Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Judas said:
Exactly. People don’t have to pick a side, all the options are flawed and worrisome. Being massively team Jim is as bizarre as being the same for Qatar. It’s all a mess.
Click to expand...
This is the exact point I made to a poster in the Maguire thread who said there’s only 2 sides to an argument. This thread has done it from the beginning, I’ve been called pro-Qatar cause I called this potential Ratcliffe deal out multiple times despite not even mentioning the letter Q.

Qatar is now gone so feelings on them are moot but this potential deal is a travesty, poll this forum when the Glazers first made their statement about someone giving them money for 25% of their shares aka 17% of the club overall & there’d have been uproar.

People are using their anti-Qatar sentiments [right or wrong] to manipulate the narrative behind this Ratcliffe deal & it’s got nothing to do with the clubs future but feeling superior to other fans. I’m happy to not take Qatar funds but this deal keeping the Glazers around is spitting in the face of the entire fanbase & some are bathing in it.
 
cyberman said:
So is he doing Ed Woodwards job or does he have control of footballing finances?
Click to expand...
Ed Woodward was CEO and did both Murtough and Arnold's job.

By the sounds of things, Murtough would report to Ratcliffe instead of Arnold if this 25% goes through.
 
UnitedSofa said:
Ed Woodward was CEO and did both Murtough and Arnold's job.

By the sounds of things, Murtough would report to Ratcliffe instead of Arnold if this 25% goes through.
Click to expand...
And I'd bet on him being relieved for Paul Mitchell before long
 
Judas said:
Exactly. People don’t have to pick a side, all the options are flawed and worrisome. Being massively team Jim is as bizarre as being the same for Qatar. It’s all a mess.
Click to expand...
Don't think there's that many who are fanatical 'Team Jim'. There's a fair few who were concerned about a potential Qatar/Jassim takeover for a number of genuine reasons.

We still don't know the full story and plan around the Ratcliffe investment, so it's perfectly reasonable to be cautiously optimistic or neutral while remaining sceptical/cautious about outcomes.
 
UnitedSofa said:
Ed Woodward was CEO and did both Murtough and Arnold's job.

By the sounds of things, Murtough would report to Ratcliffe instead of Arnold if this 25% goes through.
Click to expand...
But isn’t it the same job if Jim needs the ok from Glazers in terms of transfer fees etc?
Glazers took a back seat from football matters a long time ago from what I see.
Look I hope it’s true and we see some movement here, it’s a promising sign.
 
mattyround said:
Hello.

I'm a long time RedCafe lurker but felt compelled to sign up after reading this thread for the last 12 hours or so.
I'm quite surprised that the sentiment about the Qatar-Ratcliffe situation is so overwhelmingly negative.
My read, based on the information currently available, is that this is a very good outcome for the club.

We haven't gone into the hands of a state owner. This is absolutely massive for the institution that is Manchester United. We are big enough, if run right, to compete and be successful. You only need to look at Arse and Pool to see that.
Ratcliffe is a grizzled businessman and made a deal that creates a roadmap for full ownership. And while that 100% number is a few years off, respected reporters are saying he could be in control of the club in a year.
His initial 25% stake would give him 40% weight when it comes to board voting rights.
He's going to have sporting control right out of the gate, and any investment into the club will be under his direction, not the Glazers.

It's not a massive leap to assume that Dave Brailsford will arrive in some type of overarching Performance Director capacity, with Paul Mitchell as DoF - these are experts in their fields with proven track records. When was the last time United could say this in terms of the people above the manager? Never.
And we're also set to benefit from the data and sports science expertise Ineos already has.

Men like Jim Ratcliffe don't engineer this type of situation to be a 'yes man' - I should have thought there's going to be a codified roadmap to control / ownership, with watertight milestones for compulsory share purchases. I'd venture that he's going to act as though he's running the show from day one. He's paying a huge premium for his first tranche of shares and will have negotiated accordingly in terms of control and input. It's just totally illogical to suggest he's spending 1.5bn to be an invisible investor.

