Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
DRJosh said:
Just goes to show how fans mean so little to the owners and club management.

They know that none of these protests or boycotts will actually eventuate to anything. The owners seem to be well accustomed to their status as footballing villains and in fact they are thriving off it.

A tragic day for us fans who have spent a good chunk of our lives loving this once great footballing institution.
Click to expand...

We were screaming about boycotts in 2005 and 2010 but nobody listened. Most of the people screaming "full sale only" now were happy to tow the party line because Fergie and Gill told them so.

It's not a tragic day. It's another day. We desperately need a good alternative to the Glazers and that was never going to be Jassim and the Qatari state. The soul of Manchester United lives to fight another day.
 
captain666 said:
I would hope that the 4 minor Glazers stand down next week
Click to expand...
TheGodsInRed said:
25% is 2 glazer shares so I reckon 2 step down and 4 stay on. Maybe 2 have a pull and call option. I think Avram and Joel have no interest in leaving.
Click to expand...
Nope, none of the glazers are immediately leaving. They'll all be parting with equal shareholding amounting to what Jim is offering.
 
Sir Erik ten Hag said:
You answered your own question. What we need is the Glazers fecking off for good. With Ratcliffe owning just 25%, the Glazers still have the right to veto him. How is that different from the current situation?
Click to expand...

Maybe. But Ratcliffe is also the guy who made a bid that they accepted and eventually will make the feck of for good. Personally, my biggest issue with Glazer is the management of the club. It looks like Ratcliffe will address that imminently.
 
NinjaZombie said:
but once it was clear INEOS winning meant Glazers staying
Click to expand...
Only temporarily. Just need to have patience and see the bigger picture. Besides, what sense of achievement would we get as fans if we won anything with Qatari owners? Would feel very meh to me. Like...yay we won the league, but so we should. What do you expect? :boring:
 
I’m fine with Brexit Jim. Would have preferred Qatar but anything is better than the Glazers.
Besides, its not like state ownership is a guarantee for success, the circus at PSG makes me nauseous, we could have turned into that.
 
bond19821982 said:
Jeez - another moral Victorian. Care to explain where is the money for infrastructure coming from ?
Click to expand...
Looking at recent seasons, a better transfer negotiation team would free about 50m a year. That's a solid start (and currently an awful amount of money wasted) without damaging the actual quality of the squad. On the contrary, quicker negotiations lead to better preseasons and starts to the actual seasons.

It's not like United lack income but the money is simply wasted.
 
Let’s see how this plays out. We don’t know how this acquisition works just yet. Sir Jim is a very smart man and the structure on how he get full ownership might be very reasonable.

We don’t know much about his short and long term plans either.

If the board approves, details will be released after that. No need to panic in the meantime. Probably no need to panic at all imo. Sir Jim and Ineos can be very good owners for us.
 
clarkydaz said:
does this mean all 6 glazers stay onboard then?
Click to expand...
Seems so, why else they accepted the offer? To make more money in the long run whilst having puppet figurehead to take the heat from them. They are always good at that

Its laughable that some people already convinced sir Ratani's playing the Glazers but not the other way around. Why? As it stands they still have more voting power. Thats what matters
 
Disappointing news as nothing is effectively changing, the scum cling on to the club while bleeding it dry.

I’m keen to learn from those who keep mentioning it, what is “the soul” of the club and does that come from ownership?
 
I think we need to wait and see what sir Jim’s plans are for the club before we judge him. Yes a qatar takeover would’ve quickly solved many problems at the club (stadium, debt etc) but it not going to happen for one reason or another. Hopefully sir Jim will come out with a statement outlining his plans for the club in both the long and short term, stating what his plans are for the debt, stadium, training facilities and squad. As much as I would’ve preferred Qatar, if they were so desperate to get United why didn’t they just bid the premium the glazers wanted? I’m sure there’s a reason but for such a wealthy country a few extra 100 millions is nothing to them. Right now the club is a mess and sir Jim will know that, his next actions are important to outline his plans and goals for the club, presuming his offer gets voted in
 
Acquire Me said:
Let’s see how this plays out. We don’t know how this acquisition works just yet. Sir Jim is a very smart man and the structure on how he get full ownership might be very reasonable.

We don’t know much about his short and long term plans either.

If the board approves, details will be released after that. No need to panic in the meantime. Probably no need to panic at all imo. Sir Jim and Ineos can be very good owners for us.
Click to expand...


Yeah well if they become owners at all. And if they do history shows they probably won't.

So we would have to hope for two things:
INEOS actually do become majority owners in the forseeable future and contrary to his last sporting investments we will become a success under Ratciffe. Two big ifs.
 
Spoony said:
Which could mean that Jim'll plow enough cash into United to make it work. Here's hoping anyway.
Click to expand...
To be fair he doesn’t even really need to plow that much cash into transfers, he just needs to make sure the money we do spend is spent well.
 
By alienating a large part of an already fractured fan base the value of the club will by all normal financial metrics decrease when the commercial part to our sponsors will become less attractive. It’s not a wild guess to say that’s not a good thing in either the short or long term perspective.

The six siblings according to reliable sources couldn’t find consensus in the selling process, that’s why a full sell wasn’t an option. With a new minority shareholder, who’s not part of the Glazer family, it even less likely they will reach a majority decision on how to move forward with necessary investments in the infrastructure and clearing the debts. Not to mention that the club need an immediate cash injection to avoid being short of liquidity the next coming years.

A 25% shift in ownership means almost nothing when it comes decision making. The majority will always have the voting power to block any decision that can jeopardize their personal wealth. So don’t expect any significant investment into the club by the shareholders as long as the six siblings and INEOS doesn’t have the same agenda about how to financially move forward and make the club more valuable. Without a cash injection free from interests or other financial obligations it’s hard to expect a change in direction of the club.

