Would you be okay with state or state-backed ownership?

[Escobar]

How many people here do you know do that? Because this seems like something it would be really disingenuous to invent to paint someone as a hypocrite if it didn't happen.

Chances are quite high in our western world. I heard the same claims once the Glazers took over, and look how many fans actually left for good

 

[Escobar]

Yes, but that is a very specific example of clear hypocrisy. How many Dubai vacationing United supporters will stop supporting United if Dubai buys the club? Practically no one. And the ones that do were probably not educated on Dubai before going there. It's possible to learn from past "mistakes".

In the end it shows that we pick what we like but if someone cant live with an oil state taking over United, it is ok to leave

 

[Scandi Red]

but if someone cant live with an oil state taking over United, it is ok to leave

It's also OK to take less drastic measures. If we become Qatar/Saudi/Dubai owned then I wont spend a penny on the club anymore. Merch, tickets, TV packages, none of it. And I will always criticise the owners when the topic gets brought up, regardless of successful the club becomes. I think it's important to not start defending these regimes just because they own a club that I've supported all my life. I can't control what the owners do, but I can control my attitude towards them and how I talk about them publicly.

I honestly think that the end result of these actions are just as effective as leaving.

 

[dinostar77]

Nobody wants the UK government to own Man Utd either. This is a braindead argument.

SAF once absolutely hammered Solskjaer for making a tactical foul against Newcastle in the 97/98 season. If you think the man put aside every moral he had to win then you don't know the club as well as you think you do.

And you need to get off your high horse

 

[ShinjiNinja26]

It’s very easy to say you’ll walk away from supporting the club if a Middle Eastern state takes over when you’re an anonymous user on an internet forum. As you’re just throwing a statement out there and no one will ever know whether you’ve truly walked away or not, it’s pointless. Obviously there will be people that genuinely do but I also suspect quite a few are just saying it for the sake of it to claim the moral high ground.

 

[aganley]

It’s very easy to say you’ll walk away from supporting the club if a Middle Eastern state takes over when you’re an anonymous user on an internet forum. As you’re just throwing a statement out there and no one will ever know whether you’ve truly walked away or not, it’s pointless. Obviously there will be people that genuinely do but I also suspect quite a few are just saying it for the sake of it to claim the moral high ground.

I will bask in our glory days and quietly smile when someone calls me a glory hunter again, having spent 10 years without a league title and 5 years without any trophy.

 

[stevoc]

However we live in the UK, which is one of the worlds biggest arms exporters and therefore via proxy responisble for the deaths of many many people.

The UK government doesn't own Manchester United, they're not going to own Manchester United and no one is even discussing the possibility of them owning Manchester United.

So what relevance does the UK government selling arms to other countries hold to the discussion?

 

[matt10000]

It’s a no from me

 

[Dion]

Chances are quite high in our western world. I heard the same claims once the Glazers took over, and look how many fans actually left for good

So none then? You know of none.

And there's hundreds of ex-United supporters who turn out at FCOM every week who left when the Glazers took over. So your example of people who are hypocritical is zero and your example of people not taking a moral stance has loads... top work.

 

[Dion]

And you need to get off your high horse

If you think not wanting a state to own a football club is getting on a "high horse" then you really need to scrape yourself up out of the gutter. It's barely a moral Shetland pony.

 

[Escobar]

So none then? You know of none.

And there's hundreds of ex-United supporters who turn out at FCOM every week who left when the Glazers took over. So your example of people who are hypocritical is zero and your example of people not taking a moral stance has loads... top work.

You want to start a survey then?

 

[Dion]

You want to start a survey then?

I think if you're going to say it happens then you should have some evidence that it does. Not make obviously nonsense claims and then try to justify them afterwards. But sure, you make whatever poll you like.

 

[Conor]

However we live in the UK, which is one of the worlds biggest arms exporters and therefore via proxy responisble for the deaths of many many people.

This could be the greatest whataboutism thread ever, and we've had a few good ones in recent years.

 

[Escobar]

I think if you're going to say it happens then you should have some evidence that it does. Not make obviously nonsense claims and then try to justify them afterwards. But sure, you make whatever poll you like.

Chances are quite high but in the end, who cares really. If you want to have the moral high ground, then so be it. Most fans now say one thing and do another

 

[lukepowell1988]

Morally No.

However with the rise of Sugar Daddy owners in Newcastle City Liverpool ( Possibly ) It might be a needed evil.

