Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.

Yeah I will openly admit there is fear we can't compete without state wealth and that if Qatar don't buy us they will get Spurs or even worse scousers instead
 
Be very interesting to see their reactions if Qatar do a similar deal and allow the Glazers to remain in the background with a small minority.

In fact if Sir Jim was offering 100% buyout and Qatar was only offering enough to remove them as majority owners but also pledging massive transfer kitty they'd still prefer Qatar.

It is so painfully obvious what they want.
Hmm so I’m happy with either. But these are my main 2 requirements:
1. Kick out Glazers
2. Clear debt

If the scenario was switched I would be backing Jim. But so it stands, Qatar has the better deal.
 
There's no way the UK government, especially if it's still the Tories, wouldn't apply pressure to the PL to make this go away. The same way they did exactly the same when Saudi Arabia's bid for Newcastle was initially turned down.
They can’t. Under FIFA rules as I understand it if a government interferes in its leagues domestic affairs the country can be banned from participating in FIFA competitions.
 
It astounds me how many are seemingly willing to twerk for Jim all in the name of morality.

Jim has one thing (and arguably only one thing) going for him in terms of what you could loosely term "morality": he ain't a nation-state.

That one thing is very important to many people, though. It makes it easier to choose the deep blue sea over the devil, as it were.
 
You are arguing for the sake of it, here is the conclusion:

No I am certainly not. The overlap is that all racism is also xenophobic, not the inverse.

" a policy of favoring native inhabitants as opposed to immigrants "- If this is based on a belief that the immigrants are worth less and should not be favoured based on this it's racism. Otherwise it's not. What you are arguing is that the NHS is racist because it favours inhabitants over immigrants. Its sole existence is to provide people of a british nationality or with a british residence with healthcare and to discriminate people who are not british citizens or have residency here. NHS as an institution or organisation is of course neither racist or xenophobic.
 
Incorrect; biological race has many flaws, go check your DNA, race is a social construct.

That's not in any way my argument. I am arguing that a racist is someone who lives with the PERCEPTION that humans can be classified and ranked in an hierarchy based on race, and that it is important to keep racism to this definition and not for any view that is against multiculturalism or immigration to name 2 examples.
 
The overlap is that all racism is also xenophobic, not the inverse.

Technically that's true. It's hard to imagine a form of xenophobia that isn't also - in the broader sense relevant here - racist, though.

I mean, the "broader sense" is obviously key. There aren't many literal (as in: actually believing in "racial" supremacy) racists around these days, at least not out in the open.
 
Mark Ogden quite interesting on The United Stand at the moment discussing all of this
 
No I am certainly not. The overlap is that all racism is also xenophobic, not the inverse.

" a policy of favoring native inhabitants as opposed to immigrants "- If this is based on a belief that the immigrants are worth less and should not be favoured based on this it's racism. Otherwise it's not. What you are arguing is that the NHS is racist because it favours inhabitants over immigrants. Its sole existence is to provide people of a british nationality or with a british residence with healthcare and to discriminate people who are not british citizens or have residency here. NHS as an institution or organisation is of course neither racist or xenophobic.

Let's say it this Merriam Webster tells you that xenophobia and racism may be used almost interchangeably. Whether you like it or not that's an accepted reality, if you are not happy with it you are free to lobby for a change in dictionnaries until then your interpretation isn't correct.
 
They can’t. Under FIFA rules as I understand it if a government interferes in its leagues domestic affairs the country can be banned from participating in FIFA competitions.

The government literally did interfere when it urged the PL to reconsider Saudi Arabia being allowed to buy Newcastle, there was zero fallout with FIFA and there won't be here either.
 
Technically that's true. It's hard to imagine a form of xenophobia that isn't also - in the broader sense relevant here - racist, though.

I mean, the "broader sense" is obviously key. There aren't many literal (as in: actually believing in "racial" supremacy) racists around these days, at least not out in the open.

certainly not in the UK, which is one of the least racist counties in the world. The reason people thinks is so racist is because the term has been diluted beyond being meaningful anymore by any act or opinion that goes against the politically correct agenda.
 
They can’t. Under FIFA rules as I understand it if a government interferes in its leagues domestic affairs the country can be banned from participating in FIFA competitions.
Correct I saw that on a tv program about the superleague and thats virtually what the anchorman said
 
This thread has gone full circle, it started with bizarre definitions of racism and xenophobia and now we're back with even weirder definitions.
 
They skipped dividends one year. This year. The year they are actually selling.

Between dividends and debt we average over £50m per year.

You’re trying to gaslight us if you think that is not significant to our transfer operations.
It's not a massive difference at all. They haven't taken dividends out in a while and debt repayments amount to the price of an average fullback, ie. they are very small in the grand scheme of things.
Bloody hell Harry. What Pex said.
 
Ogden said as a throw away comment on the United stand that Qatar had tasked the negotiators to not come back until they acquire the club.
 
The government literally did interfere when it urged the PL to reconsider Saudi Arabia being allowed to buy Newcastle, there was zero fallout with FIFA and there won't be here either.
That’s very different, the fit and proper test is a grey area anyway and no doubt the government made some overtures for KSA that PIF falls on the right side of the test, the EPL may have come to that conclusion in the end anyway especially as Abu Dhabi own city.

What we’re talking about is if City are found to be in egregious breach of financial rules and the government then coming in and telling them to overturn the decision. That’s blatant interference.
 
Let's say it this Merriam Webster tells you that xenophobia and racism may be used almost interchangeably. Whether you like it or not that's an accepted reality, if you are not happy with it you are free to lobby for a change in dictionnaries until then your interpretation isn't correct.

