Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
cyberman said:
Na, can’t see a point now. Qatar would just up theirs slightly as they have twice within the last 2 weeks.
It was all about chiselling out the two Glazers and working that angle for Jim. With that seemingly gone his bid will be too.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Jim officially drop out before tonight
Click to expand...

Just going off the Reuters article tbh
 
So happy to have this done and move on from the Glazers. I don’t pay much attention to who the owners are as long as they’re doing a good job with the team and respecting the fans. it’s a passionate distraction from life for me, so happy with whoever ends up owning us as long as they do a good job. There’s enough political bs in modern daily life as it is, I cant passionately care about every single little thing that upsets a group of people, so not worried at all about the Qataris owning a football team. Bigger issues going on in the world….I just want to watch some grown men kick a ball around the pitch for a couple hours every week.
 
Mockney said:
It will happen. It’s inevitable. It might not be right away, but it will. We will one day be involved in a transfer, or a re-development, or a something which requires us to spend more than we’d budgeted for, or should be able to spend, and the people that own us, who’ve never had to deal with not getting their way or encountered a problem they couldn’t solve with money, will find a way to get that money used for their gain….

Just like City did, despite it being perfectly possible to grow them more organically over time, just like Newcastle are already doing with their sponsors, despite already being a more “marketable” team than City were, and just like Qatar themselves did with the Neymar & Mbappe deals that broke the transfer market, or the World Cup bid that saw 7 FIFA officials arrested in the aftermath and a criminal investigation opened into the bidding process FFS!

it will happen. And all the same people will excuse it and defend it, precisely because being Man Utd will be the perfect cover for it, and a much more easily defendable reason for spending ludicrous sums. And even if it doesn’t, there will always be doubts as to whether it had. That’s tainting. It’s what tainting is. City haven’t been “convicted” of anything yet, but their success is tainted because everyone already believes they have.
So yes, it will happen.

You think it’s annoying having “moralists” in our own fanbase now? You’re gonna get bored of “defending” it. And of seeing everyone portray our non-state owned rivals as “proper” clubs and the moral victors whenever they beat us.

That’s the trade off. It’s absolutely fine to some, I’m sure. Many even. And being resigned to it is perfectly fine. But forgive me if I find the celebration and pre-emptive defence of it pretty gross, and entirely alien to how I engage with supporting this club, and my love of football in general.

And forgive me if I don’t in good faith think that a lot (not all) of people now pretending it’s all because of their newly found rabid hatred of the Glazers (no Glazer thread on this site has ever been as long or contentious as this!) wouldnt have been the same people dismissing or laughing at those who initially opposed them… because the snarky “I wonder whether those pesky moralists will still support the club or feck off!?” rhetoric sounds exactly like some past insults lobbied at United fans during a takeover… and it wasn’t by those against it.
Click to expand...

I already get bored defending Utd as is. Most fans of other clubs already see us as the evil club. Ownership won't change that. There is a reason ABU is a thing. Just look at the comments around glory hunters, Howard Webb, VAR decisions and Fergie time. It'll just be one more thing to attack us with.
 
Infra-red said:
Spoke too soon - having read the Reuters piece in full, it looks like they are giving Ineos one last chance to up their offer and prevent exclusivity with Qatar.
Click to expand...

Hard to imagine how. Their last two offers all came with paying the same for less shares. They can't go for less shares if they want to keep a majority of the voting rights anymore.
 
Mockney said:
It will happen. It’s inevitable. It might not be right away, but it will. We will one day be involved in a transfer, or a re-development, or a something which requires us to spend more than we’d budgeted for, or should be able to spend, and the people that own us, who’ve never had to deal with not getting their way or encountered a problem they couldn’t solve with money, will find a way to get that money used for their gain….

