Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
glazed said:
It's easy with the Glazers and INEOS (to the extent they are business people) - just don't give them your money. That's all they want.

With the Qataris and INEOS (to the extent that they are greenwashers) it's also simple - just don't give them your approval or respect. That's what they want. It's complicated with Qatar by the fact they are seeking approval for their entire nation and culture. If you withhold your respect too much then you can - perhaps legitimately - be accused of zenophobia or racism.

Remember when Gazprom sponsored the Champions League? Now they literally have their own brand troop divisions fighting in Ukraine and we shiver in winter. You embolden bad people at your peril.
Click to expand...
It's not correct to either criticise or praise someone unless you know them personally, or have personal quotes of their opinions on a particular subject. Jassim might have a completely different mindset from the policymakers of the nation. He has spent much of his young life in the UK, schooled in Dorset and then studying at the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst.

The Qatari deal could very well be a business deal than a sports washing project as has been discussed to death. I personally think this is a marketing push for tourism taking on the likes of Dubai and Saudi.
 
This going to be 2000 pages with all the bickering and moral grandstanding before we get a conclusion.
 
jm99 said:
That wasnt actually the argument, because regardless of what happens with United we will continue to cooperate economically with these states, buying oil and gas and selling weapons. The argument was that a closer cultural alignment, which isn't based on trade, but actual cultural stuff, films, sports etc. Will lead to progress, and we have seen that starting in Saudi Arabia. Still a million miles from perfect but things are far better for women there even compared to 5 years ago, so if you're saying you've never seen that, cultural alignment changing the values of another country, then there's your example
Click to expand...


I didnt say I've never seen it, just the tiny amount doesn't alter my opinion that these states because of their human rights issues should be pariahs.

To even attempt to use Saudi Arabia as an example of what can be achieved is absurd considering the reality there.
 
moses said:
I didnt say I've never seen it, just the tiny amount doesn't alter my opinion that these states because of their human rights issues should be pariahs.

To even attempt to use Saudi Arabia as an example of what can be achieved is absurd considering the reality there.
Click to expand...

What can be achieved in terms of a big difference is going to be over a generation or two, considering how far behind they are where they need to be. But it's clearly a step in the right direction
 
Sultan said:
It's not correct to either criticise or praise someone unless you know them personally, or have personal quotes of their opinions on a particular subject. Jassim might have a completely different mindset from the policymakers of the nation. He has spent much of his young life in the UK, schooled in Dorset and then studying at the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst.

The Qatari deal could very well be a business deal than a sports washing project as has been discussed to death. I personally think this is a marketing push for tourism taking on the likes of Dubai and Saudi.
Click to expand...

Ah well I 'respectfully disagree' that Jassim is any more than a front man being used to evade dual ownership rules. In my view his wealth comes from his family which comes from the state and I have seen no credible evidence to suggest otherwise.

I'm not aware that Saudi is generally considered a tourist destination other than for religious pilgrims but marketing and sports-washing are essentially synonyms in this case.
 
jm99 said:
What can be achieved in terms of a big difference is going to be over a generation or two, considering how far behind they are where they need to be. But it's clearly a step in the right direction
Click to expand...

I see it as tokenism to grease the wheels of expansion and influence with no real will to change. Only time will tell.
 
moses said:
I see it as tokenism to grease the wheels of expansion and influence with no real will to change. Only time will tell.
Click to expand...

I see it as different, the authoritarianism, OK not as much, but rich people care about money, I don't think they give a shit about persecuting guys, personally I'm sure some members of the Saudi royal family will be gay and they won't care, the same way they make alcohol available to those rich enough. But its a very religiously culture so it will take time for these things to become more accepted or to accept changes in the law
 
Biggest threads on the forum (with post count):

1. The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated - 112459
2. The Random Chat Thread | 10th May 2023: Crime against sarnies - 84605
3. Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion - 74489
4. Frenkie de Jong | The last muppeting lap - 73915
5. The 500K Thread - 72139
6. Brexited | the worst threads live the longest - 71985
7. Club Sale | Update: Conflicting reports of exclusivity negotiations - 71661
8. SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please) - 67109
9. The Prop Grops Throps - 58701
10. Jadon Sancho| Staying at Dortmund for now - 53642
11. Is the United forum safe to go into yet? - 52801
12. Russian invasion of Ukraine - 46720

We're still only the 3rd biggest football related thread and 7th overall. Got a long way to go to beat Trump.
 
