This is sounding worse by the day.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
When did SJ make a statement? The share price rocketed after the Glazers made the strategic announcement. It reached its peak when influencers and journalists said that Qatar were leading.
I think here Sir Jim is looking to buy a minority shareholding, initially, with a view to a takeover. If that is the case then the issue of dissent (some Cayman Islands Law argument) can be used by the shareholders.
Also the Glazers can't have a side agreement when the plan was a strategic Club initiative otherwise they did not act impartially as directors, everything has to be open and fair (?)
Very frustrating how the date keeps getting pushed back
So no January signings then?
It’s really not a good omen
Delays mean pro-Qatar Twitter ITKs get one last opportunity to desperately cling onto their pathetic lies 
This might end up summing up the next couple of years in retrospect.
It was Sir Jassim all along!Delays mean pro-Qatar Twitter ITKs get one last opportunity to desperately cling onto their pathetic lies
Cayman Islands. The entire reason why this bid had to be reconstructed was because of that law.
This has been discussed about 1m times in here within the last 2 months.
It’s not breaking news. Sir Jim can buy all he wants up until that one share that gives him full control and then it’s lawyers at the ready
How do you know those are all lies and the Sir Jim stuff isnt? We havent had anything official yet from the club or either bidderDelays mean pro-Qatar Twitter ITKs get one last opportunity to desperately cling onto their pathetic lies
Only if we sign Max VerstappenSo if Jim changes the FA / UEFA rules you're telling me there's a chance?
I'll say it again, if Ten Hag hadn't done so well last season we'd already be sold by now. The Glazers are reluctant sellers and were looking for an excuse to stay. So if we continue to struggle this season it might not be the worst thing for our future, it would speed this process up.
Maybe I trust reputable sources like the Athletic, Times, Bloomberg or Reuters over those idiots claiming to be ITK?
We usually don’t anyway
It’s literally the worst outcome we could have got.
I don’t believe for one second that SJR will buy 100% of the club.
He won’t meet the Glazers £6 billion valuation now. So why the feck would he meet their £8-£10 billion valuation 2-3 years down the line?
The whole thing is a bloody mess.
Because the Glazers…
I have the same concern to be honest. I refuse to believe Jim will pay approx 8B to acquire full control . Just don't see it.
This is probably a minority investment which is what Glazers always wanted . Using this 1.25B I think the brothers will have an agreement to split the ownership and finally it will down to 2 glazers + Jim.
Jim will take up the sporting control but Glazers will be very much part of it (not all of them but the ones who doesn't want to sell)
Every single bit of enthusiasm I did have for the potential of a takeover has now dissipated.
I think I’m kinda done with all of this now. Past caring about it, whatever happens - happens.
I think I’m kinda done with all of this now. Past caring about it, whatever happens - happens.
That’s not the whole reason though let’s be honest. Buying in January involves luck. Lucky to get the player you want (most likely the club want to keep their best at that stage of season) and they cost more as a result
Depends where you buy from and what your plans are.
Mixture of the lead 'owner' parasites looking to stay and drain plus (IMO) certain fans led by the nose regarding the nature of Qatar and the Qatari bid, means that he's the least-worst option on the table. There doesn't seem to be any cash-flush billionaire looking to redevelop the club (a) out of 'love' or (b) to rebuild its brand alongside stadium/high-end fan/real-estate opportunities which would be bolstered by the former 'rebuilding', which seems to have been the Jassim angle. Neither, of course, a general move towards making all clubs 50+1 fan owned, which would be my preference.
If he can leverage enough to gain control over footballing business and (A) bring in a high-end SD/DOF and get everyone to reinterview for their jobs and (b) switch the focus back towards recruiting the most promising up and coming players with appropriate physical as well as mental and technical skillsets - basically, Dortmund-style or high-end Brighton, or a more coherent version of Chelsea's approach - then we could at the least do an Arsenal and become a contender again, if not 'top dogs'. I'd also say that, as a fan and an intelligent enough guy going by his business dealings, whatever you think of his politics (which are pretty much diametrically opposed to mine) , he will want to refashion the current squad through disposing of certain players, even if it means selling for under market value. I doubt, for instance, he permits us to turn down 30+ for McTominay and for Maguire, or allows them to receive such mixed messages, or has any qualms about letting Sancho go.
