I believe top 4 makes financial sense. It brings in the perks without the owner having to dig deep in his pockets. Ratcliffe is all about spending wisely and being sustainable right?
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
INEOS lives on debt, they cleared millions and millions of pounds of debt recently just because they could, not because they needed too.
This £800m is small change to them in company to what they have done.
They could pay it off tomorrow of they really wanted too.
I'd rather be owned by someone who is debt free and has a proven record of wanting to win stuff then someone who lives in debt and is quite happy being mediocre
I see this thread is still full of the same mental gymnastics to justify the Qataris over Jim Ratcliffe. “But he’s not very good at running a football club” are the Qataris? “But he doesn’t have enough money” if we stuck to FFP so we need unlimited funds? Has he said he can’t afford the stadium? Can the Qataris? “But he’s involved with banks” every financial transaction of this size needs banks, it doesn’t mean it’s leveraged debt on horrendous interest rates like the Glazers.
If people are so desperate for the Qatars then that is fair enough, the rubbish people spout regarding an alternative bidder to justify it is a bit embarrassing though.
If people are so desperate for the Qatars then that is fair enough, the rubbish people spout regarding an alternative bidder to justify it is a bit embarrassing though.
Its not a history lesson, its an example. 'Growing them into a brand with far bigger reputation' i'll definitely give you, cant deny that. Its their footballing achievements which i find questionable. I think Lyon and Monaco are examples of french clubs who built up a good scouting network and good youth academy respectively and achieved success in europe with some good teams. Achievable success by most french clubs i would imagine but you already know im not an expert. I respected that and what they built.Thank you for the unnecessary history lessonThey were far more chaotic than that, they also almost got relegated, infighting among sets of ultras. QSI stabilized them and grew them into a brand with a far better reputation
PSG feels like a hollow marketing company. I find them cheap and tacky and plastic. They were given cheat codes and have bought a bunch of players with little connection or care for the club and it just feels empty to me.
70 year old billionaire Manchester United fan wants to buy the club to just finish 4th. Nah!
The owner doesn't have to dig deep. Level of investment in the squad has rarely been an issue under the glazers anyway, we famously spend a fecking fortune. We've just had shit managers and execs who haven't had a strategy, which appears to have already changed with eth and this new bloke.
The almost begging for Qatar to come in any prospective owner is a bit embarrassing. Be happy the Glazers are going? Yes, sure. If you must, you can stick your head in the sand about the myriad of ethical,social and political issues. Even then, any buyer should be treated with suspicion, not as a saviour
Obscene wealth is no guarantee of either competence or good intentions. No guarantee of respect for our history, our traditions, our fans. No guarantee we don’t end up with another Woodward but with a bigger chequebook running the club and killing any positive steps made by Ten Hag. Some scepticism, scrutiny and self-respect needed. Please
Obscene wealth is no guarantee of either competence or good intentions. No guarantee of respect for our history, our traditions, our fans. No guarantee we don’t end up with another Woodward but with a bigger chequebook running the club and killing any positive steps made by Ten Hag. Some scepticism, scrutiny and self-respect needed. Please
The Club left by the Glazers need huge investment that would run in billions. So yes we need help. Ineos has yet to show ability to properly run the club and the ambition to win stuff in football
I've yet to see a United fan who hold a season ticket of a rival club and who wanted to buy that rival club
All true tbh. My point was to simply say that all in all, PSG benefited from their Qatari ownership even if the end goal hasn't been reached now and a lot of things are left to be desired
United are a stupid business purchase at 7bn
You cant take dividend
You need to invest billion in stadium
You need to invest hundreds to buy the Neymar of the season
Practically paying 7bn potentially more for nothing
You cant take dividend
You need to invest billion in stadium
You need to invest hundreds to buy the Neymar of the season
Practically paying 7bn potentially more for nothing
Remind me what's your stadium called again? And don't go around spouting "200 mil is fine, but anything more is where I draw the line"
I can see the rivals are already shitting themselves at the prospect of a United without the shackles of the leveraged loan and Glazers at the helm.
Also, rich talk about Neymar coming from someone whose club was willing to pay 80 mil for a Brighton player who's been in the PL for a whole of 6 months.
Revenue not contribution to surplus.
What has the owner of the Islamic Bank won just out of interest?
I'm sure Ratcliffe is happy with his mediocre life, owning two football clubs, one of which is improving all the time and being a multi billionaire. He just thrives on mediocrity
No need to ask which of the two you are backingWhat has the owner of the Islamic Bank won just out of interest?
I'm sure Ratcliffe is happy with his mediocre life, owning two football clubs, one of which is improving all the time and being a multi billionaire. He just thrives on mediocrity
Very well said, Sir.
You don't understand why anyone would assume they'd use the model they already have, rather than wildly invent something entirely new that could be anything really? Seriously?
In any case, it's not just a question of model, but also of competence. PSG is a spectacle more than a football team. Presumably because that's the sort of team their owners want.
Hear hear.
Yeah i feel like this is probably me arguing for the sake of arguing from a leftover conversation.
I get your point. They did benefit, just not in a way i personally have much regard for (at least footballing wise). I think i could enjoy being a Monaco or Lille supporter, I think supporting PSG would make me a bit miserable. At least in theory because i dont know the details of the clubs involved that much
Considering this guy is a chief banker and used to work at credit suisse group I’m going to assume this 92 foundation will be a consortium of very rich Qataris and they’ll make the claim it’s private money. Wouldn’t it be smart for optics to also have foreign investors within it?