Sultan said:
It's not correct to either criticise or praise someone unless you know them personally, or have personal quotes of their opinions on a particular subject. Jassim might have a completely different mindset from the policymakers of the nation. He has spent much of his young life in the UK, schooled in Dorset and then studying at the Royal Military Academy in Sandhurst.

The Qatari deal could very well be a business deal than a sports washing project as has been discussed to death. I personally think this is a marketing push for tourism taking on the likes of Dubai and Saudi.
Click to expand...
Or Real Estate. This is why (a) its funded beyond Jassim's personal wealth (or that of his immediate foundation) and (b) it's not a state project where the price to acquire a vanity asset is flexible to the point where they'd pay over value at Musk Twitter levels. I know people keep trying to argue there's no substantive distinction between state and Jassim, but thankfully we've had Qatar based people here, or posters who've studied the region in depth, nuance this. From an outside perspective, this seems about substantially expanding United's high-end 'offer' (from luxury accommodation to VR and 'super tier' experience) with the kind of vision - and access to capital - the Glazers didn't have. Keeping the team competitive and developing the area around the ground, ( in the process, developing contacts within the business and political community for further investments) both United-themed and separately branded, to part-fund but also pay dividends to investors or build up reserves for other non-United projects, is the most probable strategy, based on everything that's been released and analysis from people working around investment/commercial property.

It's not as short-term, self-cannibalizingly extractive as the Glazers -an utterly unsuitable outfit to run the club, as discussed ad nauseum here by most of us, for a million reasons - and as long as exec appointments (or review of current structure and retention where appropriate) are carried out, and development doesn't have distorting effect on access to property for working/lower-end middle-class people in the are, this is probably the closest we get to some kind of hybrid 'self-interested virtuousness' as a project, i.e. a win-win for Salford/Manchester and for the club...
 
Devil You Know said:
Biggest threads on the forum (with post count):

1. The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated - 112459
2. The Random Chat Thread | 10th May 2023: Crime against sarnies - 84605
3. Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion - 74489
4. Frenkie de Jong | The last muppeting lap - 73915
5. The 500K Thread - 72139
6. Brexited | the worst threads live the longest - 71985
7. Club Sale | Update: Conflicting reports of exclusivity negotiations - 71661
8. SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please) - 67109
9. The Prop Grops Throps - 58701
10. Jadon Sancho| Staying at Dortmund for now - 53642
11. Is the United forum safe to go into yet? - 52801
12. Russian invasion of Ukraine - 46720

We're still only the third biggest football related thread and 7th overall.
Click to expand...

There's still seriou legs in this thread, look how much discussion is going on while literally nothing happens, as soon as we get an update of a preferred bidder it's going to explode
 
glazed said:
Ah well I 'respectfully disagree' that Jassim is any more than a front man being used to evade dual ownership rules. In my view his wealth comes from his family which comes from the state and I have seen no credible evidence to suggest otherwise.

I'm not aware that Saudi is generally considered a tourist destination other than for religious pilgrims but marketing and sports-washing are essentially synonyms in this case.
Click to expand...
I have no knowledge either way if it is state-backed or not. I will leave that for others to speculate. I suppose you have missed a lot of noise around golf and Saudi clubs buying players on obscene salaries. There has been a massive drive on TV to push tourism on various platforms to push Saudi tourism. Visa restrictions have now been completely eased.
 
Devil You Know said:
Biggest threads on the forum (with post count):

1. The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated - 112459
2. The Random Chat Thread | 10th May 2023: Crime against sarnies - 84605
3. Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion - 74489
4. Frenkie de Jong | The last muppeting lap - 73915
5. The 500K Thread - 72139
6. Brexited | the worst threads live the longest - 71985
7. Club Sale | Update: Conflicting reports of exclusivity negotiations - 71661
8. SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please) - 67109
9. The Prop Grops Throps - 58701
10. Jadon Sancho| Staying at Dortmund for now - 53642
11. Is the United forum safe to go into yet? - 52801
12. Russian invasion of Ukraine - 46720

We're still only the 3rd biggest football related thread and 7th overall. Got a long way to go to beat Trump.
Click to expand...

