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

[MTF]

If the club are signed by a nation - of course the club isn’t separate from the owners IMO. Do you not think of PSG and City’s owners when you think of their success?

I used to have a slight sympathy for PSG before they were acquired. Probably started because I liked their kits, but also some interesting players went there sometimes like Ronaldinho, plus the mystery of a big city club that couldn't quite find success. Since they were acquired I generally hope that they fail, because I want that whole endeavor of royal families buying clubs to fail. I can't reconcile that attitude with supporting United in the case of a similar takeover.

 

[bosnian_red]

I know plenty of City fans who have stopped going to the games because it doesn’t mean as much as before. I know plenty of lads who will stop going to United.

United will represent Qatar. We will have them on our strips, we will be playing over there we will become synonymous with them. Just like City are now. And as for a reflection of their fan base - they’ve just unfurled a new banner of Boris Johnson’s lawyer because he’s representing them in an issue where everyone knows they’ve cheated.

I get to you it’ll mean more - but surely you can see how that doesn’t pan out? Does anyone think PSG or City’s success is anything other than due to money?

Their success is due to the money but I don't think success defines the traditionally values of the club, the community and all that? It's also a different case success wise when a club is a nothing club and transitions to being an elite club exclusively because of money, compared to our case where we already are an elite club.

Would United be defined by the new owners if the new owners come in and essentially purely invest in infrastructure/community/clear the existing debt? Let the direct football matters be self sustained? That's how it should be IMO, regardless of who takes over and if it is them then I hope they do it that way. But it's a different scenario in my eyes as we aren't being changed dramatically. It's more just they would run us differently and you hope more smartly which applies to any new owner. But we aren't being transformed from a relegation fodder team to a big team due to financial doping. It'd be financial doping to clear the debts of garbage owners and get our facilities back up to speed. I dunno. Maybe just a blinkered United fan view.

Also tbh I don't really think there is anything that would make me stop watching United. I'm still obsessed with football, and United is still the club of my childhood. I don't think that an owner defines a club, as the club has been around for over 100 years before them, and it's more "an idea that can't be killed" than anything else.

 

[Wumminator]

Their success is due to the money but I don't think success defines the traditionally values of the club, the community and all that? It's also a different case success wise when a club is a nothing club and transitions to being an elite club exclusively because of money, compared to our case where we already are an elite club.

Would United be defined by the new owners if the new owners come in and essentially purely invest in infrastructure/community/clear the existing debt? Let the direct football matters be self sustained? That's how it should be IMO, regardless of who takes over and if it is them then I hope they do it that way. But it's a different scenario in my eyes as we aren't being changed dramatically. It's more just they would run us differently and you hope more smartly which applies to any new owner. But we aren't being transformed from a relegation fodder team to a big team due to financial doping. It'd be financial doping to clear the debts of garbage owners and get our facilities back up to speed. I dunno. Maybe just a blinkered United fan view.

It’s an absolutely fair enough view. I completely understand it - just something I don’t agree with.

 

[Dan_F]

I don't see any protest getting off the ground, more likely outcome is huge celebration and parties that the glazers have been removed.

This is a strange one, United fans have generally been hostile to potential takeovers of their club. There were protests in the 80's when Maxwell tried to buy United. Same again when BSkyB launched a takeover in the last 90's and obviously the protests when the Glazers did manage to buy the club in 2005, protests that continue to this day.

But having spent the best part of 2 decades wanting the Glazers out, if the news becomes official that they are leaving and selling up. I reckon some people might find it strange to immediately start protesting against potential new owners and campaigning for their removal. Though I have no doubt some will.

Yeah I think it was more along the lines of what the previous poster was saying, rather than specifically stating for new owners to get out of the club, that wouldn’t make sense. Similar to what we see from German clubs when they have issues with sponsorships or whatever it is.

 

[Wumminator]

I used to have a slight sympathy for PSG before they were acquired. Probably started because I liked their kits, but also some interesting players went there sometimes like Ronaldinho, plus the mystery of a big city club that couldn't quite find success. Since they were acquired I generally hope that they fail, because I want that whole endeavor of royal families buying clubs to fail. I can't reconcile that attitude with supporting United in the case of a similar takeover.

It’s just a hollowness to the club. We all know it - we’ve all said it for years about other clubs.

 

[oates]

well for a start - I don’t know what the first part of your post is about.

second of all - the evidence of what you said is right there. Let people read that and make their own mind up about your morals. Your accusations of me being islamophobic yesterday is absolutely outrageous and I imagine you’ll soon be banned from the board for some of your takes.