 

[Dion]

Chances are quite high but in the end, who cares really. If you want to have the moral high ground, then so be it. Most fans now say one thing and do another

This is a nothing statement. "Chances are high the thing I said was true but I have absolutely no basis for this any more than I do my original claim... oh and people are hypocrites, I have no proof for that either but believe me"

You have nothing meaningful to say on this, you're just trashing around looking to call people hypocrites because the moral line they've chosen to draw is in a different place to the one you have and that makes you uncomfortable.

 

[Jim Beam]

Everyone can do as they wish, it is a free land. Am waiting to see who will be in charge before saying anything as I don't see the point in getting worked up about something that didn't even happen and in the outcome that I can't have any influence. Based on who it is, will see how it affects me.

Still, some people openly wanting state ownership and getting giddy about the prospect of Mbappe/Musaila/Bellingham, etc... seem both distasteful and hypocritical to say the least.

 

[Son]

Thankfully that myth finally blown out of the water 05ish ? When the council or bank had to bail them out after their first galactico spree.



True, but till jack walker and his millions came along and then Hall (Newcastle) to a degree we outspent anyone near us and from 88 till we did in 93 we spent massive money (for the time) and nearly broke the then transfer record on the players we were signing.



Wouldn't that have meant we be owned by the racist sexist bigot murdoch and no the Gov didn't give us the yanks, Alex Ferguson and his bloody ego did with his thinking he could beat two billionaires over a poxy horse in court, shows how little he knew really in that world, as one was from a city here in Ireland known as a third world city aka stab city aka Limerick and still when he was born resembled the slums of London, Dublin in the 1800s and made himself a billionaire. And even now that guy gets the Irish Gov to go along with his ideas, told them he'd get them the 2026 Ryder Cup, house them (his hotel/castle) and use his course as the venue free of charge, well not really, the Gov has to finally pump major money into Limerick now.

Yeah I get those points I agree too. It’s obviously the side who dominates just basically had the most cash always.

Apart from a few outliers here and there and the problem is our nearest rivals are owned by a country. You can beat that on any sort of fair playing field unless you have similar ownership.

Im no fan of Sky btw but it’s still criminal what happened to our club. Whether it was Fergie’s ego to blame and the Premier League accepting this ownership model we have now it’s just been completely unacceptable for a club of our size to have been treated the way it has.

The fans have suffered so it’s time to just take whoever is willing to put in enough money to make us number 1 again. Assume that will be a gulf state wealth fund of some sort rather than American companies trying to use our club as leverage for profit and having to satisfy investors at every turn when the money dries up in a recession etc.

 

[Yakuza_devils]

Glazers took us from a club at the pinnacle of world football to a laughing stock now. Unprecedented mismanagement, under investment in infrastructure, youth, scouting, sport science and etc are all in dire state. The leeches also sucked billions out of the club and now stand to make 6 to 7 bils profit. The next business owners are going to do the same to us, it's business world!

I don't believe that ME ownership is sport washing. It is also a form of business and I prefer their model which they are more than willing to invest more of their money. With the right management and investment, they can grow Man Utd to be the undisputed No.1 club in the world, far surpassing whatever Man City trying to achieve. We have massive fan base in the world and growing. By then they will have their returns in many ways.

I'm a simple man living an ordinary life. Football and supporting Man Utd is my passion. There is no way that I can stop supporting Man Utd. Owners come and go, I will always support Man Utd through thick and thin.

 

[Señor Sloppy]

The ultimate question I ask myself regarding this issue is:
“Would such an entity owning ourselves be likely to worsen the societal situation in that state?”

The answer that I arrive at is “No”.

It’s obviously an incredibly complex issue, but the historical precedent indicates that societal progress within such countries is positively paralleled with increased alignment with the West. It therefore follows that it’s much better for countries like ours to remain open to such economic and social integration with these states, as shutting the door in their faces would simply have the effect of pushing them further towards alternate, less liberal geopolitical centres of gravity.

Given my conclusion to the above issue, it’s easy for me to square the moral dilemma with the transformative benefits that such ownership would have on our sporting success, surrounding area, local community etc..

 

[Yakuza_devils]

I am a simple man and I don't follow politics. What I know is that we have been properly screwed by Glazers financially and unprecedented mismanagement by Ed, Arnold and Murtough. I don't care who is the next owners, Im happy to get rid of these people from further harming the club. As long as the new owners come in with proper plan and vision, it should be considered.

English FA found Saudi ownership at Newcastle to be fit and proper. The same for Abu Dhabi at City. I believe there will be more and more this type of ownership coming up. The next will be either Liverpool or us.