Nobody does mega threads like Trump, believe me.
 
Rood said:
It's right here! On last episode, takeover debate in the last part of the show starting around 0:45:00






:D cheers mate!

Next episode hopefully to be recorded tonight
Click to expand...

Thanks mate. Good listen so far! I’m guessing you are Nick?
 
Sultan said:
I have no knowledge either way if it is state-backed or not. I will leave that for others to speculate. I suppose you have missed a lot of noise around golf and Saudi clubs buying players on obscene salaries. There has been a massive drive on TV to push tourism on various platforms to push Saudi tourism. Visa restrictions have now been completely eased.
Click to expand...

Yes I had missed that but it really doesn't alter my central point that marketing is just a polite word for sports washing and vice versa. These countries have terrible reputations and they would like not to.
 
Baxquux said:
Or Real Estate. This is why (a) its funded beyond Jassim's personal wealth (or that of his immediate foundation) and (b) it's not a state project where the price to acquire a vanity asset is flexible to the point where they'd pay over value at Musk Twitter levels. I know people keep trying to argue there's no substantive distinction between state and Jassim, but thankfully we've had Qatar based people here, or posters who've studied the region in depth, nuance this. From an outside perspective, this seems about substantially expanding United's high-end 'offer' (from luxury accommodation to VR and 'super tier' experience) with the kind of vision - and access to capital - the Glazers didn't have. Keeping the team competitive and developing the area around the ground, ( in the process, developing contacts within the business and political community for further investments) both United-themed and separately branded, to part-fund but also pay dividends to investors or build up reserves for other non-United projects, is the most probable strategy, based on everything that's been released and analysis from people working around investment/commercial property.

It's not as short-term, self-cannibalizingly extractive as the Glazers -an utterly unsuitable outfit to run the club, as discussed ad nauseum here by most of us, for a million reasons - and as long as exec appointments (or review of current structure and retention where appropriate) are carried out, and development doesn't have distorting effect on access to property for working/lower-end middle-class people in the are, this is probably the closest we get to some kind of hybrid 'self-interested virtuousness' as a project, i.e. a win-win for Salford/Manchester and for the club...
Click to expand...
Very interesting take.

I personally know some real estate businesses desperate for land and opportunities in Salford and mostly around the club. I'm told the prices are more expensive per sq foot than in prime London. Seems people know something is happening in the area.
 
Sultan said:
This a question for those accusing others of being morally bankrupt.

I have had no say in who United is owned by, or which players they buy, and sell. Basically, no say in the running of the club. I am just a person with deep feelings for the club. To the point, it spoils my mood when they lose. I spend hours reading and writing about the club and the players. These feelings are difficult to explain to anyone without having been in this situation and they just can't be switched off.

I'd love nothing more but for things to change for the better in Qatar and the club. What are my options?
Click to expand...

While I wouldn't be one of those who call others morally bankrupt, there are a number of ways to deal with a Qatari take-over without ending your support of the club, and still remain somewhat morally consistent.

1. Be honest about the negatives the Qatari bid comes with. This is likely an attempt at sport washing by the Qataris - that is use the feelings you describe - to create a publicity army of supporters who will defend the regime and their policies. Honesty about these challenges makes the sport washing aspect of the ownership less effective.

2. Be honest as to why the Qatari bid is preferred - money and success is more important than whatever the owners stand for or do. It's a fair stance to have, but often times people want to defend their view as being morally superior or equal, and engage in whataboutism to defend their stance - which coincidentally leads to sport washing.

3. Do NOT defend problematic policies. Sport washing is a two edged sword that so far has benefited the regimes. The support base of Man Utd is large enough that if we were to genuinly hold the owners accountable for crap in their own country and not defend everything they do, we could make a significant impact in the future direction of the country itself.