Well I've a feeling I'm making a huge mistake by even tagging you but how you turn what @Abdullah7 actually posted into what you claim was support is pretty far from my understanding of the mention in that post. I can't honestly see the point in you trying to make something of it which just isn't there.

 

[Wumminator]

Well I've a feeling I'm making a huge mistake by even tagging you but how you turn what @Abdullah7 actually posted into what you claim was support is pretty far from my understanding of the mention in that post. I can't honestly see the point in you trying to make something of it which just isn't there.

Did you read the full page?

This is him talking about the beheading and killing of a journalist by the Saudi royal family.

“

I'm not wasting my time on this subject. There's a thin blue line that separates a person from being a convicted murderer to squeaky clean no record person. You could stamp a name on it and call it whatever. You could scream "Justice" to the whole world or you could say it's a cover up. It's your opinion. There's nothing on his record. Just like the whole Bill Clinton Who, allegedly, have never been to one of Epstines orgy islands. even though there were eye witnesses that saw him there.

I'm not on his side or against. My loyalty to United is higher than what you think of but I'm trying to be as realistic as I could be. Isn't it a common knowledge in the western society that your innocent until proven guilty? is it? So whenever you want to stark up a conversion about it you can use the same route and procedures and see where it'll lead you. If you end up empty handed with nothing solid to stand on then it's your word against his.”

 

[groovyalbert]

There's no denying that state-ownership would juxtapose the self-made and developed roots the club is founded on. It would mean the club feeling different to the one we know and love today.

But adapting to the times goes hand in hand with long-term relevance and success. We were massively ahead of the curve in the early 90s with sponsorship and training, and the past 15 years has seen our rivals catch up and in many instances surpass us.

There is simply no ownership model that makes us consistently competitive that doesn't cause a bad taste in the mouth.

Would I be happy with state ownership? No. Would I prefer it to the current situation? Sadly, yes. It's probably this which is convincing Qatari funds to explore investment opportunities.

 

[oates]

Did you read the full page?

I read what you quoted but I'm not sure why I even bothered and regret deeply even within minutes that I've approached this with you.

 

[Wumminator]

I read what you quoted but I'm not sure why I even bothered and regret deeply even within minutes that I've approached this with you.

Why?

 

[Pickle85]

It’s just a hollowness to the club. We all know it - we’ve all said it for years about other clubs.

The idea of a 'hollowness' nails it for me. And it's why all of the 'I bet you change your tune when we buy Mbappe' posts are ludicrous. If we do buy Mbappe and start throwing absurd sums of money around then the club, for me, ceases to exist as the entity it was and enters a new era of all shine and no heart. Yes, the history will nominally still be there (you can't erase that, obviously) but it will bear so little resemblance to the club it's become that, for me, it'll almost seem like another club entirely. I'll probably keep watching footie and I'll probably still say I support United if asked but I'll be a LOT less arsed about the club than I am now.

 

[oates]

Why?

Because I disagree that the evidence posted by you being extremely loose in the manner of which we normally expect evidence to mean stands up to much examination and my mention of this will probably mean that the potential back and forth with yourself will conclude with the erasing, bleaching and burning of my hard drive and the need for @Penna and myself going into the Witness Protection program.

 

[Strelok]

No offense to anyone but reading various thread recently I can't help but found all this hilarious and sad at the same time. People trying their best, sometime with the most twisted/weirdest logic to justify their morals in continuing support the club despite the Qataries. It's like trying to prove smoking is good for your health just because you can't quit.

 

[croadyman]

I’m sure if they come in and bring us Mbappe and Bellingham people would soon change their tune if they’re against them taking over.

Honestly think when you look at the other thread that many just see state ownership and will walk away which is a stance I respect them for making

 

[Wumminator]

Because I disagree that the evidence posted by you being extremely loose in the manner of which we normally expect evidence to mean stands up to much examination and my mention of this will probably mean that the potential back and forth with yourself will conclude with the erasing, bleaching and burning of my hard drive and the need for @Penna and myself going into the Witness Protection program.

You don’t think the thread I’ve posted is a poster trying to justify (not supprt) the murder of a journalist? Despite multiple people at the time pointing out similar things? Despite him saying at the time without proof he’s innocent until proven guilty and suggesting it’s similar to Bill Clinton?

 

[oates]

You don’t think the thread I’ve posted is a poster trying to justify (not supprt) the murder of a journalist? Despite multiple people at the time pointing out similar things? Despite him saying at the time without proof he’s innocent until proven guilty and suggesting it’s similar to Bill Clinton?