 

[croadyman]

I am a simple man and I don't follow politics. What I know is that we have been properly screwed by Glazers financially and unprecedented mismanagement by Ed, Arnold and Murtough. I don't care who is the next owners, Im happy to get rid of these people from further harming the club. As long as the new owners come in with proper plan and vision, it should be considered.

English FA found Saudi ownership at Newcastle to be fit and proper. The same for Abu Dhabi at City. I believe there will be more and more this type of ownership coming up. The next will be either Liverpool or us.

Yeah I am gonna embrace it

 

[justsomebloke]

Assuming that "state-owned" means Mid-East, then no, absolutely not. Not because they'd be particularly bad owners for United, but because Mideast oil money is already exercising far too much influence on the game globally. If they get Liverpool or other big clubs, it'd be just as bad. They've already more or less captured FIFA, as a result of which international football is now driven by a money-making spiral in which the needs of the national leagues are ignored and international tournaments being destroyed by nonsense like the 48-team format, all to increase revenue further. Football doesn't need to get more profitable. It needs to get less profitable. The way it is now, money dominates the game to such an extent that it has become less competitive at the top level, and the product is being milked to death.

 

[ThinkTank@Cafe]

Yeah. Let’s be proactive, trendy, and you know, care about the planet we live on. So ban our club from money when our rivals are getting insane amounts from their owners. United must suffer and stand up against evil. That will make us proud and Citeh players will be ashamed of themselves holding EPL Champions trophy.

I care about United or fellow fans so much that I am manifesting my love for freedom in misery of eternal top 4 battle. I’m happy with shitty signings, obsolete stadium, degraded facilities as long as my political conciseness is intact.

Hypocrisy

 

[oneway]

The ultimate question I ask myself regarding this issue is:
“Would such an entity owning ourselves be likely to worsen the societal situation in that state?”

The answer that I arrive at is “No”.

It’s obviously an incredibly complex issue, but the historical precedent indicates that societal progress within such countries is positively paralleled with increased alignment with the West. It therefore follows that it’s much better for countries like ours to remain open to such economic and social integration with these states, as shutting the door in their faces would simply have the effect of pushing them further towards alternate, less liberal geopolitical centres of gravity.

Given my conclusion to the above issue, it’s easy for me to square the moral dilemma with the transformative benefits that such ownership would have on our sporting success, surrounding area, local community etc..

Good points I agree changes take time and social inclusion might produce progress in countries that have differing values. Buying Utd will not make these states worse in fact been in the public eye could well see some progress in the long term. Look at the situation in Europe with black players it hasn’t been completely eradicated but it is better than 20 yrs ago. We need a huge injection of money and that may well come at a price for some but we are in need of ownership change and buying Utd will need serious investment.

 

[justsomebloke]

Yeah. Let’s be proactive, trendy, and you know, care about the planet we live on. So ban our club from money when our rivals are getting insane amounts from their owners. United must suffer and stand up against evil. That will make us proud and Citeh players will be ashamed of themselves holding EPL Champions trophy.

I care about United or fellow fans so much that I am manifesting my love for freedom in misery of eternal top 4 battle. I’m happy with shitty signings, obsolete stadium, degraded facilities as long as my political conciseness is intact.

Hypocrisy

Looking at the bigger picture is "hypocrisy"? It's not fundamentally about idealism (although that certainly remains a valid angle too), it's about power and who has it. We're at a point where the flood of oil money threatens to make it impossible for clubs run on any other basis to remain competitive, and where the terms of the international game is set according to the needs and requirements of parties that have no attachment to the basic interest of European national leagues. Do you think the Saudis and Qatar care about the English football pyramid? Why do you think FIFA wants the expanded Club world cup and a 48-team World Cup every three years? FIFA gets more money, and foreign owners get more competitions that are more meaningful to them than European club football. As things stand, it will continue to develop in this direction, and it won't take many more of the handful of top European clubs being controlled by oil money before the ability of European leagues to stand up to that development and protect its own interests is fatally undercut. It's not about United, it would be just as bad if Liverpool ends up going that route.

 

[Gurtej]

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

 

[Roane]

I don't really understand some of the arguments.

All I can understand, as it's in front of me, is that the countries we all love to hate have been beneficial to the EPL.

Russian money in to Chelsea. The owner loved them and made the football better

Arab money into City again well loved and made the football better

Leicester well loved and won a title, again about the football

We are a money machine and in turmoil.

If our new owners love football and show, like the above, that it means something to them then which country they are from means nothing.

 

[justsomebloke]

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

Or maybe you should move on to other threads, if you think the discussion is so pointless. Or at least abstain from embarrassing yourself by just blurting out the "call it woke then add some whataboutery" formula - the very definition of online idiocy.