4. Don't pretend like the other option is morally equal or worse. It just isn't. It might be worse in terms of financial and short-term success, but it certainly isn't morally worse. This goes back to point 1 and 2, where by constantly trying to find moral equality you inadvertently engage in sport washing.

5. We can disagree on how much the state is involved in the Qatari bid, but there is little doubt that the general appearance and how supporters keep defending Qatari policies with whataboutism, suggest that a significant portion of the fanbase are convinced that the Qatari state is involved. The debate about how involved the state actually is, is a red herring and the actual effect is still sport washing of the regime.

It is possible to both consider the Qatari bid the best for potential for success, while not engaging in sport washing to defend that viewpoint.
 
glazed said:
These countries have terrible reputations and they would like not to.
Click to expand...
This very much depends on your geographical location. You will find the USA will also have terrible a reputation in certain parts of the world.
 
Sultan said:
This very much depends on your geographical location. You will find the USA will also have terrible a reputation in certain parts of the world.
Click to expand...

In certain parts? In most parts of this world you wanted to say...
 
Laurencio said:
While I wouldn't be one of those who call others morally bankrupt, there are a number of ways to deal with a Qatari take-over without ending your support of the club, and still remain somewhat morally consistent.

1. Be honest about the negatives the Qatari bid comes with. This is likely an attempt at sport washing by the Qataris - that is use the feelings you describe - to create a publicity army of supporters who will defend the regime and their policies. Honesty about these challenges makes the sport washing aspect of the ownership less effective.

2. Be honest as to why the Qatari bid is preferred - money and success is more important than whatever the owners stand for or do. It's a fair stance to have, but often times people want to defend their view as being morally superior or equal, and engage in whataboutism to defend their stance - which coincidentally leads to sport washing.

3. Do NOT defend problematic policies. Sport washing is a two edged sword that so far has benefited the regimes. The support base of Man Utd is large enough that if we were to genuinly hold the owners accountable for crap in their own country and not defend everything they do, we could make a significant impact in the future direction of the country itself.

4. Don't pretend like the other option is morally equal or worse. It just isn't. It might be worse in terms of financial and short-term success, but it certainly isn't morally worse. This goes back to point 1 and 2, where by constantly trying to find moral equality you inadvertently engage in sport washing.

5. We can disagree on how much the state is involved in the Qatari bid, but there is little doubt that the general appearance and how supporters keep defending Qatari policies with whataboutism, suggest that a significant portion of the fanbase are convinced that the Qatari state is involved. The debate about how involved the state actually is, is a red herring and the actual effect is still sport washing of the regime.

It is possible to both consider the Qatari bid the best for potential for success, while not engaging in sport washing to defend that viewpoint.
Click to expand...

That's all fine in principle, but it would be useful if people supporting the Radcliffe bid could also adhere to equivalent principles. There also hasn't been much good-faith discussion about the 'ethics' of allowing a community institution to be run down, risked by allowing Glazers to continue in any kind of decision-making capacity as well as keeping the debt on the club (if this is the case, which some supporters of SJR have said they potentially don't care about in comparison with the prospect of the 'Arabs' taking over); or (b), what the calculus would be if opposing the SJ bid meant depriving the area of jobs and investment, including potentially well-paid regional jobs at a time of economic slump.

People without backgrounds in the ME might also try and be more equivocal or measured in their judgements about what Qatar is like, and the relationship of Jassim to the state is like: no-one's denying that a percentage of funds will likely come from people associated with the state, or that investment isn't regulated slightly differently than in the UK ( perhaps for better in some ways, like with arguments about the Chinese system and its growth policies, or worse, dependent upon your analysis or stance over laisse faire vs state-directed, state-capitalist/corporatist or otherwise heterodox systems) but there's good evidence that it isn't a state bid about branding Qatar and Qatar state isn't managing a foundation/fund in which some of its individual members may or may not have become minor shareholders.

It's easier for most of us to speak about how the Glazers have run things, because we're intimately familiar with that through outcomes and years of reports and leaks: to an extent it's also easier to speak about Radcliffe because we know about his political links and the policies - social and economic - with which his political party/faction is associated. That doesn't rule him out either as an owner: the concerns are more about how his bid impacts the development of the club - and secondarily, faced with the prospect of infrastructural investment in and beyond the ground, which bid might be of benefit to the community. A debt-free SJR with a strong plan, I'm fine with considering, and that goes for most people favouring the SJ bid currently; it's extremely patronizing to frame this as a craving for 'new toys' ala Mbappe, or just outbidding City for players to restore pride, or similar.
 
