Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know Glazers own United but I always consider that Manchester United is for the fans of the club. That is because in my mind Glazers were always gonna sell at one point and the fans will still be there when they are gone. With SJR I would feel the same that United is for the fans of the club as he would sell at one point as well. But if Qatar win, it will be the forever ownership of United and Manchester United might be be more for Qatar than its fans. I don't know how to feel about that.
 
DOTA said:
7-10 days.
Click to expand...
I've always loved your optimism.

So 7-10 days until a bid is accepted. 3-6 months before the Glazers realise that the private island they've just bought in advance has an unplugged fax machine, and SJR is sitting in his office, clutching a bottle of gin, shouting out "why won't the cnuts sign the fecking contract?"
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Yeah, what would a well-connected journalist who's been writing about Manchester United for decades know? Clown.
Click to expand...
The kid you’re replying to is the only person on redcafe I had to set to ignore

He also thinks the Glazers want to stay because they care about the club

I think you can safely disregard anything he says
 
LawCharltonBest said:
The kid you’re replying to is the only person on redcafe I had to set to ignore

He also thinks the Glazers want to stay because they care about the club

I think you can safely disregard anything he says
Click to expand...
Were you here when they were accused of being Glaston?
 
This thread gives me hope I'm not as far gone as I thought I was. Just need Jassim to drop the news before it's too late
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Let's be clear, there are no breaking moments in this thread. Maybe there's a little for a junkie here and there, but there is nothing to report right now.
Click to expand...
Yes there is. For example Ornstein breaking the Athletic news about Glazers meeting Qatari buyers at the time of the World Cup.

It wasn't Mitten, it was Ornstein.

Herman Toothrot said:
Just because a journalist hasn't told you what you want to hear doesn't make them a bad journalist.
Click to expand...
I actually edge toward Ratcliff which is basically what Mitten and Whitwell appear to want too, so youre just talking out of your arse here.
Herman Toothrot said:
The paranoia, causal use of of the term 'racism' and ridiculous disrespect of journalist in this thread is the stuff of Trump supporters. Andy Mitten has done more for Manchester United fan culture than most, he's been behind one of the best fanzines since I was a kid and representing our voice in media for years. He deserves some respect.
Click to expand...
I never once implied Mitten is a bad journalist. I said he just doesn't know anything about the takeover and his views are mainly conjecture.
In fact he has gone on Talk of the Devils and implied hes not as close to the situation himself.
Read posts better, it's actually worse to assume he knows everything about United including the takeover than it is to accept there are facets he won't know about.

We all know about his affiliation with the club, it's just irrelevant in regards to the takeover as this is a business transaction. Him knowing the groundsman and tea lady on a first name basis won't (and hasn't) get him far on that front. Ornstein has been the one breaking any developments on that front for Athletic, not Mitten.
 
AlPistacho said:
Delaney works for a newspaper that is being “newswashed” its two biggest stake holders are affiliated to states that are at war against smaller, weaker countries.

For someone preaching the moral high ground it’s a huge double standard as free and impartial press, which The Independent once was is one of the most important aspects of society.

1) Delaney’s ‘opposition’ to Saudi & UAE at Newcastle and City was no where near as intense as it is to his opposition to Qatar. Should be noted, Saudi and UAE have tensions with Qatar. There’s much worse human rights issues with Saudi

2)Since the Saudi takeover of The Independent there’s been a noticeable shift its coverage of the coverage on the war on Yemen.
Click to expand...

What are the apostrophes for? I don't like Delaney but his opposition was clear. Stop looking for conspiracy. So tedious.
 
moses said:
What are the apostrophes for? I don't like Delaney but his opposition was clear. Stop looking for conspiracy. So tedious.
Click to expand...
I’m not looking for anything.
1) he is getting paid by a newspaper whose 2 main stake holders are associated with states that are currently committing the worse human rights atrocities on earth.

2) There has been a clear shift in The Independent’s coverage of the war in Yemen. They are not suddenly pro Saudi, but a lot of the emphasis on human suffering and editorial condemnation of the war no longer exists.
 
