Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side

Status
Not open for further replies.
Garethw said:
Yep and we are going to see cut backs to everything.

I don’t see Ineos being willing to spend the money needed to put us back at the top of European football.
Click to expand...
Then why bother buying in? It's clear Ratcliffe will likely never see a return on his investment. He pretty said this himself in the media interviews he did. He's already down over a billion and is pressing ahead with plans to rebuild OT or build a new stadium despite not even being the majority owner (yet)

The cost cutting INEOS are doing is try to make us a profitable club again. Woodward and the other clowns burned through money and ran us into the ground not just on the pitch but off it too.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
Why are you holding stuff like that against a Qatari businessman who has absolutely no control over what happens in that country and might not even agree with or support the things you mentioned himself.
Click to expand...
Sorry but I don’t agree with any of that.

anyway not important now. We’ve moved on. Time for INEOS
 
Tom Van Persie said:
Then why bother buying in? It's clear Ratcliffe will likely never see a return on his investment. He pretty said this himself in the media interviews he did. He's already down over a billion and is pressing ahead with plans to rebuild OT or build a new stadium despite not even being the majority owner (yet)

The cost cutting INEOS are doing is try to make us a profitable club again. Woodward and the other clowns burned through money and ran us into the ground not just on the pitch but off it too.
Click to expand...

We also don't require outside investment, we just need to be managed better, spend wiser. Our cut backs now are due to the last few years of being reckless with money, not because of a lack of it.


If INEOS want a return on investment, then that comes from investing in our infrastructure and making us successful on the pitch.
 
Wtf are we discussing this for again? It's over, jim is here for the foreseeable.
The only reason they should pop up in conversation is if the actual state decide to try and buy out jim and the Glazers because our value is only going up for any prospective full buy outs.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
Why are you holding stuff like that against a Qatari businessman who has absolutely no control over what happens in that country and might not even agree with or support the things you mentioned himself.
Click to expand...

Whilst Jassim is not hailing from the currently most important branch of the Al Thani family, his family, represented by his dad, has been and is by all account still a major player in Qatar. Related to the founding father, related to the current Emir, son of the former foreign and prime minister (who also was instrumental in building QIA into a powerhouse fund) and chairing the largest bank, he is clearly not your average Qatari businessman without any knowledge or consent of the issues Qatar has attached to itself.
 
RedRocket9908 said:
It wasnt a any point a state bid, the person behind the Qatari bid was Shiekh Jassim who was the head of the 92 foundation which was the company that was going to buy the club and had nothing to do with the Qatari royals.
Click to expand...

RedRocket9908 said:
Well as far as im aware Shiekh Jassim is the son of a former Qatar Prime Minister and only a very distant relative of Qatar's ruling familly so there is absolutely zero evidence to say the Qatari ruling familly would be in anyway involved.
Click to expand...
The bid itself is evidence. :rolleyes:
 
pcaming said:
We also don't require outside investment, we just need to be managed better, spend wiser. Our cut backs now are due to the last few years of being reckless with money, not because of a lack of it.


If INEOS want a return on investment, then that comes from investing in our infrastructure and making us successful on the pitch.
Click to expand...

That’s all it’s ever been. Just manage the money we make well. We are too big to fail but Jesus at least make us competitive
 
11 Mbappes might help though. Wish he was a bit more specific than "improve everything".
 
RM wouldn't have kept a manager on that finished 8th in the league. So we're off to a bad start emulating them Jim, standards wise.
 
Rolaholic said:




Click to expand...

I understand the aspiration but Real Madrid have a certain type of pull that I don't think anyone can replicate. They had that pull when they fell off slightly and we didn't even have such a pull compared to Real Madrid under SAF.

The La Liga environment is also one that a bad season will see them finishing third at the very worst. I do get where he's coming from but if there was a new President at Madrid, there's no way they would keep the manager after a season like ours, regardless of other problems.

