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

[MUFC OK]

Saudi backed owners would not be in it for the money, and wouldnt bleed the club dry, pillaging whatever profits/assets they can and rinsing it of every last drop before tossing it to the side and moving on - that is our current reality/fate.

Rather the Saudi's would want to compete with Qatari's/UAE owners and so its a no brainer for me, I want the Glazers gone whatever the cost.

 

[bosskeano]

well it was brilliant start getting Woodward out but hopefully he's gone before the summer transfer window begins and he takes Murdoch with him who he appointed as the new DoF. need football men running the club when it comes to on the pitch, not some business driven douche like Woodward

still believe it's going to be quite difficult to find a buyer that Loves United given the £4billion price tag placed on the club by the Glazers

 

[Chesterlestreet]

That one really is perfect.

 

[Siorac]

I agree that there is an element of degree/scale to it, but I was specifically referring the comic. There are certainly ways round those 2 particular examples so it's not the best reference for 'the impracticalities of being 100% moral'. Either way, getting back to the question, I don't think we should sell to the Saudi RF. If we're going for a RF, let's go with our own Imagine that, we're one 1-0 down to Crystal Palace next season, Rashford looks up and sees the Queen encouraging him with a royal wave. Inspired, he goes on to score a hat-trick...regal inspiration on repeat till the end of the season. Basically, we're winning the league and all the players will be knighted. Oh and it's 51% fan-owned. Sorted.

Well, the comic is satire, obviously - but also please note that the car example is meant to depict a time before the standardisation of seatbelts. So it's not an antique car, it's meant to show a car owner who supports mandatory seatbelts that cars didn't have at the time.

I also disagree with the idea that you can't criticise a company like Apple while buying their products. Surely it makes absolute sense to say that Apple, I paid a fecking fortune for your shitty phone (well, not me, but our fictional person; I loathe Apple products), you have literally 200 billion in fecking cash so please pay the people who manufacture your stupidly expensive gadgets a fair wage.

 

[RUCK4444]

It's for an other thread but that sentence is wrong on so many level. If you say that out loud it's impossible to not cringe.

I know, I think I'm banned from that thread

Honestly though you can't tell a person to change their ways, you need to show them.

 

[RUCK4444]

Everyone has their own cut off point. But if everyone said feck it I can't be arsed taking a stand against every evil and injustice in the world so I won't bother speaking out against any. Then nothing would ever change for the better because no one would even try. Would they?

As for the Saudi Royals changing their ways because they owned United. Come on mate.

Never said they would change their ways because they owned United. What I said was it certainly wouldn't make them worse, which it wouldn't. Like I say, tighter links to the west would only make them less likely to commit atrocities. That doesn't mean they will totally reform and become the perfect state, just that if anything it would make it marginally better (no matter how slight )

 

[Devil81]

I'd happily take the Saudi's if it got rid of the money sucking b*stards.

Like others have said they wouldn't be in it for the money and it would give us a more level playing field with the noisy neighbours.

 

[RUCK4444]

Yes, fully ethical consumption is basically impossible in global capitalism.

But I need to participate in society and I don't need to participate in football. It's easy to say no to football, much harder to say no to owning a phone or ever using a vehicle that runs on oil imported from some murderous dictatorships. Saying no to football clubs used for whitewashing murderous regimes is within my power.

There's also the question of degree and scale. Stealing a few thousand from an old lady is morally wrong, and so is shooting a baby in the face - but most people would agree that these acts vastly differ in their degree of immorality. Similarly, in my opinion, exploiting underpaid sweatshop workers, while still unethical, is a far lesser evil than public beheadings.

You cannot stand up against every instance of injustice, unfairness, or exploitation. True. But that doesn't mean that the only 'internally consistent' attitude is to not give a feck about anything at all.

Whilst I understand the premise for your argument, it's invalid, purely because the same way we can't decide whether we have to ride in an oil run vehicle, we also cannot decide who owns our football club.

Conversely turning my back on the club I've followed my entire life is not an option for me. So what should I do? Cry myself to sleep because the world is a murderous disgusting place and I have no control over it?

Or perhaps I'll vent my anger on a forum to make my internet buds aware of how strong my morale compass is?

That's not pointed at you directly mate, just a generalised response.

 

[stevoc]

Oh ok ok, its only if the current face of the organization is bad. I mean maybe we can get Gadafi's grandson or something since the bad things weren't made by him. I get your logic nice one.