AlPistacho said:
I’m not looking for anything.
1) he is getting paid by a newspaper whose 2 main stake holders are associated with states that are currently committing the worse human rights atrocities on earth.

2) There has been a clear shift in The Independent’s coverage of the war in Yemen. They are not suddenly pro Saudi, but a lot of the emphasis on human suffering and editorial condemnation of the war no longer exists.
Click to expand...


Delaney has been vocal and consistent.
 
Reapersoul20 said:
Manchester United is one of the most successful football clubs in history. The club has won numerous domestic and international titles, and has a massive global following. However, in recent years, Manchester United has struggled on the field and off. The club has gone through a series of owners who have failed to bring back the glory days. It is in this context that the idea of Elon Musk, the visionary entrepreneur, owning Manchester United has gained traction. In this essay, we will argue that Elon Musk would be the best owner of Manchester United, and contrast how his visionary business acumen would make him a far better owner than Sheikh Jassim and Jim Ratcliffe.

Elon Musk is a world-renowned entrepreneur who has founded several companies, including SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and The Boring Company. He has a reputation for being a visionary who thinks big and is not afraid to take risks. Musk's companies are at the forefront of technological innovation, and he has a track record of disrupting industries. His ability to think outside the box, his willingness to take bold steps, and his focus on innovation make him the ideal owner for Manchester United.

Manchester United is a global brand with a massive fan base. However, the club has struggled on the field and off in recent years. The club has failed to compete with its rivals on the pitch, and the owners have been criticized for their lack of investment in the team. Elon Musk's ownership of the club would bring a new energy and focus to Manchester United. He would prioritize investment in the team, bring in new talent, and create a winning culture. Musk has a reputation for being a demanding boss who sets high standards for his employees. This focus on excellence and the pursuit of greatness would be a perfect fit for Manchester United.

One of the key advantages of having Elon Musk as the owner of Manchester United is his ability to innovate. Musk's companies are at the forefront of technological innovation, and he has a track record of disrupting industries. He is a futurist who is always looking for ways to make the world a better place. His ability to innovate would be a significant asset to Manchester United. He would bring new ideas and approaches to the club, and his focus on technology would help Manchester United stay ahead of its competitors.

In contrast, Sheikh Jassim, who is rumored to be interested in buying Manchester United, has a very different background. Sheikh Jassim is a member of the Qatari royal family and the chairman of the Qatar Sports Investments. The Qatar Sports Investments is the parent company of Paris Saint-Germain (PSG). Sheikh Jassim has been instrumental in turning PSG into a footballing powerhouse, but his approach to ownership is very different from Elon Musk's. Sheikh Jassim's focus is on buying top talent and spending big on transfers. He has invested heavily in PSG and has transformed the club into one of the most expensive teams in the world. However, this approach has its drawbacks. PSG has struggled to build a winning culture, and the team has underperformed in key matches.

Jim Ratcliffe, the founder of INEOS, is another billionaire who has been linked with buying Manchester United. Ratcliffe has a reputation for being a shrewd businessman who is not afraid to take risks. His company, INEOS, has become a major player in the petrochemical industry, and Ratcliffe has used his wealth to buy sports teams. He owns the Swiss football team FC Lausanne-Sport, and he has invested heavily in cycling. However, like Sheikh Jassim, Ratcliffe's approach to ownership is focused on buying top talent. His investments in sports teams have been criticized for being short-term and lacking in vision.


In contrast to Sheikh Jassim and Jim Ratcliffe, Elon Musk's approach to ownership would be focused on building a sustainable and successful team. Musk would invest in the development of young players, focus on building a strong team culture, and prioritize long-term success over short-term gains. His vision for Manchester United would extend beyond the football pitch, and he would seek to transform the club into a global brand that is synonymous with innovation and excellence.

Another advantage of having Elon Musk as the owner of Manchester United is his commitment to social responsibility. Musk has been vocal about his desire to use his wealth to make the world a better place. He has invested in renewable energy, space exploration, and the development of sustainable transport. He has also pledged to donate the majority of his wealth to philanthropic causes. If he were to own Manchester United, he would bring this commitment to social responsibility to the club. He would seek to use the club's influence and reach to promote positive change in the world.

