Oh for sure. I wasn't implying this would mean he has majority control. Obviously on any decisions the Glazers will just let Joel decide as they have always done.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
sheikh Jassim after 10 months of negotiations with the glazers
No clue! Haven't watched it yet. But the description
"Jan Aage Fjortoft, Frank LeBoeuf, Marc Ogden, Shaka Hislop, and Craig Burley join Kay Murray on ESPN FC to discuss former Qatar prime minister Sheikh Nassim withdrawing his bid in Man United to the current owners the Glazer family, who announced late last year they were considering selling. "
Someone uploading that video messed up badly
Must be Sheikh Nassim?
A year later and still most of the media don't have a clue who Jassim even is.No clue! Haven't watched it yet. But the description
"Jan Aage Fjortoft, Frank LeBoeuf, Marc Ogden, Shaka Hislop, and Craig Burley join Kay Murray on ESPN FC to discuss former Qatar prime minister Sheikh Nassim withdrawing his bid in Man United to the current owners the Glazer family, who announced late last year they were considering selling. "
Someone messed up badly uploading that video
To be honest I subscribed to that opinion, that eventually they'd just cough up what the Glazers wanted. But when you look at the breakdown of the INEOS deal they are eventually (I believe) paying more than Jassim was offering.
So maybe it really was a private enterprise and the Qatari state weren't involved. Because it looks like the limitless funds just weren't there, they've made themselves look a bit naive and with how they've withdrawn from the process after a year of pissing about with their tails between their legs they look as you say like right lemons.
Just a bit embarrassing all round.
I dont think so because The Glazers own 69% (although some of that is class A). Dont think buying all class A gets anywhere near 58%. And you are right, he still would have the votes.
Totally agree mate.Unfortunately they propped up their bid with the Old Trafford revamp, surrounding area and training ground.
glazers see us as an asset. Like selling their summer house. Who gives a bollocks about the new buyer wanting to put in a swimming pool, redoing the roof etc. all Glazers care about is the sale value that lands in their pocket. They have no connection to United, no remorse about the shit they have us in - they simply are going to go to the biggest bidder and Qatar fell short.
the fact remains Qatar underbid by at least a billion (5billion offered and 6billion widely reported to be the magic number) and are now throwing their toys out of the pram and making it sound like only 8-10billion offer would have done
It is what it is now. But Glazers need to be dethroned and moved on. Ineos now need to be very clear with their intentions, plans, full roadmap disclosure. I won’t write them off yet but it’s going to be a much longer road with the structure involved, so we need milestones declared and those milestones met at every single point.
time for the Glazers control to be fecked out.
Quite a dumb move for Qatar to go shouting about how much money they were going to spend post sale as The Glazers would only want a piece of that.
Not is just seems like sour grapes.
Or Jim Bowen on Bullseye - "look what you could have won".
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Can someone post the article please, I can't see it?
The headline is misleading.
Article reads - United tend to do only minor business in January and money is available for next summer regardless of any deal with Ratcliffe
Its literally not that becsuse Glazers aren't calling the shots in the football department anymore.
Its not. One is just prioritised to be handled first over the other.
True but that's probably due to the Glazers and we are short in a few positions.
The club has managed to spend/waste over a billion on transfers with owners that have never put a penny into the club.
Having a new owner shouting about what shiny new toys he will buy first is the last thing any fans should be wishing for.
United have never needed a sugar daddy…just give us a competent owner who will spend the money the club generates wisely.
Having a new owner shouting about what shiny new toys he will buy first is the last thing any fans should be wishing for.
United have never needed a sugar daddy…just give us a competent owner who will spend the money the club generates wisely.
Well said
Spot on. We need capable people running the football, not oil money.
Can you explain this please?
Ineos apparently have $2bn worth of investment agreements with the Saudi Royal Commision
I'd be shocked if a petrochemicals company didn't have any involvement with the Saudis
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So are we royally fecked or what?
I can't keep up with all the news and I don't know anything about Jim Ratcliffe or where all this will eventually take the club. Glazers will still be around so I'm going to guess we're still fecked but can't be sure how fecked?
I can't keep up with all the news and I don't know anything about Jim Ratcliffe or where all this will eventually take the club. Glazers will still be around so I'm going to guess we're still fecked but can't be sure how fecked?
I disagree. Brailsford is a great proponent of marginal improvements in performances. I am sure we will have marginal improvements in our transfer spending too.
Who controls your budget, controls your business/operation/department. It is like getting a job where you have all the responsibilities without the authority.
Its such a sweet deal for the Glazers. They have everything to gain and nothing to lose.
Rattcliffe's team manages the footballing side, taking the Glazers out of the firing line. And if the footballing side improves its performances, then the Glazers benefit later when they will have even more leverage a few years down the line when it comes to selling out, if they want to. Some fecked up strategic review again.
If the INEOS team fails, then it will be their fault. Glazers will only point to them.
From Glazers out to maybe Ratcliffe Out.
Brailsford better buy a new camper soon and park it at Carrington. The poor sod's got all the weight of the world on his shoulder starting this weekend.
Last edited:
Exactly, we have proven over the years that spending a shit load of money isn’t a guarantee of success. They need to start at the top of the football operations(DoF) and build around his vision. ETH should have a voice but DoF having the final word.