Haha you're the one with the flawed logic mate. I'm sure most wouldn't want to be owned by the British Royal Family either, but it was silly to compare the current British Royals with the Saudi Royals. Then switching it up and moving the goalposts to past British Royals when someone highlighted how silly the comparison was.

By your logic the current German government and the Nazi party are as bad as each other.

 

[RUCK4444]

No it wouldn't. It would move the focus away from those issues.
How would them spending billions on sports in Europe while keeping the absolute power over 33 million people possibly help the Saudi people or the Yemenites?
It would be a 100% sportswashing project for them.

First civilize your own country, share the power and resources with your people, give the people freedom of speach, religion, sexuality and equal rights as the bare minumum, before you invest billions in football clubs in Europe.

What is wrong with people?

Except nobody is jumping to defend the Yemenites right now either are they.

The Saudi's owning a football club changes nothing, it doesn't pull the collective wool over the worlds eyes.

They've made small reforms on sexuality I'm led to believe, now in my opinion tighter links with the west will only help those issues and help to shine a light on them. Surely you can agree that's the case, no matter how slight the effect may be.

 

[RUCK4444]

Wow just noticed the poll is a lot closer than I expected it to be, compared to the general tone here the last time the Saudi's were supposedly linked with a bid.

I think a lot of that swing in opinion is perhaps due to the possible Saudi takeover of Newcastle. Perhaps a few bums were twitching here eh?

 

[tomaldinho1]

It’s somewhat true though, just because a comic makes it funny doesn’t remove its relevance.

I mean what’s the cut-off point?

We buy branded goods from sweatshops and we fuel our vehicles with oil from the Middle East.

Would choose to not shop in one of the Glazers shopping malls in the States? (Well one of the few that are open.)

Saudi’s owning United changes nothing, neither positively or negatively.
If pushed I only see a positive with strengthening their ties to the west. Education through integration

You as a consumer have this choice, it was hard to avoid in the past but really isn't anymore since society have wised up to it.

It's almost impossible to be perfect but buy local or even just within Europe, there are so many websites now that help with this, there's also websites which only list products made in Europe, for example, or avoid any product made in China. As for fuel - hybrid and electric cars are very accessible for most these days and if you are in the US, Canada now exports more fuel to the US than Saudi, and if you're in the UK, it's likely coming from Norway. Point is you don't even have to go out of your way these days to avoid most of these issues but there's an underlying current from a lot of folks who just assume everything you buy is mass produced in a sweat shop with child labour and so just don't bother.

There are some things you probably will, as an everyday person, accept are hard to avoid like using an Apple product but, again, there are alternatives and it's a question for you to decide how much you care. Hopefully most people care enough to do some small things, like only buying things made outside of the UK if there's no alternative & not wanting human rights abusers to take over our club, which really wouldn't affect their quality of life at all.

Judging by the fact 34% plus of this thread are ok with the Saudis however, that might be a pipedream.

 

[stevoc]

Never said they would change their ways because they owned United. What I said was it certainly wouldn't make them worse, which it wouldn't. Like I say, tighter links to the west would only make them less likely to commit atrocities. That doesn't mean they will totally reform and become the perfect state, just that if anything it would make it marginally better (no matter how slight )

Wouldn't committing less atrocities be them changing their ways though, at least to a degree?

In any case I can't say I agree.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

In this example, the only one with a leg to stand on is the poor bugger on the lowest rung of the societal ladder who struggles to live day-to-day.

In terms of being able to claim some sort of genuine moral high ground - sure.

But then, the idea that "lefties" or "woke people" or "sandal wearers" are trying to claim the moral high ground (whilst using iPhones and whatnot) is a fallacy in this type of debate - most clearly do not try that.

 

[RUCK4444]

Wouldn't committing less atrocities be them changing their ways though, at least to a degree?

In any case I can't say I agree.

Yeah sure but I assumed you meant in a broader sense that they would then totally improve things across the board.

I did mean to an obviously quite small degree. Just pointing out that it wouldn't do more harm than good, IMO anyway.

 

[bsCallout]

Anyone willing to support the Saudis in anything can get ******

Football is far less important than the things they're involved in.

 

[stevoc]

Whilst I understand the premise for your argument, it's invalid, purely because the same way we can't decide whether we have to ride in an oil run vehicle, we also cannot decide who owns our football club.

