Dubai a contender to buy Man Utd

Livewire1974

If it moves, report it.
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
7,827
Location
Dublin
I’d rather have the Dubai cnuts than the Glazer cnuts. At least the Dubai cnuts won’t steal our own generated money to fill their own pockets.
You prefer homophobic misogynistic head chopping vermin ?
 

Laurencio

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2017
Messages
3,230
Erm dont the Glazers do this?

This pipedream of wanting a perfect owner who is also not tight needs to disappear. Its never going to happen.
All I want is someone who can run the club well and provide the structure for success. Preferably without using the club for sportwashing if possible. Take your dividends if you must, just manage the damn thing sensibly.
 

Tyrion

Full Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2014
Messages
5,236
Location
Ireland
English owned > Dubai owned
Agreed. I hate the Glazers but at least we're not used for sportswashing. I'd rather a normal(-ish) businessman like Boehly.

What even is an Emirate? A stadium, a country, an airline?

Am I an Emirate?
Afaik, Emirates are hereditary titles and places like Duchies and the UAE is made up of several of them.
 

carlbcfc

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
223
Supports
Birmingham City
…. But what happens after the Arabs get bored of waving their football ding dongs at each other?

United need to be self sustaining and not fed by a sugar daddy like City.
 

carlbcfc

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
223
Supports
Birmingham City
But let me tell you this. If they don’t get United, they WILL buy Liverpool…..
 

Cascarino

Magnum Poopus
Joined
Jul 17, 2014
Messages
7,616
Location
Wales
Supports
Swansea

lsd

The Oracle
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
10,935
We just need Lewis Hamilton,Conor McGregor and Snoop Dogg to join together and we sorted.

Still think we haven't heard the last of Elon Musk to be honest
 

BarstoolProphet

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
6,617
How would it work with Abu Dhabi (City owners) being by far the richest of the Emirates?
Abu Dhabi has been funding (from oil) the other Emirates for years but Dubai is not (or atleast lesser now than before) dependent on Abu Dhabi funds anymore due to tourism and being an international financial hub (will probably, if not already overtake London in that regard). Both Emirates/cities are probably the two richest in the world and probably have the largest reserve of feck you money so doubt it would affect anything if both owned the Manchester clubs. Dubai is also way more liberal and western-oriented than Abu Dhabi.
 

lsd

The Oracle
Joined
Jun 5, 2016
Messages
10,935

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
But let me tell you this. If they don’t get United, they WILL buy Liverpool…..
Great. Let Liverpool's club and history be sullied instead if they want. It makes not being a Liverpool fan all the better.
 

Traub

Full Member
Joined
Jun 26, 2009
Messages
10,246
Dubai knew their oil was running out so they’ve diversified their investments, including tourism.

I don’t see what’s in it for Dubai. Saudi need the sports washing, Dubai is already accepted as a business and tourism hub.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
20,891
Can't we get bought by one of those good countries, you know, like... Iceland?

*waits for someone to tell me how evil Iceland is*
Iceland is beside Greenland, Greenland is owned by Denmark, Denmark is part of NATO, the USA are also part of NATO and they dropped nuclear bombs on Japan.

So you have to ask yourself do you really want people like that to own the club?
 

Giant Midget

Aka - rooney_10119
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
5,220
Would stop supporting the club. Don’t want to be part of a sport-washing operation by a bunch of literal human slavers.
 

BuzzKillington

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2021
Messages
1,582
Location
Greater Manchester
Have a look at a breakdown of Dubai's GDP
Gdp is not income. Dubai attracts business because they offer incredibly low levels of tax. They can do this because the state is tiny and makes a lot of money from oil. They assume that once the oil dries up and they start levying taxes that businesses will stay. Given the state will still be tiny they probably won’t have to raise taxes that much to keep turning over, but if they don’t they also won’t have the oceans of cash they currently have. If they raise taxes in line with what the rest of the world charges what business in their right mind stays in a desert with 50 degree plus heat and a repressive regime?
 

Reiver

Full Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2016
Messages
2,603
Location
Near Glasgow
The Glazers are definitely the least worst option. It does matter what your owners do outside of sport, as much as some people may want to pretend it doesn't. I hope this doesn't happen.
 

VanDeBank

Ma’am
Joined
May 13, 2021
Messages
4,862
No way. Only marginally ahead of Saudis. Terrible record on human rights, womens rights, gay rights etc etc. We would be no better than City. Don’t want our club to be a sportswashing “project”.
No way mate. They're significantly better and still shite, but Saudis are another level.

Homosexuality whilst illegal isnt as agressively prosecuted and Christians aren't publically executed. I know that's a low bar, but it's a massive difference.
 

BarstoolProphet

Full Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2014
Messages
6,617
It’s a slightly less awful option than the Saudis, I guess?

even still, we don’t need an oil daddy with questionable human rights records. The club earns more than enough revenue to compete with those already, we just need owners willing to spend all that money within the club and not taking it from it.
I think it's a way better option than the Saudis solely based on that the influx of tourists, foreign companies has made the Dubai Emirate way more liberal and western-oriented than it used to be (like 15-20 years ago). Saudi Arabia are planning to build an isolated Dubai in the desert, but doubt that will make the country more secular.
 

FriedClams

Full Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2021
Messages
3,689
Both owned by an emirate nation, Manchester city and Manchester United finally put their differences to become one super club, under their new name symbolizing the merging of the two clubs: Manchester United.
 

Nou_Camp99

what would Souness do?
Joined
Apr 1, 2013
Messages
10,274
Everything is possible!

But yeah, I'm talking more about some billionaire United fan (or group of) passing through a mid life crisis.
How on earth is fan ownership possible? Unless you are referring to Ratcliffe who is a fan but also very very rich.

The fanbase between us couldn't raise the 4-5bn between us all. We'd not even raise 1bn.

The only way the Glazers go is being bought by wealthy people sadly.

I also don't want UAE money though.
 

FujiVice

Full Member
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
7,367
£3.75bn is a reasonable price for the biggest sports franchise in the world. Which United is. Nobody could have this lack of success, investment and upward mobility and retain the kind of popularity and profit worldwide as we have.
 

stu_1992

Full Member
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
4,906
Location
Ireland
Ugh. Please no, we don't want to become another one of those state backed clubs. I want to see less of that in football, not more. Especially when you consider the sports-washing angle to it all. Hard pass on this one.
 

FujiVice

Full Member
Joined
May 8, 2013
Messages
7,367
Both owned by emirate nations, Manchester city and Manchester United finally put their differences to become one super club, under their new name symbolizing the merging of the two clubs: Manchester United.
ChesterMan Tited?
 

Sviken

New Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2021
Messages
2,450
£3.75bn is a reasonable price for the biggest sports franchise in the world.
I don't believe that figure for a second otherwise Ratcliffe would have already paid it. Didn't the Saudis already offer around 4 billion a few years ago? Glazers want way more than that