Would you be happy to see the Glazers sell to Saudi Arabia-backed owners?

[sullydnl]

Thought it would be interesting to see how people feel about this in light of the reignition of protests against the Glazers, along with the fact that few others would be in a position to buy the club.

On the one hand, the Glazers are deeply unpopular among the fanbase for obvious reasons and the downside to having money-hungry leeches running a football club has been made clear once again through the latest ESL controversy.

Whereas Saudi-backed owners would put us in a much stronger competitive position as a football club. However, it would mean the club and its reputation being forever tied to a brutal regime. It would also mean seeing our club become part of the oil-money trend in football that has played a big part in deforming the current football landscape and which posters on Redcafe regularly decry.

So where would you stand? Get rid of the Glazers at all costs, even if that means putting up with Saudi-backed owners? Actively welcome lucrative petrostate ownership as the best possible outcome? Or stick with the Glazers until we can find owners less deplorable than either?

 

[Annihilate Now!]

Sorry which foot do you want me to chop off?

 

[Lemansky]

No I would not be happy, devastated would be my emotion. And there lies the problem. Who could realistically buy the club and be objectively better owners than the Glazers? I can’t stand Glazers, but the alternative you give us here ain’t better.

 

[OverratedOpinion]

No, the only reason they would buy the club is to further their Vision 2030 campaign which in my opinion is basically them saying "yes we have oppressed women and minorities but look we have some big boxing events now!"

Don't really want to see my club being used for that.

 

[pierrethesnack]

I would hate it, but I would definitely do it if I was MbS.

Huge club which could pretty much run itself, bring revenue and improve the reputation if they just hire the right people.

 

[Rood]

Probably not, although it depends on the details

for example if they promised to give fans voting rights like the 50+1 then it would be worth it

 

[youmeletsfly]

First of all I wouldn't want our club to be turned into Man City. I want it to be a well run club that spends its own money and is not tied to an obnoxious regime willing to purchase clubs only to use them as PR machines.

I'd prefer the Glazers to stay than being owned by fecking Abu Dhabi.(No disrespect to their people, as the vast majority of them are actually really cool and down to earth dudes).

 

[Annihilate Now!]

No I would not be happy, devastated would be my emotion. And there lies the problem. Who could realistically buy the club and be objectively better owners than the Glazers? I can’t stand Glazers, but the alternative you give us here ain’t better.

Where's Bezos or Musk when you need them...

 

[YouOnlyLiveTwice]

No fecking way. Too much blood on those hands, don't want that anywhere near United.

 

[MikeUpNorth]

No.

We're far better off with the Glazers as owners compared to the Saudis, for ethical, cultural and stability reasons.

 

[dcrompton]

Just watched 'The Dissident' documentary on the Saudi state ordered murder of Jamal Khashoggi so would be a no from me

 

[Kaos]

I would hate it, but I would definitely do it if I was MbS.

Huge club which could pretty much run itself, bring revenue and improve the reputation if they just hire the right people.

I'm the opposite. I don't wany any Saudi owning our club but I'll swallow my pride and take a rich prince over the Glazers assuming its NOT that murderous, warmongering scumbag.

 

[Adisa]

No.

 

[Judas]

No, but I genuinely don't see another way out unfortunately, and still feel like it'll happen one day. Which is all a bit grim.

 

[MadDogg]

I'd much rather the Glazers, thank you very much.

 

[FatTails]

I wouldn’t be happy, no. I’ve read some terrible arguments on here in support of it. The things transfer muppets are willing to put up with so they can see Haaland in a United shirt

I actually don’t want any billionaire owner. I’d love us to be a fully publicly held company and rules against any one person holding more than 50% of the shares.

And no, it doesn’t mean fans get to pick a manager or the formation, there would obviously be a CEO, board of directors, and a whole structure for decision making.

 

[tjarligdrengen]

Nope.

 

[BaneIsPain]

If there is no one interested, then yes.

 

[pierrethesnack]

I'm the opposite. I don't wany any Saudi owning our club but I'll swallow my pride and take a rich prince over the Glazers assuming its NOT that murderous, warmongering scumbag.

I meant if I was him, not that I'd want that. If that's what you thought I meant

 

[Jev]

No, I'm a little worried that these protests will end up leaving us in worse hands than we're already in. All things considered, and I know that's an unpopular view, I'm not convinced the Glazers are that bad, debt aside.

 

[Ted1985]

I wouldnt feel right about supporting the club if it was bought by some Sheik. I like that this club is able to buy very valuable players without being dependable on a sugerdaddy. In our case we are Glazers sugerdaddy, I can live with that as long as the club is competetive. I dont even see the plastic clubs as real clubs, but more like cheaters, and I think OGS has done good this season considering that the only club above us have unlimited money.

