Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
If SJR gets United AND he keeps the Glazer boys in the mix we are proper fecked....

If SJR gets UNITED 100% - getting rid of Glazers then it's good but still slightly fecked becuase he's likely not clearing the debt the way Qatar would.

Then Qatar will likely buy another English club.... Liverpool or Spurs... :nervous: I don't love state ownership idea but the game has changed and we are going to be REALLY left in the dust soon.
 
So, Al Thani can afford not only buying the club, but also clear the debt and build a new stadion. And people don't even ask where he got his money from, totally blinded by greed as they are. They actually deserve the Glazers as owners. A perfect match.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
That would be my guess. In which case the subsequent Qatar brief would be Jassim's camp calling their bluff.

It can't be coming from INEOS's camp - it's not in their interest to try to drive up the bidding.
Click to expand...
I think we will see these stunts over the next few days. If all the Glazers want out, then a higher valuation by Ratcliffe is not of much use unless he bids for all the Glazers' shares at that valuation. Also, would the Glazers want to sour their relationship with Qatar which could be very beneficial for them in the long run?
 
Per share he might be offering more but 69% at £7 a share is less than 100% at £6 a share. If this is a genuine leak it's probably to spook Qatar into throwing extra money at it.

The 'deadline ' was hardly legally binding.
 
Andy_Cole said:
This concerns me as it comes after apparently Sheikh Jassim denying he’s under bid.
Click to expand...
Well in terms of absolute money, Jassim's is higher, given that he's going for 100% ownership. Jim is said to be going for only 51% but at a higher valuation.

Obviously the later is what glazers will choose as the selling glazer siblings stand to make more money that way (probably couple hundred million more, each), while 2 of them who supposedly want to stay, still retain their ownership.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
I'd rather keep a couple of Glazers around in minority roles if it stops us being state owned. I know many of you have pretended to be disgusted by City and PSG for years when you were actually just jealous. I was actually just disgusted.
Click to expand...

Before you speak of your disgust at City and PSG being state-owned, you better look at some of the most traditional superpowers in the game. Real Madrid are state-owned by the Spanish government, Barcelona are basically owned by the Catalan government, and Bayern Munich is supported by the largest German corporations to the point that you would almost believe they are state-owned as well.

United should have been built bigger and better as an institution to compete with Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich a long time ago. We are playing catch-up because of the sick fecks who owned the club without any accountability for the last 18 years.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
City are facing 100+ charges for how they built their team. Going forward they will need to build their team with money they earn (plus 60m/year in outside investment).

Newcastle will either have to cheat, or build their team with money they earn (plus 60m in outside investment).

United will only be able build based on the money we earn (plus 60m in outside investment), or else cheat.

If FFP is enforced, United will have an advantage over everyone, even if the club merely spends what it earns. The calculus of what it takes to compete with City should be changing once those 100+ charges are settled.
Click to expand...
If pigs could fly, we'd have lean bacon.
 
Sir Jim could be clearing the debt immediately for all we know and if not could clear it withing a year or two. We just don't have the details. Anything is still possible including Qatar winning the bid.

People are flapping way too much.
 
redsunited said:
Not a penny of glazers debt will be paid off by him, so why some prefer the rat cliffe.

He is not paying any of the debt, only greedy to get his hands on 50+% share. Ratcliffe ownership is no better than the glazers. PL should ban these debt takeovers.
Click to expand...
He would move the debt off the club to Ineos, though. The club won't be saddled with it, it won't count against FFP, it won't restrict the club at all like it has for 18 years.

The cynics say that Ineos would expect something from that? Would they? What are they expecting from purchasing the club anyway? To raise the value. That's how they get paid back on the debt.
 
RedDevilQuebecois said:
Before you speak of your disgust at City and PSG being state-owned, you better look at some of the most traditional superpowers in the game. Real Madrid are state-owned by the Spanish government, Barcelona are basically owned by the Catalan government, and Bayern Munich is supported by the largest German corporations to the point that you would almost believe they are state-owned as well.

United should have been built bigger and better as an institution to compete with Real Madrid, Barcelona and Bayern Munich a long time ago. We are playing catch-up because of the sick fecks who owned the club without any accountability for the last 18 years.
Click to expand...

What?
 
MiamiSpartan said:
City are facing 100+ charges for how they built their team. Going forward they will need to build their team with money they earn (plus 60m/year in outside investment).

Newcastle will either have to cheat, or build their team with money they earn (plus 60m in outside investment).

United will only be able build based on the money we earn (plus 60m in outside investment), or else cheat.

