Man City’s owners certainly haven’t.
Glazers exploring potential sale | Stay on topic and post respectfully | Do not post dodgy tweet sources
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
What if nobody but a “sugar daddy” has the means to both buy the club and eliminate the debt?
The local laser tag, nail salon and car wash business owners might disagree.
https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/managem...ty-management-school-and-university-sheffield
I think this is a fact often overlooked - but the ties with City have been disastrous for Manchester.
Whoever can afford United will obviously need to very wealthy but just because they can afford United doesn't mean they also intend to pump another 2-3 billion in for infrastructure upgrades.
I suspect whoever ends up buying United will deal with the debt pretty quickly. What they do from there is anyone's guess, but I still maintain United don't need a sugar daddy.
It was a Breaking Bad joke mate
I will actually leave this thread now. Despite being summoned multiple times by WUMs, I’ve mostly kept out,
I guess my summarising point is, in the last 24 hours on here the pro Qatari posters have managed to
a) accuse some posters of racism for saying the bid was state backed… before it emerged the same poster had said the exact same thing a few posts before. Literally weaponising accusations of racism for something he didn’t believe.
b) get a warning for posting homophobic content.
c) get a post deleted for claiming Asian people all looked the same.
d) claim they “don’t give a feck” about the city of Manchester.
e) literally have someone from Saudi Arabia posting about how proud they were of their increased connection to United and then getting angry about people from Manchester saying they’re better connected to United for their locality.
Meanwhile we’ve had universally admired posts through the last five pages explaining why the Qatar bid feels wrong. There are literal other people on other threads in the forum saying they’re scared to post here and refuse to read this thread because of the rabid insults thrown out bysome pro Qatari people ( I also forgot two people have been warned for insulting me - one sees it as a badge of honour apparently).
If people don’t want murderers and people who are homophobic and misogynistic running the club, can you please listen to them and respect their views. We can not have valid concerns ignored because some people are excited over transfer spending. As I leave this thread (insulted and scorned for having a moral stance on our owners) please respect others with my viewpoint.
and stop with the homophobia and racism. We can not let this become acceptable, we as a club should fight for the oppressed.
I guess my summarising point is, in the last 24 hours on here the pro Qatari posters have managed to
a) accuse some posters of racism for saying the bid was state backed… before it emerged the same poster had said the exact same thing a few posts before. Literally weaponising accusations of racism for something he didn’t believe.
b) get a warning for posting homophobic content.
c) get a post deleted for claiming Asian people all looked the same.
d) claim they “don’t give a feck” about the city of Manchester.
e) literally have someone from Saudi Arabia posting about how proud they were of their increased connection to United and then getting angry about people from Manchester saying they’re better connected to United for their locality.
Meanwhile we’ve had universally admired posts through the last five pages explaining why the Qatar bid feels wrong. There are literal other people on other threads in the forum saying they’re scared to post here and refuse to read this thread because of the rabid insults thrown out bysome pro Qatari people ( I also forgot two people have been warned for insulting me - one sees it as a badge of honour apparently).
If people don’t want murderers and people who are homophobic and misogynistic running the club, can you please listen to them and respect their views. We can not have valid concerns ignored because some people are excited over transfer spending. As I leave this thread (insulted and scorned for having a moral stance on our owners) please respect others with my viewpoint.
and stop with the homophobia and racism. We can not let this become acceptable, we as a club should fight for the oppressed.
Just like how City and Chelsea have been great for the competition.
I hope you’re right.
The Glazers are just as responsible for the lack of competition seeing how they destroyed City and Chelsea’s main competition. Klopp at least made them sweat too. It can be done.
He wanted to invest in Chelsea not so long back. Was he also a fan of Chelsea?
Also a season ticket holder at Chelsea. This is why there's no real balance in much of the eristical conversation throughout this thread. To critique one area there is strong hyperbole to gratify the other. SJR is about as much a fan of the club as Carlos Tevez was.