In conclusion, Elon Musk would be the best owner of Manchester United. His visionary approach to business, focus on innovation, commitment to excellence, and social responsibility make him the ideal candidate to lead the club. Sheikh Jassim and Jim Ratcliffe may have wealth and a track record of investment in sports teams, but their approaches to ownership are short-sighted and lack the vision necessary to transform Manchester United into a global powerhouse. With Elon Musk at the helm, Manchester United would have the opportunity to reach new heights and cement its place as one of the greatest football clubs in history.
Click to expand...

Did elon post this himself?
 
Reapersoul20 said:
Manchester United is one of the most successful football clubs in history. The club has won numerous domestic and international titles, and has a massive global following. However, in recent years, Manchester United has struggled on the field and off. The club has gone through a series of owners who have failed to bring back the glory days. It is in this context that the idea of Elon Musk, the visionary entrepreneur, owning Manchester United has gained traction. In this essay, we will argue that Elon Musk would be the best owner of Manchester United, and contrast how his visionary business acumen would make him a far better owner than Sheikh Jassim and Jim Ratcliffe.

Elon Musk is a world-renowned entrepreneur who has founded several companies, including SpaceX, Tesla, Neuralink, and The Boring Company. He has a reputation for being a visionary who thinks big and is not afraid to take risks. Musk's companies are at the forefront of technological innovation, and he has a track record of disrupting industries. His ability to think outside the box, his willingness to take bold steps, and his focus on innovation make him the ideal owner for Manchester United.

Manchester United is a global brand with a massive fan base. However, the club has struggled on the field and off in recent years. The club has failed to compete with its rivals on the pitch, and the owners have been criticized for their lack of investment in the team. Elon Musk's ownership of the club would bring a new energy and focus to Manchester United. He would prioritize investment in the team, bring in new talent, and create a winning culture. Musk has a reputation for being a demanding boss who sets high standards for his employees. This focus on excellence and the pursuit of greatness would be a perfect fit for Manchester United.

One of the key advantages of having Elon Musk as the owner of Manchester United is his ability to innovate. Musk's companies are at the forefront of technological innovation, and he has a track record of disrupting industries. He is a futurist who is always looking for ways to make the world a better place. His ability to innovate would be a significant asset to Manchester United. He would bring new ideas and approaches to the club, and his focus on technology would help Manchester United stay ahead of its competitors.

In contrast, Sheikh Jassim, who is rumored to be interested in buying Manchester United, has a very different background. Sheikh Jassim is a member of the Qatari royal family and the chairman of the Qatar Sports Investments. The Qatar Sports Investments is the parent company of Paris Saint-Germain (PSG). Sheikh Jassim has been instrumental in turning PSG into a footballing powerhouse, but his approach to ownership is very different from Elon Musk's. Sheikh Jassim's focus is on buying top talent and spending big on transfers. He has invested heavily in PSG and has transformed the club into one of the most expensive teams in the world. However, this approach has its drawbacks. PSG has struggled to build a winning culture, and the team has underperformed in key matches.

Jim Ratcliffe, the founder of INEOS, is another billionaire who has been linked with buying Manchester United. Ratcliffe has a reputation for being a shrewd businessman who is not afraid to take risks. His company, INEOS, has become a major player in the petrochemical industry, and Ratcliffe has used his wealth to buy sports teams. He owns the Swiss football team FC Lausanne-Sport, and he has invested heavily in cycling. However, like Sheikh Jassim, Ratcliffe's approach to ownership is focused on buying top talent. His investments in sports teams have been criticized for being short-term and lacking in vision.


In contrast to Sheikh Jassim and Jim Ratcliffe, Elon Musk's approach to ownership would be focused on building a sustainable and successful team. Musk would invest in the development of young players, focus on building a strong team culture, and prioritize long-term success over short-term gains. His vision for Manchester United would extend beyond the football pitch, and he would seek to transform the club into a global brand that is synonymous with innovation and excellence.

