Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's clear that both bidding parties have signed non-disclosure agreements and neither can say anything on the record neither directly or through intermediaries - otherwise they'd have to pay huge penalties.

There is no news, and false news flourishes when there is no news. All these ITK accounts / journalists are just talking out of their but fans are so frustrated they will click anything.

Basically there's nothing new other than Glazers taking too long as they think they can squeeze more out Ineos/Qatar. Short of one party walking away this auction could drag on and on.
 
stevoc said:
Yeah, we all do it though I suppose.

If the news had been Jassim was jetting into NY meet the Glazers, you can imagine how a lot would have interpreted and reacted to that news.
Click to expand...
Did you read the article? Considering it was only 4-5 days ago the story broke on Reuters, it seems pretty irrelevant that Ratcliffe has been flying to NY “at some point in the last month”, no?

If it was in the last 5 days it would be very relevant and if it was in the last 5 days they would have said it was.
 
Pexbo said:
Did you read the article? Considering it was only 4-5 days ago the story broke on Reuters, it seems pretty irrelevant that Ratcliffe has been flying to NY “at some point in the last month”, no?

If it was in the last 5 days it would be very relevant and if it was in the last 5 days they would have said it was.
Click to expand...
For all we know he could have decided against making a higher bid and then we get the Reuters report.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
pocco, it’s not a gotcha in any way, shape or form.

It was posted yesterday in the transfer forum ffs. It isn’t some nugget of hypocrisy that you seem so gleefully giddy over, and it doesn’t in any way at all affect anyone’s stance on your Brexit icon.

Jim Ratcliffe is trying to buy Utd, he might not be doing too well at it - but he’s trying. And a big part of his pro narrative is that he’s a Utd fan with unlimited means.

Yet, rather than having a Utd season ticket, he has a Chelsea one, a team he also tried (and failed) to buy just 1 year ago.

Jim Ratcliffe has unlimited means, he can go anywhere he chooses and be there very quickly. The average person does not have these means.

He chooses to watch Chelsea over Utd - I have never made such a choice with any team, since this seems important to you.

Now, pay attention, really focus on this bit…

No one is saying that Jim Ratcliffe being a Chelsea regular means that he shouldn’t buy Utd. It has only been pointed out that the part of his media narrative making him out to be a die hard Utd fan who loves the club should be questioned because he has chosen to attend Chelsea matches over Utd ones, as well as numerous things like keeping the Glazers on - something no true Utd fan would ever do in a million years.

If I was a multi billionaire trying to buy Utd and it came out that I’d actively sought out a Palace season ticket for many years, had then chosen, many times to go to Palace rather than Utd and had a year ago tried to buy Palace, I would expect people to presume I was actually a Palace fan.

Sadly for me, I’m not a multi billionaire trying to buy Utd, and sadly for you, I didn’t ever actively seek out a season ticket for Palace, or ever choose to watch them over Utd, or try to buy them - thus making me comparable to Olde Jim, and as such, you have no point.
Click to expand...

You can protest all you want. If you're too embarrassed to own up to your double standards, or want to try to give reasons why you think it is any different, then I honestly couldn't give a toss.

You're trying to create a narrative which doesn't matter. Nobody is championing Ratcliffe because he's a top United fan or anything like that. You are creating that narrative to use it as a stick to beat him with, because you are so desperate to try to take down Jim Ratcliffe on RedCafe.net, as though it fecking matters one bit. I don't care that he tried to buy Chelsea, I don't care if he wants to take his kids to watch them or if you go and watch Crystal Palace.. But I'll call out idiocy when I see it, and you going at Ratcliffe for having a season ticket and then claiming days later that Crystal Palace are your 'second team' and that you have a season ticket there, is just plain daft. However you try to paint it.

Like I asked, which you conveniently ignored, how often does he go to watch Chelsea? How often does he go to watch United? The guy lives in Monaco, I doubt he goes to either ground that often. You're just creating straw man arguments about his wealth and what he can afford to do - I doubt he has time to watch either team that often, let alone fly between Monaco - London - Manchester twice a week. But if you can provide receipts then I'll accept your point (but also won't give a toss, as I've mentioned many times). But out of interest, you say there is a media narrative of him being a big United supporter, yet you claim that he misses United games to go watch Chelsea and that he has a ST there. Where do you get this information? Surely not the media, because that would imply there actually isn't a media narrative of him being a die hard united fan (not that anybody cares about that, just that he's a more palatable option than Qatar to some of us).