I understand this is not the clean break that we all desperately wanted, but we are at the beginning of the end game. This news is a net positive, and I look forward to seeing how it all comes out in the wash in the coming week.

My two pennies, for what they are worth.
Click to expand...
Well said - for some to think that there wouldn’t be a clearly defined plan by Ineos to get control and influence major change clearly do not understand how big business works. If there wasn’t agreement on the end game then this deal wouldn’t be going ahead.

Also, as much as you loathe the Glazers - they will have structured a way forward that ensures that the necessary investment into the infrastructure and football setup are improved so that they can and will always maximise their investment to the max.

They again will get a better version of Utd without dipping into their pockets……
 
Woziak said:
I am very much in the Glazers out Camp and Sir Jimmy has enabled them to have their cake and eat it, however as much as I wanted Qatar to win, their was no guarantees that they would have turned United into a powerhouse again, PSG is not a perfect example of how to run a football club but the fans needs answers and they need them quickly ?

Sir Jim’s wealth varies from £12 billion to £29 billion on the internet but I’d tend to believe the times that has his wealth listed at £29 billion and he’s listed as the UK’s second richest man, even though he no longer lives in the country because he’s a tax exile. He has very obvious links to Saudi Arabia as well and that may be something which rears its head in the next few years.

His wealth is mostly asset based by owning 60% of INEOS, so yes he can use a blue chip company to improve the finances of the club but he will not be able to just go down to his locals Barclays and do a bank transfer for the remaining £4.5 billion in 3 years, that’s why it’s a staggered put and call deal, which will have airtight clauses from his end. What the fans now need to see are the following ;

1. How and when will his role be introduced to the club and what decision will he have right now, not 3 or 6 years, how will he be able to affect the running of the club now, yes he will have a board position that’s obvious due to his investment but will he be a silent partner, the Glazers lackey ?

2. There were rumours that INEOS plan was to pay a lump sum of £200m to reduce the debt from £650m to a more manageable £450m where interest payments to service the debt would be reduced and the club would be able to be debt free 5 years by using its own profit to pay off the debt however this was when he was looking to buy 51% and have a majority control?

3. When the current delayed financial accounts are released within the next two weeks, a question of investment by the Glazers of £30m per year for the next three years must be answered. under the new FSP/FFP rules I very much doubt the club could effectively spend any more than £75m on transfers per summer in the next two years without selling their young homegrown players for considerably more than they sold Henderson and Elanga this summer.

This payment can not be made by INEOS as they are minority share holders so we need to see the Glazers actually invest £90m of their own money over the next three years and if Sir Jimmy wants to try and win over the fans, which I highly doubt, this must be made clear that this will happen.

4. There needs to be a definite answer on stadium, training ground and investment into the woman’s and youth teams. We want numbers and timelines for when these improvements happen?
If INEOS are arranging a loan for a new stadium on top of the existing debt, how does this investment potentially affect Sir Jim’s future buyout? Will this investment be deducted from his agreed price of future shares or more likely will he keep this as a separate loan through INEOS, potentially as high as £2 billion, ring fence it and then when he takes over expect the club to repay INEOS at specific monetary rate every year with a very low interest rate.

This is self financing, especially if there is a success on the pitch, an extra 15,000 seats that a new stadium will bring will increase revenue to service the payment structure and this has no effect on FFP/FSP but a plan is required for expansion or does he do absolutely nothing for 3 years until he gains control in 2027 and then look for a cheap £300m makeover maybe increasing Old Trafford to 80,000 and again simply using United’s own money or will he saddle them with even more debt recently paid off so the club still has £500-600m millstone around their neck? The fans needs answer.