Another advantage of having Elon Musk as the owner of Manchester United is his commitment to social responsibility. Musk has been vocal about his desire to use his wealth to make the world a better place. He has invested in renewable energy, space exploration, and the development of sustainable transport. He has also pledged to donate the majority of his wealth to philanthropic causes. If he were to own Manchester United, he would bring this commitment to social responsibility to the club. He would seek to use the club's influence and reach to promote positive change in the world.

In conclusion, Elon Musk would be the best owner of Manchester United. His visionary approach to business, focus on innovation, commitment to excellence, and social responsibility make him the ideal candidate to lead the club. Sheikh Jassim and Jim Ratcliffe may have wealth and a track record of investment in sports teams, but their approaches to ownership are short-sighted and lack the vision necessary to transform Manchester United into a global powerhouse. With Elon Musk at the helm, Manchester United would have the opportunity to reach new heights and cement its place as one of the greatest football clubs in history.
Click to expand...
ChatGPT
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Well, most journalism is just degrees of clickbaitery these days, so there's that.

But in general, this sort of argument doesn't really work. For one thing, I'm pretty sure Liew has written pieces that were explicitly critical of City's owners, i.e. the sportswashing angle. And for another, there isn't anything inherently contradictory about praising Pep and/or Haaland while at the same time being critical of the people who pay their salaries. I mean, what's the alternative for a sports journalist? Refuse to talk about Haaland because...sportswashing? Or pretend he's shit?
Click to expand...

I get the point, but there is something that feels very dirty about the pundits and articles written that lavish praise on them, without at least some mention of how they got there and what they are charged with right now.
 
Herman Toothrot said:
Let's be clear, there are no breaking moments in this thread. Maybe there's a little for a junkie here and there, but there is nothing to report right now. Just because a journalist hasn't told you what you want to hear doesn't make them a bad journalist. The paranoia, causal use of of the term 'racism' and ridiculous disrespect of journalist in this thread is the stuff of Trump supporters. Andy Mitten has done more for Manchester United fan culture than most, he's been behind one of the best fanzines since I was a kid and representing our voice in media for years. He deserves some respect.
Click to expand...

Very well said.
 
As far as I know, no journalist has ever got to interview any member of the Glazer family on United. It’s been Woodward at best who is/was their most trusted vessel into association football, and who helped engineer the controversial takeover at the time. I have never seen Joel Glazer say the words ‘Manchester United‘ on camera ever.

So no sports journalist who covers United has the inside track on their mindset in this and Raine Group aren’t going to let stuff leak and risk reputational damage. I think they reprimanded both Qatar and INEOS for not adhering to a confidentiality request and were both campaigning in the media. Both of them have mostly gone quiet since then. The Qatar bid have definitely sided with the Mail (namely Keegan) as a mouthpiece and INEOS used the Times to declare an intention to invest. Most of them are guessing, taking educated guesses, they may have some bias against one or the other

It’s going to be a finance/business journalist who’s going to report the next significant breakthrough, because United is NYSE listed and stuff will fall through the grapevine that way, like how Elon Musk one day decided to tweet about buying United, even though he didn’t really want too but he probably knew something was happening.
 
Berbaclass said:
Twitter says Darcie has put the brothers in their place. Could be announced later.

Obviously that’s not true though you would imagine.
Click to expand...

Darcie is the second biggest shareholder I believe. Also I doubt the siblings not interested in continuing, would want to wait till 2026 to cash out
 
Is this even still happening ? Why do I get the feeling the actual timeline for this process was after lasts game of the season?
 
Mr Pigeon said:
On that latest United podcast he was talking about how someone at the club told him three days prior that Sir Alex would be announcing his retirement. He could've blurted that one out at the time but didn't (although he apparently did leak it to his mum).

Seems bizarre that anyone would have a go at journos for The Athletic. I'd listen to them before anyone else to be fair. They also write proper articles, not just the clickbait shite that even the BBC have started to do.
Click to expand...

Always felt that Mitten and Whitwell aren't keen on Qatar at all,so not surprised they are talking up INEOS being confident. Mind you if he knew about Fergie retirement then could well be right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.