Club Sale | It’s done!

[sullydnl]

Spot on.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Some are so jealous of City and want to be them so much, that they have deluded themselves into believing Qatar has a bank vault of cash they willing to spend on United out of the goodness of their hearts. They are living in Fantasyland.

Also worth noting that even City (or more specifically their parent group City Football Group) took out a $650m loan in 2021, one of football's biggest ever debt deals, in order to fund investment.

So even the idea that state ownership guarantees zero debt is flawed.

 

[Ted Lasso]

If you want to tar those who support Qatar ownership with the same brush as those who supported Donald Trump, I don't think any of the anti-Qatar posters will object.

They're using the same argument types and points.

Take a timeout

We are close to invoking Godwin's Law

I didn't know what that was so I looked it up. Seems unfair as one event was 70 years ago and this comparison less than a decade.

 

[Raynaldo-dossantos]

If you want to tar those who support Qatar ownership with the same brush as those who supported Donald Trump, I don't think any of the anti-Qatar posters will object.

One big difference is that USA under Trump was a paradise compared to today's Qatar.

 

[jm99]

He's debating with you quite reasonably, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to do the same.

Well maybe you're new to the thread, but he's been condescending to people, gone through their post histories to find criticism and told people that if they want Qatar as owners they care more about trophies than gay rights.

 

[Wumminator]

Well maybe you're new to the thread, but he's been condescending to people, gone through their post histories to find criticism and told people that if they want Qatar as owners they care more about trophies than gay rights.

Going through people’s post histories to find out they used to criticise Qatar until they might buy us trophies and then they support them somehow makes me a bad person?

 

[Member 125398]

Well maybe you're new to the thread, but he's been condescending to people, gone through their post histories to find criticism and told people that if they want Qatar as owners they care more about trophies than gay rights.

If my memory's correct, he went through post histories to show a contrast in people's attitude to the Qatar world cup and Qatar buying United. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. Still no need to be abusive though.

 

[MackRobinson]

Well maybe you're new to the thread, but he's been condescending to people, gone through their post histories to find criticism and told people that if they want Qatar as owners they care more about trophies than gay rights.

Pointing out hypocrisy is completely fair. If you aren't a hypocrite you shouldn't worry.

 

[jm99]

If my memory's correct, he went through post histories to show a contrast in people's attitude to the Qatar world cup and Qatar buying United. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. Still no need to be abusive though.

I'd say telling people that they want gay people to die in return for trophies is fairly abusive as well

 

[Member 125398]

I'd say telling people that they want gay people to die in return for trophies is fairly abusive as well

Has that happened?

 

[MackRobinson]

I didn't know what that was so I looked it up. Seems unfair as one event was 70 years ago and this comparison less than a decade.

My point is by comparing this to Trumpism we are reaching that territory. Neither has anything to do with this, even as an example.

 

[Ted Lasso]

If my memory's correct, he went through post histories to show a contrast in people's attitude to the Qatar world cup and Qatar buying United. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. Still no need to be abusive though.

Can you link me to who that was? I'm lost with going back through your replies. Would be interesting to see what that actually looks like.

 

[jm99]

Pointing out hypocrisy is completely fair. If you aren't a hypocrite you shouldn't worry.

Like the hypocrisy of wanting a man who does billionsnof dollars of business with Saudi Arabia as our owner. It's not the issue of going through peoples post histories so much as it is doing that and criticising people on here, who basically have no power to do anything and just want their team to win, saying they care more about trophies than if gay people die, but being totally on board with a guy who does business with these regimes. He's holding posters on redcafe to a higher standard than Ratcliffe

 

[Member 125398]

Can you link me to who that was? I'm lost with going back through your replies. Would be interesting to see what that actually looks like.

I'm working off memory here. My assumption is that @jm99 is misinterpreting @Wumminator's arguments and it's all getting a little nasty.

 

[whitbyviking]

Abramovic is a Pariah. Take it up with the British government if you think Qataris and a Russian whose one of the closest allies with Putin should be treated in equal measures. Qatar is already a massive trade partner with the UK.

Qatar owns a significant stake in Rosneft, has multiple business and investment ties with Russia, and plans to continue investing- in Russia, just so you know. The United investors could actually be the same people as the Rosneft investors.

Every accusation leveled at Ineos can be leveled at Qatar and vice versa it seems, excpet for the most egregious when it comes to the human rights ones.

 

[Ted Lasso]

My point is by comparing this to Trumpism we are reaching that territory. Neither has anything to do with this, even as an example.

