Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Herman Toothrot said:
You sound like someone who accuses people of racism when they have zero concern about racism and only wants to score a cheap point to strengthen their argument.

You're a disgrace.
Click to expand...
Reapersoul20 said:
Spot on, saved me typing our a reply. Cheers.
Click to expand...
Yes because people who actively look for other flags and take digs at them is the right thing to do. How am I the bad guy here? Listen to yourselves ffs. You want to go and look for people holding Qatar flags and beat them up.

It sounds like the skin heads looking for people with brown skin to beat them up.

You sirs are a disgrace. I refer you guys to mods here. Redcafe has no place for this.

@Reapersoul20 - I see you have edited your original post! Good man. That xenophobic talk is no place for here.
 
Id applaud FIFA/UEFA if they decided that all state owned club must be sold in exchange of a level playing field. But it ain't going to happen. Thus if 'cheating' is allowed then its not cheating at all. Thus I'd rather see my club benefiting of everything that football provide then being run 'responsibly' by people who relegated a Swiss club and who thought that signing the likes of Barkley, Ramsay, Schmeichel + involving cyclist man in football is a good idea.
 
Andy_Cole said:
Yes because people who actively look for other flags and take digs at them is the right thing to do. How am I the bad guy here? Listen to yourselves ffs. You want to go and look for people holding Qatar flags and beat them up.


It sounds like the skin heads looking for people with brown skin to beat them up.
You sirs are a disgrace. I refer you guys to mods here. Redcafe has no place for this.

@Reapersoul20 - I see you have edited your original post! Good man. That xenophobic talk is no place for here.
Click to expand...

:lol:

Christ. I will not bother with a response to your baseless, hyperbolic bollocks because it stands alone as a testament to how confused you are.

Believe it or not, disagreeing with someone who unfurls a Qatari flag at a United game is not tantamount to "It sounds like the skin heads looking for people with brown skin to beat them up" and saying is really, really dumb, not to mention offensive bad unnecessarily hostile. Especially when Qatar has, and continues to, round up people with brown skin to use them as slaves.

By all means feel free to continue your misled indignancy though - it's giving me a great laugh :lol:. Have a nice day.
 
Last edited:
Can we stop posting moronic videos of Mark fecking Goldbridge now
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
The sad thing is him like so many others who are pro Qatar will have been bad mouthing City and their ownership model for about 10 years now no doubt.

Just one of dozens of videos he's done on the subject.



Funny how he doesn't think Qatar buying us will be the same isn't it?
Click to expand...


I think the difference is Chelsea and City have had a cheat code, Newcastle now have one and it's transformed these teams from being average clubs to successful clubs (Newcastle excluded so far) and many United fans think that the only way to compete is to get someone with mega wealth to compete ie a cheat code.

I also think there's a fear from some that if we don't get Qatar, Liverpool or spurs will be their next target and United will be left behind again

I personally don't think we need a country behind us, we need some one with enough money and a clear strategy in how to improve the club in all departments and more importantly grow the income to be able to compete with the mega wealthy clubs on the pitch.

I'm not pro SJR or Qatar, I just want whatever happens to happen and then we can move on with whatever the outcome is. Proof is in the pudding whoever takes over, time will tell.
 
Andy_Cole said:
Yes because people who actively look for other flags and take digs at them is the right thing to do. How am I the bad guy here? Listen to yourselves ffs. You want to go and look for people holding Qatar flags and beat them up.

It sounds like the skin heads looking for people with brown skin to beat them up.

You sirs are a disgrace. I refer you guys to mods here. Redcafe has no place for this.

@Reapersoul20 - I see you have edited your original post! Good man. That xenophobic talk is no place for here.
Click to expand...

Reapersoul20 said:
:lol:


Christ. I will not bother with a response to your baseless, hyperbolic bollocks because it stands alone as a testament to how confused you are.

Believe it or not, disagreeing with someone who unfurls a Qatari flag at a United game is not tantamount to "It sounds like the skin heads looking for people with brown skin to beat them up" and saying is really, really dumb. Especially when Qatar has, and continues to, round up people with brown skin to use them as slaves.

By all means feel free to continue your misled indignancy though - it's giving me a great laugh
:lol:
.
Click to expand...

Herman Toothrot said:
You sound like someone who accuses people of racism when they have zero concern about racism and only wants to score a cheap point to strengthen their argument.

You're a disgrace.
Click to expand...
We're on page 1,344 now and these arguments have been going round in circles for months. You've all been here years so know the rules on not insulting others and the need to be careful when accusing others of racism.