5. The remaining and other debt, some of this is part of the credit card facility, approx £150m for transfers used in the summer and should be serviced by the huge turnover of the club, apparently £650m predicted this season but the £300m of amortised debts for players like Martinez, Antony, Casemiro will seriously hamper the club going forward in the same way it has Barcelona.

Under the new FSP rules from Uefa, a club can only spend 80% of its revenue next summer and 70% in 2025, when you have a fixed debt of £80m or more for transfer fees owed to European clubs your working with one hand tied behind your back( Yes SJ/92 agreed to even going to pay all of this off in one hit the moment they took the club private ) Had we not had lecherous owners who took dividends and saddled the club with debt, we would be in a similar position to Bayern or Real right now, at least financially!

6. The most important question for the fans who want to see a strong united wining again on the pitch.
What will INEOS do for the team right now, their track record in football is awful forget Nice this season, it’s awful so after you take your place on the Goblins board, what are you going to do this winter window to help ETH stop the rot?
A good start would be to appoint Paul Mitchell as he’s clearly superior to John Murtough but will the Glazers even allow you to do that ?

The fans need to see a short term, mid term and long term plan all corresponding to INEOS going from 25% minority owner, 51% Chairmen and majority to final 100% where Manchester United are Delisted from NYSE , debt free and with a new shiny stadium that is the envy of the world?

So for all those Ratcliffe Fans, I hope he doesn’t leave you disappointed, for me it’s simple I’m a united fan and would always have supported the club who ever had bought it, however if this is Michael Knighton reincarnated in 2023, I may like many other United fans cringe at Ratcliffe being unveiled at Old Trafford trying to juggle two balls at one time , one called Joel and one called Avram!

What’s that old saying ; “Beware Wolves in sheep’s clothing!”
Click to expand...

A very good post mate.

There are way too many unanswered questions the supporters will have to live with for years to come. I do not have the mental health to continue this for more years.

With Jassim the club would have a clear and obvious direction and future, wich would benefit the club and the supporters that use their hard earned money on the club.

With Jimbo and INEOS we dont know the direction or future for the club. Glazers will still be around for years and suck the club dry. And people are celebrate this..

Jimbo and INEOS are just a british version of the Glazers. When the Glazers took over there was so many unanswered questions also wich we all know how it ended.

Another scary thing is that Jimbo has his very own Ed Woodward called Brailsford that has no idea what he is doing that will get a important position at the club. Good times ahead..

This article by The Guardian pretty much says the Nice football club were a better run club before Ratcliffe and INEOS with finishing in the top four three times the last six years, and almost won Ligue 1 in the 2016-2017 season:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2023/jan/20/manchester-united-fans-nice-jim-ratcliffe-psg
 
LordSpud said:
I just hope we see him at loads of games. I think we will. Maybe having the boss there all the time might encourage some of the players to buck their ideas up.
Click to expand...

He won't be at many games, he only has a certain amount of days he can be in the country.
 
cyberman said:
But isn’t it the same job if Jim needs the ok from Glazers in terms of transfer fees etc?
Glazers took a back seat from football matters a long time ago from what I see.
Look I hope it’s true and we see some movement here, it’s a promising sign.
Click to expand...
Doesn't seem like they have been?

Maybe he'll be able to ratify purchases instead of Joel?

At least that way it'll be much quicker process, my god.

 
VP89 said:
His league finishes haven't been great but he's apparently put in strong ground work for the long term, which builds for longer lasting success it seems. The fans themselves have eluded to this before they started clicking this season more.

My point is that he seems to be an owner capable of learning from mistakes. The article said he had a full review completed which had also led to a fair bit of change.

My only concern with him is his British player bias, but I personally had a bigger worry with how Qatar would run the club over Ratcliffe. Money aside, Qatars reported heads seemed to be unknown whereas Ratcliffe we know wants Paul Mitchell it seems and has a better idea of what needs to be done by way of footballing decisions. The problem with him for me is he will need to structure finance creatively to spend. He is also a superb business man however so he may well work well on it.
Click to expand...

