
He was the first.

5:00
Ben even had the caveat that it was what he was hearing from a source, and doesn’t mean it’s correct. He was later found correct ofcourse.
:lol:

feck off posting a video of him saying loads of things are unclear and he doesn’t know anything
 

MiamiSpartan

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,225
Location
Miami, FL, USA
He was the first.

5:00
Ben even had the caveat that it was what he was hearing from a source, and doesn’t mean it’s correct. He was later found correct ofcourse.
Except that it wasn't a world record bid, so he wasn't correct. They were outbid by Ineos, so it makes it pretty obvious where the line about "Jassim's world record bid" that he and several other journalists touted, came from.

And before anyone jumps in and says that Qatar offered 100%, so they offered more than Ineos. No, no they didn't. The Glazers don't have 100% to sell, nor can they negotiate on behalf of the public shareholders, so no one bid on 100%. Qatar and Ineos each made an offer to buy 69%, and Ineos made a separate offer for 51%. Only once a party acquires control can they then make offers for the other 31% to the public shareholders.
 

Ahriman

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 10, 2019
Messages
104
Except that it wasn't a world record bid, so he wasn't correct. They were outbid by Ineosshareholders.
You don't know this though. If the Ineos bid is so amazing, why hasn't it been acceped yet? You're taking what you want to believe as fact, but the reality is that no one knows nothing. It's all guesswork until an official announcement.
 
Last edited:

YikesSchmeics

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
345
Andy Mitten thinks De Gea should be given a new contract and be #1 next season. Not directly relevant but it's typical of his judgement on all things football related - very poor.

He is always banging on about speaking to these wonderful 'sources' and 'contacts' he supposedly has but he hardly ever puts pen to paper and gets exclusive breaking news like Whitwell or Ornstein. Funny that.

He's a BS artist. No better than those bizarre Qatari twitter accounts you see posted here sometimes.

Brilliant. The context he gives as to why he holds that opinion re De Gea is our limited resources and more pressing needs elsewhere.

Seems of course you have no issue with intellectual dishonesty though. Says a lot about you.

Have some respect.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,567
Location
Cooper Station
Except that it wasn't a world record bid, so he wasn't correct. They were outbid by Ineos, so it makes it pretty obvious where the line about "Jassim's world record bid" that he and several other journalists touted, came from.

And before anyone jumps in and says that Qatar offered 100%, so they offered more than Ineos. No, no they didn't. The Glazers don't have 100% to sell, nor can they negotiate on behalf of the public shareholders, so no one bid on 100%. Qatar and Ineos each made an offer to buy 69%, and Ineos made a separate offer for 51%. Only once a party acquires control can they then make offers for the other 31% to the public shareholders.
The only way Ratcliffe wins this is by doing the 50+1 deal so Qatar will pay more up front than he will. That’s Ratcliffes supposed trump card.
 

Plant0x84

Shame we’re aren’t more like Brighton
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
13,531
Location
Carpark and snack area adjacent to the abyss
No problem. It wasn’t a competition between both sides for me. It was more about putting on show both buyers dirty laundry. Yes you’re right that it’s not comparable. But compare INEOS to myself. I have never put anyone in danger, injured, put toxins in air, kill the earth etc. He does this to make money. Compared to me and most people, Sir Jim is a wrongun.

The worst thing I’ve probably done is call someone a cnut on redcafe.
You don’t drive a car then? Or ravel by bus? :D
 

George The Best

Full Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
2,106
Location
Nut Megging
Yeah bud weird he said that. It would also have to be disclosed to the SEC if the deal is agreed.
Would it need to be disclosed to the SEC first? This is a private transaction of unlisted shares. Yes, the holders of the 31% of listed shares would be interested but I’m not sure there even needs to be an SEC filing as first notice.
 

MiamiSpartan

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,225
Location
Miami, FL, USA
The only way Ratcliffe wins this is by doing the 50+1 deal so Qatar will pay more up front than he will. That’s Ratcliffes supposed trump card.
No, Ineos's current bid option for the Glazers' full 69% is more than Qatar's.

The only way Ineos doesn't win this is if Qatar, for the first time since this whole process begins, actually makes a bid based on a valuation of at least 5.5, if not 6bn.
 

Kinsella

Copy & Paste Merchant
Joined
Jan 20, 2012
Messages
2,775
It's mind-boggling how many people on social media think that the Glazers would receive half the money from Ratcliffe than Jassim.
Not really…sure there were a number of people on here who didn’t know that the Glazers owned 69% of the club, and not 100%.
 

Marcelinho87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
7,265
Location
Barnsley
No, Ineos's current bid option for the Glazers' full 69% is more than Qatar's.

The only way Ineos doesn't win this is if Qatar, for the first time since this whole process begins, actually makes a bid based on a valuation of at least 5.5, if not 6bn.
Source?

All I have seen is that their 51% offer values the club higher.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,567
Location
Cooper Station
No, Ineos's current bid option for the Glazers' full 69% is more than Qatar's.

The only way Ineos doesn't win this is if Qatar, for the first time since this whole process begins, actually makes a bid based on a valuation of at least 5.5, if not 6bn.
The percentages are irrelevant. Their valuation of the share price is higher yes but the only way Ratcliffe comes out of this on top is if he does a deal with the Glazers. He’s paying more for less of a share just to get control.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,567
Location
Cooper Station
Source?

