So that would put an end to nuclear (some of which are at the bottom of the ocean), chemical and biological weapons?
Qatar or Ineos - which owners would you prefer? | Vote now Private
- Thread starter Zlatattack
- Start date
It was as relevant as your response to the post you quoted
Climate change is by far the biggest existential threat right now.So that would put an end to nuclear (some of which are at the bottom of the ocean), chemical and biological weapons?
So why did he bother saying "put the Manchester back in Manchester United"? Did he not think it would curry favour with local supporters? Or is that a mistake on my part thinking that? Also, you can promise something and know you can deliver it. The debt is known, the price of a new stadium build or a major upgrade on the current one is also known (quite recently proposals were sought). Why would either bidder not be able to commit to it?
OP's implied point was that knowing our luck, Qatar would win but their main source of wealth would evaporate overnight.
Regardless, it's a moot point that was obviously made in jest (nothing is disappearing overnight).
They're probably quite related. Would be interesting to see how much military shite contributes and how much retaining an empire that controls the world has contributed. I think the last I read sub-Saharan Africa's emissions was around 1.2%.
The common denominator in all of these is empire.
Why would they? They don’t yet know what they’re paying to buy the club. Making specific commitments before they know how much money they’ll have left after closing the deal makes no sense when the upside of “winning fans over” is so insignificant.
There’s obviously no harm making vague statements about why he would be a good owner but I doubt that convincing fans of this fact is anywhere near the top of his agenda right now. Seeing as it has absolutely no bearing on whether he can get this deal across the line or not.
But that’s not working out well, the resources for alternative fuel are running out.
We have enough oil till technology takes us to that next step though. Considering the caps melting and water levels rising, would be great if we figured out water ran cars.
I mean, they’re not… there’s plenty of wind and sun left. Not to mention waves and tide from those rising seas. But we should probably park this tangent. Even though the thread (and every other thread about ownership) is a train wreck to begin with.
Solar panels are made mostly of silver, don’t they? As for wind for cars I’ve never heard of that but that sounds awesome . I also thought the issue with solar was it couldn’t be stored?
I really couldn’t care less who the owner is. My biggest worry is the debt and the new stadium. Sort that out and we’d almost by default start winning league titles again.
Taking everything on face value, the Qataris are promising to clear the debt and build a new stadium, plus invest in ETH’s project.
Sir Jim is proposing us more Glazers. Its a no brainier for me.
As for the human rights record, we‘ve seen with the PGA this week, the only people who have issue with the petrodollars are the people who aren’t being offered them.
Taking everything on face value, the Qataris are promising to clear the debt and build a new stadium, plus invest in ETH’s project.
Sir Jim is proposing us more Glazers. Its a no brainier for me.
As for the human rights record, we‘ve seen with the PGA this week, the only people who have issue with the petrodollars are the people who aren’t being offered them.
Yup. This tangent definitely needs to end.
The choice comes down to the strong likelihood that under Sir Jim we'll do no better than to continue to muddle along, scraping top four when we can but knowing that a really good guy is at the wheel...versus a well-oiled machine that will have the club compete every season for major trophies but knowing that Qatar's wealth was generated in a most unsavory manner.
If you're on either bidder's side you'll welcome this ultimatum by Jassim because it will speed up the process. And it will potentially help ETH planning next season.
If he pulls out after Friday then Ratcliffe will have leverage. The Glazers need financing, and if they were to opt for some US vulture capitalist firm providing an injection of funds, I can't imagine a move that will make things much more toxic in what has been a pretty toxic situation for years.
If he pulls out after Friday then Ratcliffe will have leverage. The Glazers need financing, and if they were to opt for some US vulture capitalist firm providing an injection of funds, I can't imagine a move that will make things much more toxic in what has been a pretty toxic situation for years.
Yeah, that's my main concern / sense of frustration at the moment.
I've not got involved in the whole owner debate for a number of reasons - it dragging on for ages with very little new information and all the arguments going round and round in circles being a key reason. Another being I don't really think there's an ideal scenario in all the options - don't want Glazers to stay, and can see big issues and concerns whichever of the two main bidders win.
Obviously, the ideal scenario for me is that the ones who prove to be the most competent by it. But as I don't know who that is at this stage then, as it's dragged on, my main concern has been - whatever the outcome - just get it sorted in time for the transfer window so that it gives ETH a fair chance to do all the dealings he needs to in order to improve us further next season.
Even that's not happened. So, yeah, I'm really hoping this ultimatum speeds up the process and moves us closer to some resolution. Whatever that is, and who I actually want to end up buying it, I'm still no closer to knowing. But just get the issue sorted and let ETH get on with his summer business.
Last edited:
Come on Sheikh Jassim! I doubt he'll get us though as it doesn't sound like the bid is much higher than before. With Sir Jim, I don't think he'll intend to run us as the Glazers have but we will struggle with the mess they've left for years to come under him. The Qatar wealth wipes all the debt out and ultimately, brings us on an even keel and maybe then some.
I mean I feel like there is more to it considering we have two contrasting examples of how both are likely to run a club. Qatar with PSG full of horrendous amounts of wages, player power, players with bad attitude, megastar awful culture and a soulless enterprise and so on or SJR with Nice and Lausenne who's fans and so on say they are run like ass, not had the best record and transfers haven't been great... so take your pick I guess
That's not to say either of them would run United the same of course.
It is really disappointing that all the 'get Glazers out' years has led to those two as the only alternatives.I mean I feel like there is more to it considering we have two contrasting examples of how both are likely to run a club. Qatar with PSG full of horrendous amounts of wages, player power, players with bad attitude, megastar awful culture and a soulless enterprise and so on or SJR with Nice and Lausenne who's fans and so on say they are run like ass, not had the best record and transfers haven't been great... so take your pick I guess
That's not to say either of them would run United the same of course.