If FFP is enforced, United will have an advantage over everyone, even if the club merely spends what it earns. The calculus of what it takes to compete with City should be changing once those 100+ charges are settled.
Click to expand...
Massive "if" though, isn't it? The problem is that up to this point, FFP has been more or less toothless, and even when enforced, clubs find new loopholes faster than the governing authorities can close them.
 
Dve said:
So, Al Thani can afford not only buying the club, but also clear the debt and build a new stadion. And people don't even ask where he got his money from, totally blinded by greed as they are. They actually deserve the Glazers as owners. A perfect match.
Click to expand...

And why they didn’t bid more instead of all the promises of investment. Talk is cheap.
 
JPRouve said:
A few things Joel and Avram are the only two that have been involved in the club dealings, so they seemingly cared enough to be actively involved. Out of 6 siblings two have been involved and are co-chairmen while 4 haven't and are said to not care one bit about the club but those have a controlling majority.

Also CEOs of Football clubs are generally not Football people, Woodward has the exact same background than Gill or Kenyon. I also don't know what makes him have no idea about the sport, his peers at the ECA seemed to think otherwise.
Click to expand...
Maybe they are more invested compared to the other 4, does not automatically mean that they care about being associated with the club. Could just be a case of them wanting control of their most prized asset which is more likely the scenario considering how we've been run.

I understand Gill was the CEO but a major difference was he didn't call the shots on the football side of things which was largely managed by Sir Alex. Woodward was actively playing FM with our club with the way he hired/fired managers without any thought to how it would work for us over time.

Wasn't it him who notoriously called out that our on the field performance has got nothing to do with our ability to generate revenue, when we were struggling. You think any owner who cares about the club would ever tolerate such an attitude towards the club?
 
Keeping a minority stake for hope of value increasing doesn't really make sense because the value would be in the overall club in that scenario, not in buying a minority stake. Also as minority stake holders they would have no real control over when or if he club is ever sold again. I don't see them wanting to be passive, junior partners in any deal.
 
stw2022 said:
Keeping a minority stake for hope of value increasing doesn't really make sense because the value would be in the overall club in that scenario, not in buying a minority stake. Also as minority stake holders they would have no real control over when or if he club is ever sold again. I don't see them wanting to be passive, junior partners in any deal.
Click to expand...
What?

It's no different from you buying a few shares of Apple. If Apple's value goes up, the value of your stake goes up.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
He would move the debt off the club to Ineos, though. The club won't be saddled with it, it won't count against FFP, it won't restrict the club at all like it has for 18 years.

The cynics say that Ineos would expect something from that? Would they? What are they expecting from purchasing the club anyway? To raise the value. That's how they get paid back on the debt.
Click to expand...
Iirc The glazers debt will remain with the club. only the debt which he gets to purchase united is through Ineos.
 
redsunited said:
Iirc The glazers debt will remain with the club. only the debt which he gets to purchase united is through Ineos.
Click to expand...

This isn't actually fully confirmed. It's what people are saying but we don't know that.

For all we know he could be clearing it immediately, within a year or two or even transfering it onto INEOS immediately too.

We just don't know.
 
NK86 said:
Maybe they are more invested compared to the other 4, does not automatically mean that they care about being associated with the club. Could just be a case of them wanting control of their most prized asset which is more likely the scenario considering how we've been run.

I understand Gill was the CEO but a major difference was he didn't call the shots on the football side of things which was largely managed by Sir Alex. Woodward was actively playing FM with our club with the way he hired/fired managers without any thought to how it would work for us over time.

Wasn't it him who notoriously called out that our on the field performance has got nothing to do with our ability to generate revenue, when we were struggling. You think any owner who cares about the club would ever tolerate such an attitude towards the club?
Click to expand...

Woodward didn't had SAF and lets not talk absolute BS. Our managers got the players that they wanted, they made the decisions, they called the shots and the club didn't hire or sacked any differently than any other club. And no he didn't notorriously called out a thing. During a conference call he was asked by the representative of shareholder if the qualification for the CL would lead to new commercial deals for the following season, it was a question to Arnold and Woodward answered that the two things aren't directly related which was true. There was nothing wrong with his attitude, he answered to the question of a shareholder to the CFO.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
So we should root for the Qatari bid so that we can cheat and cook the books, too?
Click to expand...

Utd have no need to cheat. They’ve been competing hamstrung for 15 years.

They need (and deserve) an owner who can clear the disgusting debt and mess left by the repulsive leeches and then allow the club to flourish on its own profits.

Utd aren’t the same as City or Newcastle. Utd is a giant club being bled by repugnant cretins.