All I have seen is that their 51% offer values the club higher.
The valuation is for the whole club. Ratcliffe has structured his deal in such a way that means he is able to offer more for 51% of the club because it requires less liquidity so he can afford to make a higher valuation than Qatar who intend to buy 100% at around 5 billion currently
 

George The Best

Full Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
2,106
Location
Nut Megging
The valuation is for the whole club. Ratcliffe has structured his deal in such a way that means he is able to offer more for 51% of the club because it requires less liquidity so he can afford to make a higher valuation than Qatar who intend to buy 100% at around 5 billion currently
Qatar have not bid 5bn for the entire club. They can only buy the Glazer’s 69% at the mo, which is the only deal on the table. Their bid is for the Glazer’s shares only, same as INEOS.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,567
Location
Cooper Station
Qatar have not bid 5bn for the entire club. They can only buy the Glazer’s 69% at the mo, which is the only deal on the table. Their bid is for the Glazer’s shares only, same as INEOS.
They have valued the club at 5 billion I didn’t say they had bid that much to the Glazers.
 

MiamiSpartan

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,225
Location
Miami, FL, USA
The percentages are irrelevant. Their valuation of the share price is higher yes but the only way Ratcliffe comes out of this on top is if he does a deal with the Glazers. He’s paying more for less of a share just to get control.
How is it irrelevant? Ratcliffe's offer for 69% involves more money going to the Glazers than Qatar's offer for 69%. No one can offer to buy more than 69% from the Glazers. If they take the 50% option, Ratcliffe pays less now, but the Glazers that sell still get more now than they would from Qatar, and the two remaining Glazers would get more in 2-3 year's time from Ratcliffe than they would get now from either Qatar or Ineos.
 

TheLoveless

Full Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
1,149
Location
London
Qatar have not bid 5bn for the entire club. They can only buy the Glazer’s 69% at the mo, which is the only deal on the table. Their bid is for the Glazer’s shares only, same as INEOS.
They will buy 100%. The remaining minority shareholders will be forced to sell for a price that is considered good.
 

Rayman96

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 28, 2019
Messages
1,327
Location
Glasgow
Supports
Also supports Rangers
Everyday I log on... Ooooh ten more pages.... Something has happened!
Oh, it hasn't.
Oh yes. We can literally debate about hypothetical nothingness with ever increasing passion and anger.

Today it seems whether several no name journalists are good sources or not.
One in particular, Andy Mitten (just being honest that Ive never heard of him but then I couldnt name 5 mainstream ones off the top of my head ) seems to be dividing opinion with more and more ferocity.
Perhaps we need a poll. Andy Mitten keep or sell :lol:
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,567
Location
Cooper Station
How is it irrelevant? Ratcliffe's offer for 69% involves more money going to the Glazers than Qatar's offer for 69%. No one can offer to buy more than 69% from the Glazers. If they take the 50% option, Ratcliffe pays less now, but the Glazers that sell still get more now than they would from Qatar, and the two remaining Glazers would get more in 2-3 year's time from Ratcliffe than they would get now from either Qatar or Ineos.
I’m clearly saying Ratcliffe doesn’t intend to purchase 69%. I think his current intention is to do the deal for 51% to gain control and to gain the upper hand has made his valuation higher because his upfront cost is significantly less than the Qatar bid.

If Qatar takes control of the club they will literally have put £5 billion on the table for both the Glazer and publicly traded shares.

If Ratcliffe wins he is paying roughly half that and then a premium of some kind 2-3 years down the line. IMO this is the only way he can gain control. If you disagree then fine but I fully understand the situation. My take is that 51% is the only chance Ratcliffe has.
 

MiamiSpartan

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,225
Location
Miami, FL, USA
They will buy 100%. The remaining minority shareholders will be forced to sell for a price that is considered good.
But that doesn't have any relevance to the current sale process. The Glazers don't care about that (other than a very small handful of Class A shares that some have), and it's not part of the same transaction. Qatar can't take any steps toward that unless/until they finalize control of the club.
 

George The Best

Full Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
2,106
Location
Nut Megging
They will buy 100%. The remaining minority shareholders will be forced to sell for a price that is considered good.
They will not be forced to sell. The winning party, whoever they are, will be required to make a public offering for the remaining shares. The 31% do not need to accept if they think the offer is not good enough. If Qatar win they will need to bid around $30 per share to have a chance. INEOS don’t want 100% so they will probably lowball as they don’t care.
 

MiamiSpartan

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,225
Location
Miami, FL, USA
I’m clearly saying Ratcliffe doesn’t intend to purchase 69%. I think his current intention is to do the deal for 51% to gain control and to gain the upper hand has made his valuation higher because his upfront cost is significantly less than the Qatar bid.

If Qatar takes control of the club they will literally have put £5 billion on the table for both the Glazer and publicly traded shares.

If Ratcliffe wins he is paying roughly half that and then a premium of some kind 2-3 years down the line. IMO this is the only way he can gain control. If you disagree then fine but I fully understand the situation. My take is that 51% is the only chance Ratcliffe has.
The only chance of the Glazers leaving at all currently rests with the 51% option that Ratcliffe has offered, if you ask me. But you can't say that he doesn't intend to purchase 69% if he has put a bid on the table for that (which is at the same valuation of the club as the 51%). It will cost him more to buy the remaining 18% in 2-3 years than it would now, so it makes little sense for him to prefer the 51% option.

Granted, I think it's unlikely that they take the 69% option from him. And less likely still that they take the current bid from Qatar. Barring Qatar finally deciding to offer close to the 6bn valuation, then the only chance of the Glazers giving up control at all rests with the 51% option.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.