Laurencio said:
While I wouldn't be one of those who call others morally bankrupt, there are a number of ways to deal with a Qatari take-over without ending your support of the club, and still remain somewhat morally consistent.

1. Be honest about the negatives the Qatari bid comes with. This is likely an attempt at sport washing by the Qataris - that is use the feelings you describe - to create a publicity army of supporters who will defend the regime and their policies. Honesty about these challenges makes the sport washing aspect of the ownership less effective.

2. Be honest as to why the Qatari bid is preferred - money and success is more important than whatever the owners stand for or do. It's a fair stance to have, but often times people want to defend their view as being morally superior or equal, and engage in whataboutism to defend their stance - which coincidentally leads to sport washing.

3. Do NOT defend problematic policies. Sport washing is a two edged sword that so far has benefited the regimes. The support base of Man Utd is large enough that if we were to genuinly hold the owners accountable for crap in their own country and not defend everything they do, we could make a significant impact in the future direction of the country itself.

4. Don't pretend like the other option is morally equal or worse. It just isn't. It might be worse in terms of financial and short-term success, but it certainly isn't morally worse. This goes back to point 1 and 2, where by constantly trying to find moral equality you inadvertently engage in sport washing.

5. We can disagree on how much the state is involved in the Qatari bid, but there is little doubt that the general appearance and how supporters keep defending Qatari policies with whataboutism, suggest that a significant portion of the fanbase are convinced that the Qatari state is involved. The debate about how involved the state actually is, is a red herring and the actual effect is still sport washing of the regime.

It is possible to both consider the Qatari bid the best for potential for success, while not engaging in sport washing to defend that viewpoint.
Click to expand...
These questions have been answered to death by many people over the course of this thread.

Whataboutism could have different meanings and contexts depending on which side of the divide you take.

"whataboutism, moral equivalence, two wrongs, double standards, it boils down to this: My side isn't subject to the same moral rules as the other side. My side has excusing factors for what it did. (or is doing)"
 
Solius said:
Quark sized day today.
Click to expand...

Nah, you’re overhyping it. Neutrino sized day today.

Slowly getting smaller and smaller until the day comes that we go atomic…

Rood said:
This seems a very one eyed view of things to me and you won't be surprised to hear that I see a very different picture.

There is the majority (based on polls here) who prefer the Sheikh Jassim bid as it seems the best for the future success and health of the club in terms of debts, the stadium etc.

Then there is a vocal minority who are antiQatar, I don't actually see many arguments in favour of INEOS apart from 'well it's not Qatar'. I can understand some of the worries presented but don't agree with them all.

In this group there is an extreme faction (and it's mostly these posters who turn this into a heated hysterical discourse) so entrenched in their position that they say they will boycott the club with the most extreme saying they prefer the club suffers and even gets relegated or goes bankrupt (not that either is likely) under the Glazers rather than Sheikh Jassim takeover.
These lot also go around claiming some kind of patronising moral superiority - this extremist POV is absolutely mental to me as it quite clearly isn't in the best interests of Manchester United and that is what is most important to me and many others.

Although there are antiJim arguments, I don't see anyone saying they will stop supporting if INEOS takeover so no extreme positions on that side.

Personally I prefer Sheikh Jassim based on the info available to us but, despite what you may think, it's not a strong preference as there are too many unknowns about both bids to be nailing colours to either mast so I'd still take Sir Jim over the Glazers and just hope he has learnt from mistakes at Nice.

The vast majority of fans that I know would sit in this category of just wanting the takeover to be done, either way, as soon as possible so that ETH can get on with his planning for next season. Seems the most reasonable point of view to me too, but obviously the extremists will not agree.
Click to expand...

Very good post.