I'm not comfortable with the idea of not supporting the club if it ends up being bought by the wrong owners. We've protested the Glazers ownership for almost 2 decades but never stopped supporting, yet they've benefited greatly from this ownership while actually harming the club. I don't want a state backed ownership, but owners come and go, and if we see the club being misused in any way, nothing can stop us from making our voices heard.
All woke people better make sure they stop supporting United if Qatar ends up being successful in acquiring Manchester United.
Else, all this moaning is nothing but a true reflection on you as individuals. If you truly believe in what you think, please don’t be hypocritical by keeping supporting a team owned by “murderous” regime.
Don’t be like those who went to play or watch the WC in Qatar while posting about abuse of human rights online.
Thank you
Else, all this moaning is nothing but a true reflection on you as individuals. If you truly believe in what you think, please don’t be hypocritical by keeping supporting a team owned by “murderous” regime.
Don’t be like those who went to play or watch the WC in Qatar while posting about abuse of human rights online.
Thank you
why can’t people support the club and be critical of the owners at the same time?
It’s been that way with the Glazers for 20 years
Also, where does it stop ? Qatar funding is embedded within the countries very infrastructure so there's certain public traded companies that others need to stop using. Not to mention the import of oil that runs throughout. To really effectively protest you would have to remove all contribution to the economy both at micro / macro levels. No point even talking about the murderous regime when British history is established in colonialism. The reality is if everyone cuts ties with all immoral practices (not just the ones the media has an agenda with) then there would be no normality in the function of society. There's prejudice, segregation, discrimination, negativity on all ends of the spectrum. It's the assertion that one has more ground than another that is the issue.
Apart from the facilities/ground which needs investment, I would imagine neither ineos or jassim would need to invest in the squad the same way city has. Listen to ten hag for transfers. I can't forever the club going mental in the market. Buy smart.
Would anyone like a Wumminator highlights reel? I mean I could just focus on this thread if you'd like I'm sure there's enough content.
Here we have a poster named Fahad who was in favour of the Qatar takeover and was also a follower of the Islamic faith. As you can imagine Wumminator being the 'superior' Manchester United fan had to weigh in.
With neutrality and compassion as the morale crusader i here you ask? Nope! With Islamophobia! Here is how that conversation went down.
Inappropriate question to ask when it has NOTHING to do with the thread but you're Wumminator the superior so we'll ignore it and move on.
A pretty level-headed response from someone who is tolerant of others AND follows a strict religion.
How's that high horse feeling?
Trying to belittle someone's opinion by trying using their religion to make what they have said worthless is pretty low.
Again a fantastic calm and tolerant post from Fahad considering how you've spoken about him so far, kudos.
Did he though?
What a wonderful thing to say Fahad.
What he actually did was Islam is against homosexuality as are other religions. Fairly common since the literature they follow was from a time before it was socially acceptable. What Fahad stated was a fact.
If he had said what you continued to claim he would have been banned but you're like a dog with a bone aren't you.
Is it just the Homophobia and Racism you think we should strive to distinguish? Maybe consider not slandering people's religious beliefs too to prove a point? Who knows.
Last edited:
I really try to stay away from posting in this thread, but I have seen this point mentioned many times about stadium investment by owners making us a sugar daddy club.
Is it not true that the original OT was also funded by our owner way back in the early 1900s. So by that definition were we always a "sugar daddy" owned club?
Funnily enough lots of gay people don't take too kindly to being told they'll be judged divinely for their great sins, even if you assure them you're happy to put that to one side.
The club doesn't even need a sugar daddy, if you look at what we have spent even under the glazers it is clear to see that without debt the club could easily compete in the transfer market in big ways every year. What the club needs is stadium and training facilities invested into which is the core purpose of any owner at any club.
What's suprised me most about this whole process is we have been left choosing between Qatar and Jim Ratcliffe. I'm suprised we haven't had more choice considering the size of the club.