Ah. Didn't mean to compare it to Trumpism, but rather the type of arguments coming from the liberal side. Feels like this debate has been lost by branding Manchester United fans as anti-LGBTQ anti-women or racist.

I'll throw my hands up and say, I'm a culprit in that having joined the party late and getting triggered to call out the Ratcliff bid support as xenophobic. Had a poster say he preferred British ownership, and despite Ratcliffs Brexit stance, I undermined the ability to find common ground by going to that.

And that kind of vilification and back and forth, derailed the election discourse and pushed people further apart. Seeing that same structure here and calling it out, ironically in a way that is also inflammatory hah it's hard to be chill here!

 

[jm99]

Can you link me to who that was? I'm lost with going back through your replies. Would be interesting to see what that actually looks like.

It was multiple people's post histories he went through. I don't have any issue with him exposing the hypocrisy of people who criticised city and Newcastle for their owners and then want Qatar, its just strange to hold posters on redcafe to the standard of "if you want Qatar you'd rather gay people died than have a trophy less season" but isn't so rigid about doing billions of dollars of business with Saudi Arabia

 

[Ted Lasso]

I'm working off memory here. My assumption is that @jm99 is misinterpreting @Wumminator's arguments and it's all getting a little nasty.

Yeah it is getting quite nasty. Was just saying in my post to Mack above I've been triggered by being labeled as not caring about women or human rights and my reaction of labeling the counterparts as xenophobic or racist in nature didn't help out either.

Time to step back and let things cool.

 

[Member 125398]

It was multiple people's post histories he went through. I don't have any issue with him exposing the hypocrisy of people who criticised city and Newcastle for their owners and then want Qatar, its just strange to hold posters on redcafe to the standard of "if you want Qatar you'd rather gay people died than have a trophy less season" but isn't so rigid about doing billions of dollars of business with Saudi Arabia

Has that actually been said like that though or are you making it up? Can you quote the post you're talking about?

 

[jm99]

Has that actually been said like that though or are you making it up? Can you quote the post you're talking about?

I mean he's got about 1000 posts in this thread it would take some time to go through all of them. Maybe he can clarify.

Does he think that people who want Qatar value trophies over gay rights?

 

[Member 125398]

I mean he's got about 1000 posts in this thread it would take some time to go through all of them. Maybe he can clarify.

Does he think that people who want Qatar value trophies over gay rights?

With respect, it's you that needs to clarify as you're the one who is on the attack.

 

[sullydnl]

I mean he's got about 1000 posts in this thread it would take some time to go through all of them. Maybe he can clarify.

Does he think that people who want Qatar value trophies over gay rights?

"People who want Qatar value trophies over gay rights" isn't the same as "if you want Qatar you'd rather gay people died than have a trophy less season".

 

[jm99]

Yeah it is getting quite nasty. Was just saying in my post to Mack above I've been triggered by being labeled as not caring about women or human rights and my reaction of labeling the counterparts as xenophobic or racist in nature didn't help out either.

Time to step back and let things cool.

Tbh I wasn't really intending it to be nasty, I kinds felt he was the type of poster who took pride in his smugness

I mean I remember the time he made a thread after we beat west ham laughing at everyone who criticised solskjaer in the match day thread, then we won one more game until solskjaer got sacked out of the next 7 or 8 games

It's the same way I wouldn't mind someone calling me a stubborn prick or a cnut, I am

 

[jm99]

"People who want Qatar value trophies over gay rights" isn't the same as "if you want Qatar you'd rather gay people died than have a trophy less season".

It's pretty similar though, it's saying that if you're OK with Qatar taking over, you're OK with their treatment of gay people which at times includes murder (or does it I don't knowi really know, I know Saudi Arabia have executed people for homosexuality, it kind of all gets lumped together, is it just illegal in Qatar or do people get killed?)

 

[Castia]

Yep, definitely INEOS at fault here. Pin it on Jim.

Oh I’m not pinning it all on him it’s just the usual shambles we get here at United

To be honest though Jim’s probably not in a rush I don’t see a busy summer under him regardless.

 

[NK86]

Well you're calling it an investment, that implies an attempt to make money, doesn't it?

I don't act as if I know them but a State bid would mean an investment to have the prestige associated with owning Man UTD, and perhaps to also make money off of it in some way. "Milking money" has very different meaning associated with that term, as I assume you know because of the way you used it to try and prove a point I didn't even make.