 

[wolvored]

Not me, but unfortunately that's where we will end up, or another similar state. The days of the local butcher owning us are long gone. Would have been better owned by Sky.

 

[JPRouve]

For me it comes down to why do you follow and love the club? Is it because it has won trophies or the way it did it and the history around it?

 

[wolvored]

I am also thinking this sale is probably being negotiated now. The fact that they have come out with a definite figure for the sale, suggests this. You don't normally get a peep out of them.

 

[calodo2003]

I would be the opposite of happy.

 

[Eckers99]

Absolutely not. Looking for a benevolent billionaire might be the equivalent of hunting unicorns but there has to be a limit to what we'd accept for the sake of a couple of big summer signings.

 

[2 man midfield]

I definitely wouldn’t be pleased with it. It really depends on how strong your moral compass is vs how much you want to see United succeed.

 

[Zlatattack]

Thought it would be interesting to see how people feel about this in light of the reignition of protests against the Glazers, along with the fact that few others would be in a position to buy the club.

On the one hand, the Glazers are deeply unpopular among the fanbase for obvious reasons and the downside to having money-hungry leeches running a football club has been made clear once again through the latest ESL controversy.

Whereas Saudi-backed owners would put us in a much stronger competitive position as a football club. However, it would mean the club and its reputation being forever tied to a brutal regime. It would also mean seeing our club become part of the oil-money trend in football that has played a big part in deforming the current football landscape and which posters on Redcafe regularly decry.

So where would you stand? Get rid of the Glazers at all costs, even if that means putting up with Saudi-backed owners? Actively welcome lucrative petrostate ownership as the best possible outcome? Or stick with the Glazers until we can find owners less deplorable than either?

Create a poll.

Personally I'd prefer our owners not to be horrible people, but i'm not fussed as long as the money rolls in.

 

[Tarrou]

We'd just be swapping one set of cnuts for a worse set of cnuts, and who knows had badly they could feck things up

Saudi Arabia will need to reform eventually with the oil running out and the need to diversify to foreign business interests, so I feel it's only a matter of time before consumer power forces their hand so to speak. It's not impossible that them buying United could push that timeline along

and to be clear I don't want them buying United and dragging our name through the mud. I'm just not completely convinced by the idea that it's definitely a bad thing for ordinary every day people who live there - we won't know until it happens

edit:

the poll should say if there is no other alternative to the Glazers, because surely no one would want them if there was another viable alternative?

 

[manc exile]

Its like choosing whether to have your right testicle cut off or your left testicle cut off


Glazers are shit owners
Saudi would be shit owners

 

[largelyworried]

God no.

 

[JPRouve]

We'd just be swapping one set of cnuts for a worse set of cnuts, and who knows had badly they could feck things up

Saudi Arabia will need to reform eventually with the oil running out and the need to diversify to foreign business interests, so I feel it's only a matter of time before consumer power forces their hand so to speak. It's not impossible that them buying United could push that timeline along

and to be clear I don't want them buying United and dragging our name through the mud. I'm just not completely convinced by the idea that it's definitely a bad thing for ordinary every day people who live there - we won't know until it happens

edit:

the poll should say if there is no other alternative to the Glazers, because surely no one would want them if there was another viable alternative?

I think that they are already in the diversification phase and it's going to accelerate since their sworn enemies(Qatar) have been doing it for more than a decade. Though Saudi Arabia's reserves are significantly larger.

 

[Devil77]

No! It'd be even worse than the ESL debacle. Can't imagine this proud club be used purely for white washing.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

I don't want to paint all Saudi's with the same brush, but no, I would not want Saudi owners. They are horrible horrible people...

 

[glazed]

I'm not happy with anyone owning the club for reasons other than love of the club. And as it makes loads of money it doesn't really need rich owners. Keep in mind the Glazers just take money out.

Of course that ship sailed when the club was floated on the stock exchange. Only a billionaire can afford to buy Manchester United now. So our only choice is between greed and sports washing. The only variable is how much. Saudis and Glazers are extreme cases of both.

 

[Kaos]

The Omanis seem like an OK bunch. How rich is the Sultan of Oman?

 

[Frasbul]

If the club is ever sold to people affiliated to the Saudi Arabian government, I will stop supporting it. That's my line.

 

[Adisa]

I don't want to paint all Saudi's with the same brush, but no, I would not want Saudi owners. They are horrible horrible people...

Nothing wrong with Saudis but an investment on this scale is almost certianly going to involve the royal family especially Mohammed 'Bone saw' Bin Salman.

 

[red_de_pologne]

No, running the club badly is one thing, then there's violating basic human rights. Different scale altogether.

 

[groovyalbert]

If it ain't Mick Hucknall, it ain't worth doing