He's not going to hire his brother in law to run the club, there will be someone competent.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
He's not going to hire his brother in law to run the club, there will be someone competent.
...and you think he can't hire competent leadership to run the club?
He is doing things properly though. Full ownership, zero debt, heavily investment on the infrastructure and the academy. Sjr seem ready to do a deal with multiple devils to get his hands on the club and the way he ran nice and lausanne kind of proof that he has no idea what he is doing. If SJR was from Tampa bay, Doha or Beijing then that bid would infuriate local fans
Jim is a just a leech just like the Glazers. NO ONE claims they want the best for Manchester United, AND keeps the Glazers within the club in any capacity. Feck off! Qatar all the way now, people!
I’m sorry but what’s the actual point in this? For them to retain their lovely dividend? feck this bid. They’re destroying the club - you cannot have our best interest at heart and keep those clowns onboard. Enough already
This would be one of the biggest perks of this deal for me. Making all you Qatari apologists mad whilst the Glazers lose control of the club anyways.
I get the anti Qatar stance but some of y’all would prefer the club implodes to Qatar and that’s fecked up
I don't understand the meltdown regarding SJR's proposal, it honestly doesn't sound that bad to me as long as the Glazers lose control of the club.
Maybe it’s SJR being stingy which is a sign of things to come? Hopefully Qatar up their bid or SJR comes to his senses and bids for the entire shares
20% is a pretty big stake though? Not a controlling stake but influential enough
No one with United's interest at heart would want to keep the Glazers in any capacity. They are like parasites, better rid of completely.
The club is losing money and it requires huge investment. There's no way that anyone would invest that money into something that he isn't fully owning.
Is it though? It sounds like they would stay behind the scene until they can sell their shares for more, wouldn't the controlling party, ie INEOS, be able to kick them out of the board and thus they have no decision making capabilities within the club?
Your hatred for the Qataris run so deep that you'd prefer to see the club being tanked even further down?This would be one of the biggest perks of this deal for me. Making all you Qatari apologists mad whilst the Glazers lose control of the club anyways.
Can unfortunately see this giving SJR an edge over The Qataris
You'd think The "Mancunian" who apparently "Loves United" wouldn't want to get into bed with The Enemy he's supposed to defeat
Sir Jim comes up with a suggestion that would result in the Glazers getting less money out of the deal and people are complaining?
He claimed himself to be the savior to get rid of the Glazer leeches. Now it turns out he's an even bigger leech that would let the Glazers stay and suck United dry TOGETHER with him. Depressing future for our club.
NO ONE who claims they want the best for the club would keep the Glazers at the club in any capacity. Our club needs them to be rid of, completely.
You only deal in absolutes, don't you?! Life really isn't as BLACK and WHITE as you're making it out to be.
And how would that work why would any body pay further premium for remaining Glazer's shares when they won't be able to push for Controlling stake in United or have any decision making power unless Ineos themselves would be willing to sell United as well just 7-10 years down the line
Whole reason Glazers are getting even these high valuation currently is because it represents controlling stake proposition for willing buyers otherwise United wouldn't be valued as high as 5b .
Except that it wouldn't be tanked even further down?
The only thing I care about is those leeches get as little cash as possible out of it. They've already had too much.
Does it really matter if the rats retain some shares if they relinquish control?
Nah. People are being disingenuous.
Agree. It's certainly not ideal but if it removes them from power, so be it
Our club needs the Glazers rid of, completely. The longer we keep them at the club, the last 18 years would still continue.
We tried to be GREY in judging the Glazers after their takeover in 2005. And we all saw where it landed the club: At the current state. Now we can be sure they are LATE in their departure. 18 years too late.
Actually it will make them get more money out of the deal as they can sell the shares later + they would still want dividends
INEOS must have leaked this info to judge fan reaction.
No bidder who has seen the disdain for the Glazers and recemt protests would go ahead with that offer risking the bad optics of laying in bed with the previous regime that has seen the club crippled in the eyes of the supporters?
Probably gauging the reaction to see if their possible attempt at getting control at all costs would be worth it.
No bidder who has seen the disdain for the Glazers and recemt protests would go ahead with that offer risking the bad optics of laying in bed with the previous regime that has seen the club crippled in the eyes of the supporters?
Probably gauging the reaction to see if their possible attempt at getting control at all costs would be worth it.
This isn't true.
He has a history of promising a lot and deliver very little. Just read INEOS statement following them buying Lausanne and Nice
Ratcliffe would have to agree to the dividends though. Why would he do that?
Of course its true. EPL clubs had seen an increase in their worth throughout the years irrespective of how badly they were managed (ex Newcastle or pre Abu Dhabi City). Joel/Avram want to keep their stake knowing that in few years time they can cash in and make more money
You're right in principle however I can see the Glazers forcing a deal were dividends will be paid. Why would the Glazers keep a 20% stake if they don't get anything out of it?
They'd get less money.
What do you mean? This would be at least a 50.1% bid from INEOS, not a minority stake like Elliott and Carlyle's rumored intentions.
Why? Do you think that the Glazers will get into a deal that will leave them with less money?
I actually think people were gradually warming up to INEOS, even the hardcore Qataris side. But this rumor shattered whatever bit of support they might have gotten regarding him. No one put "the best for Manchester United" and "the Glazers remaining at the club" in one sentence.
Our views don't matter though.
No it won't they won't be getting dividends and they would be lucky to get much premium over current valuations because whole reason they are getting this high valuation now is because it represents controlling stake in United but once that taken off the table because Ineos already would be majority owners it just doesn't represent much value for perspective buyers unless Ineos themselves put United for Sale again .
- Status