 

[Tiber]

Summer. Feck off

Meh source not much better than the sun

 

[Woziak]

Happy to be corrected. You're more likely to know better sources than me on this but again, I've just googled it and looked at a few of the results.

Still reaching, Qatar are not buying united, for the record I’m 100% neutral, ABG will do but I think the reality is they actually bid less for the 69% controlling all the shares

Manchester United under INEOS ownership would have greater wealth backing it up than Barcelona, Real Madrid, Atletico, Bayern Munich, Juventus, Milan, Inter, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool.

They wouldn't have oil state money but there's only so much you can spend in football anyway due to FFP, so it's largely a moot point. With regards investment after purchase, SJR actually pledged £1.75 billion of additional investment (pledging investment was a requirement of that bid, he doesn't need to forward plans for Utd in this bidding process). Interesting enough, it's reported that Jassim only pledged £0.8b of further investment into Utd (again, this wasn't a requirement).

It's actually crazy that so many of you think Ratcliffe is going to seize control of the club without making substantial investments on a grand scale. He is literally a dream option and far preferable to Qatari ownership and all the baggage that'd entail.

See this post, I can completely relate to, I really was completely neutral with who won the bid but slightly favoured SJR because of the human rights and LGBTQ views of Qatar and like you I don’t believe that having money means success, there’s only so much you can spend that money on.

With the new FSP, the 70% rule will soon be in play and a club like united under SJR would be richer than all that you mention but because of the way we’ve been run for over the last 12/13 years in particular, we are playing catch up, Madrid are moving into a new state of the art stadium, Bayern modernised there’s last decade and we need new sponsorship, regular CL football and increase out turnover from £600m to £800m which we probably can not do until 2027/28 when the new stadium is finished.

Even then, United have to go up against a coach who by then may have won 8 PL titles from 11 seasons and 14 from his last 17 seasons including Bayern, only Klopp, Mourinho and Conte have managed teams that finished in front of him to win a domestic title, City dominance is more about Pep than it is their incredible wealth so we need to first find a coach that belongs in the same Conversation and ETH is yet to prove if he sits at that elite highest table or the one just below, it won’t matter if Qatar or SJR own the club and they both spend £200-300m every transfer window if your coach and infrastructure are still not quite the best in class and your competing against one of the all time great managers in history, there is will be no quick fix !

 

[Member 125398]

It's pretty similar though, it's saying that if you're OK with Qatar taking over, you're OK with their treatment of gay people which at times includes murder (or does it I don't knowi really know, I know Saudi Arabia have executed people for homosexuality, it kind of all gets lumped together, is it just illegal in Qatar or do people get killed?)

It's not similar at all, you're extrapolating with no reasonable cause to do so.

 

[jm99]

It's not similar at all, you're extrapolating with no reasonable cause to do so.

Well it is similar, given that the gay rights most focused on are that its illegal to publicly be homosexual, and the punishment can include murder. I don't see how that isn't similar

 

[Godfather]

Whoever thought this might be completed before the Summer needed their heads checked in any case.

There was every chance this could have been done before summer. The fecking rats are dragging this out endlessly which fecks our summer business and already puts a huge burden on ETH for next season. Another reason I want each and everyone of these leeches out of the club.

 

[Member 125398]

Well it is similar, given that the gay rights most focused on are that its illegal to publicly be homosexual, and the punishment can include murder. I don't see how that isn't similar

The only similarity is the topic, one statement is not inferred by the other. If you could understand this, you wouldn't be getting angry about something that hasn't been said.

 

[Suv666]

I hope this thread gets nuked after the takeover

 

[CodeRed]

I'm getting old but a quote I've heard so many times in my life and I have followed is 'If you want it then spend the bloody money....you can't take it with you when you die'.

I'm sure Sheik Jassim has heard of a similar quote many times. More so being so damn rich.....and I still believe he will. All this news coming out is leaked from the Ratcliffe camp. Nothing from the other bidders or the Raine group at all yet.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Scenario

Obviously, all the Glazer children need to agree on the sale, full or partial.

Therefore, they must have agreed that the SJR bid was the best for them financially.

However if SJ gives each of them another 10 million+ then he may become the preferred bidder.

Avram and Joel would be pushed up into accepting that higher bid?

I think this still has some distance to run, unless SJ withdraws.

