Allegedly. Thats not factual
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
What do you mean its all speculation?
There is credible info to state how he's structuring the deal, you can look it up.
It's quite funny, when you are reminded that banks aren't only involved in debt related transactions, and that there is no actual credible information that states he is using debt to buy the club - you have no problem poisoning the thread with fake information claiming he is.
But when you are pointed to what has actually been credibally reported, you don't want to be discussing "speculation"
Oh ok so i've missed a recent report then because thus far I haven't seen the reports on Jim paying out of his own pocket. If that's the case I'll look it up.
Any link to that article?
LikewiseMost of your posts on this thread??!!
We also know that the Sheikh’s representatives have repeatedly stated that he will not bid recklessly for the club and will not pay more than what he believes United are worth.Allegedly. Thats not factual
Have they?
You are taking reports as gospel man.
Youll need to go back to when the first rounds were taking place and each side briefed their intent.
Sheikh Jassim had briefed that he'd clear all debt and invest in the infrastructure, transfers and the city of Manchester.
SJR was similar, but did not brief clearing the debt. Rather that INEOS will shoulder all Glazer debt in the deal and no extra debt is being added.
Bit of pedantry here, but just to clarify, Ratcliffe isn't buying the club, INEOS is (if they win the bid).
I’m going by the facts as we know them. That’s all we can do.
Yes…according to various reports over the previous months.
Absolutely this. It’s a great outcome for the club, just not the symbolic moral victory some fans seem to crave.
According to those same reports and Mouth pieces they also bid over 5b which turned out to be bullshit?
I’d also argue a lot of reports past the initial opening bid have had sources close to Raine or close to the process attached, not really sources close to Qatar
But those bids was when Jim was looking bigger stake in the club and he was willing to pass the debt over to INEOS
Why would he do that with a 51% stake I just can't see it but fair enough time will tell.
'Don't worry lads we'll pay off your 600m debt' isn't happening under this deal id bet my left bollock on it
Somebody else who can’t tell what a joke is…
I’m going by the facts as we know them.
So if he's not using any extra debt when theres a big stake, why would he decide to use debt if there's a smaller stake involved?
You've just basically made up that he's using debt and posted it like it's a fact.
My point is - Sir Jim Ratcliff might not be a state, but that doesn't make him a bad owner for us. He was seen as a white knight less than a year ago but he's being painted as a villain because a lot of posters want a shiny new toy instead.
Also I question Jassim massively if he's being outbid by INEOS in the first place.
But what we know aren't facts are they? Merely speculation.I’m going by the facts as we know them.
Jesus, I'm not arguing semantics
That was also a jokeSomebody else who can’t tell what a joke is…
Indeed they have. It’s been parroted by Kaveh on sky sports for months.
This is getting confusing alreadyThat was also a joke
Technically everything is speculation until one of three outcomes is reached:But what we know aren't facts are they? Merely speculation.
Jesus, I'm not arguing semantics
i) no sale,
ii) sale,
iii) minority investment.
I've not posted anything as fact, i've said multiple times to you and the thread that everything is speculation
So your take on all this is that Jim comes it at 50% and INEOS pay off the debt?
I'll tell you now that isn't happening and I don't need a report to tell me otherwise he'd be an absolute moron to do that
Could be this:
INEOS purchases 51% of the club
INEOS refinances the debt, under their name, at a better interest rate
Man Utd make a recurring transfer payment to INEOS to cover the debt payments
I haven’t been following this thread but now I‘m hearing Jim’s offer is more appealing as he is offering the glazers to still own a share in United. Is this true? If so how does that work? Does he buy them out completely then sell them shares. Or do they just relinquish their b type shares?
Because as long as they are in play aren’t they still the true people in power at the club? No one else bar a glazer can own a b type share. If a glazer family member sells their share it automatically becomes an A type share.
I want the glazers gone and I’ve always felt that Qatari ownership was probably what is best for the club but this Jim mixing in with the glazer stuff sounds almost as bad as the glazers finding an investment firm.
Because as long as they are in play aren’t they still the true people in power at the club? No one else bar a glazer can own a b type share. If a glazer family member sells their share it automatically becomes an A type share.
I want the glazers gone and I’ve always felt that Qatari ownership was probably what is best for the club but this Jim mixing in with the glazer stuff sounds almost as bad as the glazers finding an investment firm.
Lies:
You were freely just saying that Ratcliff is using debt to buy us when that wasn't reported.
No, as I've said many times (as have the credible articles). Ratcliff is NOT PAYING OFF THE DEBT. INEOS will lift the debt from Manchester United and place it on the holding company to manage, and they have stated they plan not to add any extra debt on top.
Correct it most likely would be this. Ie no new debt to buy the club and no new debt added on. Just a better management of the debt that exists.
Everyone wants them out but if that's not possible the next best option is removing them from control surely?
I understand people are trying to rationalise this deal to themselves in order to make SJR more palatable but someone having a small equity stake in a business is very much so different to them having none at all.
GlazersOut was never about them selling off part of their shares & the 2 that claim to care being given the opportunity to hang around. If it were the only option, fair enough but their are other options on the table, non more so than SJR actually buying the thing outright, apparently Ineos have more than enough to do this.
I would think that those who suggest this or a similar scenario operate with the premise that Jim will purchase 50 +1 % of the votes (as it were), as in: he will get control of the club.
Joel and Avram won't be sitting on B shares as they do under the current model/structure. They will lose any direct influence and won't be entitled to representation on the board.
That would require all of the Glazers to be willing sellers. We don’t know for sure that they are or aren’t.
A clear message to the Glazers there
I know the guy is clued-in but I very much doubt he knows what this means.
Hope Ten Hag doesn’t get sacked for it
He will know exactly what it means BUT this stuff happens so fast he won't have time to sit and decide what flies towards him.
He probably just caught it but I'm fairly certain he knows what it means. You'd have to be pretty dumb/ignorant not to.
Yeah, this is probably closer to the truth. I doubt he'd endanger his position at the club.
Yes, but there's no chance in hell that Ratcliffe is interested in buying the shares of the other four siblings and leave Avram and Joel in charge of the club (with INEOS owning nothing but A shares).
If something like this happens, the current model/structure itself (the shares to votes ratio) will be changed as part of the deal between the Glazers and Ratcliffe. And the only realistic scenario is one in which they give up control of the club: Ratcliffe will be in charge, period.
What are the other options if those two are unwilling to sell? Didn't this option only come up because they didn't want to sell?
- Status