Conversely turning my back on the club I've followed my entire life is not an option for me. So what should I do? Cry myself to sleep because the world is a murderous disgusting place and I have no control over it?

Or perhaps I'll vent my anger on a forum to make my internet buds aware of how strong my morale compass is?

That's not pointed at you directly mate, just a generalised response.

You can though, ride a bike, get an electric car, in the UK it's highly unlikely you are consuming Saudi Oil through buying petrol/diesel anyway. And even then you can buy from garages you know only use North Sea Oil, which is the vast majority of them.

 

[Siorac]

Whilst I understand the premise for your argument, it's invalid, purely because the same way we can't decide whether we have to ride in an oil run vehicle, we also cannot decide who owns our football club.

But we can decide if we want to continue giving our time and money to that football club. We can also protest and voice our opposition to certain people owning that football club. The same way we did voice our opposition to the Super League, even though we couldn't actually decide whether our club does it or not.

To you, just giving up on the club and on football is not an option. That's OK. That's an understandable position. I understand and don't blame anyone who feels like that, as long as they don't try to justify it with ridiculous whataboutism like equating them Saudi royal family to the current British royal family, as someone did in this thread.

To me, supporting and giving time and money to the PR organisation of the Saudi regime is not an option. I simply can't justify it to myself, no matter how inconsequential I am in the grand scheme of things. Because in this one area I at least have the power to turn away from it.

(On a slight tangent, this is why buying one of these huge traditional clubs is actually a terrible idea for the Saudis. It's a lot of money and a LOT of resistance because we have a huge fanbase and we're still competitive in terms of wages and transfer fees without their money so our fanbase is more likely to be picky than that of Newcastle or Villa. They're much better off buying one of those.)

 

[SAFMUTD]

Haha you're the one with the flawed logic mate. I'm sure most wouldn't want to be owned by the British Royal Family either, but it was silly to compare the current British Royals with the Saudi Royals. Then switching it up and moving the goalposts to past British Royals when someone highlighted how silly the comparison was.

By your logic the current German government and the Nazi party are as bad as each other.

Difference is the Nazi party was destroyed. If Hitler had resigned and it was his grandson ruling Germany then it would've been the same case and the British royalty.

My point is history picture the good and bad guys according to who writes it. The Saudis are clearly pictured as the bad guys, not defending them since they are clearly fecked regarding human rights it's just silly to me that many here take the moral high ground against them but praise the English crown.

I know is your patriotism or whatever but as an outsider from Spain or UK I don't find the logic in praising the royals.

 

[stevoc]

Yeah sure but I assumed you meant in a broader sense that they would then totally improve things across the board.

I did mean to an obviously quite small degree. Just pointing out that it wouldn't do more harm than good, IMO anyway.

No mate that's not what I was getting at, nothing would lead to that barring maybe a revolution from their own people.

 

[manuchamp88]

Well, the comic is satire, obviously - but also please note that the car example is meant to depict a time before the standardisation of seatbelts. So it's not an antique car, it's meant to show a car owner who supports mandatory seatbelts that cars didn't have at the time.

I also disagree with the idea that you can't criticise a company like Apple while buying their products. Surely it makes absolute sense to say that Apple, I paid a fecking fortune for your shitty phone (well, not me, but our fictional person; I loathe Apple products), you have literally 200 billion in fecking cash so please pay the people who manufacture your stupidly expensive gadgets a fair wage.

I just think it's morally inconsistent, to be honest. This person could be supporting a more ethically-minded company and still have a smart phone. The fact that this person buys from Apple doesn't oblige Apple to change what they see as a winning formula. Huge companies like this only listen when sales are significantly affected which they won't be if people keep buying at the same rates. Just like the Glazers. It's essentially naivety not seeing that what people ought to do and what they do do are 2 different things.

 

[Ali Dia]

Saudi already has about 100 billion diversely invested in the U.K. industries and 100s of billions invested in the USA. The whole don’t buy their oil argument bolted with the horse about 15/20 years ago when your politicians, entrepreneurs and bankers took their money and sold the rest of you out. Nobody gives a fk about morals in the leading classes. Let the poor fight each over the crumbs and the ethics of it all while the real criminals, the leaders you voted in, pocket the cash. Moral high ground my arse, especially when it’s British or Americans complaining about them. Your governments created them, validated them and then happily took their “blood money”

Partners in crime

 

[red thru&thru]

It's mind boggling how you and 1/3 of our fans would prefer to be owned by an actual tyranny over some profitdriven businessmen. Beheading, stoning, flogging, death by burning, cutting off hands, torture, no freedom of speech, no freedom of religion, no freedom of sexuality, non-equal rights for men and women, no elections, on top of the list of badguys when it comes to human rights, Yemen.... etc.

