Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

owlo

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
3,252
If that's true (I haven't checked the shares they hold) then that's good to go under UEFA rules. Absolutely nothing they can do to prevent it. As clear a difference between PSG's owners and our bidders as you will get legally
They own 17.2% iirc. I posted a thread with a bit of a dive into the bid the other day. Should be good to go yes. Looks designed in a way that they've already consulted UEFA etc.
 

7even

Resident moaner, hypocrite and moron
Joined
Jun 4, 2006
Messages
4,233
Location
Lifetime vacation
I’m almost 60 years old and I want what’s best for the club from a financial standpoint.

That means no debt. No dividends. A owner who owns 100% of the club and see this as a long term investment. A owner with visions about our academy, men and women’s team and a detailed plan regarding building a new stadium and invest in our infrastructure.

With that in mind only one bid is attractive and the second bid is frankly underwhelming and bad from so many perspectives.

Everything I read about Ratcliffe turns me off.

He just seems like a greedy businessman with questionable morals and a person who has a history of being not trustworthy. Living in Monaco and talking about Manchester back to Manchester United is what a real hypocrite does.


From everything I read and understand the bid from Qatar is by far the best from a financial perspective. There’re issues regarding how they look at our HBQTI community but on the other hand if we look at PSG then this questions shouldn’t be a problem.

We can’t expect every citizen in Qatar to be hold accountable for their country’s history and laws. We don’t expect that from ourselves. We have no idea where they stand in these questions. Let’s wait and see how they answer all the critical questions that will follow if they end up as new owners. After that we can judge them.

My vote goes 100% to Qatar. Not even one second of hesitation.
 

crossy1686

career ending
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
32,201
Location
Manchester/Stockholm
Didn't realise it was that high - that's quite grim.

Any surveys done from the whole population of fans, rather than just those online? There's presumably a big bias there (Twitter is generally a disaster where fans only want to one-up fans of other clubs, so I can see them especially just wanting money without any further thought)
People say this stuff but a large majority of our fans are on Twitter. Just because anonymity makes it a shit show doesn't mean it's not a fair reflection of what people want.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
41,006
Location
Cooper Station
I’m almost 60 years old and I want what’s best for the club from a financial standpoint.

That means no debt. No dividends. A owner who owns 100% of the club and see this as a long term investment. A owner with visions about our academy, men and women’s team and a detailed plan regarding building a new stadium and invest in our infrastructure.

With that in mind only one bid is attractive and the second bid is frankly underwhelming and bad from so many perspectives.

Everything I read about Ratcliffe turns me off.

He just seems like a greedy businessman with questionable morals and a person who has a history of being not trustworthy. Living in Monaco and talking about Manchester back to Manchester United is what a real hypocrite does.


From everything I read and understand the bid from Qatar is by far the best from a financial perspective. There’re issues regarding how they look at our HBQTI community but on the other hand if we look at PSG then this questions shouldn’t be a problem.

We can’t expect every citizen in Qatar to be hold accountable for their country’s history and laws. We don’t expect that from ourselves. We have no idea where they stand in these questions. Let’s wait and see how they answer all the critical questions that will follow if they end up as new owners. After that we can judge them.

My vote goes 100% to Qatar. Not even one second of hesitation.
Agree fully.
 

Prodigal7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2015
Messages
2,303
Location
Daenerys' pants
I’m almost 60 years old and I want what’s best for the club from a financial standpoint.

That means no debt. No dividends. A owner who owns 100% of the club and see this as a long term investment. A owner with visions about our academy, men and women’s team and a detailed plan regarding building a new stadium and invest in our infrastructure.

With that in mind only one bid is attractive and the second bid is frankly underwhelming and bad from so many perspectives.

Everything I read about Ratcliffe turns me off.

He just seems like a greedy businessman with questionable morals and a person who has a history of being not trustworthy. Living in Monaco and talking about Manchester back to Manchester United is what a real hypocrite does.


From everything I read and understand the bid from Qatar is by far the best from a financial perspective. There’re issues regarding how they look at our HBQTI community but on the other hand if we look at PSG then this questions shouldn’t be a problem.

