Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Andycoleno9 said:
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
Click to expand...
What do you think of Qatar's environmental record mr ecologist?
 
Chesterlestreet said:
Come on, dude.

He obviously wouldn't pay a shitload of money for that kind of ownership.

(This has been done to death and then to death again - it obviously won't happen, it's a silly idea that somehow refuses to die.)
Click to expand...
Insane that this non-issue keeps getting brought up. As if it's some game-changing detail that Caf posters noticed but multi-billionaire Ratcliffe and his army of lawyers, accountants, consultants, and other M&A experts somehow overlooked.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
Click to expand...

The way it normally works, is make a stack of emotive posts about morals and how you'll never watch us again if a,b or c happen.

Then not go through with your threat.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
As i said many times here; i understand anti Qatari people. I don't share their opinion but i respect and i accept their reasons (unlike them understanding us who want Jassim).

But wanting Jim for owner i simply can't understand. Everything around him and his offer is a complete disaster. If he wins we are truly fecked.
Click to expand...
Really hard to understand some people in favour of Qatar though, especially those who write stuff such as “inject all the Qatar money into my veins” or “If Qatar/Jassim buys us I am buying Al-Khelaifi’s shirt”.
I assume you know exactly which poster(s) I mean.
 
Big Ben Foster said:
Insane that this non-issue keeps getting brought up. As if it's some game-changing detail that Caf posters noticed but multi-billionaire Ratcliffe and his army of lawyers, accountants, consultants, and other M&A experts somehow overlooked.
Click to expand...

Lovely... same way the caf and you think Jassim bid is a state one, as if you were part of the conversations?
 
Andycoleno9 said:
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
Click to expand...

What does that mean? If it goes against your conscience to support a Manchester United owned by Ineos, then you shouldn't support United if Ineos wins through.
 
Sensing we are now at the end game, its Qatar, and they are bringing Mbappe with them as the statement signing.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
Click to expand...

If you have "moral issues" (on behalf of the planet) with regard to Jimmy, you should feel that way about Qatar too. Qatar is the worst state in the world (by some distance) in terms of fossil fuel consumption per head. And they obviously contribute heavily to fossil fuel consumption elsewhere too, much more so than ol' Jim.

(Given that some people will undoubtedly construe this as a "pro-Jim" post, let me clarify: Jim is a shameless old, capitalist cnut who's making money from raping the planet.)
 
Chesterlestreet said:
If you have "moral issues" (on behalf of the planet) with regard to Jimmy, you should feel that way about Qatar too. Qatar is the worst state in the world (by some distance) in terms of fossil fuel consumption per head. And they obviously contribute heavily to fossil fuel consumption elsewhere too, much more so than ol' Jim.

(Given that some people will undoubtedly construe this as a "pro-Jim" post, let me clarify: Jim is a shameless old, capitalist cnut who's making money from raping the planet.)
Click to expand...
I think he's playing with the other poster. Sarcasm.
 
stw2022 said:
Yeah but if this new rule only applies to "wholly leveraged" buyouts it wouldn't stop the Glazers from buying the club in the same way tomorrow
Click to expand...
Exacty!

Unless of course there is more to it than the few words of the tweet suggest. Otherwise, it's absolutely a waste of time having the rule.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's how having principles works. Enjoy your life post-United.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
I work in ecology department. I have moral issues against Sir Jim. I will not support club if Jim wins. Because moral high ground and shit.

This is how that works, right?
Click to expand...

If this was your good faith opinion from sincerely held beliefs, then that's fine, you're fully entitled to support or not support whatever club you want.

I'd hope you'd have a level of consistency in your beliefs such that this would apply to Qatar as well seeing as their economy is entirely derived from the extraction and distribution of oil, but if not then that's your business really.

This is all a bit moot though, because that's not something you actually believe. Difference being a lot of people actually do hold sincere moral objections to Qatar owning the club. If they choose to stop supporting the club, I don't know how or why that would affect you. Certainly don't see why it would invite snide remarks.
 
The absolute cheek of the turds! :lol: “yeah, we agree. No one is allowed to do what we did”

 
BarstoolProphet said:
Why is it flawed, though?

And I can understand why you hate that argument - it's provocative and divisive, not exactly healthy ingredients to keep a nice message board climate. But the exact same thing can be said for those that dictate what people should feel by acting patronising to devaluate their opinions. And that goes for both sides of the spectre.
Click to expand...

Let's be honest though mate it's also nonsense.

I think that's my main problem with it. The idea that someone can't have a moral objection to something unless they object to every immoral ththingn the world is pointless and adds nothing to the discussion.

For what it's worth to my knowledge I've never told anyone how they should feel about this takeover, that's also pointless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.