 

[phelans shorts]

Yeah. Let’s be proactive, trendy, and you know, care about the planet we live on. So ban our club from money when our rivals are getting insane amounts from their owners. United must suffer and stand up against evil. That will make us proud and Citeh players will be ashamed of themselves holding EPL Champions trophy.

I care about United or fellow fans so much that I am manifesting my love for freedom in misery of eternal top 4 battle. I’m happy with shitty signings, obsolete stadium, degraded facilities as long as my political conciseness is intact.

Hypocrisy

This is the single dumbest post I’ve seen on the internet, congratulations I guess?

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

Nobody is supporting Britain buying a club either

 

[norm87cro]

No. This club is self sestainable and it only needs decent owners to do well.

 

[Coops73]

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

Yeah, and let’s not forget what the Spanish did to the Mayans, or what the Mongolians did to china, Persia and parts of Russia and what did the romans ever do for us?…apart from sanitation, roads etc. and don’t even get me started on the Vikings, what they did to York really boils my piss.

 

[Massive Spanner]

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

Ugh.

 

[Pexbo]

I don't really understand some of the arguments.

All I can understand, as it's in front of me, is that the countries we all love to hate have been beneficial to the EPL.

Russian money in to Chelsea. The owner loved them and made the football better

Arab money into City again well loved and made the football better

Leicester well loved and won a title, again about the football

We are a money machine and in turmoil.

If our new owners love football and show, like the above, that it means something to them then which country they are from means nothing.

Because the world is a bigger place than “The Premier League”?

They use it to clean their image on the world stage. They buy up land and put money into the local area which will eventually give them political leverage.

 

[georgipep]

Looking at the bigger picture is "hypocrisy"? It's not fundamentally about idealism (although that certainly remains a valid angle too), it's about power and who has it. We're at a point where the flood of oil money threatens to make it impossible for clubs run on any other basis to remain competitive, and where the terms of the international game is set according to the needs and requirements of parties that have no attachment to the basic interest of European national leagues. Do you think the Saudis and Qatar care about the English football pyramid? Why do you think FIFA wants the expanded Club world cup and a 48-team World Cup every three years? FIFA gets more money, and foreign owners get more competitions that are more meaningful to them than European club football. As things stand, it will continue to develop in this direction, and it won't take many more of the handful of top European clubs being controlled by oil money before the ability of European leagues to stand up to that development and protect its own interests is fatally undercut. It's not about United, it would be just as bad if Liverpool ends up going that route.

To me, the real hypocrisy is not minding a state(-backed) owner but being against a Super League. The entire argument was about the football pyramid, fairness and all that. But if the money comes to United, then nobody cares, right? It's all good,as long as we are winning.

Reading responses here makes it so much easier to understand why the world is in its current state. People never want to take any responsibility for the bad things if they are benefiting them, or at least not impacting them directly...

 

[georgipep]

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

And who is suggesting to back the British state to own Manchester United?

 

[justsomebloke]

To me, the real hypocrisy is not minding a state(-backed) owner but being against a Super League. The entire argument was about the football pyramid, fairness and all that. But if the money comes to United, then nobody cares, right? It's all good,as long as we are winning.

Reading responses here makes it so much easier to understand why the world is in its current state. People never want to take any responsibility for the bad things if they are benefiting them, or at least not impacting them directly...

Word.

 

[Gurtej]

Yeah yeah yeah…. All these people raising their voices about the end of the world if we are backed by a state will be posting with cheers the moment we start winning leagues…. The hypocrisy will be amazing to watch….

 

[68cob]

The hypocrisy will be amazing to watch….

Will you be keeping note of those who object and then cheer the success (if there is any) under state ownership? Or are you just going to guess that you were right in your claim? What will be so amazing about it?

 

[11101]

Yes yes yes ….. now move on.

Enough of this woke discussion. In my view no regime is without blood on its hand so let’s just stop this western nonsense… Britain has the biggest blood on its hand given it’s history so this is an absolute non sensical discussion.

Yes and how many centuries ago was that? Every country on the planet has blood on its hands. Some learned and moved on, others haven't. Reducing every single topic to what Britain did in the colonies is the sort of thing youd expect to see in a piece of school homework, or a Guardian opinion piece.

None of us want to see our club in the hands of a murderous regime. We aren't starved of success and desperate the way some clubs are. Us, Arsenal, Liverpool, we are all clubs that should aim for better.

The only positive to Saudi ownership would be the look on Toon faces when they get dropped for a bigger and better sportswashing project.