- Joined
- Feb 15, 2023
- Messages
- 485
A combo of the Glazers and Ratcliffe might be the final straw for the fan base, could be a very toxic club, and I believe that with this in mind they ultimately sell the whole club to Sheikh Jassim.
Ratcliffe ownership will still leave us in same position of being heavily financed with considerable debt repayments and needing to find £700m-£1.3bn in addition to that to fund the stadium project
It's not though, is it. Option a is state owned oil money using the club for sportswashing purposes.INEOS is oil money as well though. Our options are essentially oil money A, oil money B, or the Glazers.
You'd like to think he's got a better plan than that.
Ratcliffe ownership will still leave us in same position of being heavily financed with considerable debt repayments and needing to find £700m-£1.3bn in addition to that to fund the stadium project
It's not though, is it. Option a is state owned oil money using the club for sportswashing purposes.
Do do you really think that Ratcliffe is looking to use the club for greenwashing purposes? To what end? It's not like INEOS are always in the news with their reputation in the gutter, is it? Your average Joe (me included) had little idea about what the company did and its ethical implications before he became involved with united. So what reputation exactly is he looking to sanitize with this purchase?And option b is private owned oil money for greenwashing.
As if one is better then the other, so instead of arguing about whose got the better ethics as they will both fall foul of most of the average persons ethics/morals you look at the best deal for the club itself.
Why do people keep saying this? Nobody knows his plan. The details haven't been released.
He's not likely to want to see his huge investment fail is he? He's a Utd fan firstly and also he's the richest British person on the planet secondly.
The debt could well be being cleared for all we know. He hasn't said anything.
I know. The argument that some horrible old people 100s of years ago, who are now dead used slavery in the UK, so UK people can't complain about countires using slaves now, is such a weak point.
Wrong place to raise this discussion, place has proven itself incapable of it on countless occasions. If an ‘ism isn’t overt it doesn’t exist.As opposed to people not asking where INEOS’ owner git his money from. Don’t get this attitude people have towards the middle east. Seems like white people money is somehow cleaner than brown people money. Smacks of racism. No billionaire is going to be completely clean.
The poster I quoted argued that oil money is tainted. I was pointing out both the main bids are “oil money”. On that criteria there’s little difference between them.It's not though, is it. Option a is state owned oil money using the club for sportswashing purposes.
Remember the word on him was that he’d made his name being the last guy standing in these deals. He’ll get the deal done and worry about that later.From what I've ve gathered Ratcliffe's PR as been atrocious now there are rumours he wants to the two Glazers to stay on with a minority stake. We don't know the details but it's bad optics regardless.
Do do you really think that Ratcliffe is looking to use the club for greenwashing purposes? To what end? It's not like INEOS are always in the news with their reputation in the gutter, is it? Your average Joe (me included) had little idea about what the company did and its ethical implications before he became involved with united. So what reputation exactly is he looking to sanitize with this purchase?
The Qataris on the other hand have everything to gain, reputationally, from the United purchase. Their reputation re human rights is widely known and discussed and a purchase like this would be to repair some damage on that front and build their reputational capital in the west.
The two aren't remotely comparable and your argument is a bad faith one.
If he's intending to buy the other two out, it could take ages. There are just too many questions surrounding his bid. What do you think Brophs?Remember the word on him was that he’d made his name being the last guy standing in these deals. He’ll get the deal done and worry about that later.
has anyone actually read the latest article? AS IF that is not a brief, from the cockroach feck pieces of shit Glazer, trying to eke out a few more sheckels from Qatar. The shameless slimy rats. Penny pinchers to the last. Can’t buy class i guess.
has anyone actually read the latest article? AS IF that is not a brief, from the cockroach Glazers, trying to eke out a few more sheckels from Qatar. The shameless slimy rats. Penny pinchers to the last. They’re so embarrassing in everything they do. I imagine any self made person of a similar wealth would laugh at them. Can’t buy class i guess.
has anyone actually read the latest article? AS IF that is not a brief, from the cockroach feck pieces of shit Glazer, trying to eke out a few more sheckels from Qatar. The shameless slimy rats. Penny pinchers to the last. Can’t buy class i guess.
From what I've ve gathered Ratcliffe's PR as been atrocious now there are rumours he wants to the two Glazers to stay on with a minority stake. We don't know the details but it's bad optics regardless.
Why would he? Despite the hysterics over the last fifteen years, debt is an established part of the corporate and always involved in corporate acquisitions. Even Musk had to borrow to buy Twitter.
There's no chance we're not saddled under Ratcliffe with at least the same amount of debt as we have now, and like ALL debt incurred to purchase a commodity, it's the commodity that'll pay for it.
Those who think you look at his reported net worth and think he can just go to an ATM and withdraw £5bn and slap it on the table are terribly naive. The financed debt on the club on a multibillion-pound acquisition will make Glazer repayment look like chicken feed.
The deadline isn't a thing. It's not a legal, contractual process. A busker could set a deadline of 4pm for coins in his hat but if someone with a wad of £50s came up at 4:01 pm he's got saying "geeze dude, I can't accept this, I had a deadline"If their deadline has past, then it's probably not. Could equally argue that the brief benefits the Qatari bid more than anyone as it's clearly whipped up the more emotive elements of our fanbase in their favour.
Why can't the Shiek agree to similar kind of agreement with Glazers. Put an additional obligation to sell their shares within 5 years for so and so amount.
2 bellends will get additional price for their shares. Qataris can implement what they want.
