Here's a breakdown of who owns what A class shares. Only Joel and Darcie own them from the family then fecking Ed Woodward.
My apologies, Infra-red, this is the correct portions.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
My apologies, Infra-red, this is the correct portions.
Wouldn't it be better to frame offers as an amount per percent?
For the general public, yeah probably. But everyone is under NDA's so we're not meant to even know any of this!
The latter. They are not offering to pay £4.8bn for 69%. If Qatar's offer was accepted, they'd be handing over about £3bn to the Glazers.
I think we can all agree (INEOs fans, Jassim fans etc) that journalists haven't covered themselves in glory regarding the takeover. Do you remember when almost everyone stuck his neck regarding Ineos and Jassim's bid on deadline day when it wasn't the case?
Why wouldn’t he? The Glazers have for the most part
City are the poster boys for this model. How many times was anything about ownership and state backing mentioned last night when they made the CL final?
Needless to say, James Ducker had the last laugh.
Not really. I don’t think anyone sane believed this would be wrapped up fast. Big deals like this never do. We are lucky if we wrap this up in June.
Aye, it's a weird argument.
The entire premise of being against Qatari ownership is that you think it's a bad thing for the club. So asking "well what if that bad thing happens to your biggest rivals instead?" should typically come with a pretty straightforward answer, "great". Particularly if an ancilliary point is that you think we can compete with state-backed clubs without ourselves being state-backed. In which case, let the bad thing happen to them instead and then be better than them anyway.
The only exceptions would be a) if you're particularly charitable and don't even wish that on Liverpool or b) you're particularly uncharitable and are hoping for worse for Liverpool.
We won't be laughing as Klopp's backed to the hilt and they become a dominant force in Europe, lapping up trophy after trophy. And considering how City - a sportwashed, financial doping cheating outfit is praised to high heavens by the media, you really think Liverpool's achievements would be downplayed? No, they'd simply point to the fact they were already a big club prior to the takeover, and everyone else would lap it up. It wouldn't bother their fans one bit.
It would objectively be a horrible scenario if our two biggest rivals became financial juggernauts, while we contend with the dream team of Brexit Jimbo and the Glazers.
This is my take, too. Although I'm honestly in the "particularly charitable" camp, in the sense that I don't want Liverpool to be taken over by the Qataris not because it would guarantee them untold success (it wouldn't) but because I think it'd be sad to see any club with such a rich history and importance to its city (and, much as I despite Liverpool, you can't deny the truth of either of these) become just another sportswashing vehicle.
The sports washing argument. Does anyone give a feck about Abu Dhabi because they own City? Does it make any difference to anyone? Seems to be City fans reaping any benefits here.
Can we all agree that none of us no for sure what the contents of the bids are, nor is everybody an expert on stock listed announcements rules, finances, merger’s & acquisitions and due diligence?
Quite a lot? My social media was full of it, at least. Just because the commentators on TV aren't mentioning it doesn't it isn't generally being mentioned.
And even then, it was brought up post-game on Irish TV and I would imagine by channels in other countries too. Just because English media aren't inclined to criticise an English club when they reach a CL final that doesn't mean others don't. And even within the English media, some do regularly highlight the problem. For example just yesterday:
The idea that City aren't regularly criticised is a weird one. Football fans know what they are are and do regularly talk about it. We're doing so right now.
It's his company and he owns 60% of it so I think it's safe to say he can do what he wants
The first post in thousands which has broken it down all in one post, very helpful.
It's not that people consciously decide "Abu Dhabi own City, and look how good they are; they can't be that bad!" It's more that by owning/associating themselves with a successful football team, say, some people just become more willing to ignore the darker side of these regimes.
I'd argue it's happened with some United fans and Qatar, and Jassim hasn't even actually bought us (yet).
Here's a breakdown of who owns what A class shares. Only Joel and Darcie own them from the family then fecking Ed Woodward.
Well hopefully Ed gets paid. I do miss him
Because they've spent less (on the books) than a bunch of other teams. So although everyone is desperate to paint this is a 'hollow' achievement, if they don't get banned, they've done very well indeed.
I'd also be willing to bet this state funded talk dies a death in the coming years when a lot of clubs get minority investment from a state at some point.
Don't underestimate the NFL possibilities and opportunities in the ME - An untapped market. This is far from INEOS offering more and it being cut and dry. If Quatar want the club, they will get the club.
Not sure if this is the right place for this, mods please move/delete as you see fit.
I appreciate people have certain views when it comes to the bidders for UTD. I have views too but am just putting those to one side.
I watched City last night and the thing what struck me is the money and ownership has meant that not meant first 11 will compete with them. They have like a first 32. Each player coming on would be a permanent fixture in most top teams.
Newcastle will probably go that way too at some point (it's taken City 14 years) but probably quicker time wise due to City.
We all know what happened with Roman at Chelsea.
I'm 50+ and have seen a lot of changes in football. From players buying pubs on retiring to wages that's et them up for life. Liverpool had dominance and I would say that was money lead. Our dominance was also money lead. Now we have a new type of money that seems to be taking over.
That all said l, and putting aside some of the moral etc views. How much of a mistake would not getting on that band wagon now hinder us going forward?
And who would be best for that "bandwagon"? Qatar or Jim?
I appreciate people have certain views when it comes to the bidders for UTD. I have views too but am just putting those to one side.
I watched City last night and the thing what struck me is the money and ownership has meant that not meant first 11 will compete with them. They have like a first 32. Each player coming on would be a permanent fixture in most top teams.
Newcastle will probably go that way too at some point (it's taken City 14 years) but probably quicker time wise due to City.
We all know what happened with Roman at Chelsea.
I'm 50+ and have seen a lot of changes in football. From players buying pubs on retiring to wages that's et them up for life. Liverpool had dominance and I would say that was money lead. Our dominance was also money lead. Now we have a new type of money that seems to be taking over.
