It's based on a slightly strange premise. The Saudis couldn't buy United unless the Glazers wanted to sell, and I can't think of any reason why they would. If all they wanted was profit they could have sold the Bucs years ago - would have got them out from under a bunch of fans continuously bitching about the team. But they didn't - they seem to actually enjoy owning their teams. Odd considering the grief that both sets of fans give them.
The Saudi Takeover Rumor Thread
- Thread starter C3Pique
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
- Status
I think there is definite interest but whether it will happen is another story. Bit like the whole Red Knights thing.
They won’t stop supporting Utd, they’re just frustrated at the idea.
I don’t like what the Saudis stand for but to be quite honest, I couldn’t care less who owned United. We will always be Man Utd no one can change that.
Edwards would have sold to anybody who met this price, even the Saudis
That's pretty much my stand too. If the Glazers sell the club to Saudis, there is nothing pretty much we can do about it and I would still be supporting the club as before.
the reason would be they can pay above market rate, presumably
lets hope you're right though
A few points mate that will hopefully clear things up.
1, I have never said the Glazers should or shouldn't sell to anyone, all i have said is that i don't want people like the Saudi regime to own the club i've supported all my life.
2, I'm from Ireland i'm not British and i have never actually voted for any government thats sells weapons to the Saudis.
3, I'm still confused by what exactly the British or US governments selling arms to others countries have to do with someone potentially buying United.
On the 3rd point, when we are able to digest the fact that our govts (not necessarily yours) endorse or strengthen the Saudi regime directly (arms sale) and indirectly (allowing Saudis to invest in country) , it seems somewhat artificial to be shocked about Saudis becoming direct owners
What if my government does no business with the Saudis? Am I allowed to not like it then?
Well, I stopped watching United during Jose's tenure and I can see me doing the same again if we end up being owned by the Saudis.
City are a great example of a club that no longer has any links to their past. Saudi ownership would do the same to United.
City are a great example of a club that no longer has any links to their past. Saudi ownership would do the same to United.
It's amazing that people are talking about this still even though theres nothing happening to the ownership of the club. 
To be honest i'm still having trouble trying to see what link there is between certain governments selling arms to the Saudis and people somehow being hypocritical if they don't want the Saudi ruling family to own the football club they support.
I mean the US government funded and supplied weapons to Al Qaeda and the Mujahideen, does that mean no american should object if an islamic terrorist group wanted to buy an NFL team?
We're so good at supplying the bad guys to get rid of the bad guys. You'd think we'd learn at some point.
Also I've pumped petrol in my car from over there. Maybe. So obviously I need to shut up.
The mental and moral gymnastics in this thread is bizarre.
People are just trying to ascertain where the line is. Clearly for you being owned by the Saudi’s has crossed that line. But the Glazers funding Trump which has indirectly lead to innocent lives being lost, does not. Wherever that line is is ultimately arbitrary. The easiest solution is to not let politics mix, and just watch football for football’s sake, because as soon as you scratch the surface there is always muddy water underneath (goes for more than just football). That’s the counter argument in any case.
It’s a stupid argument. You’re right, the line is arbitrary, because everyone holds different values. The easiest solution is not to not let politics mix, the easiest solution is to let everyone draw their own line on what is acceptable for them, and not try to force down people’s throats that they should be okay with the Saudis taking over United because X Y Z have happened in other places.
Why are we debating semantics? Is there any legitimacy to this at all yet?
I'm all for it. Let's be honest, we're going nowhere under the Glazers. They don't care about competing at the top. The required investment doesn't interest them.
We're treading water at best, appeasing the sponsors by buying one or two marquee players.
We'll lose Pogba & De Gea soon because of the lack of ambition. They see through it. The allure of more money wears off eventually. Pretty sad that, that's all we have to offer nowadays.
Anybody we get who turns out to be top class in the future is not going to stick around for long as things stand.
So yeah, i don't care who owns us as long as they pump in the money to compete properly. Would make a change from having owners that are only interested in bleeding us dry instead.
We're treading water at best, appeasing the sponsors by buying one or two marquee players.
We'll lose Pogba & De Gea soon because of the lack of ambition. They see through it. The allure of more money wears off eventually. Pretty sad that, that's all we have to offer nowadays.
Anybody we get who turns out to be top class in the future is not going to stick around for long as things stand.
So yeah, i don't care who owns us as long as they pump in the money to compete properly. Would make a change from having owners that are only interested in bleeding us dry instead.
Last edited:
Nobody is stopping or allowing you to do anything. It is all about where one wants to draw the line. Its a personal viewpoint.
