Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
So what would an ownership under Jim look like? Stadium, team wise etc?
What he said about Chelsea

"We're not interested in making money out of Chelsea. The investment in Chelsea is a long-term thing.

"Can we run that club really, really well and turn it into one of the finest clubs in Europe? That's our ambition with Chelsea."
 
'Preparing a bid'. He already has the United transfer policy down

I don't know if this is good or what I want to be honest. It's annoying that unless we get taken by some ME nation, we aren't in the same financial league (in terms of potential investment) as our rivals
 
Ratcliffe would be an amazing owner but I just don't think he can afford us. Would take him over anyone else of course if money wasn't such an issue.

INEOS (annual revenues of £65bn) would presumably purchase the club, rather than him personally. Worth noting though that Ratcliffe's personal net worth (£21.05bn) is around three times that of Ambramovic and around five times that of Todd Boehly, for example.
 
'Preparing a bid'. He already has the United transfer policy down

I don't know if this is good or what I want to be honest. It's annoying that unless we get taken by some ME nation, we aren't in the same financial league (in terms of potential investment) as our rivals
Chelsea weren't bought by a ME nation and look at them...
 
Others talk about getting #GlazerOUT, that Ratcliffe's kid tries to make it happen. He is someone you can trust. A man of action. :)
 
No surprise that bluffer Ratcliffe is the first to go public with his intentions of bidding, he loves his name in the headlines. Let’s wait for the serious players to get involved.
 
INEOS (annual revenues of £65bn) would presumably purchase the club, rather than him personally. Worth noting though that Ratcliffe's personal net worth (£21.05bn) is around three times that of Ambramovic and around five times that of Todd Boehly, for example.
If INEOS or Dubai were t buy us them being multiple times poorer than the Saudis or Abu Dhabi wouldn't matter because the competition for transfers and amenities would never reach levels where such a difference matters. It just depends on what their plan is and their ability to identify and attract managerial talent at executive level.
 
If INEOS or Dubai were t buy us them being multiple times poorer than the Saudis or Abu Dhabi wouldn't matter because the competition for transfers and amenities would never reach levels where such a difference matters. It just depends on what their plan is and their ability to identify and attract managerial talent at executive level.
True. A debt free United can compete with most without investment anyway.
 
He has already back tracked in this. Looks like the Qataris very well might be getting Liverpool
Where did he backtrack? All I see is that QSI themselves are ruled out, but that doesn't necessarily mean that QIA won't be involved. However, if QSI isn't involved, then I wouldn't expect QIA themselves to be heavily involved at this stage.
 
:lol: that will trigger a few on here

Im a Max fan not Lewis but I'm all for new United Ownership. Hell if Toto wants a change in scenery he can be our CEO.

The more people who care about sports the better.

Plus if Ineos buys us Hamilton having a minor stale in it is a no brainer for him as he is already on a team they part own
 
True. A debt free United can compete with most without investment anyway.

United have been competing with everyone with debt. United don't need a sugar daddy to be highly competitive and they don't need to be debt free either and the same applies to Real Madrid.
 
If INEOS or Dubai were t buy us them being multiple times poorer than the Saudis or Abu Dhabi wouldn't matter because the competition for transfers and amenities would never reach levels where such a difference matters. It just depends on what their plan is and their ability to identify and attract managerial talent at executive level.

Exactly right. Yes, the Saudi PIF has hundreds of billions of assets under management, but when you are talking about purchasing football players, whether you have 10s of billions or 100s of billions, is really immaterial. You can afford what you want when you want, including infrastructure investment, which is the all-important thing here. United can continue to compete in the transfer market without outside funding, but the club cannot afford to do that AND fund the required refurbishment work to the stadium and training ground. Ratcliffe/Ineos can.

We don't need a sugardaddy nation state (unlike City, we generate plenty of legitimate income) - we need someone to remove the debt burden from the club's balance sheet and invest in infrastructure, so United can continue to fund transfers from our own operational cashflow.
 
If INEOS or Dubai were t buy us them being multiple times poorer than the Saudis or Abu Dhabi wouldn't matter because the competition for transfers and amenities would never reach levels where such a difference matters. It just depends on what their plan is and their ability to identify and attract managerial talent at executive level.
True. A debt free United can compete with most without investment anyway.

We just need to be debt free and we'll run. That's it.
 
True. A debt free United can compete with most without investment anyway.
Yeah that's true, I'd imagine next summer would be the only season where we need overstretch our transfer spending because we need a midfielder and striker plus possibly a couple more signings for depth but after that we can get by spending £80m - £120m per season. We just need to push the boat out next season and trust the young core emerging under Erik Ten Hag - Martinez, Antony, Rashford, Dalot and Garnacho.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.