Whatever you said applies to Jassim too. Can't his team not learn from previous mistakes at PSG?

I don't care who the owner is but my concern is Jim still hasn't told a word about the infra part which requires billions.

Putting 25% and getting control is great for him but where is the money coming from for transfer? Why would Jim spend huge money for transfers when he owns only 25 % ?

Glazers are still here owning 75% of shares.
 
black country red said:
I’ve said this before on this thread do you understand the religious beliefs of a large proportion of the spurs fan base a buyout by an Arab businessman would not go down very well in the current crisis
Click to expand...
Supporters don't have much power, mate. United is an example
 
Remember the geese said:
True. Though if you really wanted something enough, you would play the long game and be flexible. Not simply talk a good game and fail to stump up the dough.
Click to expand...
If Qatar were to buy a club, it would be a propaganda project for them and that only works if the club is consistently successful on and off the pitch.

It would be useless for them to buy a minority share like Ineos, because they don't get to control the way club is run in all aspects. Ineos will ultimately look to make monetary profit from their investment while for Qatar, the profits they are looking for would be more in line with what Abu Dhabi did at City. You can't do that with a minority share and if Glazers aren't interested in relinquishing full control, not much any buyer can do about it.
 
In the end I think I am happy Sheikh Jassim decided to withdraw. I am not in favor of sport washing and financial doping and I don't want to be a hypocrite. The main reason maybe why I wanted him to take over was money: him promising investments in the stadium, training facilities and the club in the whole.
I just can't see that with Sir Ratcliffe. Also, 100% control means 100% change. Sir Ratcliffe only getting 25% of the shares and maybe gradually getting full control is not something I am looking forward to. When will this happen? Sir Ratcliffe is not getting younger either. What will happen if he dies? Yet again, the club's future is looking bleak.
 
SAF is the GOAT said:
Click to expand...

arthurka said:
It just doesn't make any sense? One of the best business man in England is buying 25% of Man Utd to pour money into it while he still has to buy the rest of the Glazers stake at a higher price. Something isn't adding up.
Click to expand...

That to me strongly suggests there is a call option on the rest of the Glazer shares.
 
Drizzle said:
We still don't know the full story and plan around the Ratcliffe investment, so it's perfectly reasonable to be cautiously optimistic or neutral while remaining sceptical/cautious about outcomes.
Click to expand...
When the Glazers first made their statement nearly a year ago had someone pulled you to one side & said that they’d eventually be selling 25% of their shares to a guy that owns other football clubs with varied success, with no other real information to go off, would you have been ‘cautiously optimistic’ then?

It’s understandable people want change but any change other than Qatar isn’t necessarily good/better. 25% of 69% is b*llocks.
 
Hope he doesn’t bring his cycling crew cause those people don’t know anything about football.
 
pascell said:
PL TV deal is about to go up even more.

UEFA are reforming the CL to mirror more or less, the model the Super League was going to adopt.

All of this plus further commercial growth and possibility of on field success means the value of the club will go up further in the next 2-5 years. Which plays into the Glazers hands with the minority deal Ratcliffe/INEOS are brokering.
Click to expand...
Be a good idea if we get in the CL then. Not a certainty nowadays.
 
Feel I got kicked in the balls twice yesterday with the Qatar stuff and Ireland loss but feck it. Best of luck Jim, also please don't put Brailsford in charge of anything football related.
 
UnitedSofa said:
Christ sakes, calm down.
Click to expand...
How? Too many years have passed with the Glazers at the club, and that will now continue for years. The Glazers have been a huge parasite on our finances and the club's development. Now there was finally an opportunity to get rid of them, but that opportunity is gone now. How can a fan be "calm" in this situation? I don't understand how you can encourage that.
 
bond19821982 said:
Whatever you said applies to Jassim too. Can't his team not learn from previous mistakes at PSG?

I don't care who the owner is but my concern is Jim still hasn't told a word about the infra part which requires billions.