Jericholyte2 said:
Imagine how ETH must be right now
- comes in to the club after the shitshow of the prior season,
- is (presumably) told the need is Top 4 and then to push on,
- manages that and gets a trophy in his first season
- is then told he’s got next to nothing (in relative terms) to spend because ‘we’re too busy trying to get 30 pieces of silver instead of 20 for the club sale.’

He must be absolutely fecking fuming!
Click to expand...

It’s fecking disgraceful, lowly.

T00lsh3d said:
My life has gone to absolute shit in the last week, and I come on the caf to get away from it, get a bit of distraction.
It actually makes me feel weirdly better seeing people losing their minds over something that fundamentally means bugger all to them in the grand scheme of things
Click to expand...

Hope things pick up soon my friend, can always PM if you need a vent mate. x

711 said:
I'm suspicious of those who tell me there is only one possible answer and that I have inferior morals and I'm 'disingenuous' if I don't agree with their own point of view.

I think your best option is to carry on supporting our club, and as for Qatar itself criticise where you feel it is warranted and praise if progress occurs.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with this.

Andy_Cole said:
So guys. Football? Pros and against each owner on a football level?
Click to expand...

For me, what any serious owner who truly wants to turn Man Utd around in the current climate needs to do can be summed up in 3 words…

Best In Class

From top down, you need best in class. Best people available in every position, all the way down.

And given Ratcliffe’s long track record of doing the exact opposite of that - I do not trust him to do so.

He has employed serious positions at Nice using nepotism and drawing from his limited contacts including the cycling world. This reeks of Glazers mark 2.

I also don’t like what we know of his convoluted, cobbled together bid and keeping the Glazers on. He doesn’t seem at all bothered to pay more in order to get cracking.

92 Foundation haven’t run a club, but I trust them more to employ ‘Best In Class’ due to them…

a. Not having done the opposite multiple times at other clubs

b. Publicly pledging to invest heavily at all levels of the club - clearly showing more ambition and energy for the project.

c. Voicing that they want to get started ASAP and are frustrated by the dithering

d. Desire to buy the club properly and remove Glazers

e. Better contacts within the football World

I can see Utd becoming a truly top football club under 92, and I just do not feel the same about Ratcliffe’s potential.

Also, less on topic but with Ratcliffe being old, imagine if he passed away as with Malcom Glazer and the club went into the hands of his family… or back to the Glazers if they remain on the board.

I want the Glazers gone. And I want an ambitious, energetic new ownership that will appoint ‘Best In Class’ all the way down through the club and will dedicate themselves with turning Utd around.

For me that’s 92 Foundation, and I just don’t see it with Ratcliffe’s offer.

But, if Ratcliffe wins I will hope for the best, and hope that I’m wrong.
 
Laurencio said:
While I wouldn't be one of those who call others morally bankrupt, there are a number of ways to deal with a Qatari take-over without ending your support of the club, and still remain somewhat morally consistent.

1. Be honest about the negatives the Qatari bid comes with. This is likely an attempt at sport washing by the Qataris - that is use the feelings you describe - to create a publicity army of supporters who will defend the regime and their policies. Honesty about these challenges makes the sport washing aspect of the ownership less effective.

2. Be honest as to why the Qatari bid is preferred - money and success is more important than whatever the owners stand for or do. It's a fair stance to have, but often times people want to defend their view as being morally superior or equal, and engage in whataboutism to defend their stance - which coincidentally leads to sport washing.

3. Do NOT defend problematic policies. Sport washing is a two edged sword that so far has benefited the regimes. The support base of Man Utd is large enough that if we were to genuinly hold the owners accountable for crap in their own country and not defend everything they do, we could make a significant impact in the future direction of the country itself.

4. Don't pretend like the other option is morally equal or worse. It just isn't. It might be worse in terms of financial and short-term success, but it certainly isn't morally worse. This goes back to point 1 and 2, where by constantly trying to find moral equality you inadvertently engage in sport washing.

5. We can disagree on how much the state is involved in the Qatari bid, but there is little doubt that the general appearance and how supporters keep defending Qatari policies with whataboutism, suggest that a significant portion of the fanbase are convinced that the Qatari state is involved. The debate about how involved the state actually is, is a red herring and the actual effect is still sport washing of the regime.

