Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
And that bears relevance to the Venn Diagram how?
Oh was Brexit about human rights was it?

No need to conflate things mate.

I don't think there's any correlation between voting Leave and preferring Sir Jim over Qatar. I'd argue the opposite and that Brexit voters are more likely to favour a Qatar ownership based on not caring about the consequences and just wanting the option with the most money to spend.

The only thing the two arguments have in common is that both are a case of weighing up the least worst option.
 
Just wondering out of curiosity, how many of the anti-Qatar folks wouldn't give a toss about this stuff if they were not buying United. How many of them who see a pretty woman, first thing they say is 'Oh I certainly would' or 'I couldn't care less about the woman's football team. Why are we wasting money on the women's team when that would buy us a strikerWomen are stupid, women drivers :lol:The other way round, hope people read all this and not just the first bit, drive cars that eat up petrol, travel here there and everywhere on planes for business, throw litter on the floor, leave dog crap lying around, rather than cleaning it up. That is just bad for the environment, it is a danger to young children as bacteria in it can cause blindness. How many recycle properly. Whatever side of the argument, we will all likely be hypocrits.
What?
 
I don't think there's any correlation between voting Leave and preferring Sir Jim over Qatar. I'd argue the opposite and that Brexit voters are more likely to favour a Qatar ownership based on not caring about the consequences and just wanting the option with the most money to spend.

The only thing the two arguments have in common is that both are a case of weighing up the least worst option.

:lol: cool, it would be interesting to see a Venn Diagram nevertheless
 
Just wondering out of curiosity, how many of the anti-Qatar folks wouldn't give a toss about this stuff if they were not buying United. How many of them who see a pretty woman, first thing they say is 'Oh I certainly would' or 'I couldn't care less about the woman's football team. Why are we wasting money on the women's team when that would buy us a strikerWomen are stupid, women drivers :lol:The other way round, hope people read all this and not just the first bit, drive cars that eat up petrol, travel here there and everywhere on planes for business, throw litter on the floor, leave dog crap lying around, rather than cleaning it up. That is just bad for the environment, it is a danger to young children as bacteria in it can cause blindness. How many recycle properly. Whatever side of the argument, we will all likely be hypocrits.

So being sexually attracted to a woman and being uninterested in women's football is comparable to Qatar's oppression of women? You must be trolling.
 
If Ratcliffe was American his very same supporters would be vilifying him and shitting the prospect of him becoming owner.

But because he's 'one of our own' (with a Chelsea season ticket) and the Qataris will apparently turn Manchester into a medieval landscape, then he's supposedly our best option.
Sounds like extreme nationalism?
Sounds like a made up argument he's created in his head, divorced from reality just so he can continue to justify his support of the Qatari state even though somewhere deep down he knows it's unjustifiable.
 
I feel that Ratcliffe will feel right at home with the Glazers. Maybe they can ask Woodward to return so he could help Brailsford and Bob Ratcliffe plan for the future
 
And that bears relevance to the Venn Diagram how?
Oh was Brexit about human rights was it?

No need to conflate things mate.

Some argued back then that they wanted Brexit as it would allow non EU migrants to come in as opposed to just EU migrants. In reality they wanted no one
 
Women's rights in Malta, the monarchy, BREXIT

Anything related to the takeover in this thread?
 
Nice have qualified for a European competition twice since the INEOS takeover. So far its one qualification every two years. Thats perfectly fine for a club like Nice.

Maybe, but it is worse than they were before INEOS.

Between 15/16 and 18/19 (the 4 seasons prior to INEOS) Nice averaged 62,7 pts per season.
From 19/20 until now ( the 4 seasons with INEOS) Nice has an average of 55,6 pts per season.


They kind of quickly destroyed the team that got them 66 points last year (21/22). And their captain is explaining publically that they are badly managed, changing too many players with no logical plan or strategy...
 
Why are you supporting a company that's one of the biggest contributors to global warming, the rising extinction of species, the rising level of natural disasters, the rising level of homes being destroyed by said natural disasters, etc. These are all valid concerns also. Apparently you support global warming and all of the above through your silence

Personally I'm not silent. I'm an active pain in the hole for lots of people who wish I would stfu.
 
Again simplisitic guilt trip. No two societies in the world a exactly the same. Gun law in the US, the condition and treatment of animals in certain countries etc. Societies evolve over time. The UK was different 10 years ago let alone 50 or 100 years ago, just take the welfare of the trans communities, making people feel they have a right to live. However cutting off a society and importantly a football club to punish a different culture/society does not make any sense when the UK Government have encouraged billions of pounds of investment from those nations. We're not even the thin end of the wedge.

Sending your message by cutting off a society does send a message, but doing so when your own nation is not doing so does not make any sense, if you want to make that statement then get the government to legislate and remove all such investment.