All I can say at the moment at the advice from lawyers, agents and priests is that is not what I read from the quote you posted. Sorry, I can't go into much detail since the agents want me to put the burning laptop down and get in their big dark suv.

 

[Abdullah7]

well for a start - I don’t know what the first part of your post is about.

second of all - the evidence of what you said is right there. Let people read that and make their own mind up about your morals. Your accusations of me being islamophobic yesterday is absolutely outrageous and I imagine you’ll soon be banned from the board for some of your takes.

The first part I deleted it. it was a miss quote where I copied and pasted my replay from a thread to thread wrongfully. can you please remove it as well.

second, What were my accusations?

 

[Abdullah7]

Because I disagree that the evidence posted by you being extremely loose in the manner of which we normally expect evidence to mean stands up to much examination and my mention of this will probably mean that the potential back and forth with yourself will conclude with the erasing, bleaching and burning of my hard drive and the need for @Penna and myself going into the Witness Protection program.

There is no justifications what so ever there my friend.

 

[dannyrhinos89]

Honestly think when you look at the other thread that many just see state ownership and will walk away which is a stance I respect them for making

it’s fair enough but I love the club I couldn’t really give a damn who owns it providing they show they care about it too, it’s not just fancy signings though if they get rid of the debt, improve the stadium and facilities and more important the local Community etc then it can only be a good thing.

 

[redcucumber]

This is him talking about the beheading and killing of a journalist by the Saudi royal family.

I'm not wasting my time on this subject. There's a thin blue line that separates a person from being a convicted murderer to squeaky clean no record person. You could stamp a name on it and call it whatever. You could scream "Justice" to the whole world or you could say it's a cover up. It's your opinion. There's nothing on his record. Just like the whole Bill Clinton Who, allegedly, have never been to one of Epstines orgy islands. even though there were eye witnesses that saw him there.

It's the same bizarre conspiracy strewn nonsense that Trumpites try to blur discourse with. I'd much rather people were honest that they don't care about the issues to do with morality and just want to get rich quick. I can at least respect that sort of self-centred reasoning.

 

[redcucumber]

it’s fair enough but I love the club I couldn’t really give a damn who owns it providing they show they care about it too, it’s not just fancy signings though if they get rid of the debt, improve the stadium and facilities and more important the local Community etc then it can only be a good thing.

Lots of people love the club. Turning away from United because of unease to do with the owners doesn't mean they love it less than you, if anything I'd argue the opposite.

 

[Abdullah7]

Did you read the full page?

This is him talking about the beheading and killing of a journalist by the Saudi royal family.

“

I'm not wasting my time on this subject. There's a thin blue line that separates a person from being a convicted murderer to squeaky clean no record person. You could stamp a name on it and call it whatever. You could scream "Justice" to the whole world or you could say it's a cover up. It's your opinion. There's nothing on his record. Just like the whole Bill Clinton Who, allegedly, have never been to one of Epstines orgy islands. even though there were eye witnesses that saw him there.

I'm not on his side or against. My loyalty to United is higher than what you think of but I'm trying to be as realistic as I could be. Isn't it a common knowledge in the western society that your innocent until proven guilty? is it? So whenever you want to stark up a conversion about it you can use the same route and procedures and see where it'll lead you. If you end up empty handed with nothing solid to stand on then it's your word against his.”

What's wrong about it?

 

[croadyman]

it’s fair enough but I love the club I couldn’t really give a damn who owns it providing they show they care about it too, it’s not just fancy signings though if they get rid of the debt, improve the stadium and facilities and more important the local Community etc then it can only be a good thing.

Yeah I want to see what they can do with that side of things more so than the signing of players

 

[Rex Banner]

At least it's not the Saudis?

 

[Wumminator]

it’s fair enough but I love the club I couldn’t really give a damn who owns it providing they show they care about it too, it’s not just fancy signings though if they get rid of the debt, improve the stadium and facilities and more important the local Community etc then it can only be a good thing.

Just FYI - the Abu Dhabi group have been a nightmare for Manchester and are currently profiteering massively over their new influence.

 

[Abdullah7]

At least it's not the Saudis?

I prefer Tamim over him any day of the week.

 

[groovyalbert]

At least it's not the Saudis?

New Stretford End chant?

 

[AjaxNL]

I cannot believe how many people say not to care about the owners of their club, as long as they care about United, buy the right players, take care of the stadium, etc. Shame on all of you who think that. Don't let the club be used for sportswashing away human rights violations, war, etc.