Just like City did, despite it being perfectly possible to grow them more organically over time, just like Newcastle are already doing with their sponsors, despite already being a more “marketable” team than City were, and just like Qatar themselves did with the Neymar & Mbappe deals that broke the transfer market, or the World Cup bid that saw 7 FIFA officials arrested in the aftermath and a criminal investigation opened into the bidding process FFS!

it will happen. And all the same people will excuse it and defend it, precisely because being Man Utd will be the perfect cover for it, and a much more easily defendable reason for spending ludicrous sums. And even if it doesn’t, there will always be doubts as to whether it had. That’s tainting. It’s what tainting is. City haven’t been “convicted” of anything yet, but their success is tainted because everyone already believes they have.
So yes, it will happen.

You think it’s annoying having “moralists” in our own fanbase now? You’re gonna get bored of “defending” it. And of seeing everyone portray our non-state owned rivals as “proper” clubs and the moral victors whenever they beat us.

That’s the trade off. It’s absolutely fine to some, I’m sure. Many even. And being resigned to it is perfectly fine. But forgive me if I find the celebration and pre-emptive defence of it pretty gross, and entirely alien to how I engage with supporting this club, and my love of football in general.

And forgive me if I don’t in good faith think that a lot (not all) of people now pretending it’s all because of their newly found rabid hatred of the Glazers (no Glazer thread on this site has ever been as long or contentious as this!) wouldnt have been the same people dismissing or laughing at those who initially opposed them… because the snarky “I wonder whether those pesky moralists will still support the club or feck off!?” rhetoric sounds exactly like some past insults lobbied at United fans during a takeover… and it wasn’t by those against it.
Click to expand...

Superb post
 
jm99 said:
I'd imagine so, though they're a financial site, no a sports one right? Dno if that makes them more or less reliable
Click to expand...

Reuters are not a financial site, it's a news agency that only has for equivalent the likes of AFP or AP. It's basically where a number of serious news in other papers come from.
 
Finally dropping that fecking virus family. Feels like a new day.
 
Mockney said:
It will happen. It’s inevitable. It might not be right away, but it will. We will one day be involved in a transfer, or a re-development, or a something which requires us to spend more than we’d budgeted for, or should be able to spend, and the people that own us, who’ve never had to deal with not getting their way or encountered a problem they couldn’t solve with money, will find a way to get that money used for their gain….

Just like City did, despite it being perfectly possible to grow them more organically over time, just like Newcastle are already doing with their sponsors, despite already being a more “marketable” team than City were, and just like Qatar themselves did with the Neymar & Mbappe deals that broke the transfer market, or the World Cup bid that saw 7 FIFA officials arrested in the aftermath and a criminal investigation opened into the bidding process FFS!

it will happen. And all the same people will excuse it and defend it, precisely because being Man Utd will be the perfect cover for it, and a much more easily defendable reason for spending ludicrous sums. And even if it doesn’t, there will always be doubts as to whether it had. That’s tainting. It’s what tainting is. City haven’t been “convicted” of anything yet, but their success is tainted because everyone already believes they have.
So yes, it will happen.

You think it’s annoying having “moralists” in our own fanbase now? You’re gonna get bored of “defending” it. And of seeing everyone portray our non-state owned rivals as “proper” clubs and the moral victors whenever they beat us.

That’s the trade off. It’s absolutely fine to some, I’m sure. Many even. And being resigned to it is perfectly fine. But forgive me if I find the celebration and pre-emptive defence of it pretty gross, and entirely alien to how I engage with supporting this club, and my love of football in general.

And forgive me if I don’t in good faith think that a lot (not all) of people now pretending it’s all because of their newly found rabid hatred of the Glazers (no Glazer thread on this site has ever been as long or contentious as this!) wouldnt have been the same people dismissing or laughing at those who initially opposed them… because the snarky “I wonder whether those pesky moralists will still support the club or feck off!?” rhetoric sounds exactly like some past insults lobbied at United fans during a takeover… and it wasn’t by those against it.
Click to expand...

Brilliant post Mockney.

Keep fighting the good fight lads. Great to see so many reflecting on this.
 
Infra-red said:
Spoke too soon - having read the Reuters piece in full, it looks like they are giving Ineos one last chance to up their offer and prevent exclusivity with Qatar.
Click to expand...
Aye, obvious Raine brief is obvious.

Still time for more drama!
 