That all said l, and putting aside some of the moral etc views. How much of a mistake would not getting on that band wagon now hinder us going forward?
And who would be best for that "bandwagon"? Qatar or Jim?
So the Glazers are still trying to squeeze out the last drop of blood and are happy to continue to do so while jeopardizing our next season under new owners. Leeches gonna leech.
It's also just a weird point to raise. I'm not arsed what the media's general consensus is surrounding City; to me, their victories are entirely vapid. I was in the away end at the Etihad recently and it is by far the most inauthentic footballing experience I've ever had. It's not just on the pitch, everything felt entirely polished and sanitised. I somewhat understand why their fans are so aggressively unenthusiastic now; the whole thing is just really boring.
People are making the comparisons between their prospective treble winners and our 99 team. Does anyone on here seriously think that our treble would've felt anywhere near as meaningful or special if instead of the class of 92 and the comebacks against Arsenal and Bayern against all the odds, we'd won the Champions League final 5-0 with a team of all stars handpicked from across Europe by an owner with inconceivable wealth and under the shadow of accusations that we'd circumvented financial regulations?
Nobody respects Delany anyway.
Yes, this is also a factor. Ineos are offering more per share than Qatar (although not by much, following Qatar's increased offer this week). The sweetener that Qatar can reportedly offer is the prospect of preferential terms for the Glazers regarding other Qatari-based business opportunities (the benefits of being a state-backed bid). If these reports are accurate, you would assume that this will definitely have been raised by Qatar in their direct talks with the Glazers in advance of their improved offer earlier this week.
Ineos do also have a sweetener of their own, though - flexibility. They are prepared to do something that the Qataris are not - offer a continuing interest for the family in Manchester United. How attractive a proposition that actually is to the Glazers, nobody outside of the family really knows. All we have is some reports that Joel and Avram are more attached to the club than their siblings (and Avram's presence at two high profile United matches at Wembley in the past few months might lend some credence to that view).
People need to stop googling says the man that posts a link to google
Not many people outside of England care about how "hollow" their success is. What they see is probably the best football played on the planet by a team that is utterly dominant in the most competitive and spectacular football league in the world. City are gaining more and more fans across the globe whilst we are heavily reliant on the old-timers. We are losing the younger generation of fans, we are becoming more and more irrelevant. We are about to turn into an Arsenal or pre-Klopp Liverpool.
That's their prerogative. For me, it matters greatly.
City are more hated outside of England than even in it. Other leagues constantly bring them up as something to fight against.
Don’t let the media fool you, there is no Man City rush. Look at the world wide reaction when the 115 charges dropped. They’re a laughing stock.
Do not listen to the media as to how they’re looked upon by fans.
However, are they being criticised because (1) Abu Dhabi own them, or the (2) the financial cheating.
Most sensible people would suggest it is (2).
Agreed.
I am not listening to media, I am judging by the countries that I usually visit. China, Middle East, Turkey, Central Asia, Caucasus. Much more kids wearing city shirts than ours. Haaland is mentioned hundreds of times more than Rashford or Martial. Pep is much more popular than any of our coaches after SAF, whilst youngsters think of the great gaffer as we currently think of Cruyff.
Precisely. No one can catch up to City for this reason. Whether they won their titles by 1 or 10 points is not relevant. They won them. The whole bullshit about how Liverpool and Arsenal showing you can catch them is denying reality, because they haven't caught them. City can keep the same high level not only throughout an entire season, but across multiple seasons as well. Their unparalleled depth can only be achieved with unparalleled investment. Yes, you need the correct structure to spend it wisely, but you still need overwhelming amounts of cash. And having that amount of money, you can buy the structure to spend it efficiently. Or Brighton would be challenging right now.
I think this season in the Premier League has perfectly captured that. Arsenal just couldn't keep up with City. As soon as Saliba got injured they had to start... Rob Holding. Meanwhile, City have at least 4 players that can play CB and would be as good, or even better, than Saliba. They have cover for most positions on the pitch, so they can rotate with almost no drop in quality. It's insane and no other team can do that. Liverpool were their rivals for years, but only got the better of them once in the league, and now they have fallen apart and are sitting 5th, while City go to win once again. City's vast resources have made them immune to all the football woes other teams face - injuries, fatigue, drop in form, and poaching.
City as a club are unstoppable presently. The only thing to do is wait until the right people leave. But then again, they have the money to once again buy the next.
I mentioned they get some criticism but like on the BBC website there are 5 stories about city today
1. Are Manchester City destined for the treble?
2. Moment of greatness from perfectionist guardiola
3. Unstoppable man city banish pain of last year
4. Man city thrash real to reach champions league final
5. Ten great pictures on a special night for Manchester City
While yes, you will get some journalists criticising them, BT. Sky, the BBC are all largely full of praise and don't put an asterisk next to their achievements.
In the future people won't care what Miguel delaney wrote two decades ago, they'll see the achievements and the stories praying them
Why are people on here unproblematically assuming state ownership = more transfer money ? I don’t think it works that way. We will still spend the same amount we always do. Players are assets anyway
I mean again, though, whether the media will or won't care if we're bought by Qatar and become successful is of no concern to me. I think we'd still become just as hollow, just as vapid and soulless, regardless of whether the media is full of glittering praise for us.
What do you mean "why?". Precedence. It evidently worked that way for City and PSG. They both spent orders of magnitude more money on transfers and salaries post state ownership. Do you have an example of a big state-owned club that didn't spend more on transfers + salaries since its buyout?
Perhaps with their greater amount of investment comes greater ambition. Therefore no more tolerating incompetent people being in charge of football matters. That's what has been our downfall, rather than lack of money spent
- Status