Is that really the better long term bet?

Where did I say I 'prefer' the Saudis?

 

[stevoc]

Difference is the Nazi party was destroyed. If Hitler had resigned and it was his grandson ruling Germany then it would've been the same case and the British royalty.

My point is history picture the good and bad guys according to who writes it. The Saudis are clearly pictured as the bad guys, not defending them since they are clearly fecked regarding human rights it's just silly to me that many here take the moral high ground against them but praise the English crown.

I know is your patriotism or whatever but as an outsider from Spain or UK I don't find the logic in praising the royals.

I'm Irish mate, I have no particular fondness for the British Royal family. The comparison is still silly though.

The Saudi Royals are being depicted as bad guys, because well they are bad guys. And I haven't seen anyone in here praising the British Royal Family.

One day I hope there will be a sensible discussion on here about the possibility of the Saudi's buying United. But without mental comparisons and idiotic whataboutisms. Maybe one day.

 

[RUCK4444]

You as a consumer have this choice, it was hard to avoid in the past but really isn't anymore since society have wised up to it.

It's almost impossible to be perfect but buy local or even just within Europe, there are so many websites now that help with this, there's also websites which only list products made in Europe, for example, or avoid any product made in China. As for fuel - hybrid and electric cars are very accessible for most these days and if you are in the US, Canada now exports more fuel to the US than Saudi, and if you're in the UK, it's likely coming from Norway. Point is you don't even have to go out of your way these days to avoid most of these issues but there's an underlying current from a lot of folks who just assume everything you buy is mass produced in a sweat shop with child labour and so just don't bother.

There are some things you probably will, as an everyday person, accept are hard to avoid like using an Apple product but, again, there are alternatives and it's a question for you to decide how much you care. Hopefully most people care enough to do some small things, like only buying things made outside of the UK if there's no alternative & not wanting human rights abusers to take over our club, which really wouldn't affect their quality of life at all.

Judging by the fact 34% plus of this thread are ok with the Saudis however, that might be a pipedream.

I agree that things are generalised and your probably right that a lot of things can be avoided but at the same time asking people to make an ethically sound choice on every purchase they make is totally unrealistic in this fast paced and poverty stricken society.

People need things quick and cheaply. Hybrid cars are ridiculously expensive, no chance on earth your average Brit can afford one.

What's your thoughts on attempting to influence their traditions/practices through stronger integration with the west? I mean we can all sit at home wagging our fingers at them but surely integration and education is the only way things will improve over there? Isolating them will only internalise and strengthen their traditions and current way of life, that much is obvious.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

I do think that if someone buys United from the Glazers then it will be Saudis

But it still feels a long way off

 

[red thru&thru]

I still see PIF still involved in looking to purchase Newcastle.

Once this is done, we will be very limited to our options. China backed consortium/individuals will also be out of the running.

 

[Andy_Cole]

....it's just that in this case, the one treating you incredibly would be a murdering tyrant with absolute power over 33 million Suadis and the one treating you like shit would just be an asshole.....
Still don't get the difference? No?

So you’d rather the asshole who wants to ruin the game and create the ESL, pretty much destroying English football and everything we love over a tyrant who will preserve our traditions?

 

[matt10000]

I'm more from the idea that they shouldn't inherit the money/power in the first place. But if saying buying a football club counts as some sort of amend I think we'll disagree.

Why would we disagree? If you read my posts I am against them owning MUFC to sports wash.

 

[bsCallout]

Saudi already has about 100 billion diversely invested in the U.K. industries and 100s of billions invested in the USA. The whole don’t buy their oil argument bolted with the horse about 15/20 years ago when your politicians, entrepreneurs and bankers took their money and sold the rest of you out. Nobody gives a fk about morals in the leading classes. Let the poor fight each over the crumbs and the ethics of it all while the real criminals, the leaders you voted in, pocket the cash. Moral high ground my arse, especially when it’s British or Americans complaining about them. Your governments created them, validated them and then happily took their “blood money”

I'm British and I didn't create them or validate them. Any supporting or defending the Saudis is off their rocker.