Asking for calm, reasoned debate in this thread feels a forlorn hope. The guy in a Qatar flag is obviously a massive tit (assuming the pic on twitter I've seen was real), but was a minority of one and no doubt a thick, attention-seeking twat.
 
bludsucker said:
But if i am right the shares are listed in the US and the threshold for squeeze out is different in different states (as low as 50%).
Click to expand...

I think that in the company's articles of association there's a drag along clause that forces owners below a certain threshhold (presumably all other owners in this case) to sell if the majority shareholder sells, so that minority owners doesn't mess up mergers or sales like this.

Imagine you have a startup business today and you need someone to help you with something small but crucial, say something that'd be worth £3k. You don't have the money at the moment, or you have a cash flow issue (very common in the beginning), so you offer this person 0.5% of your business instead of money. 5 years later your business have boomed and an investor wants to buy your entire business for a huge amount of money, say £10 million. Now you don't want that person that helped with something that was worth £3k 5 years ago to stall the enitre sale because he or she believes your business will be worth even more later, or some other stupid reason. I am not sure how it works for companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange as I don't trade there, but in a non listed company you'd never take a small owner onboard without a drag along clause in the contracr or articles of association because of precisely this.

If you exclude personal/fanboy reasons for owning Manchester United and look at it from a pure business perspective, you're likely to get a really good deal here as minority owner. Usually the same deal as the majority shareholder. As the business of Manchester United is well established, the business is not likely to develop in a way that the majority shareholder could not forsee and thus this is reflected in their asking price, which you get a part of. Please see the link below.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/d/dragalongrights.asp

I don't think Qatar whould say that they bid for 100% if this was not possible. They will presumably take it of the NYSE.

Valuations are usually per share and not for 100% or 69%. Then it needs to be multiplied with 69% of the total number of shares to get the Glazers family's share of the bid.
 
Reapersoul20 said:
:lol:

Christ. I will not bother with a response to your baseless, hyperbolic bollocks because it stands alone as a testament to how confused you are.

Believe it or not, disagreeing with someone who unfurls a Qatari flag at a United game is not tantamount to "It sounds like the skin heads looking for people with brown skin to beat them up" and saying is really, really dumb, not to mention offensive bad unnecessarily hostile. Especially when Qatar has, and continues to, round up people with brown skin to use them as slaves.

By all means feel free to continue your misled indignancy though - it's giving me a great laugh :lol:. Have a nice day.
Click to expand...

When people are trying to forcibly take something off someone and assualting them in the process, then I'd say that's a bit beyond simple disagreement. Whatever peoples view they should be able to express it without fear of violence, Yeah but Qatar does this, so what? What's that got to do with us? That means it's ok to manhandle an old guy expressing his opinion? And other united fans tring to justify it, it's disgusting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rood
Son said:
You realise you can put football first without cheating under a state ownership. Bayern do that quite well and barely spend that much.

Fans will start throwing their toys out the pram with all the money even. Urgh we didn’t like this Mbappe get us Mbappe 2.0. Put football first spend another 200m on a single player. Give us more toys that are replaceable.
Click to expand...
You realise some of us just want the club to be back on a good footing?
I've no interest in mbappe or any other disgusting transfers, I just want the club without a crippling debt and for the stadium and infrastructure to be back on a par for a club this size.
After that I'd love for us to operate within our means.
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
The sad thing is him like so many others who are pro Qatar will have been bad mouthing City and their ownership model for about 10 years now no doubt.

Just one of dozens of videos he's done on the subject.



Funny how he doesn't think Qatar buying us will be the same isn't it?
Click to expand...


Can you ruin something once it has already been ruined though?

The horse has bolted as they say.

What I find harder to digest is posters who have spent years claiming City’s success is meaningless. Those are the ones who will struggle to stay consistent most if Qatar buys us.
 
MarkoDolohov said:
Really like the look of that Kim Jim fella from Napoli for £43m
Click to expand...
Would be a great bit of business, although I won't believe it until its sealed.
£43m is the supposed release clause, which I believe are normally paid upfront.

Would be a little surprised if we straight up pay out £43m before we have new owners.
 
Jippy said:
We're on page 1,344 now and these arguments have been going round in circles for months. You've all been here years so know the rules on not insulting others and the need to be careful when accusing others of racism.

