Are the Glazers preparing for a sale? | Saudis deny the news

Status
Not open for further replies.
DzoxJNLXgAAW3fS.jpg


the end of discussion

Saudi Media minister
All the news of Prince Muhammed bin Selman willing to buy man utd is false. The meetings was between the Saudi investment fund and Man utd football club to discuss a partnership project and the investment fund committee discussed it as a project like any other project and they did not come to an agreement.
So there was something to this, but thankfully, nothing much at all. Hopefully the story dies with this.
 
The news about takeover probably explains why there are no big transfers recently. The board must be waiting for new board to take control and do future investments.
 
DzoxJNLXgAAW3fS.jpg


the end of discussion

Saudi Media minister
All the news of Prince Muhammed bin Selman willing to buy man utd is false. The meetings was between the Saudi investment fund and Man utd football club to discuss a partnership project and the investment fund committee discussed it as a project like any other project and they did not come to an agreement.

That's that then. Thank God.
 
I am unsure about the Saudis but I can't see the club growing much in the future. Haven't won a major title for 6 years now and you can't expect the club to grow while we are not winning anything major for such a long time. Reckon its going to take huge investment now to win the Premier League or the Champions league especially with PSG and Manchester City on the scene. Reckon its the perfect time to sell the club. You can't expect the club to grow and keep the amount of revenue the same without winning anything major. How can the Glazers turn down close to 4 billion pounds when its going to take major investment to grow the club further. I don't really believe the statement of the Saudis denying it. Can't exactly say it in public that they want to buy the club. Can't see the Glazers selling the club for much more than what the Saudis are prepared to pay in the future.
 
Last edited:
It's not a case of me having loose moral values as you put it, it's more about who can realistically buy us. Like it or not United don't have many options to get rid of the Glazers. I would never defend the regime that is going on by the Prince. I'm all about the long term regarding United. I don't think the money that is involved in the game is sustainable going forward. I think United will need to have an owner that needs to be debt free and pump money in properly in to the club. The Glazers had a head start when they came in and managed to fck it up over time, they have created a mess with the worst planning I've ever seen. I want the best for United on the pitch, I think we will properly invest with new owners. The likes of long term contracts for Jones and Smalling is where we have. We are rewarding average players that will likely not get better to save money. The scrimping is serious for such a big club. I want owners who go head to head with City, we should be dominating the league with the financial power we have, instead our big summer investment is Fred and Dalot. Playing a 2011 defense in 2019, it's a joke.

I'm very aware of the products I buy and where they are sourced. United have sponsers that have questionable backgrounds regarding human rights at best. I just love the double standards people have, I find it so contradictory. The same crowd that are banging on about the Prince are probably wearing sports clothing like Nike and Adidas and drink Coca Cola. Don't chat to me about loose morals, I'm just not a hypocrite. Manchester United are a machine at making money, the money that's being made isn't being managed properly. You can argue it's poor planning, unlucky timing ect but it all comes back to our current owners. You can't tell me that these new owners coming in, wouldn't put way more in to the club. I'm chatting structurally regarding staff, stadium/academy and first team. I'm not arguing that they are good be people, I'm arguing that they would be better owners and bring more stability to Man United long term. I'm not sure many would be as outraged if we were winning CL's and leagues regularly again. I want the Glazers gone and I think this is the best chance of getting rid with the money that needs to be involved.

:wenger::wenger::wenger:

You keep banging on about how you want to best for UTD and that you words don't make you a hypocrite, yet you persistently ignore all the points as to why saudi takeover isn't all that good for UTD. It's not all about the money, we've proven that we can generate enormous amounts of money without oil money or becoming a playtoy. Do we need a better owners? Yes, most definitely, but we don't need to be associated with saudis.

Really amazes me how you can be so indifferent on the fact that if UTD is bought by saudis, the club will become a synonym for saudi murderous regime and everything negative that follows them.