Putting 25% and getting control is great for him but where is the money coming from for transfer? Why would Jim spend huge money for transfers when he owns only 25 % ?

Glazers are still here owning 75% of shares.
Click to expand...
Jassims team never ran PSG, and no one had any idea on what their plans were from a footballing perspective. But if we fairly assume he takes a similar approach to PSG then it's worrying - they are a club who have been much farther in the process by what, a decade? and made constant errors of the same ilk as time went on.
 
Not really convinced by Ineos and how they would run the club based on their time at Nice and while Qatar's proposal sounded the most ideal, it also sounds a bit too good to be true. Think they could have easily have fecked things up from a football perspective.

As long as the Glazers are guaranteed to leave at some point, I'm happy with this deal.

Taking immediate control of the football operations is also a positive in my opinion too as that's really the core area that we as fans care about.

The future of OT will be an interesting one though as something does need to be done.
 
VP89 said:
What is this based on?
Click to expand...

See below.

I have a different opinion to them in the sense that I don't want Mitchell as DoF considering past experiences not exactly pulling up trees.

But all in all, he doesn't seem to be the 'best in the business'

Adnan said:
The problem is that many fans don't even understand the role of the DoF/football administrator. And if we compare how we have operated during Wooward's tenure and how the most successful clubs operate on the structural side of their football clubs, the difference is obvious imo, and that then causes a paranoia amongst fans who are then confused into believing that the successful clubs have some sort of magic beans that will unlock football. And those magic beans only reside with a select few football directors/football administrators in their minds. And you've got people duped into believing Paul Mitchell is one of those people who has the midas touch when in reality, his career as a head scout has been a mixed bag.
Click to expand...

Adnan said:
Mitchell was someone that the media hyped up when he was at Southampton and fans thought he was the DoF. But the actual DoF was Les Reed who brought Mitchell to the club in a scouting capacity. And Mitchell's role as a DoF at a high level only started at Monaco a few years ago, and he hasn't pulled up any trees in his tenure at the club. And now he's quoted as saying that he will leave Monaco at the end of the season.

But i'd be okay with Mitchell coming in, because it's not about one man but rather a group of people working collaboratively, which will determine how we progress on the football side of the club. I would personally prefer to bring in someone like Lee Dykes from Brentford.
Click to expand...


Adnan said:
I very much doubt Christian Falk will know what the intentions of the Qatari group are regards Man Utd.

And Paul Mitchell has got a lot wrong when it comes to recruitment and he was a total failure at Spurs hence he jumped before he was pushed after signing duds like Dier, Janssen, Wanyama, Georges-Kevin N'Koudou, Clinton N'Jie.

I'd say Mitchell has quite a few friends in the media.
Click to expand...


Adnan said:
They're in a 4 way battle with Lorient, Reims and Clermont foot for positions 8th to 11th. It's been a season of real mis-management on the football side of the club and I'm not surprised Dante is asking questions of INEOS.

Paul Mitchell also has failed to make his mark at Monaco, where they've failed to even finish in the Champions league places. So he's jumped before he can be pushed.
Click to expand...


Adnan said:
Paul Mitchell has only had experience working as a sporting director at Monaco where he didn't do a good job at all. Monaco ended up finishing 6th in the season just gone and they've also sacked the head coach Mitchell chose for his project. And prior to getting the role as the DoF at Monaco, his role was working as the head of recruitment at Soton, Spurs and RB Leipzig and from what i've seen, the players he identified have been a real mixed bag.
Click to expand...
 
Castia said:
You see we say that to cope with our absolute failure and their success. United under state ownership, American ownership or even British ownership wouldn’t be soulless because of our history.

I have a few friends and family who are City fans and have been going to the games since the league 1 days, they see posts like yours and laugh. They’re one of the best clubs in the world winning trebles they give no fecks what so ever about your stupid morals.

