Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sir Erik ten Hag said:
But he is not a traitor to the club, like a certain someone who would still keep the Glazers here.
Click to expand...

Weren't they talking with Liverpool for a while before we entered the frame.

Big Utd fan speaking with FSG?

You see you can twist these things to your own agenda.
 
I’m not sure why people think the two brothers really want to still own part of the club.
SJR could quite easily tank the value (that he would already be overpaying for) of the club with bad decisions, bad appointments and potentially back tracking on promises he’s made. The brothers would be trusting him to not only keep the club stable but to increase the value of it.
The purchase could go through and he turns round and says investing in the stadium isn’t a priority right now or he might just make some quick fixes
Will he employ the right person for commercial deals? Chevrolet was our record shirt sponsor, team viewer wouldn’t match the same fee and now want out of the deal. Will we get even less on our next sponsor?
If recruitment isn’t done well, I can’t see SJR continuously throwing money at it until it is right
All things that can destroy a club. Surely they only stay on from a finincial POV and now receive no dividends
 
Sir Erik ten Hag said:
But he is not a traitor to the club, like a certain someone who would still keep the Glazers here.
Click to expand...
Well he's apparently in a position to buy the whole club with no strings attached according to the people on here who think we'd be building a new stadium and buying Mbappe easily but he's decided to not bid what they want which may keep the Glazer's here.
 
Plant0x84 said:
The X factor method. They ask Jim and Jassim if they would consider becoming a manufactured boyband and release crappy cover song after crappy cover song.
Click to expand...
Smart. The licensing rights for that would make for another attractive revenue stream.
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
Sheikh Jassim to my knowledge hasn't ever owned a football club. What makes you think that's good then? Surely you could argue Sir Jim has more experience in football using that logic?

Of course logic isn't in your mind. Oil money is.
Click to expand...

I'd rather take the untested super rich then the proven moron (football wise) with a vastly inferior bid.
 
devilish said:
Let me rephrase it into a different way. The Glazers net worth is around 5b. Thus Manchester United with its super inflated price represent a big chunk of their personal wealth. Now 4 of the rats want to feck off while 2 want to stay. Assuming they decide to take INEOS offer then those who won't leave will have most of their wealth tied into the club's fortune. I very much doubt that they'll accept having no say on it whatsoever especially when the man in question seems to be a proper idiot around football.

I understand the Glazers POV because some distant relatives of mine are passing from a similar situation. They inherited a huge piece of land which basically represent their pension pot. 3 sold their stake to the same developer while 2 entered into a 'partnership' with him. Sure he's got the majority share at this point and yet they are quite vocal on how things are run and they made sure to have ample say on what truly matters. The guy can't afford ignoring them as they can take him to court which in turn would delay the project and would make him lose huge money in the process.

Returning to United I can see INEOS being the boss but I refuse to believe that Joel/Avram would have 1-2 B tied in a business in which they won't have a meaningful say on how its going to be run. I can also see friction in terms of investment. For example why should INEOS invest on a new stadium unless the Glazers put their own share into it. After all everyone will be benefiting of that investment. We all know that the Glazers had never invested a single penny into the club
Click to expand...
Dude, no one will put billions in the club and still allow control to Glazers. Best case for Glazers would be for them to have shares that have the same power as INEOS, but with INEOS having 50%+, INEOS will have total control.

Why Ineos should invest money while Glazers (and co.) own shares? If they invest money, they will organize it essentially as buying shares. Essentially, if they put 1B there, let’s assume that is 1/5th of the club’s value, then 20% new stocks are issued with all shareholders being offered the chance to buy new shares (proportional to their holdings). If no one buys them, then Ineos buys. If someone buys some of them (for example 200m worth of shares), while Ineos the others, then they put 800m of their own, instead of 1B. Obviously, the shares get diluted, which means that Ineos ownership of United increases. This type of financing is completely doable and legal. We can expect either of Ineos/Qatar doing so as long as there are other shareholders.
 
Telsim said:
Compromise. The other four get paid somewhat less, but Joel and Avram unblock the deal, and then stay on.

The difference in the bids doesn't seem to be overwhelmingly large, but just enough to tip the scales in Qatar's favor. By allying himself with Joel and Avram, Ratcliffe has tipped the scales his way.

Qatar will not own the club. Simple as.
Click to expand...

Why though? Jim won't be buying it and not having control so Joel and avi would be left as minority shareholders, which means the entire reason for them to remain would be financial, and keeping these shares with the intention of selling them later for an inflated value.

This means that Joel and avi have to think that rather than receiving like 600m cash, that should be able to generate about 10% returns annually if they just chucked it in an investment fund, which means after 5 years it would be worth nearly a billion. So in order for this to make sense, Joel and avi would have to think that within 5 years, being run by Jim and keeping on the same debt, and selling class a shares rather than the controlling shares, there would need to be about a 60% increase on the value of the club.

For joel and avi to stay if they control the club is one thing, staying as minority investors makes no sense, shares in a football club that are already being sold at an inflated value aren't a great investment compared to the rest of the market. When they hold class b shares and they're all needed for a full takeover, those shares are more valuable than if they try to sell them in a few years time to someone else who isn't trying to own the club
 
devilish said:
I'd rather take the untested super rich then the proven moron (football wise) with a vastly inferior bid.
Click to expand...

Again moron isn't fair. He hasn't thrown money at Nice to try and take down PSG has he? Had he done that and still failed then moron might be fair.
 
We are one post away from "My billionaire is going to beat up your billionaire after school!".
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
Again moron isn't fair. He hasn't thrown money at Nice to try and take down PSG has he? Had he done that and still failed then moron might be fair.
Click to expand...
I hope to god he’s not moron enough to throw money at United to take on City and Newcastle.
 