It is possible to both consider the Qatari bid the best for potential for success, while not engaging in sport washing to defend that viewpoint.
Click to expand...

Really great post which probably best sums up my feelings

Well said that poster!
 
jm99 said:
There's still seriou legs in this thread, look how much discussion is going on while literally nothing happens, as soon as we get an update of a preferred bidder it's going to explode
Click to expand...
We're more interested in Biden & Trump than Club sale??
 
Rhyme Animal said:
Nah, you’re overhyping it. Neutrino sized day today.

Slowly getting smaller and smaller until the day comes that we go atomic…



Very good post.



It’s fecking disgraceful, lowly.



Hope things pick up soon my friend, can always PM if you need a vent mate. x



Absolutely agree with this.



For me, what any serious owner who truly wants to turn Man Utd around in the current climate needs to do can be summed up in 3 words…

Best In Class

From top down, you need best in class. Best people available in every position, all the way down.

And given Ratcliffe’s long track record of doing the exact opposite of that - I do not trust him to do so.

He has employed serious positions at Nice using nepotism and drawing from his limited contacts including the cycling world. This reeks of Glazers mark 2.

I also don’t like what we know of his convoluted, cobbled together bid and keeping the Glazers on. He doesn’t seem at all bothered to pay more in order to get cracking.

92 Foundation haven’t run a club, but I trust them more to employ ‘Best In Class’ due to them…

a. Not having done the opposite multiple times at other clubs

b. Publicly pledging to invest heavily at all levels of the club - clearly showing more ambition and energy for the project.

c. Voicing that they want to get started ASAP and are frustrated by the dithering

d. Desire to buy the club properly and remove Glazers

e. Better contacts within the football World

I can see Utd becoming a truly top football club under 92, and I just do not feel the same about Ratcliffe’s potential.

Also, less on topic but with Ratcliffe being old, imagine if he passed away as with Malcom Glazer and the club went into the hands of his family… or back to the Glazers if they remain on the board.

I want the Glazers gone. And I want an ambitious, energetic new ownership that will appoint ‘Best In Class’ all the way down through the club and will dedicate themselves with turning Utd around.

For me that’s 92 Foundation, and I just don’t see it with Ratcliffe’s offer.

But, if Ratcliffe wins I will hope for the best, and hope that I’m wrong.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Good post.
 
kouroux said:
Camaradie isn't me catering to a view I don't agree with nor caring about things that don't move me. If you're looking for therapy, the Caf ain't the right place, sort your life out first.
Click to expand...

Not after therapy or your approval. I'm just highlighting that a section of our (online) fan base are reveling in fellow supporters anxieties about the future of the club. It's crass at best.

For a lot of people, united has been a significant part of their life since birth. To see something they have grown up with and been apart off for decades turn into something they despise is not easily dismissed. Seeing posters on here saying that they hope those people end up miserable about it is pretty disgusting.

This thread is the pits.
 
Rood said:
This seems a very one eyed view of things to me and you won't be surprised to hear that I see a very different picture.
Click to expand...

Irony anyone?

You have be the most pro-Qatar poster in this thread so nobody will be at all surprised.
 
Devil You Know said:
Biggest threads on the forum (with post count):

1. The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated - 112459
2. The Random Chat Thread | 10th May 2023: Crime against sarnies - 84605
3. Ole Gunnar Solskjær | 2021/22 Discussion - 74489
4. Frenkie de Jong | The last muppeting lap - 73915
5. The 500K Thread - 72139
6. Brexited | the worst threads live the longest - 71985
7. Club Sale | Update: Conflicting reports of exclusivity negotiations - 71661
8. SARS CoV-2 coronavirus / Covid-19 (No tin foil hat silliness please) - 67109
9. The Prop Grops Throps - 58701
10. Jadon Sancho| Staying at Dortmund for now - 53642
11. Is the United forum safe to go into yet? - 52801
12. Russian invasion of Ukraine - 46720

We're still only the 3rd biggest football related thread and 7th overall. Got a long way to go to beat Trump.
Click to expand...
tenpoless said:
We're more interested in Biden & Trump than Club sale??
Click to expand...

‘We’re gonna post so much, you’re gonna get tired of posting!’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.