"Old Trafford" will probably be renamed to "Saudi Aramco arena", we can forget about playing youth, since why would you bother developing youth when you can buy a Neymar each transfer window. If it's proven (just the matter of whether the investigation will have cojones to do it) that prince was the man who issued the order for that poor journalist to be killed and dismembered inside the saudi ambassy in Turkey, the negative backlash will be even high, which could ultimately prove costly as we will may be starting to lose sponsorships as a direct consequence etc.
 
the end of discussion

Saudi Media minister
All the news of Prince Muhammed bin Selman willing to buy man utd is false. The meetings was between the Saudi investment fund and Man utd football club to discuss a partnership project and the investment fund committee discussed it as a project like any other project and they did not come to an agreement.
Brace yourselves for more years of United under-investment when other teams keep stacking up talents. And we have to "choose our poison" every season, wondering if City or Liverpool would win the League... Dreadful time! Without money, we could be looking at many years ahead celebrating "top 4" trophy.
 
So fecking glad this isn’t happening.

Rest assured there would be monumental meddling if these guys got involved. We don’t want them anywhere near our club.
 
If city don’t establish themselves as a sustainable club and Abu Dhabi remove the cash flow they’ll be in a real mess.

There’s a lot to be said for living within your means. We’re hardly a poor mans club. Just not had any real plan for the last few years.
 
When you take out a mortgage on a house and put the house up for rent, isn't it proceeds from the rent you use to pay back the mortgage?
How can people not get their heads around the fact that that the Glazers used revenues from the club to pay back the debt?
I hate the Glazers as much as anyone but I'm hearing some say what they did is bordering illegal...wtf?
 
If they are OK with their government being the cause of atrocities in other countries, selling guns to the exact same regime, why would they care if a football club being sold to that regime?

People don't love the government, they don't feel attached to the government, but on the other hand people love United, people feel attached to United .
 
Brace yourselves for more years of United under-investment when other teams keep stacking up talents. And we have to "choose our poison" every season, wondering if City or Liverpool would win the League... Dreadful time! Without money, we could be looking at many years ahead celebrating "top 4" trophy.
We've spent an insane amount of money since Fergie retired. Stop peddling this myth that we're somehow poor; we've just invested terribly and wasted a lot of money. It's not like Liverpool have more resources than us, quite the opposite.
 
The news about takeover probably explains why there are no big transfers recently. The board must be waiting for new board to take control and do future investments.
Makes no sense as they just spent £20m sacking a manager.
 
When you take out a mortgage on a house and put the house up for rent, isn't it proceeds from the rent you use to pay back the mortgage?
How can people not get their heads around the fact that that the Glazers used revenues from the club to pay back the debt?
I hate the Glazers as much as anyone but I'm hearing some say what they did is bordering illegal...wtf?
It should be illegal though. If FFP was really about preventing a "Portsmouth" situation, it would have done something about leveraged takeovers. These should not happen in football as they pose very high risk to clubs.
 
The tweet however suggests the Glazers and Saudis were exploring buying a stake in the club or some sort of partnership agreement. Something like the Chinese and City. Nothing like a sale. Very happy it fell apart.
 
It should be illegal though. If FFP was really about preventing a "Portsmouth" situation, it would have done something about leveraged takeovers. These should not happen in football as they pose very high risk to clubs.
As long as the value of the club doesn't fall below the loan, I don't see a problem. If the Glazers couldn't pay, they would simply have sold the club as Hicks and Gillet did with Liverpool.
 
DzoxJNLXgAAW3fS.jpg


the end of discussion

Saudi Media minister
All the news of Prince Muhammed bin Selman willing to buy man utd is false. The meetings was between the Saudi investment fund and Man utd football club to discuss a partnership project and the investment fund committee discussed it as a project like any other project and they did not come to an agreement.

"But on the off-chance, we would like to invite Ed and Avram to our embassy for further negotiations... heh heh..."
 
When you take out a mortgage on a house and put the house up for rent, isn't it proceeds from the rent you use to pay back the mortgage?
How can people not get their heads around the fact that that the Glazers used revenues from the club to pay back the debt?
I hate the Glazers as much as anyone but I'm hearing some say what they did is bordering illegal...wtf?