Neither tick any boxes either morally or competency (Football ownership wise). I really wasn't expecting much difference on the morality level to be honest - anyone having the money to buy United, and try to compete with state owned City and Newcastle, was unlikely to be much better than those. But I was hoping we'd get bidders that filled me with hope in terms of competency. But neither do, really.
I now just want the whole business sorted one way or another as quickly as possible so that we can allow ETH to know the budget and get on with his transfer business.
Which of the scenarios is most likely to lead to success, I've no idea. My guess would be the Qatar bid is the biggest gamble as it's the most likely to lead to biggest success, given their wealth, but also most capable of going the most wrong if they run it like PSG or Malaga. And that going with Ratcliffe, or sticking with Glazers, would be most likely to just carry on in a similar vein to recent times - which, at least under ETH, still offers the possibilities of some trophies and a good squad togetherness, even if it still maintains the club debt and makes it unlikely we'll catch up with City until they themselves drop down a few levels.
So no real idea which scenario would be best. Just feels all options are far less ideal than was hoped, and it's dragged on for way too long and is now going to unnecessarily impact our summer transfer business which is really frustrating.
Last edited:
It really is a farce isn't it. It's a shame it's come down to this but unfortunately we've been pretty doomed ever since the Glazers were allowed to take charge, it was only ever going to end in tears... sucks that it was our club that had to be the test subject before the FA and co did anything about it.
I would personally be cautiously optimistic about Ratcliffe because I feel like we'd be run at least a little bit more conservatively and sensibly. My idea of a great ownership is not us going out and buying Mbappe, Neymar, offering all the players obscene wages and all these types of players and turning our club into a complete circus all so we can chat shit on twitter and so on, I just can't say i'd be into United at that point. Same time I don't want to fall into a rabbit hole with Ratcliffe so if he does win I hope he has at least learned his lessen from Nice and Lausenne but I guess we'll see...
Yeah, pretty much the dilemma I've got as well.
Ratcliffe feels the 'safer' choice, but only in terms of I think if it went wrong with either, it would probably go less wrong under him as we'd spend less money, and on fewer 'galacticos'. If it goes well under him, I think it'll be a solid, as you say, more conservative type of success.
Under Qatar owners, I think we'd spend more and, if wisely, we'd have a better chance of success. But, if unwisely, things could go very wrong indeed.
So very torn about it all, and really not nailing my colours to either bid. Though I do know that the Glazers staying on is still my least favourite option despite my concerns about the other two bidders.
Qatar but think their race is run
If Ineos do win - it’ll be very interesting to see how some people who have been backing the Qatar bid react. Many of them have had to completely go back on their former words, it’ll be hard for them to swallow.
Also really interesting that the Qatar backers want the Glazers to get more money from the club. Jim giving them less and leaving them with no power must be really galling for them. People who back Qatar want them to get more money from our club.
It's depressing so many want us to become Man City 2.
It does seem that Ineos is by far the more competent at the moment, Qatar's bidding process seems weird, not engaging directly and just throwing random bids in, it hardly bodes well for how they would run the club.
Team Ineos rise up!
That should be enough indication that we ought to stay away from the Jassim bid.
How silly of me to expect a thread on possible United owners to be on topic!
That's about as logical as you being with your partner because you don't want them to be with Mel Gibson.
Apologies. And again.
An owner who knew what the hell they are doing would be a bonus! not sure either Ineos or Qatar qualify on the showing so far tbh.
But lets be honest, the temptation to disrupt another season will be too hard for the Glazers to resist, resulting in the sale (if it actually ever happens) being delayed until transfer deadline day...so any revival will be put on pause until the 24/25 season.
But lets be honest, the temptation to disrupt another season will be too hard for the Glazers to resist, resulting in the sale (if it actually ever happens) being delayed until transfer deadline day...so any revival will be put on pause until the 24/25 season.
It seems like supporters of the Qatar bid assume that we’ll be run like Man City, based solely on them being from the Middle East. Even weirder are the supporters who are convinced it’s a private bid and are twisting themselves in knots trying to convince everyone how good it’ll be.
They are being outbid by a ‘Glazer mk2’ who’s going to penny pinch. They are using phrases like ninety two foundation even though Ineos took heat for their ‘putting the Manchester back in Manchester’ phrase. Jassim has barely ever been pictured but is a massive United fan, yet they throw shade on Jim for claiming he supports the club.
It’s very strange behaviour.
Zero support from me until leeches are gone so probably that will be 2026/27
No I just wanted debt cleared, leeches GONE and investment into club. That's not the same thing at all which surely you can understand
Or we remain also rans, with leaches owning the club. Sadly Gulf money will run sport, do we want to sit at top table or not.
Yeah, it makes me really sad tbh. Suprised to see two thirds of respondents actually want something that will make me reconsider being a proper fan altogether.
It is literally the same thing
Yeah we got it the first time you wrote it. You should rather be asking yourself what motives Qatar have for wanting more control than the Glazers currently have? Why should that matter for them? Unless they are rather focused on the surrounding areas and their potential properties and so on than on United.
There is nothing Man City have done that we couldn’t have done if we had competent owners. Even with the debt, the dividends etc. If they were even remotely competent at running a football club, we could have done everything City have.
Are you fecking kidding? The French league is a walk-over for them every year and they do not do well in Europe.
Yes, the French league is a walkover for them, they've done OK in Europe, reaching a final and a couple of semi finals is pretty decent. Jim's team in the French league aren't doing quite as well