Mockney said:
It will happen. It’s inevitable. It might not be right away, but it will. We will one day be involved in a transfer, or a re-development, or a something which requires us to spend more than we’d budgeted for, or should be able to spend, and the people that own us, who’ve never had to deal with not getting their way or encountered a problem they couldn’t solve with money, will find a way to get that money used for their gain….

Just like City did, despite it being perfectly possible to grow them more organically over time, just like Newcastle are already doing with their sponsors, despite already being a more “marketable” team than City were, and just like Qatar themselves did with the Neymar & Mbappe deals that broke the transfer market, or the World Cup bid that saw 7 FIFA officials arrested in the aftermath and a criminal investigation opened into the bidding process FFS!

it will happen. And all the same people will excuse it and defend it, precisely because being Man Utd will be the perfect cover for it, and a much more easily defendable reason for spending ludicrous sums. And even if it doesn’t, there will always be doubts as to whether it had. That’s tainting. It’s what tainting is. City haven’t been “convicted” of anything yet, but their success is tainted because everyone already believes they have.
So yes, it will happen.

You think it’s annoying having “moralists” in our own fanbase now? You’re gonna get bored of “defending” it. And of seeing everyone portray our non-state owned rivals as “proper” clubs and the moral victors whenever they beat us.

That’s the trade off. It’s absolutely fine to some, I’m sure. Many even. And being resigned to it is perfectly fine. But forgive me if I find the celebration and pre-emptive defence of it pretty gross, and entirely alien to how I engage with supporting this club, and my love of football in general.

And forgive me if I don’t in good faith think that a lot (not all) of people now pretending it’s all because of their newly found rabid hatred of the Glazers (no Glazer thread on this site has ever been as long or contentious as this!) wouldnt have been the same people dismissing or laughing at those who initially opposed them… because the snarky “I wonder whether those pesky moralists will still support the club or feck off!?” rhetoric sounds exactly like some past insults lobbied at United fans during a takeover… and it wasn’t by those against it.
Click to expand...
Youve been on a roll in this thread, great post putting into words what everyone against this feels. It's tainted. All the pride, happiness, joy - it's all tainted with them because even on the odd 1% chance it isn't true, everyone will believe it's true, just as you say for City. Who the feck actually wants that?
 
Brophs said:
So, essentially, they’re having a meeting about potentially having a meeting. Are we sure they aren’t just civil servants?
Click to expand...

It depends, are the people who are supposed to have the meeting accompanied by people who will stay around and have a chat about what they saw at the grocery store yesterday?
 
My reading of this latest development - the door is open just enough for INEOS to up their bid, if nothing is forthcoming then we are going full sportswashing.
 
Godfather said:
When was the last Jassim bid? They had enough time since then and it hasn't happened, so I don't think he has the funds.
Click to expand...
He was never going to be able to compete against a State. For him, it all hinged on being able to get the majority stake from glazers
 
Tom Van Persie said:
Click to expand...


Manchester United would not be allowed to negotiate with any bidder other than Sheikh Jassim for the exclusivity period. It could not be learned how long this period may last. The sources cautioned that the situation remained fluid and a new bid from Ratcliffe could prevent Sheikh Jassim from securing exclusivity.

Nah it's done. They aren't entering exclusivity with Qatar without knowing Jim is done.
 
Can we get to the important questions already. Do we know the length, width, height, depth and weight of the summer warchest yet?
 
Jim most likely is not bidding more than he already has. The reason he offered a chance to let Glazer's remain in some form is cos it was already too much
 
Godfather said:
Hard to imagine how. Their last two offers all came with paying the same for less shares. They can't go for less shares if they want to keep a majority of the voting rights anymore.
Click to expand...

They would need to up their price per share. This has always been about money - it looks as though the Qataris have matched or exceeded the Ineos 3rd round bid with their own 5th round bid.

Ineos have a very experienced M&A team, who will have prepared for this eventuality - the question is, how high can they go, or have they already reached the limit.

The Glazers must be rubbing their hands (and possibly their other appendages) with glee.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.