Yes? I can't tell if this is a serious question or not, because it is so utterly ludicrous.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Yes? I can't tell if this is a serious question or not, because it is so utterly ludicrous.
It wouldn’t make my top 100 issues with those companies, and I still use them
The Qataris don't want to sell PSG outright, but they are looking to sell a minority stake of around 15% and have reportedly attracted interest from two US bidders and one based in Europe. A strategic partnership, similar to City's deal with Silver Lake, seems to be their preferred option. United and Liverpool may end up going the same route - we should find out in the next few months.
https://www.arabianbusiness.com/lif...r-looking-to-sell-psg-stake-after-4-1bn-offer
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...nterest-from-three-bidders-for-minority-stake
So the same as the Glazers were a few months ago, then.
The Glazers attempted to sell 30% of United to the Saudis in 2019. They may look to sell a minority stake again now if their rather bullish £6bn outright valuation is not achieved.
No it wouldn’tyou think all United fans in England just stopped using 3 when they sponsored Chelsea? Maybe one or two deranged nutters care about that stuff but the vast majority won’t give a shit.
in fairness, when I was 8 I told my old man I didn’t want him to buy crown paints to decorate my room
No it wouldn’t
When I was a child I without a doubt didn't want anything JVC because of Arsenal. But I was literally a child. Imagine adults acting like that! The scary thing is its possible.
yeah kids get the benefit of the doubt. I never got a Sega because of Arsenal too but I was like 9 at the time.
I can be affected by these type of things when its convenient, like I wouldn't 'drive across town' to avoid a store next door, but sure, it affects me.
Is it childish? 100%. But sometimes I like to be childish.
That I totally agree with. It's just the part about growing "their chunk of the club" part I didn't get and wanted some understanding around how that would look.
They looked to sell and no one took the bait.
There is a difference between buying parts of a successful business and not a successful business. We fall into the latter category.
Some thoughts:
1. I think the news flow from the Glazer sale would be well suited for some kind of scientific study. I do a search on like Glazer and Manchester United limited to the last 24 hours every day.
* Any little piece of "information" is picked up by everyone in the UK instantly and then travel across the world. Yesterday's "news" are picked up by like newspapers in Vietnam and Indonesia up to 48/72 hours after breaking.
* The slightest vaguety when "speculation" is re-reported, often creates sub stories with a new source. The Athletic got info from some business expert speculating on Mukbani, and the expert mentions in passing that he has seen how Mukbani's son is an Arsenal fan. Pretty fast that becomes a story "by" a UK newspaper who was a little vague indicating that Mukbani would prefer Arsenal and that it becomes Mukbani is looking to by Arsenal.
* So you have literary 100s of re-reports of a certain item, and all it takes is -- one -- doing a bit of a sloppy job wording their report, and you get a new "information". If you follow like the Amazon "information", its perfectly possible that it origins from that first report that mentioned Apple, Amazon and someone else, and how they are "believed" to be interested or something like that. Arnold informing ETH of the press release becomes Arnold informing ETH of that a sale will happen.
* You can write a pretty long article today based solely on 100% non-news events. Someone speculating, then that speculation is re-reported as a rumor/actual interest.
2. We are probably at a point in the process where interested parties are asked to submit their interest to the Raine Group. When Chelsea was sold, the deadline for submitting interest was set like 16 days after the information broke. That was really short. I can easily see parties given to like 31/12 to submit their interest, price range, financing plans etc. After that with Chelsea a short list was created, and when the short list was established, it took a month to name Boehly the preferred buyer. That part of the process did not proceed with the same break-neck speed as the first part did. Then, in the third part of the process, it took another month after Boehly had been named the preferred buyer to the closing of the transaction. For us, for various reasons, it could easily take up towards 3 months from when we know who the buyer will be, to when that buyer actually becomes the owner of 100% of the shares in Manchester United plc. But as long as the summer window haven't opened, that is irrelevant.
