Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is gonna sound crazy but I'm legit invested in this press war.

It'll help filter which outlets are really about it vs chancers
 
I think Qatar have been ahead since last Friday, I'm surprised we've not heard much or anything about an improved bid from Jim since. Plus we've had no pro Ratcliffe PR recently. Whereas Qatar has been in overdrive and the share price has moved north for a week at good volume and all. So there's definitely a lot of people betting on Jassim. It's over to you Jim. Can he score? He always scores

Because we all know that Qatar can just keep upping their bid and beating him if they wanted, as much as they say it's a private bid.

Also i think one report that Jim's bid is complicated, he doesn't have all the money himself, it requires shifting some debt to Ineos, getting involved with hudge funds/banks and is got lots of parts to it, we've heard it maybe for 69%, 50% but a controlling stake, thae he'd let Joel and Avram stay, or he'd let all of them stay, that some money will be paid over X years or that he'd buy out the Glazers over years. They also have the matter of the club share structure considering he's not buying the Class A shares.

So an improved bid from Jim may not be so easy as just putting up another number like Qatar can. Which is why lots of report saying that they just been using Jim as a way to keep pushing up Qatar bids.
 
It's not baffling it's a normal stage as an example here you have the same stage for the Washington Commanders.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/05/12/josh-harris-dan-snyder-commanders-deal/
That's not what's happened in the link you provided - they had entered an exclusivity period.
This is negotiating to go into an exclusive negotiation period, which is just not news imo. If an exclusive period has been agreed like in your link (in other words, no more bids from other parties), then that's big news.

Until then, it's all meaningless words.
 
If the Glazers sell to Qatar or SJR how long does it take for the owners to be ratified? The transfer window will be closed by the time this all gets finalised. The Glazers are truly screwing us over with this saga for next season.

It looks that way, but there is surely a way around that, which are legal. The new owners could provide the current owners with a loan for example, no?

My understanding is that there’s two parts - wipe out the debt and provide the capital for spending

so assuming that translates to £150m in FFP spending capacity, the total value of transfers in could be more like £400m (assuming 4 year player contracts).

regardless of whether the purchases are made upfront or via installments

That makes a lot more sense than the 100-120m that keeps being floated about. I don't know if it is the club briefing trying to get some leverage in transfer dealings (far fetched) or the whole media jumping on one interpretation for clicks.

Nearly all transfers will be done with instalments right now, but if SJ 92 Foundation won and it was completed by August 15th so 8 weeks. We would gain another £50m due to wiping the debt and no longer having to service that debt with interest payments. If we sold D Henderson for £25m you would probably add £10m to budget so you could be looking at £250-300m but remember player wages go on this too for new transfers.

This makes sense to me. That means, even when we're taking a loss on players (say Maguire, Telles, Bailly, Donny, Martial) and even if we're having to subsidise their wage for the rest of their contractual time here at their new club, we'd be clearing a lot of the wage bill in essence allowing for more room to manoeuvre.

It won't buy you a Kane where Spurs would want the whole sum up front, it won't allow you to trigger expensive release clauses (i.e. Costa) but we can still sign 4-5 players of the required quality amortising the payments over the maximum allowed period.

- - -
Here's another question of a hypothetical scenario.

Let's say we are spending 100m on a player, the selling club doesn't want 20m instalments over 5 years. Is it possible to make the first instalment 20m, the second 50m, and then spread the remaining 20m over 2-3 years? I.e. is it possible to load most of the cost onto next summer in anticipation of renewed and new sponsorships and for those instalments thereby to be uneven?
 
This is gonna sound crazy but I'm legit invested in this press war.

It'll help filter which outlets are really about it vs chancers

Still hoping the INEOS cheerleaders Times are left with egg on their faces. Think we have had the rush of news on it for this week
 
Is it typical for owners to 'know' football? Aren't most fans just hoping they hire the right people in the right places and don't strip the club of it's assets? Also random to include allegations levied at the manager as if that has much to do with Ratcliffe.

But good for owners to "know" is to trust and use competent people in the right positions in the club. Does not look like they have used the right people in Lausanne or Nice.
 
I feel like the whole of the British press are rooting for SJR/INEOS and are puring cold water on any positivve Qatar development story just because theyre not the first ones to be briefed/leaked to about it. Emabrrasing...
 
While this may technically be a "meme", I'd argue that it isn't pointless.

hotel.png
 
I'm not 100% sure there is a conscious effort to "hide it", as I'm doubtful that the distinction between a "state bid" and a "private bid" is relevant or meaningful in the minds of those involved. But even if there is, the reasons could relate to basically unknowable factors relating to the internal dynamics of the al-Thanis - shifting alliances, the granting of favors, etc.


In regards to 2, the first article claims there is "no real separation" between state and private interests, and that "there is no meaningful distinction, either political or legal" between the Emir and the state. The second notes "the lack of clear boundaries" between the private and public sectors, describing the lines between the wealth of ruling families and the state as "murky". The third describes the public-private distinction as "problematic" and the distinction between public and private funds as "meaningless." The fourth notes how economic and political elites are often "indistinguishable". The fifth describes the distinction between rulers' wealth and state wealth as "artificial." A sixth article I posted here states that the "dichotomy between “state” and “business” is not strictly accurate" and argues that the private sector is basically subservient to the state."