Exactly. If the Glazers did spend an extra 500 million in the transfer window, the idiots would waste 90% of it. We've spent a billion in ten years to get Bruno and Martinez as the only successes.
Just because we heard of a reputed DOF doesnt mean he will succeed at United. I don't think there are any certs for this.
How do you define a top DOF and their operation? These are boffins behind their computer screens, in rooms most people arent allowed to visit.
As fans, we can only go by reputation. But like the past managers, reputations don't always guarantee success.
We will only be able to judge with hindsight.
Completely agree with you. From a deal perspective, Glazers won hands down. The club has not won at all, Sir Jim paid over the odds just to get his foot in the door. People say there must be a time table for him to get total control, yes there should be but we don’t have insight of the conditions - could be years. Sir Jim and his team equally aren’t stupid, there is an option in there where they can either purchase or back out if things don’t go well. Owning 25% of the club as a pure investment play is a sound strategy given the value of the club will inevitably go up. There is only one Manchester United, it doesn’t matter how crappy we are on the pitch. This is the real leverage of the Glazers. That said, the best reflection about the attractiveness of this deal is always in the market. On that, the share price has dropped. Conversely, if one was a betting man, had the club been fully sold to Qatar, would be a good bet on the shares going up.
Agree with this. Let’s just put performance aside (and the massive transfer fees potentially involved). What is sorely needed is stability and investment on infrastructure + clearing of debt. It’s simple, the club just needs to be able to spend its own earnings. That’s not possible right now. Does the Sir Jim deal change that? Can’t see it.
That's the misnomer that everyone here keeps using. We can't spend based on our own earnings anymore. Folks are looking at selective line items in the spreadsheet only.
As economists would say, Ceteris paribus or if all things remain equal then we could spend what we earn. But unfortunately, there are two big elephants in the room.
If we didn't have the ever-increasing cost of the debt and the kicked-down-the-road capital expenditure spending then I would agree. If we had to borrow for the infra upgrades then there is no way our existing revenues can carry/support those expenditures.
Last edited:
Good post.
I think the biggest difference will come from the ownership. And if Ratcliffe does have control over the football side then that should make a difference and aid the football department in making decisions quickly and then signing players more efficiently.
And if you look at the top clubs who have a defined way of playing the game. Their vision on how they play comes from managers from the past. For example the positional play in possession and the coordinated pressing concepts are ideas that came from managers from bygone eras. Whether it's Rinus Michels, Cruyff or Sacchi, these guys have provided the direction for many top clubs who have copied and developed the same concepts in the modern game.
Jassim was trying to get the fans to his side. I think that was naive by itself. Glazers only cares about which deal will benefit them financially, do they care about debt? Care about former glory? Care about the stadium rebuilt? These are things that they are hardly interested. Jassim should have not look desperate and works things in the background. Could even make Glazers a minority shareholder, this deal would have been concluded before pre-season starter. Just hope that there will be right people in place to run the club.
Its all hindsight, 20/20 vision. Like any deal lost, its easy to criticise after the fact.
I bet if he had won, the fans would have lauded his vision and how pro-fan he was.
But is it? Jassim allegedly went months without hearing anything? He had ample time to redraft or recalibrate is offer. The only thing that was in Jassim's favour was that he gave the four siblings that wanted to sell a clean transaction.
I don't know what his thinking was? The incremental raises in his offers did nothing. It was as if he was just expecting a "yes" to come his way.
It was probably his to lose at one stage, but he had to offer the full price, but he seemed to underestimate the process.
Or maybe the Glazers and half the world thought he was funded by the Qatari Sovereign Fund? Maybe he was just a businessman after all? He had a budget allocated to the bid.
I think in theory his proposal was by far the better one for everyone. My only criticism is that the best proposals don't always win and he assumed that the Glazers are rational.
Ultimately and not surprisingly greed got the better of the Glazers ---- instead of the bird in hand theory. I would take the bird in hand approach, especially at the ROI that the Glazers are getting with that proposal and who knows what could happen in 3-5 years time.
But Ratcliffe showed a bit of cleavage (but not everything) to the Glazers and that was enough for the Glazers to get sucked in for a higher potential profit.
Who ends up owning us? Sir Jim personally or his company INEOS? What happens when he passes away?
Rich folks tend to live much longer esp billionaires. I expect INEOS to be sold before Ratcliffe dies. They are too small to compete in the long run.
Bet you use some of the products his company makes though, if you don't then you probably live in a cave
It was, but as you say Ratcliffe played the better game. Jassim wanted to use the fans and personalities like Ferdinand and Beckham to glitter his offer. He also probably thought off the back of a World Cup being hosted this would be a cake walk. There is definitely something peculiar about the Qatari process in this.
However, there is one thing that the 2 brothers that wanted to stay are stating (which I thought was BS when I first heard it), that the US economy and interest rate crisis applicable to the US is not as bad as first predicted when the time of the Chelsea sale. That with the US World Cup could bring in opportunities and that was why there was a "consideration to take the club off the market". I thought that just a Glazer line but it is apparently true.
Going back to Jassim, maybe the credit Suisse issue and hosting the World Cup hampered his ability to spend?
- Status