Firstly it didn’t. It concluded that expressions of racism can also be xenophobic. Also the quote you provided was a definition of nativism, which also overlaps with racism and xenophobia.

Plus, one of my main arguments is that the term has been diluted, which is very dangerous. So I don’t understand how trying to show me that the term has been diluted is an argument against mine? If you manage to prove this you’ve proven my point.

Racism is probably the worst catalyst for violence and oppression in the world except for socialism.

The NHS is not racist which means that the Merriam Webster definition is not right. If you go back 30 years the definition was not the same.
 
Ogden said as a throw away comment on the United stand that Qatar had tasked the negotiators to not come back until they acquire the club.

Yeah he's referring to what was said a couple months back. Just rehashing all old news like most journos are.
 
Ogden said as a throw away comment on the United stand that Qatar had tasked the negotiators to not come back until they acquire the club.

Qatar PR has been spinning that line since they entered the race.

Let’s be honest though, if Qatar weren’t still in this then this deal would have been done weeks ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if they win it.
 
Ogden said as a throw away comment on the United stand that Qatar had tasked the negotiators to not come back until they acquire the club.

Can't help but feel that there is probably a lot of truth in this and that the Glazers are well aware of this too. It's quite possibly why this is taking so long.

It was said in the aftermath of the latest round of bidding that there would still be opportunity of any parties to submit further bids and I'm sure I read that the Qataris would gazump Ineos if it came to it.

Wouldn't surprise me if it was the Glazers themselves that leaked the rumours about Ineos being preferred bidders in the hope of flushing out some extra cash from the Qataris.
 
Can't help but feel that there is probably a lot of truth in this and that the Glazers are well aware of this too. It's quite possibly why this is taking so long.

It was said in the aftermath of the latest round of bidding that there would still be opportunity of any parties to submit further bids and I'm sure I read that the Qataris would gazump Ineos if it came to it.

Wouldn't surprise me if it was the Glazers themselves that leaked the rumours about Ineos being preferred bidders in the hope of flushing out some extra cash from the Qataris.

100% agree on this.
 
Qatar PR has been spinning that line since they entered the race.

Let’s be honest though, if Qatar weren’t still in this then this deal would have been done weeks ago. I wouldn’t be surprised if they win it.

I don’t think that has been the line Qatar have been putting out there. All the news concerning the Qatar bid mentioned they will not over pay. It was just an assumption from fans that they would overpay due to their wealth.
 
Can't help but feel that there is probably a lot of truth in this and that the Glazers are well aware of this too. It's quite possibly why this is taking so long.

It was said in the aftermath of the latest round of bidding that there would still be opportunity of any parties to submit further bids and I'm sure I read that the Qataris would gazump Ineos if it came to it.

Wouldn't surprise me if it was the Glazers themselves that leaked the rumours about Ineos being preferred bidders in the hope of flushing out some extra cash from the Qataris.


Yep. Some brinkmanship going on. I think Qatar sorry Jassy will blink first.
 
It’s called negotiating. The Glazers are finding Ratcliffe’s best offer so they can tempt the Qatari’s to beat it and then you have a deal.

Ratcliffe is in turn being creative with his offer and offering something the Qataris don’t want to offer - a way for the Glazers to stay in some capacity and reap rewards later down the line.

So that means the bids are harder to quantify. It’s not a case of the Qataris offering $1 more than what Ratcliffe can and the deal being sealed. The Qataris just have to find the value which makes the offer more attractive without resorting to throwing silly money at them.

It’s no wonder the process has slowed down now. People are naive or ignorant if they think this is an easy deal to negotiate and that things like the transfer window are going to be a consideration for the Glazers. This is endgame for them, they’re going to look to secure the best deal for themselves and if you were in their position you would too. It’s laughable when people act like like a few hundred million here and there is not a big deal.
 
certainly not in the UK, which is one of the least racist counties in the world. The reason people thinks is so racist is because the term has been diluted beyond being meaningful anymore by any act or opinion that goes against the politically correct agenda.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Do you think that there is a form of "legitimate" xenophobia (i.e. one that is not "racist" either in a literal sense or in the broader sense already mentioned)?

Something like: I don't like foreigners specifically as immigrants (to my country) because...some reason or other? (But I have nothing against foreigners in general).

If so, taken at face value (but come on, it's a stance normally taken by people you'd be very right to suspect of being xenophobic or "racist" in a broader sense) I wouldn't call that xenophobic in the first place. It would be something else - but again, people who are genuinely non-xenophobic or non-racist do not tend to be against immigration on principle.
 
Firstly it didn’t. It concluded that expressions of racism can also be xenophobic. Also the quote you provided was a definition of nativism, which also overlaps with racism and xenophobia.

Plus, one of my main arguments is that the term has been diluted, which is very dangerous. So I don’t understand how trying to show me that the term has been diluted is an argument against mine? If you manage to prove this you’ve proven my point.

Racism is probably the worst catalyst for violence and oppression in the world except for socialism.

The NHS is not racist which means that the Merriam Webster definition is not right. If you go back 30 years the definition was not the same.
Oh you are one of those.
 
Jim has one thing (and arguably only one thing) going for him in terms of what you could loosely term "morality": he ain't a nation-state.

That one thing is very important to many people, though. It makes it easier to choose the deep blue sea over the devil, as it were.

Sheikh Jassim is not a nation state (or sovereign wealth fund) either
 
Yes the pic was real. I was sat 3 rows behind them. There was a small scuffle that broke out with a lady who tried to take the flag from the guys holding it up but they got their flag back from her.
Jesus, I guess every club has its share of idiot fans. It's embarrassing though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.