Not whilst SAF is the manager. However, a new manager might shift emphasis away from the present policy of producing teams the way SAF has done during his reign. In which case a sugar daddy might be needed if success on the pitch is the ultimate goal.
Qatar Bollocks (AKA Qatar consider MUFC takeover?)
- Thread starter Q80
- Start date
Well I was thinking about this & I'm not sure how much difference it would make to us. SAF is never going to spend mega bucks on half a dozen different players, the squad doesn't need that.
Thank god the football on the pitch is different from last season.
United should put in a cheeky bid for Qatar. I bet, the Glazers have the required credit facilities.
Even with unlimited funds I truly hope Manchester United never go out and do a City, Chelsea or even a Real Madrid.
We've worked hard for success, so some may say we deserve that type of transfer activity more, but the simple fact is when it happens the youth production drops dramatically. Look at Chelsea, City used to have a semi-decent academy, but you won't see a young player brought into that side for many years.
We've worked hard for success, so some may say we deserve that type of transfer activity more, but the simple fact is when it happens the youth production drops dramatically. Look at Chelsea, City used to have a semi-decent academy, but you won't see a young player brought into that side for many years.
I can genuinley say I'd rather be a mid table team with some soul, playing youth players and signing Hernandez/Ronaldo esk finds than dominate world football with a team of big money buys.
We do that & we are a top of the table team, why change a winning formula?
The odd marquee signing is perfectly acceptable, we've always done that anyway...
I'd echo that, but I'm sure our minds are swayed slightly by all the success we've had. I understand the City fans loving it (although it's obviously completely hypocritical considering all the jibes they've thrown at us over the years).
This. I love us going out an buying rough diamonds and turning them into gems whilst backing them up by quality marquee signings.
If you were a mid-table side playing the likes of Hernandez or Ronaldo, you wouldn't hold on to them for long.
I just want my club free of any debt as it was pre Glazer, is that much to ask?
We may have been free of debt but the club had an obligation to shareholders and also had to play by stock market rules. The current situation is probably favorable by comparison.
Indeed , hence why United, just like Industry & service, wasn't immune to England sellling it by the pound......
I was just thinking about what bullshit it is to sell stock where the purchaser has to buy a 'non-voting' share for each share they buy.
So the Glazers can sell 50% of the stock and still keep control. But that 50%, say 100 shares for argument, will really be 200 shares, which should account for 100%. So the Glazers get to sell stock amounting to 100% while still keeping control of the team!
I believe I read you can't do that in England, which is why they're doing it in Singapore.
It would make sense that, if the Qatari are serious about buy the team, you'd want to do it before this phenomenon artificially inflates the value of the club.
So the Glazers can sell 50% of the stock and still keep control. But that 50%, say 100 shares for argument, will really be 200 shares, which should account for 100%. So the Glazers get to sell stock amounting to 100% while still keeping control of the team!
I believe I read you can't do that in England, which is why they're doing it in Singapore.
It would make sense that, if the Qatari are serious about buy the team, you'd want to do it before this phenomenon artificially inflates the value of the club.
What?
I presume they are some sort of Preference share with a fixed coupon at a decent rate?
Anyone know?
What I read is that for every share you buy, which gets a vote, you have to buy a share that doesn't come with a vote. Which isn't allowed in England, and I'd think any other major market, thus Singapore. So in my example 100 shares would have a vote and the other 100 wouldn't get one. And the Glazers would have the other 100 voting shares, and thus keep majority.
Considering the demand for the bond outstripped supply, even though it wasn't rated well, they think it's going to work, and I tend to agree.
This isn't the one I read but it references the idea:
Manchester United to limit voting shares - report | Reuters
Did they not offer similar before though and it was refused?
Just read it. Daily Mirror.
Hmm, plan to sell a portion of your club on a stock exchange and then the Qatar buyout rumour starts up again. We have though apparently decided to delay the stock sale.
"The super-rich Qataris think United is a good deal - even at the profit it would make for the current rulers and other shareholders."
Who are they then?
That would be me.
Glazers will obviously sell if the price is right but I'd hate us to be in the middle of some silly fight between two Arab families trying to show each other who's richer and who can take their club further.
Haven't the Qataris bought PSG, therefore making it impossible for them to buy another club?
Not sure of the ins and outs, but if teh worst came to the worst for them, I'm sure they would be happy to drop PSG in a flash if they had a chance ofgetting hold of United...
I wonder if a club plus cash deal is feesible... eg £1.5bn plus PSG?
If you are on about money, they could buy the entire league they wanted to.
He's not talking about money.
It's actually a good point - although in theory they could stick someone different in charge than at PSG and form a different company, I have no idea of the detail of the UEFA regs on that. e.g. Malaga are also owned by a Qatari
Anyway I'm firmly of the opinion that the latest Qatar rumours are even more bollocks than the previous ones - only the Mail seem to be running with it.
Ah my bad then. But like Rood says, they could easily get a 'brother' etc to own a second club.
Yep, I'm sure they'd find a way.
Qatar people have also bought Malaga in addition to PSG.
Where did the post about a Qatari helicopter being spotted in Barton go? 
Yep, not sure how that works at the moment.
Hopefully if they were to buy United they'd stop sponsoring Barcelona too!
Well in theory it is all different companies:
The QIA own PSG (this actually is the company that the media link to us and is more or less the Qatari Royal family):
Qatar Investment Authority - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Some other bloke who according to Wiki is the 3rd cousin of the Emir of Qatar owns Malaga:
Abdullah bin Nasser bin Abdullah Al Ahmed Al Thani - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Qatar Foundation sponsor Barca:
Qatar Foundation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
It's this sort of shit that, IMO, is going to make the FFP rules pretty much unworkable...
What do you mean?
That would be me deleting it , It was there and I put 2 and 2 and got 5.Where did the post about a Qatari helicopter being spotted in Barton go?
The helecopter in UK based and used by The Qatar Royal Family sometimes.
But I cant disagree with you it was
Weren't we meant to have been purchased by now, any way the buying person is supposedly the Emir - Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani who is meant to be in London at the moment.
This Thani chap is well loaded too..
Is he richer than the lot over the road?