3. It is reported that Avram and Joel want to keep the Club and bring in investors while the rest of the siblings want a complete sale. Serious attempts to achieve something to this effect was tried during the fall. They failed. Can we really rule out that an investor is coming? Nah, of course not. In fact, an argument could be made that it could be pretty likly that Joel and Avram remains with the club while the siblings sells their shares. The outside investor/investors would buy-out the siblings and subscribe for new shares in a private placement by Manchester United plc. The money obtained in the private placement would be used to build a new stadium and on the roster.
So, what circumstances will describe which alternative we will get -- a full sale or a partial investment? Ultimately, it is just an issue about how much "control" of the club an outside investor would want. The more control the investor get, the less Avram and Joel's remaining shares would be worth.
What do I think? I think a total sale is more likely than a partial sale. With that said, a partial sale -- if the conditions are right -- could be just as good for us as a complete sale. It is all about the condtions.
1. I think the news flow from the Glazer sale would be well suited for some kind of scientific study. I do a search on like Glazer and Manchester United limited to the last 24 hours every day.
* Any little piece of "information" is picked up by everyone in the UK instantly and then travel across the world. Yesterday's "news" are picked up by like newspapers in Vietnam and Indonesia up to 48/72 hours after breaking.
* The slightest vaguety when "speculation" is re-reported, often creates sub stories with a new source. The Athletic got info from some business expert speculating on Mukbani, and the expert mentions in passing that he has seen how Mukbani's son is an Arsenal fan. Pretty fast that becomes a story "by" a UK newspaper who was a little vague indicating that Mukbani would prefer Arsenal and that it becomes Mukbani is looking to by Arsenal.
* So you have literary 100s of re-reports of a certain item, and all it takes is -- one -- doing a bit of a sloppy job wording their report, and you get a new "information". If you follow like the Amazon "information", its perfectly possible that it origins from that first report that mentioned Apple, Amazon and someone else, and how they are "believed" to be interested or something like that. Arnold informing ETH of the press release becomes Arnold informing ETH of that a sale will happen.
* You can write a pretty long article today based solely on 100% non-news events. Someone speculating, then that speculation is re-reported as a rumor/actual interest.
2. We are probably at a point in the process where interested parties are asked to submit their interest to the Raine Group. When Chelsea was sold, the deadline for submitting interest was set like 16 days after the information broke. That was really short. I can easily see parties given to like 31/12 to submit their interest, price range, financing plans etc. After that with Chelsea a short list was created, and when the short list was established, it took a month to name Boehly the preferred buyer. That part of the process did not proceed with the same break-neck speed as the first part did. Then, in the third part of the process, it took another month after Boehly had been named the preferred buyer to the closing of the transaction. For us, for various reasons, it could easily take up towards 3 months from when we know who the buyer will be, to when that buyer actually becomes the owner of 100% of the shares in Manchester United plc. But as long as the summer window haven't opened, that is irrelevant.
3. It is reported that Avram and Joel want to keep the Club and bring in investors while the rest of the siblings want a complete sale. Serious attempts to achieve something to this effect was tried during the fall. They failed. Can we really rule out that an investor is coming? Nah, of course not. In fact, an argument could be made that it could be pretty likly that Joel and Avram remains with the club while the siblings sells their shares. The outside investor/investors would buy-out the siblings and subscribe for new shares in a private placement by Manchester United plc. The money obtained in the private placement would be used to build a new stadium and on the roster.
So, what circumstances will describe which alternative we will get -- a full sale or a partial investment? Ultimately, it is just an issue about how much "control" of the club an outside investor would want. The more control the investor get, the less Avram and Joel's remaining shares would be worth.
What do I think? I think a total sale is more likely than a partial sale. With that said, a partial sale -- if the conditions are right -- could be just as good for us as a complete sale. It is all about the condtions.
all I’m saying is since that newbie complained about everything going quiet on the United sale/investment front we’ve had more info than ever
Ambani*
Great overall post, thank you.
But I also think it will be a full sale. If you look at all the crumbs being left behind, it all points towards a sale.