Asking for calm, reasoned debate in this thread feels a forlorn hope. The guy in a Qatar flag is obviously a massive tit (assuming the pic on twitter I've seen was real), but was a minority of one and no doubt a thick, attention-seeking twat.
Click to expand...
Sorry mate
 
McTerminator said:
Can you ruin something once it has already been ruined though?

The horse has bolted as they say.

What I find harder to digest is posters who have spent years claiming City’s success is meaningless. Those are the ones who will struggle to stay consistent most if Qatar buys us.
Click to expand...
Unless you're expecting them to cheat its not the same, United can generate real revenue without making up fake sponsorships and fixing the books
 
Andy_Cole said:
Sorry mate
Click to expand...
It's ok. Obviously one of the problems when there is such virulent hatred against a horrible regime is that it can be hard to unpick if any of that is just masking racism, with the likes of Qatar, Saudi and Israel being prime examples.
My own utter loathing of the UK government probably looks obsessive at the moment.
 
Jippy said:
It's ok. Obviously one of the problems when there is such virulent hatred against a horrible regime is that it can be hard to unpick if any of that is just masking racism, with the likes of Qatar, Saudi and Israel being prime examples.
My own utter loathing of the UK government probably looks obsessive at the moment.
Click to expand...
I’m going to try stay out of any moral debates and stick to talking football! Haha.
 
As many assume when we talk about state backed projects we are thinking of PSG, City, Newcastle and Chelsea. But to add to that in 2021 both Barca and Real were found quilty to have had illegal state aid by the ECJ since 1990 in the form of sweetheart property deals, tax breaks and soft loans.
I would prefer if Man Utd were fan owned at least partly like in Germany but that ship has sailed and that will never happen. Picking between Ratcliff or Sheikh Jassim is impossible and frankly I do not care as long as the new owner stops bleeding the club dry and makes Unied self sufficient again. I despise the Glazers and hopefully we will see them gone a.s.a.p.
 
McTerminator said:
Can you ruin something once it has already been ruined though?

The horse has bolted as they say.

What I find harder to digest is posters who have spent years claiming City’s success is meaningless. Those are the ones who will struggle to stay consistent most if Qatar buys us.
Click to expand...

It's not the owners themselves that make city meaningless. It's how the owners have operated. It's possible Qatar buys us and runs us properly without fabricating ludicrous sponsorship deals to artificially inflate our income.
 
Berbaclass said:
Nowhere have I stated the contrary

The process requires the bidders to value the whole club in terms of a share price, with the Glazers then receiving 69% of that valuation or 51% depending on who wins etc
Click to expand...
It can’t possibly work that way. The listed A shares are of significantly less value than the Glazer’s B shares.
 
devilish said:
Id applaud FIFA/UEFA if they decided that all state owned club must be sold in exchange of a level playing field. But it ain't going to happen. Thus if 'cheating' is allowed then its not cheating at all. Thus I'd rather see my club benefiting of everything that football provide then being run 'responsibly' by people who relegated a Swiss club and who thought that signing the likes of Barkley, Ramsay, Schmeichel + involving cyclist man in football is a good idea.
Click to expand...
What about cheating like the 100+ charges City are facing for cooking the books? In other words, if it isn't allowed, are you still ok with cheating?

Legally Qatar isn't going to be able to spend 500m+ per year like many (not necessarily you) are fantasizing about. The amount that Qatar and Ineos would be able to spend would be essentially the same.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
What about cheating like the 100+ charges City are facing for cooking the books? In other words, if it isn't allowed, are you still ok with cheating?

Legally Qatar isn't going to be able to spend 500m+ per year like many (not necessarily you) are fantasizing about. The amount that Qatar and Ineos would be able to spend would be essentially the same.
Click to expand...

I keep saying this too but for whatever reason most people don't want to engage with it.

Most of the top clubs these days spend right up to the FFP limit (including the Glazers!) on squad building because they know they have to in order to stay relevant because the competition is so fierce. It's basically a given.

Ratcliffe knows this and he essentially alluded to it in a recent long form interview.

He isn't going to buy a controlling share in the club only to kill it's competitiveness by limiting spend to well under the FFP allowance in order to pay off debt or help pay for the new infrastructure upgrades etc. It's totally illogical.

I can't really see any way in which the Qataris significantly outspend him unless they do so illegally.

I think in a practical sense, it comes down to who you trust to run the club in terms of decision making, not who will spend the most money.
 
It astounds me how many are seemingly willing to twerk for Jim all in the name of morality. The irony.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.