Agreed.
 
Ok, so would you rather have glaziers who have stolen money from the club and fans, don't invest their own money and laden us with debt we didn't previously have or the Saudis?

A simple glazier vs Saudi ownership question for you in all honesty

If it came to it, would prefer we stuck with the Glazers between these two. Not ideal but rather that than the alternative.
 
You cynical muppets who go around crying “Well everyone is bad, so we shouldn’t care about what x people do because w,y,z also do things” are so damn annoying.

You’re just as bad as the conspiracy theorists and anti-vaccine idiots.

It's just shocking, it appears so people can't quite see the difference between accidentally squashing an ant and slaughtering a human being in a brutal medieval fashion just because he dared to question the oppressive regime.
 
Good to have an official ending to this rumour.

They actually didn't end it, they just dropped a bombshell on us about United having talks with the Saudi investment fund. I think it was unnecessary to include other talks even if MBS is not keen on us.
 
As long as the value of the club doesn't fall below the loan, I don't see a problem. If the Glazers couldn't pay, they would simply have sold the club as Hicks and Gillet did with Liverpool.
Having massive amounts of debt is very dangerous for a football club. After all, an unfortunate injury, for example, can mean a season going down the drain. It's a very volatile business.

Now that might not be such a big issue to a Liverpool or a Manchester United because their ability to create revenue will always make them attractive targets. But look at Leeds: there was no one to save them when it turned out they could not manage their debt.

I wish football as a whole adopted the Bundesliga model of ownership. Then leveraged takeovers would be impossible.
 
When you take out a mortgage on a house and put the house up for rent, isn't it proceeds from the rent you use to pay back the mortgage?
How can people not get their heads around the fact that that the Glazers used revenues from the club to pay back the debt?
I hate the Glazers as much as anyone but I'm hearing some say what they did is bordering illegal...wtf?

A lot of people don't understand how businesses work is my guess and they're emotionally invested.
 
Brace yourselves for more years of United under-investment when other teams keep stacking up talents. And we have to "choose our poison" every season, wondering if City or Liverpool would win the League... Dreadful time! Without money, we could be looking at many years ahead celebrating "top 4" trophy.
:(
 
All this from an unsubstantiated story in the Sun.....

However, I am despairing at the moral compass of some 'fans' who don't care who the owners are, as long as they have buckets of cash.

The Sun's great culling of the fans :lol:

This news have thought us a lot about our little fanbase we have here on caf.
 
Last edited:
People don't love the government, they don't feel attached to the government, but on the other hand people love United, people feel attached to United .
So are the fans, they dont love the owners, we have nothing to do with the owners, we love the club. Same logic.
 
Brace yourselves for more years of United under-investment when other teams keep stacking up talents. And we have to "choose our poison" every season, wondering if City or Liverpool would win the League... Dreadful time! Without money, we could be looking at many years ahead celebrating "top 4" trophy.

Funny that you mentioned Liverpool, because they're owned by penny-pinching owners yet they've managed to rival City even though they've spent the similar amount to what we've spent, but in contrast they had to sell their best player in order to invest the money.
 
When you take out a mortgage on a house and put the house up for rent, isn't it proceeds from the rent you use to pay back the mortgage?
How can people not get their heads around the fact that that the Glazers used revenues from the club to pay back the debt?
I hate the Glazers as much as anyone but I'm hearing some say what they did is bordering illegal...wtf?
And if the house needs serious repairs, the landlord has to fix them with his own money.
 
As long as the value of the club doesn't fall below the loan, I don't see a problem. If the Glazers couldn't pay, they would simply have sold the club as Hicks and Gillet did with Liverpool.
"simply". G&H were days away from defaulting on their loans, which would have meant going into administration. And the sale happened against their wishes. It was only possible because they had to give power of the board for a sale to a rbos appointed chairman in order to re finance the original loan they were struggling to pay off.

Nevermind the asset stripping they has carried out up to that point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.