Not that I’d be shocked if they dragged it out even more, but I do believe a winning bidder will be announced in the next week. It can’t go on forever and the club and it’s value will suffer if there’s still uncertainty in the summer transfer window

I think reading between the lines, Qatar effectively have this weekend to make an unrejectable offer, and if they don’t then Ineos will win

 

[Member 125398]

I don't act as if I know them but a State bid would mean an investment to have the prestige associated with Man UTD, and perhaps to also make money off of it in some way. "Milking money" has very different meaning associated with that term, as I assume you know because of the way you used it to try and prove a point I didn't even make.

Fair enough, it was a bit hyperbolic, I think this post is relevant to this discussion:

Do you think the money from Qatar is a gift? It will be funded by investors, if it is not funded by the state which is a whole different can of worms.

If Sheikh Jassim is a private investor then he will be using money from other private investors, as he doesn't have the money himself. Qatar are not doing this for philanthropy, there will be investor lead motives, maybe the land around Old Trafford, maybe the opportunities in Manchester or the UK, maybe sportwashing. Who knows.

This whole conversation around Ineos, debt etc completely ignores there are equally as many question marks (if not more, since Qatari net worths appear to be a mystery, as does the source of the money).

People really need to take the blinkers off and realise that the umlimited pots of gold offered by Sheikh Jassim will also come with conditions. It is not a case of free money vs guaranteed debt.

 

[MrPaxtons]

Not that I’d be shocked if they dragged it out even more, but I do believe a winning bidder will be announced in the next week. It can’t go on forever and the club and it’s value will suffer if there’s still uncertainty in the summer transfer window

I think reading between the lines, Qatar effectively have this weekend to make an unrejectable offer, and if they don’t then Ineos will win

Yeah looks like they’ve leaked about Ineos so Qatar bids again, this is all for more money and this isn’t over yet.

 

[NK86]

Yes. He had that option. I wish he would have taken it.

Doing business with x is not the same as being x. I would rather someone who works with x than being owned by x. X here is a corrupt nation state that has cost lives.

Hence, one is morally more unacceptable.

Isn't it companies like Ineos who give these State more validity and greater power and exposure by doing business with them? I don't think you can then turn around and say "well, they aren't doing it but just profiteering from it". It's like saying it is China's fault that they are allowing their workforce to be exploited when talking about the sweatshops and poor work conditions employed by giants like Apple, Nike etc in that country. As far as I am concerned, both are equally culpable as one allows it and the other exploits and prospers from it.

 

[whitbyviking]

Well no, I'm asking why some people who say they'd be appalled at us being owned by Qatar are desperate for a billionaire who happily does business in Saudi Arabia after the khalshoggi murder.

I mean they say morally they can't accept Qatar but are totally OK with Jim, surely if your morals are so strongly against these regimes you wouldn't want either in charge

If you want to damn SJR/Ineos by association with Saudi on the grounds of Khashoggi then I suggest do some reading on Sheikh Khalid Al Thani and damn Sheikh Jassim by association too. For balance of course.

 

[jm99]

If you want to damn SJR/Ineos by association with Saudi on the grounds of Khashoggi then I suggest do some reading on Sheikh Khalid Al Thani and damn Sheikh Jassim by association too. For balance of course.

That's my point though, calling out redcafe posters for wanting Qatar for sporting reasons, but being OK with Jim doing billions of dollars pf business with Saudi Arabia is fairly hypocritical. I don't mind people having a preference on moral grounds, but there seems to be a sentiment among the anti Qatar posters that anyone who's ok with them owning us endorses their regime, but Jim doing billions of dollars of business with Saudi Arabia isn't him endorsing their regime

 

[whitbyviking]

Like the hypocrisy of wanting a man who does billionsnof dollars of business with Saudi Arabia as our owner. It's not the issue of going through peoples post histories so much as it is doing that and criticising people on here, who basically have no power to do anything and just want their team to win, saying they care more about trophies than if gay people die, but being totally on board with a guy who does business with these regimes. He's holding posters on redcafe to a higher standard than Ratcliffe

It's totally accurate, you can't criticise our fans for wanting Qatari owners then turn a blind eye to a guy who does billions of dollars of business with Saudi Arabia

Qatar owns a significant stake in Rosneft, has multiple business and investment ties with Russia, and plans to continue investing- in Russia, just so you know. The United investors could actually be the same people as the Rosneft investors.

Every accusation leveled at Ineos can be leveled at Qatar and vice versa it seems, excpet for the most egregious when it comes to the human rights ones.

Have a read of these, and read my other post about Sheikh Khalid Al Thani and his antics. As with most of the negatives, they can be leveled at both, with the exception of some of the more egregious human rights issues.