Godfather said:
Well for a club being owned by a billionaire still not getting into the CL places in fecking France is a farce. It's not even about taking down PSG.
Click to expand...

The City group own about 7/8 clubs around the world. Man City is the only one that gets major investment.

I don't think him running Nice has any significance on how he could potentially run Utd. It's a different animal.
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
Weren't they talking with Liverpool for a while before we entered the frame.

Big Utd fan speaking with FSG?

You see you can twist these things to your own agenda.
Click to expand...
You do understand a business talk with FSG and trying to take over United by keeping the Glazers here despite every supposedly United fan have seen how they are are very different, right? I do know which one I detest more. We need the Glazers gone, vanished without a trace.
 
Sir Erik ten Hag said:
But he is not a traitor to the club, like a certain someone who would still keep the Glazers here.
Click to expand...

He has divided loyalties between two clubs, he will keep the debt, he supported brexit and then he moved to Monaco and he is running nice and lausanne to the ground. His bid will keep us in debt and will keep the Glazers. A non local would be slaughtered for that
 
jm99 said:
This means that Joel and avi have to think that rather than receiving like 600m cash, that should be able to generate about 10% returns annually if they just chucked it in an investment fund, which means after 5 years it would be worth nearly a billion. So in order for this to make sense, Joel and avi would have to think that within 5 years, being run by Jim and keeping on the same debt, and selling class a shares rather than the controlling shares, there would need to be about a 60% increase on the value of the club.
Click to expand...
Completely viable if the Super League ends up happening, which is an outcome the Glazer brothers are bullish on.
 
Sir Erik ten Hag said:
But he is not a traitor to the club, like a certain someone who would still keep the Glazers here.
Click to expand...

Not a traitor? Apparently he'll immediately buy Liverpool if he doesn't buy us according to his biggest supporters and therefore he is treacherous swine.
 
JagUTD said:
Not a traitor? Apparently he'll immediately buy Liverpool if he doesn't buy us according to his biggest supporters and therefore he is treacherous swine.
Click to expand...

At least he bid to us first rather then Chelsea
 
JagUTD said:
Not a traitor? Apparently he'll immediately buy Liverpool if he doesn't buy us according to his biggest supporters and therefore he is treacherous swine.
Click to expand...
When did he state he'd buy Liverpool if the United deal failed?

And if that's the case, he would not have any tie to United then, after failing the bid. So not really a betrayal arc. Ratcliffe, on the other hand, becomes United owner WHILE still keeping the Glazers here. We can see clearly which one is the big traitorous act.
 
JagUTD said:
Not a traitor? Apparently he'll immediately buy Liverpool if he doesn't buy us according to his biggest supporters and therefore he is treacherous swine.
Click to expand...

According to reputable sources they met with FSG to possibly try to takeover Liverpool before they knew we were on the market.

They would have picked a different front man for that bid. Somebody else who is a big Beatles fan probably. Hahaha
 
Sir Erik ten Hag said:
When did he state he'd buy Liverpool if the United deal failed?

And if that's the case, he would not have any tie to United then, after failing the bid. So not really a betrayal arc. Ratcliffe, on the other hand, becomes United owner WHILE still keeping the Glazers here. We can see clearly which one is the big traitorous act.
Click to expand...
I too prefer Qatar, but my God, you sound like a broken record
 
If Jassim won't overpay then he won't overpay and he won't overpay for other clubs based on what they're worth so other clubs will need to accept a bid that Jassim thinks is reasonable.

Spurs not Liverpool are worth 5.5 billion, far from it.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
I too prefer Qatar, but my God, you sound like a broken record
Click to expand...
I was fairly at ease with both choices at first, as I just want us to be rid of the Glazers. Now what am I supposed to feel when the news broke out that one of them decided to ally with the Glazers and became the likelier one to win?
 
Baxquux said:
Ok Miguel, lets draw up new rules based on the current regulations and hold all clubs accountable to them, with any clubs not already in a position to meet these rules, being offered for sale: no state buy-ins, no leveraged buy-outs with debt placed onto clubs by owners with insufficient resources to buy them from their own pockets or by mortgaging their existing assets, 50+1 fan ownership options, owners subject to external audits ensuring that they're acting for 'the good of the club and community' with the threat of being made to put it on the market and sell for present market value.

Just don't expect us to unilaterally abide and continue being exploited whilst oil-doped clubs prosper and regime-funded journalists cry 'scandal' at any prospect of our once again meeting top clubs on anything like an even footing. ...
Click to expand...
I wonder why he doesn't have same standards for himself that he expects out of football clubs, fecker gets paid by Saudis but i suppose all that journo blood soaked money is OK when it puts food on his table.
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
The City group own about 7/8 clubs around the world. Man City is the only one that gets major investment.

I don't think him running Nice has any significance on how he could potentially run Utd. It's a different animal.
Click to expand...

Let's fecking hope so as this club needs major, major investment in the coming years to become competitive on all fronts again
 
I think back to when fergie made that speech in 2013 and think, the feck has happened to our club? We been bummed financially by the glazers, shits falling apart, had players with feck all passion for the club. Finally, we get a proper gaffer, and the glazers are not done fisting us yet..what a cluster feck. I'm numb thinking about jassim/SJR so often..
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
According to reputable sources they met with FSG to possibly try to takeover Liverpool before they knew we were on the market.

They would have picked a different front man for that bid. Somebody else who is a big Beatles fan probably. Hahaha
Click to expand...

Sheikh Bin Bossim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.