Moriarty
Full Member
The club should never have been purchased by the Glazers in the first place. I blame the PL.
And Martin Edwards.
The club should never have been purchased by the Glazers in the first place. I blame the PL.
Unless they have set a price for future share sales.Here is the issue I have with this, galzers staying aside.
Jim will only own 25%.
But if he injects funds, say for a new stadium (however unlikely), he pushes up the value of the club, meaning he will also have to pay more for the other 75% he supposedly wants.
The better he makes us, the more expensive it will become. So it is not in his interest to spend on success.
Its a major conflict of interest.
And will ineos really inject millions while the glazers, majority share holders, just sit there and offer nothing?
SJ has offered $7 billion to the Glazers which is £5.8 billion plus the debt £1 billion plus another £1.25 billion in investments in stadiums, squad etc plus then buying the 31% class A shares. Let that sink in and they’ve said no !!!!
He should walk away buy another club and embarrass united again, Sir Jim needs to make money available immediately and explain why he’s potentially fecked a club he’s suppose to support. The Glazers now must realise they really can’t step foot in old Trafford ever again, the hatred will be intense on a whole new level !
Yeah!
One year ago, if Manchester United fans were told that we would soon be on the way to being owned by a life long United fan and self-made billionaire, born and raised 7 miles from OT, most would be delighted.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe. Future Manchester United owner and the man that is going to take control from The Glazers....
It has ruined the club for years. If you took a mortgage out you would expect to pay it off at some point. Our debt is neverending.And Martin Edwards.
And at a potentially set price to cover increases, these people aren't stupid no matter what the plebs on here think.I suppose he'll have a deal to buy the remaining shares over a certain period of time from now.
Unless they have set a price for future share sales.
I genuinely wonder how much of this investment in the club will actually go to the club, rather than just being more cash to line Glazer pockets. I don't expect very much of it, which leaves us in exactly the same place as before, only without any hope for a sale.
Its like Jassim has turned into some kinda martyr for some of themThis is pathetic, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't enjoying the meltdown.
Here is the issue I have with this, galzers staying aside.
Jim will only own 25%.
But if he injects funds, say for a new stadium (however unlikely), he pushes up the value of the club, meaning he will also have to pay more for the other 75% he supposedly wants.
The better he makes us, the more expensive it will become. So it is not in his interest to spend on success.
Its a major conflict of interest.
And will ineos really inject millions while the glazers, majority share holders, just sit there and offer nothing?
Why was this our only chance to become serious again?I am gutted. Our one chance to become serious again. This club is finished.
£££££££££££Why was this our only chance to become serious again?
Not sure how the Ratcliffe deal would be positive for the club. All the money from the sale will go to the Glazers. The club will still be a billion in debt and in need for a 2b stadium investment. What is going to change exactly?
Solhekol reporting that ETH and players wanted Qatar to take over.
I can't even remember the last time we had some good news about this club. How depressing!
Solhekol reporting that ETH and players wanted Qatar to take over.
Its like Jassim has turned into some kinda martyr for some of them
They also wanted Greenwood back and he wanted to sign Arnautovic, what they think is worth dick. Obviously this isn't a great result but it's still better than United becoming a tool for any state.Solhekol reporting that ETH and players wanted Qatar to take over.
Early on in this process I remember a gay fan posting about how he couldn’t support the club if Qatar took over. He got told to “not let the door hit him on the way out”
I posted a report from Amnesty international decrying Qatar’s human rights record and they were lambasted as being woke and virtue signalling.
I hope our gay fans are sleeping easier tonight. I hope whichever heaven the dead migrants highlighted by Amnesty are in are smiling down on this decision.
I do believe we have a long road back to the top. But we are doing it the right way. And to me that means so much.
I hope everyone can understand that.
Were did you read this?Ineos process to make Manchester United the biggest club in the world again to start shortly after acquiring 100%
Solhekol reporting that ETH and players wanted Qatar to take over.
Solhekol reporting that ETH and players wanted Qatar to take over.
He will only invest if others do, he won't just put money into United.Here is the issue I have with this, galzers staying aside.
Jim will only own 25%.
But if he injects funds, say for a new stadium (however unlikely), he pushes up the value of the club, meaning he will also have to pay more for the other 75% he supposedly wants.
The better he makes us, the more expensive it will become. So it is not in his interest to spend on success.
Its a major conflict of interest.
And will ineos really inject millions while the glazers, majority share holders, just sit there and offer nothing?
You really think he is going to buy 25%, invest in infrastructure (as a minority owner) only for the Glazers to pump up the price and make it even more difficult for him to buy?
He will buy 25% and there will be put and call options put into the contract with The Glazers.
He's not become a self made billionaire because he is stupid.
They also wanted Greenwood back and he wanted to sign Arnautovic, what they think is worth dick. Obviously this isn't a great result but it's still better than United becoming a tool for any state.
Well it depends on if you believe the reports or not. The most positive outlook is that there's a binding agreement to complete a 100% takeover in 3-6 years and have majority control in as little as 1 year. Ineos would also be allowed to inject funds immediatly with full control over where those funds go. I'd say that's way way better than a non sale.Not sure how the Ratcliffe deal would be positive for the club. All the money from the sale will go to the Glazers. The club will still be a billion in debt and in need for a 2b stadium investment. What is going to change exactly?
I mean considering the news just coming out now that broke boy Ratcliffe - whilst only getting a minority stake to begin with - will be taking over in the long run because he met the Glazers valuation so clearly he wanted United more than Qatar, it’s as simple as that really. For clarity i wanted neither but not like we have much choiceUnited isn't one of a kind - it is a failing sporting institution with amassing debt and need of serious investment. They bid way above the market cap even under those circumstances. This is a circular conversation at this point, but surely with those things in mind you can understand why the notion that "they didn't want it" is laughable? Which, is the only thing I questioned - and caused you to interject
having money =/= paying way over the odds
Where can I see this?