Regarding the points in bold....did you get took to Selhurst Park against your own free will? For all I or any of us know you could be at Selhurst Park every weekend. You did once say this afterall...

Rhyme Animal said:
Utd are a special club to me and I grew up a Utd fan but I no longer consider myself a ‘fan’ and more just a football fan in general.

But I so desperately want to see the Glazers out of the PL… to be brutally honest, I’d want to see them out of the PL WHOEVER they ‘owned’, as their ‘ownership’ is immoral.
Click to expand...

But like I said, don't care who you or SJR go to watch at the weekend, or why. So you trying to explain what the issue is with SJR will just fall on deaf ears with me, especially when you admit to doing the same thing. I don't know how many times I will have to explain this, so please try to understand this time.
 
Another potential reason for the delay in further announcements could well be the Glazers doing their usual "move the goalpost" trick to try and extract every penny they can out of the deal. During Woodward's time at the club we had a really bad reputation among other clubs for last minute changes when making deals for players. There were countless stories of us changing amounts at the last moment, or trying to have different payment plans radically different to what had been agreed when negotiating with a club.

Given that United has a large amount of complex payment plans for different transfers, as well as the usual complex range of business liabilities falling due at various points I can see them getting deep into the nitty gritty of arguing that "SJ should pay that...." rather than them leaving behind a cleared ledger.

So that "price" for the club may well have been agreed, but the Glazers will be arguing that they can take the light fittings, carpet and integrated kitchen units. They will haggle over this sort of stuff while the club's planning for next season is destroyed. They don't care!
 
Solius said:
One of them is a picture of him sitting in a chair wearing a jumper and the OP has written “AURA”. Why is everyone so pathetic.
Click to expand...

He is clearly subconsciously inching his way out of the closet. Give the poor guy a break!

He gets a B- for effort
 
Last edited:
Pexbo said:
Did you read the article? Considering it was only 4-5 days ago the story broke on Reuters, it seems pretty irrelevant that Ratcliffe has been flying to NY “at some point in the last month”, no?

If it was in the last 5 days it would be very relevant and if it was in the last 5 days they would have said it was.
Click to expand...

I did. Perhaps.

I was simply commenting on how people interpret the same news differently depending on who the news involves and on their own biases. I prefaced what was a light hearted post by saying we all do it.
 
stevoc said:
I did. Perhaps.

I was simply commenting on how people interpret the same news differently depending on who the news involves and on their own biases. I prefaced what was a light hearted post by saying we all do it.
Click to expand...

It works both ways though... I hear alot about you dont care about human life if you favour Qatar... but nothing to do with Goldman Sachs and their scandals ?

Their underage child abuse and many other accusations laid against them.
 
stevoc said:
I did. Perhaps.

I was simply commenting on how people interpret the same news differently depending on who the news involves and on their own biases. I prefaced what was a light hearted post by saying we all do it.
Click to expand...

Yeah and it goes both ways as well. There’ll be people who don’t want Ratcliffe who see that story as proof he’s making progress and worry about it.

Then there’ll be others who see it as PR prepping for his defeat…

The most likely thing is that it’s just The Mirror using a nothing story to get clicks, but fewer of us (including me) want that to be the case because we’re all so desperate for it to reach a conclusion!
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
I thought we were actually getting somewhere when that Reuters piece came out last week but it seems like we’re back in limbo again. Radio silence.
Click to expand...
I found it weird Reuters was reporting something Bloomberg wasn't on in the first place.
 
stevoc said:
Not really what I was talking about but ok.
Click to expand...

Its the same principle. What is the difference?

People saying they favour SJR because of all the human rights issues the Qatar bid brings but yet their favourite bidder is getting money from people who dont value human rights either?
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
I thought we were actually getting somewhere when that Reuters piece came out last week but it seems like we’re back in limbo again. Radio silence.
Click to expand...
It still very much seems like we are getting somewhere. That's the last notable and credible news we have received. Silence does not equal inactivity.
 
MUFC OK said:
No news today then.
Click to expand...

Last we heard was exclusivity so I guess based on that they will be working through the details of the takeover and finer margins. Might be a couple weeks again before we hear.
 
stevoc said:
I did. Perhaps.

I was simply commenting on how people interpret the same news differently depending on who the news involves and on their own biases. I prefaced what was a light hearted post by saying we all do it.
Click to expand...
Rhyme Animal said:
Yeah and it goes both ways as well. There’ll be people who don’t want Ratcliffe who see that story as proof he’s making progress and worry about it.