Last edited:
I’m one. At 20 I moved to London. Had a OT season ticket but craved football so bought a West Ham season ticket for weekends when I couldn’t get to OT. Didn’t support them in any way but had a good laugh for a couple of years with some West Ham mates.
Or maybe he gifts it to MUST or Redcafe admins. Who knows?
You didn't try to buy West Ham though.
Maybe you did. Those wretched souls would undoubtedly prefer you!
I’m the ghost of David Gold!
Jim Ratcliffe vs Qataris in a bid to buy United? Let's see what both parties have to offer. I am sure the latter will invest more and not expect any short term return on their investments. However, the value of United will grow, so if they decide to sell, they will make some profit.
Ah I see, thanks!
The debt is feck all to a company of their size. I don't understand why there's so much worry about that. As if they'd buy an asset like United, take over all debt, but then cripple the asset by leeching money to repay a debt that they can easily absorb on their own
Yes because you are assuming it's the same set of people at the helm of that financial group intent on the same goals without any chance of using the QSI ownership as a way to not make the same mistakes.
The difference between you and me is that I am taking no stance at the moment, I'm willing to give any owner the same chance. You've basically written them off already based on what QSI did with PSG, it makes little sense to me
Arsenal plays in Emirates stadium.
He probably won't cause he claimed they definitely won't fall in form. Before they grabbed one point in 3 games.
I'm backing whomever is best for the club, right now we don't really know who that will be.
I'd prefer INEOS for sure as I don't want United to become a front for a state like the mob across the road or Newcastle, the heart was ripped out of City when that happened, likewise Newcastle.
However the Qatari bid, hopefully without state backing could be good for the club.
But what I have bigger issues with is people writing INEOS and Ratcliffe off based on complete fabrications and their desires to be owned by the richest persons possible.
People have claimed Ratcliffe is doing this for publicity and won't tender a bid, that was a lie, they have claimed he doesn't have the money, that's a lie. It's been chucked at him that he doesn't even support United because he wanted to buy Chelsea and had a season ticket at the Bridge. Well how many times has Mr Jassim set foot in Manchester yet alone Old Trafford? (To be fair he may have been in Manchester, I don't know for sure!!).
But you get my point.
People are blindsided by the one side they are on, without viewing the bigger picture.
I can only hope the Glazers do their due diligence and for once put the club first rather than their wallets.
Ronay is an interesting writer, but this is a really poor and lazy analysis.
Well I don't blame you for the atrocities that your Country does, that would be insane, it would be like blaming one or two people who act rogue and perform terrorism and then the country itself gets blamed, which is again incorrect.
Because I have seen that part because of where I am from, the people are just like you and me, who have no ill will towards anybody and wants to live in harmony and peace, but this world is an evil place and we share the earth and sometimes the country with those same people so not much we can do.
I never got the outrage at the Glazers taking dividends. So did the shareholders under the PLC. The Edwards would skim off the top before this. Yet with the Glazers it was treated like some unprecedented, egregious act that shouldn't be tolerated.
Do you own any Art? Jewelery?
What makes little sense is to choose to ignore everything we know (which is quite a lot) about the prospective buyers.
I do give any owner the same chance - if they represent interests I'm comfortable about owning the club I support, and have given anyone reason to believe they'll run a major sports team competently and with the right ambition, they have my support. If not, I consider it bad news that they are involved in the takeover race. The notion that anyone is welcome and should be given a few years to show what they can do before anyone really forms an opinion is just absurd.
Sadly, given their history of burdening a debt free club with debt, taking out £1b to fund this debt with interest, fees, dividends etc I find it very hard to believe they’re simply not going to go for the bidder who offers them to most money
I'm backing whomever is best for the club, right now we don't really know who that will be.
I'd prefer INEOS for sure as I don't want United to become a front for a state like the mob across the road or Newcastle, the heart was ripped out of City when that happened, likewise Newcastle.
However the Qatari bid, hopefully without state backing could be good for the club.
But what I have bigger issues with is people writing INEOS and Ratcliffe off based on complete fabrications and their desires to be owned by the richest persons possible.
People have claimed Ratcliffe is doing this for publicity and won't tender a bid, that was a lie, they have claimed he doesn't have the money, that's a lie. It's been chucked at him that he doesn't even support United because he wanted to buy Chelsea and had a season ticket at the Bridge. Well how many times has Mr Jassim set foot in Manchester yet alone Old Trafford? (To be fair he may have been in Manchester, I don't know for sure!!).
But you get my point.
People are blindsided by the one side they are on, without viewing the bigger picture.
I can only hope the Glazers do their due diligence and for once put the club first rather than their wallets.
but I am on par with your thinking as to whom I’d like to own the club
Sure. Value of club in 2005 vs what is likely to be sold for in 2023. I can't see anyone who doesn't see how that's very attractive.
£5bn profit . All money spent in interim the club generated itself anyway.
A 5b investment is a 5b investment just as 800m debt is 800m debt. Ineos will ask 4 a ROI. That might happen now or once the 70 year old Chelsea season ticket holder die
- Status