If their deadline has past, then it's probably not. Could equally argue that the brief benefits the Qatari bid more than anyone as it's clearly whipped up the more emotive elements of our fanbase in their favour.
The deadline isn't a thing. It's not a legal, contractual process. A busker could set a deadline of 4pm for coins in his hat but if someone with a wad of £50s came up at 4:01 pm he's got saying "geeze dude, I can't accept this, I had a deadline"
Isn't greenwashing the use of supposedly green marketing and PR to distract from a company's poor environmental practices? If so, unless he covers OT in solar panels or similar, I'm not sure how united would be used for greenwashingOf course I do, it’s obviously gonna be of great benefit to own one of the worlds most prestigious sports clubs in the world.
He will use it for greenwashing, he will use it to generate more business for his chemical company more than likely align the two together. He may very well also want to make United the best team he possibly can in the same process.
Taking a billionaire businessman and not expecting him to use an asset he is buying to help further his already successful business is a given if anything.
An indisputable fact.The poster I quoted argued that oil money is tainted. I was pointing out both the main bids are “oil money”. On that criteria there’s little difference between them.
Isn't greenwashing the use of supposedly green marketing and PR to distract from a company's poor environmental practices? If so, unless he covers OT in solar panels or similar, I'm not sure how united would be used for greenwashing
This just proves "greenwashing" works as well as "sportswashing".Do do you really think that Ratcliffe is looking to use the club for greenwashing purposes? To what end? It's not like INEOS are always in the news with their reputation in the gutter, is it? Your average Joe (me included) had little idea about what the company did and its ethical implications before he became involved with united. So what reputation exactly is he looking to sanitize with this purchase?
The Qataris on the other hand have everything to gain, reputationally, from the United purchase. Their reputation re human rights is widely known and discussed and a purchase like this would be to repair some damage on that front and build their reputational capital in the west.
The two aren't remotely comparable and your argument is a bad faith one.
Of course I do, it’s obviously gonna be of great benefit to own one of the worlds most prestigious sports clubs in the world.
He will use it for greenwashing, he will use it to generate more business for his chemical company more than likely align the two together. He may very well also want to make United the best team he possibly can in the same process.
Taking a billionaire businessman and not expecting him to use an asset he is buying to help further his already successful business is a given if anything.
The clubs future is literally at stake here. A lot of people who have made their name/wealth via the club have been far too quiet.
I'll start with the biggest of them all. Sir Alex Ferguson.
He an extent he gets a pass considering what he has done for us but even he isn't untouchable. A lot of people won't like his loyalty being questioned as he's taken on almost a holy figure If he truly loves the club/fans that have given him everything he needs to speak up. He can't just show up to games every week, smile and make a passing comment about the squad every now and then.
Can you imagine the impact if SAF spoke out against the Glazers?
Him and a few other "Legends" can't sit around scratching their a** hoping this will all pass and they'll continue to make an income off their history at the club. TOP figures in and around the club need to speak up now. We will remember who fought for our clubs future and who protected their own interests.
Feck sake man, let the guy enjoy his retirement. He gave us decades of his life, he doesn’t owe us or the club anything!The clubs future is literally at stake here. A lot of people who have made their name/wealth via the club have been far too quiet.
I'll start with the biggest of them all. Sir Alex Ferguson.
He an extent he gets a pass considering what he has done for us but even he isn't untouchable. A lot of people won't like his loyalty being questioned as he's taken on almost a holy figure If he truly loves the club/fans that have given him everything he needs to speak up. He can't just show up to games every week, smile and make a passing comment about the squad every now and then.
Can you imagine the impact if SAF spoke out against the Glazers?
Him and a few other "Legends" can't sit around scratching their a** hoping this will all pass and they'll continue to make an income off their history at the club. TOP figures in and around the club need to speak up now. We will remember who fought for our clubs future and who protected their own interests.
Of course it's greenwashing. Let's hope Ratcliffe sees of Qatar and then we can start calling him a cnut.Isn't greenwashing the use of supposedly green marketing and PR to distract from a company's poor environmental practices? If so, unless he covers OT in solar panels or similar, I'm not sure how united would be used for greenwashing
Of course you want Ratcliffe to buy, all Liverpool fans do.Exactly, which is why it's ridiculous to see people wetting their pants over his takeover from a competitive pov. Ratcliffe isn't going to sink billions into buying Utd only to let the infrastructure rot and be uncompetitive in the transfer market. Why would he do that? He knows the value of the club would just plummet and he'd become a hate figure, and he'll have paid billions for the pleasure. It makes zero sense for him to buy the club only to do that.
The clubs future is literally at stake here. A lot of people who have made their name/wealth via the club have been far too quiet.
I'll start with the biggest of them all. Sir Alex Ferguson.
He an extent he gets a pass considering what he has done for us but even he isn't untouchable. A lot of people won't like his loyalty being questioned as he's taken on almost a holy figure If he truly loves the club/fans that have given him everything he needs to speak up. He can't just show up to games every week, smile and make a passing comment about the squad every now and then.
Can you imagine the impact if SAF spoke out against the Glazers?
Him and a few other "Legends" can't sit around scratching their a** hoping this will all pass and they'll continue to make an income off their history at the club. TOP figures in and around the club need to speak up now. We will remember who fought for our clubs future and who protected their own interests.
Feck sake man, let the guy enjoy his retirement. He gave us decades of his life, he doesn’t owe us or the club anything!
Remember the word on him was that he’d made his name being the last guy standing in these deals. He’ll get the deal done and worry about that later.