It doesn’t need financial doping - it needs financial liberation.
 
Rojofiam said:
Liverpool and Arsenal have successfully competed with this City superteam, both of them doing so on a budget. We've outspent these 2 clubs even under Glazer ownership. All we need is less money being taken out of the club and a bit of investment + competent people in charge of the footballing decisions (i.e appoint managers with similar philosophies, sign players that fit said philosophy, etc.).



They just make up their rules the way it suits them. :lol: In their eyes, United would be the only state-owned club whose success isn't "hollow".
Click to expand...
Exactly, and City have done all of this with an incredibly good manager, there is no guarantee they get that decision right for the next one, or that Pep stays for much longer. There are enough footballers in the world to ensure that a couple of teams can't have a monopoly on building the best teams.
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
This isn't actually fully confirmed. It's what people are saying but we don't know that.

For all we know he could be clearing it immediately, within a year or two or even transfering it onto INEOS immediately too.

We just don't know.
Click to expand...
Isn't that the biggest concern - we just don't know what he will do with our existing debt, plans to improve our infra?

At least Jassim has put out PR regarding what his aim is towards those things irrespective of whether you believe it. With Ratcliffe, it's like we'll be going into a blind U-turn full pelt hoping there's no one rushing at us from the other side.

A lot of people will feel at ease if he clarifies his stance on it.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
What?

It's no different from you buying a few shares of Apple. If Apple's value goes up, the value of your stake goes up.
Click to expand...

The value of the shares will drop once a takeover is completed. They’re currently overpriced and could be worth a third of what their siblings are selling their shares for.
 
MyBloodIsRed said:
If SJR gets United AND he keeps the Glazer boys in the mix we are proper fecked....

If SJR gets UNITED 100% - getting rid of Glazers then it's good but still slightly fecked becuase he's likely not clearing the debt the way Qatar would.

Then Qatar will likely buy another English club.... Liverpool or Spurs... :nervous: I don't love state ownership idea but the game has changed and we are going to be REALLY left in the dust soon.
Click to expand...
Spot on ! You either join them or get left behind. Doesn't matter how big you are how many tittles you have as none of that matters when you are going up against state money.
 
#RatcliffeOut trending on Twitter already. Oh dear. :lol: :lol: If anything other than Qatar happens I can forsee a lot of protests and match abandoned like last season. We will become the most Toxic club.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
What?

It's no different from you buying a few shares of Apple. If Apple's value goes up, the value of your stake goes up.
Click to expand...

It isn't like that at all unless you own Apple and then sell the majority of your shares in the hope the value of the company will increase in the future.

We're not talking about something looking for an investment, they already own the club. Selling most of their shares means they lose almost complete control over whether the club can benefit from this future exponential growth in value.

It would also mean they had considerable investment tied up in a club they would now not control. It would largely be a passive investment. I don't think the Glazers would want to have so much equity tied up in a minority stake in a business.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
Ugh, f u c k off. Utter cretin.

Another debt purchase. Shouldn’t be allowed.

Utd fans thought they were finally rid of these repulsive leeches, instead they’ve just got an extra cretin to put with the rest.

Just sell the club and feck off out of English football you fecking parasites.
Click to expand...
Don't be silly.

Practically every major investment involves some form of debt. It's already been stated that he won't leverage the debt involved in the purchase of the club itself, it'll be on the books of INEOS. You can't ask for more than that.

By calling for a ban on clubs to be bought with any form of debt, you're effectively calling for a rule change to only allow nation states to buy football clubs. As I said - don't be silly.
 
NK86 said:
Isn't that the biggest concern - we just don't know what he will do with our existing debt, plans to improve our infra?

At least Jassim has put out PR regarding what his aim is towards those things irrespective of whether you believe it. With Ratcliffe, it's like we'll be going into a blind U-turn full pelt hoping there's no one rushing at us from the other side.

A lot of people will feel at ease if he clarifies his stance on it.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

If he was intent on clearing the parasite’s debt, it would be made clear.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
Utd have no need to cheat. They’ve been competing hamstrung for 15 years.

They need (and deserve) an owner who can clear the disgusting debt and mess left by the repulsive leeches and then allow the club to flourish on its own profits.

Utd aren’t the same as City or Newcastle. Utd is a giant club being bled by repugnant cretins.

It doesn’t need financial doping - it needs financial liberation.
Click to expand...
I don't bother 'discussing' with people like that. I struggle to think of a United fan who would peddle such obvious ABU bullshit with a straight face.

Just shows absolutely no attempt at critical thinking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.