Considering these collectively, I don't think my characterization is unfair or misleading, but if you absolutely insist on just "problematic" I won't quibble.

In regards to point 3, it is true that factionalism has traditionally been a marked feature of internal al-Thani dynamics, and that the previous lack of any clear legal means by which to select a successor has stoked this factionalism and led to coups and shifts at the very top in the past. However, the current Emir's father Hamad introduced a new constitution in 2005, article 9 of which states "The Emir shall, by an Emiri Order, appoint an Heir Apparent after consultation with the members of the Ruling Family and the people of wisdom (Ahal Alhal wal agd) in the State." This is how Tamim came into power.

According to this book, "The Emir can approve or disapprove of any project – the state coffers and the Qatar National Bank are in theory separate from the Emir, but in actuality he can direct Qatar’s enormous gas and oil revenue if he wishes...Institutionally, economically and legally, the Emir seems to have effective, absolute power....the Emir will only increase and centralize his authority, using the rhetoric of liberalization only to shore up his power. Much reform has been about centralizing the power of the Emir, not limiting it."

However, it seems correct to say that the Emir must rule more as a first among equals than a despot, and that there are non-institutionalized limits on his authority brought about by the need to develop and maintain factional alliances within the broader family and beyond. A major means of doing so, it seems, is by the distribution of state resources and institutions to favored factions among the al-Thanis and other leading tribal and merchant families. The book states "the power of the Emir is circumscribed in subtle ways, not by international threats but by internal political arrangements of a highly local, informal and tribal nature that is hard for Western political scientists trained in formal institutional politics and economics to understand or quantify."

As implied in your points 1 and 4, we don't appear to have any reliable information regarding the current status of Jassim and his father within this ruling system, so I'll refrain from further speculation on that topic until a clearer picture emerges one way or another.

A nice reply; at least we're agreeable that it's complex and probably not static.

The consitiution of 2005 was interesting, in part because it seems to frame HBJs branch out of the family Al Thani/ ruling family.

Article 8
The rule of the State is hereditary in the family of Al Thani and in the line of the male
descendants of Hamad Bin Khalifa Bin Hamad Bin Abdullah Bin Jassim

I believe SJ is the great-grand nephew of Jassim bin Mohammed Al Thani, not a direct decendant of Hamad Bin Khalifa Bin Hamad Bin Abdullah Bin Jassim. It's not beyond the relms that SJ is not close enough to be the front of a state bid. If anything it adds to the probability it is less likely.

We agree also agree on how the Emir seems to keep Al Thanis on board. It reminds me, theortically, of the eglitarian model used by Ricardo Semler at Semco Partners, Brazil for voting in managers by subordinates (every 6 months). If the managers don't keep the subordinates happy the managers can be voted out; books- Maverick and The Seven Day Weekend.

I also found this interesting

The book states "the power of the Emir is circumscribed in subtle ways, not by international threats but by internal political arrangements of a highly local, informal and tribal nature that is hard for Western political scientists trained in formal institutional politics and economics to understand or quantify."

As an aside Gray 1988 is worth a read Towards a Theory of Cultural Influence on the Development of Accounting Systems Internationally - GRAY - 1988 - Abacus - Wiley Online Library it was also interesting to read @OmarUnited4ever comments. Other academic research suggest SA isn't strict with it's uniform in financial enforcement, and Qatar also isn't as uniform, whereas, Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Oman are either uniform or largely uniform. All the countries are influenced by culture, which points to findings in the book. This implies Qatar isn't as strict as some suggest, why that is and how that associates with some perceiving the Emir has control is unclear. My own view is that I'm not convinced by the degree of interventions/control of the state/Emir in business and Qatar is probably closer the SA.

It's good to see you provide links so I can read. Cheers
 
That's not what's happened in the link you provided - they had entered an exclusivity period.
This is negotiating to go into an exclusive negotiation period, which is just not news imo. If an exclusive period has been agreed like in your link (in other words, no more bids from other parties), then that's big news.

Until then, it's all meaningless words.
I honestly can’t see how Glazers choosing Qatar for exclusivity and are negotiating the terms isn’t a massive deal?
if Jim was in the same boat we’d have heard about it by now. We wondered if the 5th bid worked and it did. The really pedantic posters here were the ones mocking that 5th bid while telling us INEOS were still in the lead.
 
That's not what's happened in the link you provided - they had entered an exclusivity period.
This is negotiating to go into an exclusive negotiation period, which is just not news imo. If an exclusive period has been agreed like in your link (in other words, no more bids from other parties), then that's big news.

Until then, it's all meaningless words.

It should be self-explanatory. An exclusivity period is a legally binding phase that includes penalties if a party unilaterally decides to leave, you have to negotiate and find a legal agreement. There is nothing baffling about the mention of that process.
 
I don't want to discuss people's morals but to me this world view and approach leads to isolation, extremism and overall no progress or even regression. In the end, everyone digs in and no one moves closer to each other.