It's not simplistic at all.

I like a good boycott.

I also believe really strongly in human rights and workers rights. You seem to think arbitrary lines on maps trump this. That's simplistic to my world view.


And I do also like holding elected reps to account.

Societies change in time, not always for the better. It's why we bother with international laws.

So you disagreed with the boycott on South Africa?
 
The devil you know at this point…in light of SJR’s failures at Nice, I’m starting to think we’d be better off with the glazers pulling out and staying w the club.
 
What are the odds they are going to sell before next season starts? Feckers.
 
It's not simplistic at all.

I like a good boycott.

I also believe really strongly in human rights and workers rights. You seem to think arbitrary lines on maps trump this. That's simplistic to my world view.


And I do also like holding elected reps to account.

Societies change in time, not always for the better. It's why we bother with international laws.

So you disagreed with the boycott on South Africa?
Not quite.

I respect your views, however South Africa was different. South Africa was subject to boycotts from the world community at large and most nations.

The South African issue was nothing like Qatar. The UK Government had placed sanctions against South Africa, the UK government has encouraged Qatari investment. Sports teams were banned from travelling to South Africa, we have just held a World Cup in Qatar.
 
This has been a dog's breakfast from the start. Nobody in the media knows anything about the sale. If information is leaked, it can be taken as breaking the law as a public company is for sale. Rumours appear daily to sell papers and advertising space on YouTube. Only Sir Jim and the Qataries know what is happening and even they may not know the full story. So chill out, it will be sold when it's sold. Sir Jim's offer looks the most tempting for the greedy Glazers if details of his offer are true. Any sale will be announced on the NYSE before anywhere else.
 

@JacobsBen


Understand Sheikh Jassim is not considering West Ham if unsuccessful in buying Manchester United. Nine Two Foundation haven't made any approach or even discussed West Ham internally.
 
Suspect there’s a big overlap in the Venn diagram between Jim supporters and those that voted for Brexit. Mind you, that was a majority of people in Britain, although I suspect it would be a lot less in favour if you reran the vote now.
The opposite of this would be true. The Venn diagram would show the Brexit voters as pro-Qatar - the same people that want to keep politics out of sport, that opposed black players taking the knee, that don't care who own United as long as they get a transfer rush. The framing of people being opposed to Qatar as racists is just a bad faith argument.
 
Nice have qualified for a European competition twice since the INEOS takeover. So far its one qualification every two years. Thats perfectly fine for a club like Nice.

So buying a club, telling the fans that you we will challenge for the league, but instead go backwards is perfectly fine? Imagine doing the same thing with united and when they fail you say it is "perfectly fine":lol:.
 
Suspect there’s a big overlap in the Venn diagram between Jim supporters and those that voted for Brexit. Mind you, that was a majority of people in Britain, although I suspect it would be a lot less in favour if you reran the vote now.

I’m sorry this isn’t football related mods, but I can’t let that go unchallenged.

It has been said over and over again that the majority of people who prefer Jim do so for non footballing reasons, namely abuses of human rights in Qatar. Being British is nothing to do with it. I hate everything to do with a Union Jack and voted remain, but would prefer Ineos.

Why do you think that those with a social conscience would have wanted Brexit to happen? I would say that if anything, it would be the other way around. Leaving aside all of the trade stuff, most remainers knew that Brexit would likely lead to loss of workers rights etc due to the dropping of EU laws. This is the exact thing that is causing people to speak negatively against Qatar.
 
Suspect there’s a big overlap in the Venn diagram between Jim supporters and those that voted for Brexit. Mind you, that was a majority of people in Britain, although I suspect it would be a lot less in favour if you reran the vote now.

People that don't want to sell the club's soul to a murderous, human rights abusing regime are Brexit voters. :lol:

I'm not even from the UK but that's hilarious from you.
 
The only way the Ineos majority share plus 2 Glazer’s remaining works, is if the remaining Glazer’s keep their class B shares, as that’s where the value is. Yes, that means they can be outvoted by SJR, but it also means they will need to contribute their fair share to any investment In the future that Ineos may demand. For that reason alone I can’t see this flying. They might be in favour of investment happening, but not if they have to put their hands in their pockets. SJR is not going to fund all investment on his own whilst they are still on board. If he does he’s bonkers.

I said this about 200 pages ago, maybe more :lol:
 
The opposite of this would be true. The Venn diagram would show the Brexit voters as pro-Qatar - the same people that want to keep politics out of sport, that opposed black players taking the knee, that don't care who own United as long as they get a transfer rush. The framing of people being opposed to Qatar as racists is just a bad faith argument.
I just don't want Qatar to own us simple as that we don't need state backing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.