We can’t expect every citizen in Qatar to be hold accountable for their country’s history and laws. We don’t expect that from ourselves. We have no idea where they stand in these questions. Let’s wait and see how they answer all the critical questions that will follow if they end up as new owners. After that we can judge them.

My vote goes 100% to Qatar. Not even one second of hesitation.
I think you've highlighted the point right there. If you want to fight for human rights in Qatar then good for you, but it should be treated separately from your support of Manchester United given the context mentioned above.
 

crossy1686

career ending
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
32,201
Location
Manchester/Stockholm
I’m almost 60 years old and I want what’s best for the club from a financial standpoint.

That means no debt. No dividends. A owner who owns 100% of the club and see this as a long term investment. A owner with visions about our academy, men and women’s team and a detailed plan regarding building a new stadium and invest in our infrastructure.

With that in mind only one bid is attractive and the second bid is frankly underwhelming and bad from so many perspectives.

Everything I read about Ratcliffe turns me off.

He just seems like a greedy businessman with questionable morals and a person who has a history of being not trustworthy. Living in Monaco and talking about Manchester back to Manchester United is what a real hypocrite does.


From everything I read and understand the bid from Qatar is by far the best from a financial perspective. There’re issues regarding how they look at our HBQTI community but on the other hand if we look at PSG then this questions shouldn’t be a problem.

We can’t expect every citizen in Qatar to be hold accountable for their country’s history and laws. We don’t expect that from ourselves. We have no idea where they stand in these questions. Let’s wait and see how they answer all the critical questions that will follow if they end up as new owners. After that we can judge them.

My vote goes 100% to Qatar. Not even one second of hesitation.
I think most of us feel this way to be honest. We will never condone the actions of a state that discriminates against people but it's ultimately nothing to do with us. I don't agree with it and never will, but I want what's best for United and what's best for United is the Qatar bid at the moment. INEOS and Jim have to clear up a lot of doubts before I'm onboard with their offer. I want clear plans of action that they can be held accountable to before I would agree to their ownership.
 

BD

technologically challenged barbie doll
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
23,991
People say this stuff but a large majority of our fans are on Twitter. Just because anonymity makes it a shit show doesn't mean it's not a fair reflection of what people want.
Are they? Twitter clearly isn't representative of any group of people, we know that by now.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
13,307
United wouldn’t be servicing that debt though, hence it wouldn’t figure in any FFP regardless.
Yes, for now. If he needs a loan to buy the debt out at 500m. Where is he going to get the money to improve the club? New Stadium, training ground, womens team, youth?
 

Withnail

Full Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
31,247
Location
The Arena of the Unwell
We are one injury away from the season going drastically wrong, City are having a terrible season by their standards and that’s before mentioning Liverpool and Chelsea.

We drew in the europa league with a Barcelona that are far far away from the team they used to be, let’s be realistic here.

The stadium is in tatters, the concourse looks like a public swimming baths, cramped and dangerous access in and out for todays standards.

If by compete you mean we can regularly pick up a top 4 places until Liverpool are bought up by the next baron then sure. You can point to Liverpool beating city to the league as proof it can be done but just look at what level they had to play at just to get a single league title.
The subject of the conversation was whether we could stand on our own two feet when we were debt free. I was talking about a situation where we didn't have any debt and was using this season to show how that would be possible, given we'd be in a much better position without debt.
 

Rightnr

Wants players fined for winning away.
Joined
Jan 25, 2015
Messages
14,768
Are they? Twitter clearly isn't representative of any group of people, we know that by now.
You know this how? Have you, by chance, done a poll on say... Twitter?
 

Godfather

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
30,128
Location
Austria
Small-minded much you?
Plenty of us ex pats are still extremely affectionate of our roots, plenty of us still got teary eyed at Tony Walsh’s “The is the place” poem etc.
He's hardly an expat for Monaco is he. It's a perfectly valid point from him. Making this a British or Manchester thing when he personally fecked off is kind of... funny.
 

laughtersassassin

Full Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
11,580
One thing you have to wonder about this Qatari bid is who if anyone is supposed to be a part of the bid other than the Main guy reported.

Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?

Edit: I know the obvious answer I just mean I wonder where they are claiming it's coming from.
 
Last edited:

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
41,006
Location
Cooper Station
One thing you have to wonder about this Qatari bid is who if anyone is supposed to be a part of the bid other than the Main guy reported.

Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?
I heard he used to work in a car wash and came into a little money so he bought it and now he’s fairly wealthy.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
21,525
If you read one of my posts you'll know I'm aware QIA was reported to own 16.7% of QIB, that ownership goes back many years and is across the sector. If you spent some time reading the governance statement you'll know there is zero evidence of QIA involvement in managing QIB.

You're grasping at straws
If you genuinely think this isn't a state backed bid then fair enough mate.

On a completely unrelated note I have a bridge I'm looking to sell. Would you be interested?
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
41,006
Location
Cooper Station
It’s obviously not for a company that generates revenues of 2bn-ish a year man. As mentioned previously, they could service debt to the tune of 4.5 times our current debt servicing and their bottomline would change from £2,100,000,000 to £2,020,000,000 :wenger:
Take Ratcliffe out of the equation and just imagine INEOS we’re buying us themselves. Would people look at that deal any differently and any more sceptically?

Ratcliffe won’t be around for that much longer and then it becomes about profit for them just like a hedge fund or investment capital company.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
14,143
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
One thing you have to wonder about this Qatari bid is who if anyone is supposed to be a part of the bid other than the Main guy reported.

Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?
I don’t think we need Jessica Fletcher for this one :lol:
 

BD

technologically challenged barbie doll
Joined
Sep 1, 2011
Messages
23,991
You know this how? Have you, by chance, done a poll on say... Twitter?
You what? I'm saying that Twitter is not a representative sample of the views of people in general. Is that not fair?
 

Godfather

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
30,128
Location
Austria
You made the point that, as an ex pat, you are still affectionate of your roots. My point is Ratcliffe isn't an ex pat. Nor did he have any other noble reason to leave England. He went to Monaco to save tax. The tory cnut. And now he is talking about bringing Manchester back to Manchester. Pretty bold.
 

Compton22

Knows that he knows nothing.
Joined
Jul 27, 2014
Messages
3,400
Unquestionable that for the clubs finances and investment, Qatar is far and away the best option, morality aside.
 

Appletonred

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 15, 2023
Messages
485
If you want that which is best for the club ie no debt, investment in the local community, investment in all areas of the club then Qatar represents far and away the best option, it is essentially everything that anyone else cannot bring to the table, I get the feeling Utd will be Qatar's for around £5.8 billion in the next month or so, the glazers will not be refusing that kind of money.
 

ShinjiNinja26

Full Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
11,625
Location
Location, Location
One thing you have to wonder about this Qatari bid is who if anyone is supposed to be a part of the bid other than the Main guy reported.

Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?
Don’t worry about that pal, he’s good for money.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
41,006
Location
Cooper Station
INEOS and SJR were everyone’s knight in shining armour a year ago, the only thing that has changed is people are seduced by state ownership.
Not INEOS though. People are only not questioning that as much due to Ratcliffe. He’s an obvious bluffer.

Ratcliffe himself arguably goes against the ideals of Manchester United just as much as Qatar.
 

Rightnr

Wants players fined for winning away.
Joined
Jan 25, 2015
Messages
14,768
You what? I'm saying that Twitter is not a representative sample of the views of people in general. Is that not fair?
How do you know that? For politics, it's well established that Twitter is an echo chamber (because of actual polls being carried out called elections) but where's your evidence that this is the case for football and our fanbase, in particular.

You have shown no evidence, so I am asking you how you've made that assumption, unless, of course, it's just wishful thinking
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
21,525
One thing you have to wonder about this Qatari bid is who if anyone is supposed to be a part of the bid other than the Main guy reported.

Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?
Is this a genuine question mate?

If so then obviously it's coming from the Qatari state and it's being presented as a private endeavour to get around UEFA rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.