Then there’ll be others who see it as PR prepping for his defeat…

The most likely thing is that it’s just The Mirror using a nothing story to get clicks, but fewer of us (including me) want that to be the case because we’re all so desperate for it to reach a conclusion!
Click to expand...

Yeah.
 
romufc said:
It works both ways though... I hear alot about you dont care about human life if you favour Qatar... but nothing to do with Goldman Sachs and their scandals ?

Their underage child abuse and many other accusations laid against them.
Click to expand...

feck sake this thread is literally the worst. It's so bad. Everything is so bad.

Its enough to put you off football never mind Manchester United.

Please for the love of all that is good and holy in the world lock this thread, then delete it, then take a giant steaming shite on the database storing the remnants of this thread. Having done all of that, the remains would still be better than whatever the feck this pile of shit has transmogrified into in the past few months.
 
romufc said:
Its the same principle. What is the difference?

People saying they favour SJR because of all the human rights issues the Qatar bid brings but yet their favourite bidder is getting money from people who dont value human rights either?
Click to expand...

''Ratcliffe meeting the Glazers in New york''

Pro Ineos: ''Could be there to seal the deal''

Pro Qatar: ''Could be laying the PR groundwork for him admitting defeat''

That's the sort of thing I was talking about. Interpreting and reacting to the same news differently depending on who it involves and their own view point.

Not people highlighting the problems with one bidder while ignoring the other. For what it's worth I've seen plenty of noise in here about the problematic aspects of Ratcliffe, Ineos and Goldman Sachs.
 
stevoc said:
''Ratcliffe meeting the Glazers in New york''

Pro Ineos: ''Could be there to seal the deal''

Pro Qatar: ''Could be laying the PR groundwork for him admitting defeat''

That's the sort of thing I was talking about. Interpreting and reacting to the same news differently depending on who it involves and their own view point.

Not people highlighting the problems with one bidder while ignoring the other. For what it's worth I've seen plenty of noise in here about the problematic aspects of Ratcliffe, Ineos and Goldman Sachs.
Click to expand...

You are going to get this though... there is clearly a divide in terms of what the fans want.

Lets be honest though, what is posted in the media, is just PR for both sides because really, neither sides PR machine has any idea what is going on...

Why do I think this? Because I think the Glazers themselves have no idea what to do.. they have seen 2 bidders keep trying to outbid and they are loving this, they just want the most money, regardless of how long it takes.
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
Aye it’s the first time I believe Reuters have reported anything since this whole thing began so a source must have specifically went to them.
Click to expand...
That or what I find more likely, they have a lower benchmark for reporting news. They aren't really relevant to the likes of Bloomberg so their best advantage is being first where possible.
 
Reapersoul20 said:
feck sake this thread is literally the worst. It's so bad. Everything is so bad.

Its enough to put you off football never mind Manchester United.

Please for the love of all that is good and holy in the world lock this thread, then delete it, then take a giant steaming shite on the database storing the remnants of this thread. Having done all of that, the remains would still be better than whatever the feck this pile of shit has transmogrified into in the past few months.
Click to expand...

I might be wide of the mark here… but I’m sensing that you don’t like this thread…
 
romufc said:
You are going to get this though... there is clearly a divide in terms of what the fans want.

Lets be honest though, what is posted in the media, is just PR for both sides because really, neither sides PR machine has any idea what is going on...

Why do I think this? Because I think the Glazers themselves have no idea what to do.. they have seen 2 bidders keep trying to outbid and they are loving this, they just want the most money, regardless of how long it takes.
Click to expand...

I do think the Glazers will be aware of the transfer window though.

I think they want to feck off before the pressure turns up on them to start making signings.

I think there’ll be significant progress by this time next week. Well, significant relative to the speed that the Glazers take with every single decision.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
I do think the Glazers will be aware of the transfer window though.

I think they want to feck off before the pressure turns up on them to start making signings.

I think there’ll be significant progress by this time next week. Well, significant relative to the speed that the Glazers take with every single decision.
Click to expand...
Maybe. We do know the Glazers usually take two summers to sign one player or panic on the last day and sign three. And still never get to the appropriate price the fecking clowns.
 
VP89 said:
That or what I find more likely, they have a lower benchmark for reporting news. They aren't really relevant to the likes of Bloomberg so their best advantage is being first where possible.
Click to expand...
FT had a story about the Jim deal having all 6 siblings stay that wasn’t verified by any other big time publication?
It seems this idea of Reuters etc having stories verified by someone else was plucked from thin air. I’ve asked for other examples and have never got an answer
 
Status
Not open for further replies.