If everyone took this standpoint at any point in history, nothing ever would have changed because most big (or even small) change at state level takes time, effort and just stupid hard work.

But back to the topic, seems like we have some hope for resolution soon if Qatar can pressure these rats to give them exclusivity and we have, at least unofficially, an owner.

There is a chasm between digging in and cheerleading. You have no idea what my standpoint is beyond not wanting authoritarian nation states with scandalous human rights records entering the free market and taking ownership what I see as important cultural institutions. It's empire by another name. This is utterly consistent with my views across the board. And not I itself digging in.


I have been involved with people's rights on a grassroots and international level to various degrees since I was basically a kid. There is sometimes more required than incremental or token change.
 
It should be self-explanatory. An exclusivity period is a legally binding phase that includes penalties if a party unilaterally decides to leave, you have to negotiate and find a legal agreement. There is nothing baffling about the mention of that process.
I understand that, but my point is they aren't at that stage yet. Could be weeks away or it might never happen. Not worth getting carried away until something concrete is announced.
 
I understand that, but my point is they aren't at that stage yet. Could be weeks away or it might never happen. Not worth getting carried away until something concrete is announced.

That's not what you did and my post had nothing to do with being carried away. I answered to a post suggesting that the phase in question was baffling which it quite obviously isn't.
 
It's not baffling it's a normal stage as an example here you have the same stage for the Washington Commanders.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/05/12/josh-harris-dan-snyder-commanders-deal/

An exclusivity period is standard, news about an exclusive negotiation to enter exclusive negations is not. On that link it's after the deal has been done anyway, we're currently closer to the start of the process than to the deal you're referencing.

Also my previous post had really weird formatting - the bit I bolded was actually quoting someone else. Bit confusing, apologies.
 
It's not baffling it's a normal stage as an example here you have the same stage for the Washington Commanders.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/05/12/josh-harris-dan-snyder-commanders-deal/
Thank you for the link, very interesting, they refer to bidding process as “very open, transparent and enjoyable” , obviously similar to the one we are all monitoring.

However they also advise that they have signed the exclusivity agreement and are entering into that phase. Here they are negotiating the exclusivity agreement. After several months of haggling you would have assumed that there would have been a general idea of how the matter would progress and that there would not be something touted as an additional stage but a formality. That said it is possibly baffling for just me.
 
There is a chasm between digging in and cheerleading. You have no idea what my standpoint is beyond not wanting authoritarian nation states with scandalous human rights records entering the free market and taking ownership what I see as important cultural institutions. It's empire by another name. This is utterly consistent with my views across the board. And not I itself digging in.


I have been involved with people's rights on a grassroots and international level to various degrees since I was basically a kid. There is sometimes more required than incremental or token change.

An interesting question - thread worthy - would be assuming this takeover goes through, what cant he fans organise to put pressure on the Qataris to reform their human rights record? It's easy to be flippant about it and say they'll be thousands of miles away and not care, which was said of the Glazers too, but I think the negative reviews all over the place of business associates and sponsors cannot have been welcomed by the Glazers. If every Qatari tweet, comment section, etc. is clogged with reproach of aforementioned record than it's certainly better than nothing and quite different from what we've seen from City and Newcastle fans (I don't know about PSG fans).
 
An exclusivity period is standard, news about an exclusive negotiation to enter exclusive negations is not. On that link it's after the deal has been done anyway, we're currently closer to the start of the process than to the deal you're referencing.

Also my previous post had really weird formatting - the bit I bolded was actually quoting someone else. Bit confusing, apologies.
It’s a new phase of negotiations. It makes perfect sense that there are terms that need to be agreed before entering that process.

Both parties will want to protect their own interests. The buying party will have additional granular access to financials so new NDAs will need to be signed. A timescale might need to be agreed. Compensation in the event one or the other withdraws without reasonable cause.

I’m pulling these out my arse btw but I can imagine it’s very complex and very sensitive with a lot of risk that needs to be mitigated by both parties.
 
An exclusivity period is standard, news about an exclusive negotiation to enter exclusive negations is not. On that link it's after the deal has been done anyway, we're currently closer to the start of the process than to the deal you're referencing.

Also my previous post had really weird formatting - the bit I bolded was actually quoting someone else. Bit confusing, apologies.

That's the part that I don't get. Unless you think that an agreement for exclusivity can happen without negotiating it, how do you not understand that it's a normal process? How do you interpret it as baffling?

Or are you baffled by the fact that this stage was reported?
 
Thank you for the link, very interesting, they refer to bidding process as “very open, transparent and enjoyable” , obviously similar to the one we are all monitoring.

However they also advise that they have signed the exclusivity agreement and are entering into that phase. Here they are negotiating the exclusivity agreement. After several months of haggling you would have assumed that there would have been a general idea of how the matter would progress and that there would not be something touted as an additional stage but a formality. That said it is possibly baffling for just me.

At this point there are no formalities, these are serious legal talks, not general ideas. In fact this phase is done by lawyers.
 
Please give us some positive news on takeover,all I have seen today is Russo leaving,big price for Hojlund, Min Jae to Bayern, oh and De Gea likely to stay over signing GK
 
Status
Not open for further replies.