I could see how that may cause offense, more so if you were a believer in the divine, however that is still a fact of following the religion of Islam. Not Fahads morale compass and certainly has no bearing on his position/opinion on the Qatar state acquiring Manchester United.
I was responding to a post claiming investment in our stadium/training facilities by our owner would make us a "sugar daddy" owned club.
I was highlighting that by that definition, were we not always a sugar daddy owned club since our owner paid for our original OT way back in the early 1900s.
Did the local support object to it and were there calls of stopping support for United because apparently that's making the playing field tilted towards us? We built an 80k stadium and it was almost always filled up way back then as per records, so why would the support feel different to having the owners invest in our stadium this time around? Is it because at that time the owner was an English guy unlike a ME person this time potentially?
Mate this 'strict religion' condemns homosexuals and Fahad, seems like a nice guy, but if you read closely, even he only says that he'll tolerate them even if they're wrong (for being gay) and God will judge them. If the state that wants to buy us has that kind of mindset, well it's a concern to put it mildly.
Islam like any large religion is practiced in many different ways, including by gay people.
From the looks of it this conversation actually begins because this guy was defending Qatar's homophobic laws on the grounds of Islamic doctrine, so yes I think it has a bearing. It seems quite dishonest that you decided against including that context.
Possibly however it could also be because the majority of the fans were but a twinkle in their dads eye when the original stadium was built. Most fans know the clubs history but this is based around players, accolades, tragedy etc most will know very little about how the original OT was funded.
Still it's good point and a fair question.
it’s very different. Glazers protest is because of their handling of the club on and off the field. In simple words complain is around incompetence. It’s like working for an incompetent manager.
Here people are literally accusing Qataris of being a murderous regime, human rights abusers etc etc…
I mean come on, then you shouldn’t be supporting the club no matter how much you love it.. You should stand by what you believe in. How can you be so hypocritical and keep supporting the club whose owners are so disastrous in your eyes.
but my question still remains, why?
I support Manchester United, and I also don’t like the human rights abuses in Qatar
so what?
First of all they're not accusing, they're pointing it out. More importantly, you don't get to lay out conditions for people to continue to support the club. There's no right or wrong here in regards to what people choose as a result of a Qatari takeover. If someone wants to spend every day of next season condemning the owners, and then attends a parade if we win the league, that's nobody's business but their own.
It does and I understand that concern wholeheartedly it goes along with many other legitimate concerns like human right abuses. Still doesn't give Wum the right to dig Fahad out about his beliefs to disregard his opinion and make him look homophobic and intolerant.
To even ask him such a question is reprehensible.
well that’s a question you need to ask you inner self…. Not me.
Not Turning away from what you perceived to be so morally wrong is your choice, not mine. But stop lecturing others that they are wrong , those who have no problem with Qatar taking over.
don’t be ridiculous, I’m not asking for advice
it’s perfectly fine to criticise the Qatar regime and still support the club
you said it’s not, hence me asking you and not myself
Of course you would say that. The moment someone ask people like you to follow actions with your words, you bring all this nonsense….Social media has made virtue signaling a joke and this forum is a classic example of that…
Hypocrisy at its finest.
Of course, absolutely fine when you are a hypocrite. You can’t even back your own strong held beliefs…
do me a favour, let’s not extend this useless conversation. Thank you!
Your inadvertently saying that its a concern for anyone to be associated with any practicing Muslim on this basis ? That is their beliefs and someone who is a supporter of LGBT has their own beliefs. It's our perspectives that frames our ideology. Just because someone has an opposing ideology doesn't mean the two can't comply because the United Kingdom upon which Manchester United is based is supposedly established in multiculturalism. If United can't have a Muslim theology based owner than the club ought to also alienate Muslim based players / staff at the same merit because they practice the same beliefs ? Might aswell throw all the Abrahamic faiths into the same concept.
Last edited:
sorry, why are you being so aggressive? I just asked a question
So, are gay people going to hell? Just came here to read about buy out news and stumbled upon this.