Our spending probably won’t even change that much we’re already one of the top spenders. The appeal was always being debt free and upgrading our facilities something this Jim simply can’t afford to do.
Click to expand...
“My stupid morals”. I care about human beings. I didn’t think state ownership was ever a good fit. I would go without trophies forever. But I’m not a spoilt glory hunter.

Your posts has summed up why I hate modern football, and the online fan.

And I don’t believe you have friends who are City fans.
 
GoldanoGraham said:
Well said - for some to think that there wouldn’t be a clearly defined plan by Ineos to get control and influence major change clearly do not understand how big business works. If there wasn’t agreement on the end game then this deal wouldn’t be going ahead.

Also, as much as you loathe the Glazers - they will have structured a way forward that ensures that the necessary investment into the infrastructure and football setup are improved so that they can and will always maximise their investment to the max.

They again will get a better version of Utd without dipping into their pockets……
Click to expand...

A lot about this doesn't make immediate sense to me (and no, I cannot claim to know in much depth how big business works). How might this structured way forward be assumed to plausibly look? And can you explain what likely makes this a mutually attractive approach for both sides, compared to Ratcliffe's former bid?
 
Last edited:
Hester_manc said:
How? Too many years have passed with the Glazers at the club, and that will now continue for years. The Glazers have been a huge parasite on our finances and the club's development. Now there was finally an opportunity to get rid of them, but that opportunity is gone now. How can a fan be "calm" in this situation? I don't understand how you can encourage that.
Click to expand...
Give Ratcliffe a chance. I'm not too optimistic and think he'll be somewhat similar to the Glazers, based solely on the fact that we haven't heard anything from him about what he plans to do.

But I'm willing to give him a chance, not having a bottomless money pit doesn't always equate to success so let's see what happens.

There's no reason why we can't do all those things with Ratcliffe either. It just won't be instant, which is what the modern football fan craves.

Calling for patience, yes we've been waiting long enough, but let's wait some more and see what happens over the next several years.
 
UnitedSofa said:
See below.

I have a different opinion to them in the sense that I don't want Mitchell as DoF considering past experiences not exactly pulling up trees.

But all in all, he doesn't seem to be the 'best in the business'
Click to expand...
You quoted Adnan who says he'd be OK with Mitchell because it's about the collaboration. Mitchell as a scout is really good and the structure Ratcliffe brings is yet to be seen, just that Mitchell would play a key role.

Who would you go for? You do know almost every DoF has been a mixed bag, right?
 
So SJR has paid 2bln to be Arnold’s boss and report to the glazers? What’s in this for the glazers? This is a terrible deal for everyone involved.
 
Thom Merrilin said:
According to his report, there is a route to 100% ownership including class A shares over 3-6 years and a controlling majority in a little as 1 year. He also says that Ineos will be able to inject funds immediately and have full control over what those funds are used for.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this. I sincerely hope there is some kind of obligation to eventually buy the whole thing within a few years. I fully expect we get an official announcement (albeit stating Board approval is pending) of the deal tomorrow before the NYSE opens, so hopefully this gets cleared up.

Personally, between the two imperfect options we had, I wanted the Qataris, but as long as INEOS and Jimbo have an obligation to take a controlling stake within the foreseeable future, I think we all need to at least give them a chance and refrain from immediately pulling out the pitchforks.
 
VP89 said:
You quoted Adnan who says he'd be OK with Mitchell because it's about the collaboration. Mitchell as a scout is really good and the structure Ratcliffe brings is yet to be seen, just that Mitchell would play a key role.

Who would you go for? You do know almost every DoF has been a mixed bag, right?
Click to expand...
They also heavily criticise him and say that he's largely been a disappointment, I also highlight that my opinion is different to theirs.

I don't know who I'd have, I'd wait until we're linked with a few and it's credible and not a rumour and then do my research on them.

But from what I've read Mitchell doesn't seem to be that guy to solve everything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.