That I suppose is a cultural difference, our fans are extremely patient in comparison.
 
giggs-beckham said:
RM wouldn't have kept a manager on that finished 8th in the league. So we're off to a bad start emulating them Jim, standards wise.
Click to expand...

Did he say we are going to emulate Madrid in one summer?

If you also read, he mentions alot more than the manager.

I hope fans understand that the football club is not successful just by the manager. There are so many aspects that we struggle with, they are looking to improve the club, sporting areas, infrastructure so when they do change the manager, the environment is right.
 
giggs-beckham said:
RM wouldn't have kept a manager on that finished 8th in the league. So we're off to a bad start emulating them Jim, standards wise.
Click to expand...
I absolutely see this point. And maybe you are right.

However perhaps they've decided that keeping Ten Hag and that bit of continuity while they get the Sporting Director, CEO and Head of Recruitment in place is best. Rather than having lots of upheaval all at once.

Also if they got a new manager last month, he'd have walked into a job that still wasn't set up to succeed. Maybe it is better to wait to hire a manager until the structure they keep speaking about is in place. And that won't happen until the aforementioned CEO etc are here
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I absolutely see this point. And maybe you are right.

However perhaps they've decided that keeping Ten Hag and that bit of continuity while they get the Sporting Director, CEO and Head of Recruitment in place is best. Rather than having lots of upheaval all at once.

Also if they got a new manager last month, he'd have walked into a job that still wasn't set up to succeed. Maybe it is better to wait to hire a manager until the structure they keep speaking about is in place. And that won't happen until the aforementioned CEO etc are here
Click to expand...

Obviously we cry for years that our set up is not right, the structure isnt the best. A new owner comes in, starts with the structure and the fans moan saying its all the manager...

Thats United fans for you.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I absolutely see this point. And maybe you are right.

However perhaps they've decided that keeping Ten Hag and that bit of continuity while they get the Sporting Director, CEO and Head of Recruitment in place is best. Rather than having lots of upheaval all at once.

Also if they got a new manager last month, he'd have walked into a job that still wasn't set up to succeed. Maybe it is better to wait to hire a manager until the structure they keep speaking about is in place. And that won't happen until the aforementioned CEO etc are here
Click to expand...

This is how I would interpret what he’s saying.

I think that part of their managerial discussions were as much about sounding out future replacements but also seeing how building a squad now can factor that in. Think Pep at city, many suggest city were gearing up the club for his arrival before he even signed.

Hiring McKenna now would put massive pressure on him , especially with things so messed up. He could fail because the structure is a load of toss.

That’s just a theory , but I feel overall the club is in a transitional phase that makes comparing us to well oiled machines like Madrid relatively pointless.
 
It's a bit surreal to go from owners who barely exists in the public sphere to getting a rent-a-quote pretty much overnight. I do enjoy hearing Ratcliffe speak, just cautious to believe him until they start to deliver something more concrete.
 
romufc said:
Obviously we cry for years that our set up is not right, the structure isnt the best. A new owner comes in, starts with the structure and the fans moan saying its all the manager...

Thats United fans for you.
Click to expand...

To be fair , I don’t think United is unique in that sort of thing.

The big divide with United fans seems to be those of us who think managers have been setup to fail by the dysfunction and those who think throwing more managers at the problem would help.

Another issue is people thinking that I want managers to get 5 years to get it right. I don’t , u want the club to properly support the manager and the squad. Spending money badly is not properly supporting the team.

So chicken and egg. A quality manager at a poorly run club is gonna struggle to meet their standards. A poor manager at a well run club has in my view a better chance, like Di Matteo, even average managers winning leagues with city or Barca or Madrid or Bayern.

United can sack managers every year for all I care, once we have everything else up to professional standards of our peers.
 
BarstoolProphet said:
It's a bit surreal to go from owners who barely exists in the public sphere to getting a rent-a-quote pretty much overnight. I do enjoy hearing Ratcliffe speak, just cautious to believe him until they start to deliver something more concrete.
Click to expand...
It's right to be cautious, he will run us as a business but that doesn't mean we can't be successful. The fact he's put money in though immediately elevates him to god like status versus the Glazers.
 