To the risk of repeating myself
a- The fans had the chance to buy of buying United out when shares were sold on the stock market during Edwards time. They preferred not to. Once people like the Glazers bought out the shares we lost control over the club. You can complain about them selling it to the Saudis but our opinion or wishes are irrelevant
b- Instead of wasting time on something we cannot do we should instead focus on things we can do and that is voting honest politicians in. As said before these regimes do not survive long in isolation. They needs arms to remain in power, arms governments in the West sell to them freely. These arms are then used to oppress the local population or cause endless misery in countries like Yemen. Not to forget that its hypocritical to criticise the Saudis when some of us still have former politicians walking around as free men who involved their own countries into an illegal war that costed the lives of thousands of people.
Same goes for everyone who thinks that fans who are indifferent to Saudi ownership is a glory hunter or worse lesser of a fan.
True but at the time none of these regimes were interested. Instead he sold them to the stock market were every United supporter could buy the shares. The fans of the time (not the glory hunters of our time but the top reds of that time) chose not to.
Strictly speaking I can walk to the white house and kick Trump in the groin. That ain't happening though right?
United is nowadays far too expensive for anyone of us to afford. That ship sailed long ago.
Last edited:
Keep drawing that line in the sand mate and see if the Glazers care about it.
Also for the millionth time I am not trying to equate the Glazers with the Saudis. All I am saying is that once the club was sold to capitalists who bought it for purely business reasons the rest was pretty much inevitable. It was only a matter of time that someone would meet their price and considering there's not many people who can afford paying that outrageous amount of money then the choices were pretty limited and dire.
So nothing new then recently?
Think there's interest, but not at £4bn.
For the millionth time this isn't about what the Glazers care about. That's a red herring, yet you keep continually repeating it. Everyone understands the Glazers can sell to the Suadis or whoever they want. This is an obvious and a largely irrelevant point. The question is would the fans approve regardless of the increased amount of resources and stop supporting United b/c of it. Hopefully you can stop repeating yourself.
same old same old and no new news. Some saying they'll stop supporting United if we get taken over by them, others wanting it for the cash etc. Basically the same for the last 30 odd pages.
What can I say? Don't approve. I think a strong worded letter will do
Ps have you ever voted to a government who arms these a holes?
Looks like it was just some random guy desperate for YouTube hits.
Apart from that, we haven't heard a peep for 6 months. It's possible that even if there was at one time a slim chance of a Saudi takeover, it died with Khashoggi. We may never know.
Last edited:
And you know this how?
Also it's not really much of a counter argument, it's not much of an argument at all. It's a tenuous comparison and a false equivalence, it's nothing more than an exercise in mental gymnastics to justify not giving a feck.
If people don't give a feck about United being owned by the Saudi's fine just say you don't care and leave it at that.
Right so we need to change the sociopolitical landscape of the world before we can object to a brutal regime potentially owning the football club we support. Yeah thats a fair and realistic argument mate, lets cure world hunger and save the environment while we're at it shall we.
We're not going to find any angelic owners, especially someone who can afford $4.5Bn. Out of curiosity though, what are people's suggestions for appropriate owners? Bill Gates? Jeff Bezos? Do they even give a feck about football?
Would Elon Musk be willing to pump money into this team? Imagine a Manchester United badge on a spaceship into space...We're not going to find any angelic owners, especially someone who can afford $4.5Bn. Out of curiosity though, what are people's suggestions for appropriate owners? Bill Gates? Jeff Bezos? Do they even give a feck about football?
Or some futuristic injury treatment what would make Phil Jones fulfills his potential as the next Duncan Edwards?
Hey look another red herring. You‘re really good at this logical fallacy thing. What does voting to a government who arms the Suadis have to do wether or not you would still support United if they took over? Not only is it completely irrelevant to the topic at hand but it assumes voting indicates support for that country’s foreign policy. That is one of the most inane arguments I’ve heard in my life.
He’s talking complete nonsense and I suspect he knows it
Or better still we should try and change what we can change rather then moan on things that we cannot change.
I am pretty sure that losing you and me as supporters will determine whether the Saudi will buy our club or not. Darn it might even cause a regime change while at it
As said I'd rather see us focusing on what we can change instead ie by voting for politicians who truly safeguard human rights and would send war criminals like Blair to prison. Oh well
Do any actually exist? in the west anyway?? I feel like voting is all rigged too unfortunately..
He's exercising one of the few things he can change and that's who he supports, that's his point. Expecting him to arrest and send Blair to prison or stymie arms trade might just be a bit out of his purview.
You're chatting shit.
It's just football mate.
- Status