Thanks mate. The following is just my opinion as I have no insight on the specifics of this process beyond what we have seen reported in the media.
I think no transaction at all is the least likely outcome. I've seen some people worrying that this whole process is a farce and it's all just for the Glazers to estimate what they could get and accept only if anyone blew them away. Sorry, not buying it. As far as I can tell, the club needs significant investment, we know the Glazers will not spend any of their own money, interest rates are the highest they've been in years, and many sports teams have been partially/fully sold in the past 2 years for insane sums. The conditions are perfect for them to make a clean break.
I think the second least likely outcome is private equity minority investment. This makes almost no sense. The short of it is: a firm would have to fork over a significant amount to invest into the club and a significant amount to purchase whatever their minority stake is. Why spend that much when you can spend a bit more to control the thing? I also can't see who in their right mind would invest if Joel and Avram are still in charge, and likewise, I can't see Joel and Avram going for this deal if they don't get to call the shots still.
That brings me to my next point: the Jimmy Rat bid where he buys out 4 Glazers, Joel and Avram stay on, and in 3 years, there are two sets of options exercisable that would give J&A the right (but not the obligation) to sell to Sir Jim at a predetermined price, and another option that gives Sir Jim the right (but not the obligation) to buy out J&A at a (presumably different) predetermined price. If we are to believe Ratcliffe has 3 bids still on the table (69% now, 4 Glazers now + put option, 4 Glazers now + call option), I don't see how there would not be 3 different valuations.
This bid is what has thrown this process into turmoil as far as I can tell. All we can go on is what is reported, and who knows how reliable that is. If their description of these options is accurate (calling them put and call options), on the surface, there would be absolutely nothing forcing them to be exercised when they mature in 3 years. Unless the put option (the one where J&A have the right to force Sir Jim to buy their shares at a predetermined price) are priced very favourably, I personally don't see the appeal of this offer for J&A, unless they truly do want to hold on for 3 more years (minimum). Final comment on this bid: I don't see why J&A would want to stay on as shareholders with no influence, and I don't see why Mr. Ratcliffe would buy a controlling stake only to give these two muppets any kind of a say.
I have serious questions about if Ratcliffe's 69% bid is still on the table, and if that bid also values the club higher than the Sheihk's bid. Reading between the lines, my guess would be "no," because I don't see why he would bid with the options in 3 years if that were the case. Reminder, this is all going under the notion that media reports on these bids are actually accurate.
My personal opinion is that it has always been and still is the Qataris to lose and Ratcliffe is simply used a pawn to help the Glazers and Raine get the largest sum out of Qatar. If the Qataris were only bidding against themselves, they would have massive leverage. I believe one or both of the Ratcliffe option proposals is the one beating the Sheikh's in valuation and the Glazers are using it as leverage in the hopes of the Qataris matching or beating it. I believe J&A are blowing smoke about wanting to stay on under Ratcliffe.