It’s really really hard to be positive when we look at the numbers and who’s owning the club. The Glazers history as owners speaks for itself and Ratcliffe’s history as a businessman is filled with broken promises, lies and mismanagement. Wait until journalists or independent media starts to dig into INEOS record of how they deal with environmental issues and how they threat their employees. All negatives that come out of such investigation will reflect badly on United when INEOS is owning 25% with an ambition to be a majority owner.

Forgive me for being cynical and pessimistic but I can’t see the light in the tunnel when knowing Ratcliffe’s and Glazers history when it comes to developing and making a mature sport business more successful, it’s not what their past history tells us.
 
roonster09 said:
The way I see, one party was desperate to own the club that they tried multiple options to start the take over process while the other party was rigid and fed the media with soundbytes to appease the fan.

Media reporting how much SJ would have spent improving infrastructure, i mean how does that help their case to buy from glazers, it looked more to appease fans. First thing to achieve any of that is to be flexible to own the club, or spend shit loads to buy it outright. They didn't do both.

Not sure how this will play long-term, I hope Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe FIChemE is not an idiot to spend 1.5 billion for 25% without guaranteed to take over the club in the near future and sporting say immediately. He is paying the premium price, so I hope at least his team worked out the details.
Click to expand...

Yeah I did not like the way Qatar handled this. Surely they could have been more savvy and offered Glazers alternatives.
Jim wanted the club at any cost, I like the ambition.
 
So much for all those that said this would break with news from the NYSE or some financial institution and never from some football journalist .
Egg on a few faces
 
I'm looking forward to watching all the 'Ratcliffe Ravers' on here implode when it becomes apparent that nothing has changed, apart from Ratcliffe becoming the 7th Glazer.
 
LordSpud said:


Jesus I don't know what this actually means but looks like we are shopping British in the immediate future..
Click to expand...


Dear God... :lol:

Maguire reinstated as a captain and a new 5-year-deal in the making. I bet the Glazers agree with this, as well. ;)
 
Josep Dowling said:
Worst of both world as a fan. I’m done.
Click to expand...
Hardly. This is the best scenario for the club. Qatar was never a serious option. They wouldn't stump up the necessary or be willing to play the long game/be flexible. This scenario is far better than any other possible option, which includes the Glazer's staying long term, or them selling a minority stake to someone who has no interest in a full takeover.
 
If he were a couple years ago buying British would make sense.

England have a good team but with an overly conservative manager. I think that boat has sailed now with all the top English talents at big clubs.
 
Let's put the Glazers to one side for a moment.

As things currently stand, Manchester United is flat broke. We had to sell Dean Henderson, just to scrape enough money together to LOAN Amrabat. We cannot strengthen the team in January, without selling fringe players. Our fringe players are currently in the starting 11 because of our horrendous injuries.

The roof of the stadium is leaking and we are 700 million in debt. So cannot even pay to fix it.

Estimates say that we need 1.7bn to redevelop the stadium/facilities and to clear the existing debt. We already generate 600 million per season, but this is going straight out the door on signings, wages and servicing the debt.

INEOS are potentially investing 1.7bn into the club.

To put that into context, Abu Dhabi's entire investment into Manchester City over the last 15 years has been about 2.5bn.
Which included buying the club in its entirety. So they are a fully state owned, sports washing, fraud of a club. With fake sponsorship deals, bogus income, under the table payments to players and managers, because nobody wanted to play for them. It's a totally corrupt façade, and it stinks to high heaven.

We don't need to fake it until we make it. We don't need to build Disneyland in Manchester, just to break even. Our sponsorship deals are real. Players want to come to here. We can fill the stadium 3 times in 7 days. We are a global entity, where the mere mention of MUFC generates unprecedented media traffic. We are already a juggernaut.

1.7bn is a very substantial amount of money. And it's rumoured that INEOS will turf out all of these bankers and Glazer stooges and bring in actual footballing experts to run the football side of the club. This is music to my ears.
 
Godfather said:
Yeah well if they become owners at all. And if they do history shows they probably won't.

So we would have to hope for two things:
INEOS actually do become majority owners in the forseeable future and contrary to his last sporting investments we will become a success under Ratciffe. Two big ifs.
Click to expand...

I can’t see him making a deal to not become the majority owner, but exactly how and when that happens will be interesting to learn more about.

The success part is not easy to say anything about without short and long plans somewhat revealed.

In the end, SJ could not get the deal done and that’s a not a positive for him. The acquisition of the club was the first big test and it looks like Sir Jim will be the one who comes out on top. If the best way to get the club from the Glazers is not a complete takeover now, but a partial takeover to complete full ownership gradually, then that is the right way imo.
 
For a supposed boyhood fan Jimmyboy has well and truly fecked us. It almost feels like a final nail in the coffin. The paralysis of the past year has just been extended by a at least a further three of more limbo and more torture because Jimmy Rat won't invest a penny whilst still owning just 25% as that would make his eventual takeover more expensive.

So rather than have the Glazers out we have come out of this with them still in control but 1.8bn richer, no fresh capital for the needed renovations and just added another layer in the decision making process that was already too cumbersome. We are fecked and what hurts more is that its been enabled by someone who pretended to be one of our own.

The next three to five years look like they will be most transformative in football and instead of catching up with the competition we will still be stuck in this never ending Glazer torment. Thanks a lot Jimmy the Rat.
 
Instead of clearing out the clueless leeches we've gotten another who's bailing out the Glazers. Jim will want to install his own client oligarchy, so we'll see more bloat at the club. This will not fundamentally change the course this club is on.

I can't help but feel that if the Glazers surname were Ghazari they'd have been kicked out a long time ago, most certainly if they announced this deal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.