People have been sceptical about the 25% 'buying him privileges over the footballing side, but an average CEO or Chair potentially has far less invested in the business in terms of stock and serves at the 'pleasure' of the board and then majority ownership (as I understand it, which might not be too well! am not a 'business guy') and still wields pretty much all responsibility. Levy doesn't majority own Spurs, though he has a sizable stake, and yet basically runs it without Lewis' interference, except an expectation to make the numbers work and grow the thing, as far as we've been led to understand. Likewise the CEO at Brighton. Hence, with some fiduciary responsibility clause in the corporate agreement and a general agreement to square the footballing side with specific brand commitments (tours, building a squad for whatever new version of the CL/ quasi- super League the Glazers have in mind), is there any compelling reason why he wouldn't be granted it?
If he can leverage enough to gain control over footballing business and (A) bring in a high-end SD/DOF and get everyone to reinterview for their jobs and (b) switch the focus back towards recruiting the most promising up and coming players with appropriate physical as well as mental and technical skillsets - basically, Dortmund-style or high-end Brighton, or a more coherent version of Chelsea's approach - then we could at the least do an Arsenal and become a contender again, if not 'top dogs'. I'd also say that, as a fan and an intelligent enough guy going by his business dealings, whatever you think of his politics (which are pretty much diametrically opposed to mine) , he will want to refashion the current squad through disposing of certain players, even if it means selling for under market value. I doubt, for instance, he permits us to turn down 30+ for McTominay and for Maguire, or allows them to receive such mixed messages, or has any qualms about letting Sancho go.
People have been sceptical about the 25% 'buying him privileges over the footballing side, but an average CEO or Chair potentially has far less invested in the business in terms of stock and serves at the 'pleasure' of the board and then majority ownership (as I understand it, which might not be too well! am not a 'business guy') and still wields pretty much all responsibility. Levy doesn't majority own Spurs, though he has a sizable stake, and yet basically runs it without Lewis' interference, except an expectation to make the numbers work and grow the thing, as far as we've been led to understand. Likewise the CEO at Brighton. Hence, with some fiduciary responsibility clause in the corporate agreement and a general agreement to square the footballing side with specific brand commitments (tours, building a squad for whatever new version of the CL/ quasi- super League the Glazers have in mind), is there any compelling reason why he wouldn't be granted it?
Then that begs the question,why leave it so late?
I think Jassim has been lacklustre and proactive enough. When set out to acquire something and don't achieve it, you have ask yourself why?
Yes, we can point to the greed, but they must have known what was required.
In regards to no deal occurring, there is a part of me that goes not give a Shyte anymore. They have to sort their own crap out without me investing head space in it.
Perhaps, there was a lot from Beckham last week?
So it might take the 8 weeks they stated.
So much for all that horseshit about Raine Group making the process seemless in the year this has been going, if this INEOS thing drags out to Christmas.
Ideally this falls through and we finish mid table and fall out of European competition completely.
this entire saga has completely fvcked up this great club and this season is going to end up a disaster with us possibly missing out on europe next season
There are laws in place in some countries, where if you purchase a certain percentage of shares in a company you have to offer to buy all the shares, in some cases the shareholders have to sell, I have no idea what the case is here but there have been threats of lawsuits about the A class shares being left out of "bids"
Better to end up out of Europe but with a new dominant owner. Maybe the only way to flush the druts.
It'd be a struggle to get January signings done even if the takeover had been completed due to FFP.
100%. can a win be a loss?
So being a 25% owner does Ratcliffe get to decide where it is spent without any interference from glazers and the board. If so then what is stopping him from spending £100m on a nothing player from Nice or Lausanne. Wouldn’t that be a way to siphon off money from United to his other ventures. See now why i said you can’t give control to a minority investor.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Just feck off
So Now the Glazers are involved in the sporting side?
I cannot understand why anyone watches these types of channels, let alone take any of it seriously.
Looks like it - much more so than currently. Maybe this was a condition of the part sale
Awesome.
- Status