 

[cyberman]

At least it's not the Saudis?

Yeah, we’ve got the good ones

 

[RedSky]

Would be more okay about that than I would be a return for Gr**nwood.

That's an interesting opinion to have.

On one hand you have Mason, who we all know the backstory too.
On the other hand you have Qatar owning United, a country that imprisons people for being gay, you can be arrested for public intimacy outside of marriage. Where dancing publicly is deemed as indecent and provocative leading to arrest. Not forgetting the migrant trade 'issues' and lack of womens rights, effecting hundreds of thousands of people.

Don't you think it's a little hypocritical to take a strong stance against Greenwood but then allow Qatar to take over? If you think morals shouldn't be in football then that should open the door to Greenwood returning. If you think morals should be in football then it closes the door on both Qatar and Greenwood. It's an interesting debate.

 

[bosnian_red]

That's an interesting opinion to have.

On one hand you have Mason, who we all know the backstory too.
On the other hand you have Qatar owning United, a country that imprisons people for being gay, you can be arrested for public intimacy outside of marriage. Where dancing publicly is deemed as indecent and provocative leading to arrest. Not forgetting the migrant trade 'issues' and lack of womens rights, effecting hundreds of thousands of people.

Don't you think it's a little hypocritical to take a strong stance against Greenwood but then allow Qatar to take over? If you think morals shouldn't be in football then that should open the door to Greenwood returning. If you think morals should be in football then it closes the door on both Qatar and Greenwood. It's an interesting debate.

IMO for me I think it's easier to separate the owner from the club than an actual player. Knowing Greenwoods situation, having him then paraded and supported on the field is very different. You can always protest your owners, you don't cheer for your owners, just like United fans hate the Glazers now.

 

[dannyrhinos89]

Just FYI - the Abu Dhabi group have been a nightmare for Manchester and are currently profiteering massively over their new influence.

I thought they'd done loads for the community. I've only ever read positive things about what they've done to the area.

 

[RedSky]

IMO for me I think it's easier to separate the owner from the club than an actual player. Knowing Greenwoods situation, having him then paraded and supported on the field is very different. You can always protest your owners, you don't cheer for your owners, just like United fans hate the Glazers now.

It's strange because its the opposite for me. The Glazers have made a significant mark on United, more than any player. I can moan and complain about players, they can be sold, loaned out. Owners are there, they only leave when they decide too, it's a constant shadow over the club.

 

[ThomasEmil]

Would I like to support a club with infinite amounts of money, ability to compete with other clubs also having infinite amounts of money?

Or would I rather support a club with moral standards playing League 1 in 10 years due to choosing morals over money...

Decisions, decisions...

 

[bosnian_red]

It's strange because its the opposite for me. The Glazers have made a significant mark on United, more than any player. I can moan and complain about players, they can be sold, loaned out. Owners are there, they only leave when they decide too, it's a constant shadow over the club.

I feel like I can disassociate them from what the club is about. I don't feel owners ever represent a club or that a club represents it's owner. Players are far closer to that. You go to the stands, you support the team and the players on the pitch.

Yes the owners have more impact in the hand scheme but they are just separate business side of things people. You can remove them/change them/eliminate the need for them and the game will still be played on the pitch and people will still watch the team. People come to watch the players and coaching staff. Nobody goes to watch the owner or because of the owner.

I feel like the owners don't change what the club is about while if the team actively started playing someone like Greenwood when it is public, then it would change it more. I just can't get on board with the idea that a club represents it's owner, as then it is the idea that football is only representing some rich ass who wants a plaything rather than about players who are very talented at a sport we all love to play and watch.

 

[Coxy]

I would prefer we weren't state owned - but sadly I think we will be.

 

[Abdullah7]

@Wumminator I really feel that I should report you for falsifying these accusations about me. Don't waste my time again.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

I’m sure if they come in and bring us Mbappe and Bellingham people would soon change their tune if they’re against them taking over.

Yeah. Kinda like a wife beater having a kid with his battered spouse. Everyone celebrates the birth.

Vapid point though.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Would I like to support a club with infinite amounts of money, ability to compete with other clubs also having infinite amounts of money?

Or would I rather support a club with moral standards playing League 1 in 10 years due to choosing morals over money...

Decisions, decisions...

Well you’ve clearly decided that you enjoy false equivalences above all else, so I don’t know what your point is kid.

 

[Cloudface]

I don't want any state to own the club. I definitely don't want an ultra-conservative fascist dictatorship owning the club.

It's going to be a shitshow.