To this day I refuse to drink Carlsberg and used to quite routinely tear up/hand back Carlsberg beer mats if ever given to me in a pub.
Not ever using Nivea or whatever crowd sponsor Liverpool for those stupid ads either.
I wont drink Red Bull because of the F1 team either. Also because its piss.
All three of those brands are piss, Liverpool connection notwithstanding
I do wonder how economically viable football sponsorships are. Like are many United fans pissing away their money on Tezos because they sponsor our training kit??
Why is not wanting to spend your money on a major sponsor of a rival considered so trivial? If Apple were to buy Liverpool, and then proceed to buy them Bellingham, Enzo Fernandez and Mbappe for them, and then you look down at your iphone, ipad, macbook, iwatch, etc you have to realize that you are playing a part in funding the success of a rival. When you could easily buy an android phone, tablet, watch, etc.
I am not saying people should automatically do that, maybe someone is a football/United fan, but also an Apple fanboy, and that passion runs deeper, then obviously you go with what is more important to you. But if you are just someone that every 10 years buys a new phone and you have no brand loyalty, but are a big United fan, and buying an iphone helps Liverpool and buying something else doesn't, why wouldn't you avoid apple?
The free market is a place where you can choose where your hard earned money goes, why not make sure it goes somewhere you like?
I am not saying people should automatically do that, maybe someone is a football/United fan, but also an Apple fanboy, and that passion runs deeper, then obviously you go with what is more important to you. But if you are just someone that every 10 years buys a new phone and you have no brand loyalty, but are a big United fan, and buying an iphone helps Liverpool and buying something else doesn't, why wouldn't you avoid apple?
The free market is a place where you can choose where your hard earned money goes, why not make sure it goes somewhere you like?
most people simply don't give a shit though
Because it’s just football, there are thousands far more significant factors that it.
For you, maybe not for others
Yeah, I couldn't be arsed, but I don't judge people who are.
I don't know a Manchester United fan who doesn't go to Liverpool because of LFC. However, I do know a LFC fan who doesn't go to Manchester because of United. And this is true.
If sponsoring Liverpool is the red line then I seriously question whether this person has any kind of moral compass.
yeah same
every man has to have a code and I do sorta respect such pettiness in a way, when it comes to football fandom at least
Surely you know thats not how any of it works, right?
I can't believe people would spend hard earned money on stuff that they chose based off factors such as who they sponsor etc. I guess it can be a factor but surely most important is value for you for the money you are spending? To each his or her own I guess.
Anyone putting their money in crypto is definitely pissing it away, to be fair.
Oh I know. It wasn’t really a serious question, it was leaning into the dumb idea that people won’t buy apple products if they bought us.
I think it is a real concern for these companies like Apple and Amazon who are literally competing for the entire world market. If your brand is already so big that you don't need any more exposure you just need to maintain brand identity, there is genuine risk to a polarizing association like a major football club.
A company like Apple also isn't going to own United and then be able to compete for PL streaming rights. And the idea (thrown out somewhere in this thread) that the PL is moving in a direction where each club will sell its own streaming rights is not realistic, especially given the way the politics of the FA and PL are moving in recent years (toward more regulation and more sharing of revenues from bigger clubs to smaller ones).
Yet Tezos can afford to pay the club so much for sponsorship. Amazing.
You are free to invite him to manage your local, I would prefer someone who actually knows a bit about football.
Good post. I think it’s safe to say we are using a bit more time than Chelsea did. A fair guess would be that they have used the most part of 2022 on the process of finding potential buyers.
First quarter of 2023 will be exciting.
MukbaniAmbani*
Great overall post, thank you.
But I also think it will be a full sale. If you look at all the crumbs being left behind, it all points towards a sale.
Charles Ponzi could afford an awful lot of things too.
What’s your evidence that he doesn’t? If you make a claim like that you have to back it up
So can Alphabet!
Microsoft co-founder was the owner of the Seahawks
This wasn't the fans, it came from credible journalists.
- Status