Chumpsbechumps said:
To be fair , I don’t think United is unique in that sort of thing.

The big divide with United fans seems to be those of us who think managers have been setup to fail by the dysfunction and those who think throwing more managers at the problem would help.

Another issue is people thinking that I want managers to get 5 years to get it right. I don’t , u want the club to properly support the manager and the squad. Spending money badly is not properly supporting the team.

So chicken and egg. A quality manager at a poorly run club is gonna struggle to meet their standards. A poor manager at a well run club has in my view a better chance, like Di Matteo, even average managers winning leagues with city or Barca or Madrid or Bayern.

United can sack managers every year for all I care, once we have everything else up to professional standards of our peers.
Click to expand...

Exactly this.

I love how fans compare us to Madrid saying this wouldn't be allowed as a manager. Well, Real Madrid have not finished below 4th since 99/00 season. They have had managers like Bernhard Schuster and regardless of if they sack the manager or not, their squad is always really good.

They new manager has to challenge for the league in the next season.

If we sacked Ten Hag now, how many fans think we should challenge for the league next season? I would say less than 5% think we can win it.
 
tomaldinho1 said:
It's right to be cautious, he will run us as a business but that doesn't mean we can't be successful. The fact he's put money in though immediately elevates him to god like status versus the Glazers.
Click to expand...

We're about to spend £50m on refurbing Carrington, when apparently before we hadn't replaced missing tiles in the pool in the intervening years between Ronaldo's stints at the club...

It's not going to be an open cheque book under INEOS, like at oil state clubs, but the Glazers set a very low bar for them.
 
Rood said:
Strange comment seeing as There would have been absolutely no need for any owner of United to cheat to get around FFP rules

Our club is nothing like City
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we would've been in that scenario.

The pro-qatari crowd can try to cope all they want that we would've had the history and self-generated money anyways, but state-ownership would've tainted us forever and we would've been a stain on the football world, just like City, PSG, Newcastle and Chelsea are. Ratcliffe might be an unethical asshole in real life, but you can't compare him to an authoritarian Middle Eastern state.

And both Jassim and his dad were born into the royal family of Qatar, and that's why they are billionaires...saying it wouldn't have been a state bid is once again just a form of coping.
 
Last edited:
romufc said:
Obviously we cry for years that our set up is not right, the structure isnt the best. A new owner comes in, starts with the structure and the fans moan saying its all the manager...

Thats United fans for you.
Click to expand...
You can’t totally absolve ten hag of any blame. He was huge 400m of new signings
 
romufc said:
Exactly this.

I love how fans compare us to Madrid saying this wouldn't be allowed as a manager. Well, Real Madrid have not finished below 4th since 99/00 season. They have had managers like Bernhard Schuster and regardless of if they sack the manager or not, their squad is always really good.

They new manager has to challenge for the league in the next season.

If we sacked Ten Hag now, how many fans think we should challenge for the league next season? I would say less than 5% think we can win it.
Click to expand...
We would at least be in the top 4, of that I don’t doubt
 
golden_blunder said:
You can’t totally absolve ten hag of any blame. He was huge 400m of new signings
Click to expand...
People have apparently absolved Ten Hag of any accountability. All it took was the FA Cup and the season-ending so he could feck things up further.
 
Crimson King said:
We're about to spend £50m on refurbing Carrington, when apparently before we hadn't replaced missing tiles in the pool in the intervening years between Ronaldo's stints at the club...

It's not going to be an open cheque book under INEOS, like at oil state clubs, but the Glazers set a very low bar for them.
Click to expand...
Whilst I don’t believe that particular story - there were multiple Carrington upgrades during the Glazer tenure - the point is it’s external money coming in, not United paying for United as was the Glazer way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.