And outside of gut feeling what exactly is the evidence to back it up? This is a guy who went from I want to buy the club to any % will do just let me say I own utd. This is a guy who has said or done nothing to show he cares about winning or good of the club beyond bragging rights to say he owns utd, every single one of his sports ventures till date have been anything but a success.
Also blood money is what made the west today what it is, but let's not get into the moralistic bs. The club you support makes money from things like gambling and has money coming straight from the so despicable Saudis so i would suggest getting off the high horse. The whole we are self sufficient and don't need the devil ME countries owning us bit comes from taking blood money from these evil sources.
Almost everything you wrote is totally wrong, made up or irrelevant.
Ratcliffe has enjoyed sporting success in both cycling and F1. His Nice project had stagnated for a few years, sure, but it hasn't been a failure and there are a lot of positives to take away from it, especially recent results and appointments. The takeover has made them financially secure and they aren't under pressure to sell their best players anymore. Not for cheap, anyway. I know they haven't blindly thrown hundreds of millions of euros onto every issue (because I guess that's what most of you really want), but they've been improving both on and off the pitch and getting smarter with operating the club. They've appointed a new, promising sporting director and new, younger managers in Digard and Fariola in place of older, probably less riskier options (especially in the public eye) in Galtier and Favre. They've spent €264 million in the transfer market so far, more than 2.5 times the amount that they bought the club for. Whilst they are definitely not a project where Ratcliffe comes in and burns money like Boehly at Chelsea or Qatar at PSG, it has overall been getting better in the last ~12 months and they are learning from their mistakes...admittedly, you can't really compare this to how they would potentially run one of the biggest clubs in the world in United, but it's not been a failure at all. It's also been a much more sensible and likeable approach than to build a toxic culture and senselessly spend billions on the tranfer market on big names, without any vision, just to show the world how wealthy you are...because what I've just described is exactly what PSG have done in the last 12 years without showing any signs of realizing their mistakes after more than a whole decade. Remember 2021? Hakimi, Danilo Pereira, Nuno Mendes, Messi, Donnarumma, Wijnaldum, Ramos...apparently the "best window ever" for a club...turned out well, didn't it.
And that was after 10 years of "learning on the job".
Also, what's the evidence that Jassim (if it isn't a state bid) will be able to restore the club to its former glory or even that he'll spend hundreds of millions on players every summer? Has he been involved in any sports operations? Not to mention that he sure as shit doesn't have the money to invest tens, if not hundreds of millions into Manchester United every year for the next 1-2 decades out of his own pocket...he'd have to rely on his dad or the state to provide him further funds besides the rumored 5-5.5bn, which is also not coming from himself, that's for damn certain.
You also claim that Ratcliffe has gone from first wanting a full takeover to a partial one, and now he'll take any % just so that he can claim to own the club. This is completely false, since it's been stated several times by reputable sources that his offer is "flexible", meaning that there are several options on the table ranging from all Glazer shares for 69% of the club, a 50.1% offer with put and call options for the future and now a 25% minority investment that we don't know the details of just yet. If not all 6 of the Glazer siblings want to leave, what can Ratcliffe do? If that deal isn't achievable, then he can try alternative methods to get his foot in or he can be stubborn like Qatar and submit an offer that Joel and Avram won't accept.
Regarding the blood money part of your post: I don't know any western countries that buy football clubs or other sporting institutions in order to buy the sympathy and support of masses of people, do you? If the US, UK or any country wanted to buy United, I would heavily be against that too. If a Russian oligarch wanted the club, I'd be heavily against that too. I know Ratcliffe isn't the cleanest guy around but I'll take him over state-ownership and/or blood money any day of the week.
By the way, do you think gambling is as bad as working poor Asian immigrants to death in 40 Celsius degrees for 16 hours a day, confiscating their passports upon arrival in the country and just generally treating them like subhumans? All this for what, $200 a month? How about human rights issues? How about womens' rights? How about forcing religion down the throat of their own people? How about sentencing underage people to death? How about committing genocide in Gaza, Yemen, etc.? You're just shamelessly defending the Middle East because they have money.
And yes, I know about our Saudi sponsor and strongly condemn it, however, it's drastically different from complete ownership of the club. And we could be self-sufficient even if we didn't have a single sponsor with a controversial background. Not many other clubs in the world out there that can say the same.