 

[matt10000]

it’s not “some investors” it’s the president and the whole political system. Saudi owns a big stake in America and vice versa. They are in cahoots.

No one has said they want the American Government to buy MUFC

 

[bsCallout]

I agree that things are generalised and your probably right that a lot of things can be avoided but at the same time asking people to make an ethically sound choice on every purchase they make is totally unrealistic in this fast paced and poverty stricken society.

People need things quick and cheaply. Hybrid cars are ridiculously expensive, no chance on earth your average Brit can afford one.

What's your thoughts on attempting to influence their traditions/practices through stronger integration with the west? I mean we can all sit at home wagging our fingers at them but surely integration and education is the only way things will improve over there? Isolating them will only internalise and strengthen their traditions and current way of life, that much is obvious.

I'm not inviting murderers into my home for a cup of tea in the hope they'll learn not to do that.

 

[RUCK4444]

I'm not inviting murderers into my home for a cup of tea in the hope they'll learn not to do that.

Great that’s also a good way to deal with all forms of prejudice, like racism etc

What you should never do of course is try to educate them and change their mindset, that would be terrible...

 

[Ali Dia]

I'm British and I didn't create them or validate them. Any supporting or defending the Saudis is off their rocker.

Im not defending them but any American or British person attempting to take the moral high ground is missing the point. Especially given the history of both counties. The economic argument was settled a long time ago. The Saudis already own a massive stake in both countries and have the total backing of the U.K. and USA as long as the money keeps flowing and they buy their weapons and enable them to keep a foothold in the region. American posters going on about the human rights violations of any other government is just rich. It seems to me that they are the worst criminals of the last 100 years but they are our guys so it must be ok

 

[bsCallout]

Great that’s also a good way to deal with all forms of prejudice, like racism etc

What you should never do of course is try to educate them and change their mindset, that would be terrible...

Yeah, because the Saudi royalty don't know whether it is right to kill people or not.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

but praise the English crown

praising the royals

Eh? I haven't read every page of this thread, granted - but has anyone actually praised the UK monarchy?

 

[bsCallout]

Im not defending them but any American or British person attempting to take the moral high ground is missing the point. Especially given the history of both counties. The economic argument was settled a long time ago. The Saudis already own a massive stake in both countries and have the total backing of the U.K. and USA as long as the money keeps flowing and they buy their weapons and enable them to keep a foothold in the region. American posters going on about the human rights violations of any other government is just rich. It seems to me that they are the worst criminals of the last 100 years but they are our guys so it must be ok

They are not missing the point. I didn't decide my countries history, heck I don't even have a say in the reprehensible acts they carry out now but I'm certainly not going to support a country so far back as the Saudis that have no problem killing a Journalist that doesn't agree with their regime.

I'm entirely against out backing the supply of weapons too. Surprisingly enough.

Just because the country I happen to be born in has its own problems doesn't mean I shouldn't oppose a regime such as the Saudis. Dreadful logic.

 

[Ali Dia]

They are not missing the point. I didn't decide my countries history, heck I don't even have a say in the reprehensible acts they carry out now but I'm certainly not going to support a country so far back as the Saudis that have no problem killing a Journalist that doesn't agree with their regime.

I'm entirely against out backing the supply of weapons too. Surprisingly enough.

Just because the country I happen to be born in has its own problems doesn't mean I shouldn't oppose a regime such as the Saudis. Dreadful logic.

It’s not problems of their own. USA Britain Saudi. It’s all the same at this stage. Unfortunately for us

 

[Random Task]

I can only assume those voting in favour of the Saudi's does not watch the news or keep up with current events across the globe.

I'd take Conor Mcgregor ahead of the Saudi's.

 

[Siorac]

This person could be supporting a more ethically-minded company and still have a smart phone.

But then this person would be called a hypocrite anyway because other smartphone manufacturers also use cheap labour in China or India or whatever. That's the point here: that this all-or-nothing attitude is stupid. People like the 'very intelligent' hero of this comic essentially encourage a certain nihilism: if you give a feck about anything, you're a hypocrite, so you shouldn't. You either turn a blind eye to all abuses and exploitation or you become a freedom fighter aiming to overthrow the current world order. Anything in between and you get labelled a hypocrite.

Rejecting the Saudi royal family owning your favourite football club while owning a smartphone and driving a car is in between therefore boom, hypocrisy! It's, well, stupid.