Real Madras
Full Member
If SJR buys a 25% stake in man united I am done with the club I have supported my whole life. I will move on and spend my time with my family instead. No point watching football anymore.
fecking hell, yes it is. He took over a mid-table French club and Swiss club whose longest period in their highest league was 3 fecking years and you legitimately claim that it's worse than what Glazers have done with United.Is it? he got one club relegated. The other is finishing on average between 8th-10th in a 1 club league.
Hes appointed non football personnel at Nice, their summer window last year consisted of Ramsay, Schmeichael and Ross Barkley, their fans want him out
Now calm down mate, let's not get silly now.I will move on and spend my time with my family instead.
At $46 per share all of the board are agreeing this deal.If this deal get approved, this is a deal that gives Sir Jim and Ineos majority in the long term. That much I think most will agree on.
That said, I would not be amazed if the deal had a structure that allowed Sir Jim and Ineos to take over the business in the short term.
The agreement for the remaining shares are not easy for me to say anything about obviously. My bet would be that the Glazers are confident of an upside coming and that the possible upside are part of the deal on the remaining shares.
Will be interesting if we get some more information on this if/when the board approves.
You support Oviedo anyway, so you’ll be fine.If Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe FIChemE buys a 25% stake in man united I am done with the club I have supported my whole life. I will move on and spend my time with my family instead. No point watching football anymore.
Sir Jim has set aside around £4B from Ineos towards football operations at United. He is not expecting to profit from that £4B.Firstly, it's Ineos who's buying the stake, not Jim Ratcliffe.
And if you think a corporation is not making an investment with the aim of ultimately making a profit, then I'm sorry ,but I don't have a polite way of calling you deluded.
I have shares in Real Ovideo. I support Man United.You support Oviedo anyway, so you’ll be fine.
From which there is £2.5 Billion left over.Sir Jim has set aside around £4B from Ineos towards football operations at United. He is not expecting to profit from that £4B.
He must have some type of legal binding agreement that the class B shares he bought eg 25% of their 69% remain Class B and have 10 times the voting rights otherwise he’s a complete mug and Jim Ratcliffe is many things but he’s not a complete mug!No he won't.
Class B shares are the only ones that matter. He can own every publicly traded class A share in existance, and the glazers will still have complete control of the club.
“What Does Jim Actually Do?” Thread coming soon.
fecking hell, yes it is. He took over a mid-table French club and Swiss club whose longest period in their highest league was 3 fecking years and you legitimately claim that it's worse than what Glazers have done with United.
Sorry why do you think I like Jim? Where have I said that, or am I just reading your tone totally wrong. Where am I lauding anything? I'm just making a post with my viewpoint. Just seem to be biting at me, when I swear you agreed with my point a few hours ago this thread is exhausting.I know it’s great, we get what we all wanted nearly a year ago. Glazers staying with some guy buying 25% of their shares.
Qatar we’re the only offer of a complete change of ownership, turning on fellow fans & claiming ‘people are crying’ because this Ratcliffe deal is shite does what exactly?
Ratcliffe has offered the Glazers what they want & that benefit the club how exactly? Your first sentence sums it up perfectly, if what the Glazers want is money in their pocket & to hang around I’m not sure why you’d be lauding the fact that a prospective buyer wasn’t willing to do this.
Doesn't help you've got guys like Fabrizio still outlining Jassim's offer. Like a proper 'heres what you could've had'..
Indeed.From which there is £2.5 Billion left over.
Totally agree but he can’t sack Joel and Avram, if they are giving him sporting control they would have to resign from the Transfer committee board but the main board.If he really has sporting control with his 25% then prove it. Sack the board and get a new structure, and new board members eho can actually run the club. Not yes men like Murtough,if not just shut up.
My money is on Spuds.
Keegan now also.
Hmmm.I have shares in Real Ovideo. I support Man United.
- Sir Jim Ratcliffe will take control of footballing operations in an attempt to remove the Glazers from the firing line in his proposed 25 per cent Manchester United co-ownership deal, Telegraph Sport understands.
- Under terms close to being agreed by key parties, the controversial American owners would remain at the club but take back seats amid efforts to calm the mood among fans.
- A clause handing Ratcliffe control of sporting matters also goes some way to explaining why the Ineos owner is willing to pay an estimated £1.35 billion, a significant premium on market valuations, for just a quarter stake.
- One interested party claims an agreement with Ratcliffe could now be voted by key club figures this week although other insiders said a deal could yet be delayed.
- Sources on both sides of the deal played down suggestions that a deal had already been done with Ratcliffe. One added that final negotiations could yet “change the dynamic”.
- However, Ratcliffe has sought assurances that his proposals include “operational control of footballing matters”, a key figure with knowledge of the situation explained.
- Ratcliffe, whose Ineos firm generates $61 billion (£52 million) in revenue, has lined up financing from banks including Goldman Sachs Group Inc, while JPMorgan Chase & Co., Rothschild & Co. and Bank of America Corp. are among other banks advising or offering capital on a deal.
Keegan now also.
Jassim side from the beginning said they would not over payThis is a daft post by Romano. If Jassim wanted the club that badly, he would have offered what was acceptable. You can't say "you will buy something at any cost" and then refuse to give the owner what they want.
I’d imagine this signals the end for Richard Arnold, John Murtough and their various satellites around the club.
The Glazers have not been shy of spending money but they've been happy to let incompetent people control it, which includes Murtough and Arnold. Both yes men to the old regime. If somebody who knows what they're doing gets control of that money it might not be the worst thing.
I'm just glad Qatar are out of the running especially after the last week's events.
This is a daft post by Romano.
He does not need to say the Glazers have done a shit job to restructure the sporting side of the clubFor all the reports of Ratcliffe getting immediate sporting control, he'll still have to toe the party line with regards to the Glazers if he wants to acquire the club outright over the next few years. Everyone thinking that Ratcliffe getting "sporting control" with a 25% stake means he's going to come out and say the Glazers have done a shit job and restructure the club are probably wide of the mark.
This has the potential to get very messy.
It would also be an admittance from the Glazers (not that it's needed) that they couldn't care less about the football side of the club. Will Ratcliffe have the power to get rid of Arnold and Murtough and all the other incompetent clowns? I very much doubt it. Nothing about this makes sense. Nightmare scenario really. Ratcliffe is essentially our version of Usmanov, we've completely transitioned into late 00's - 2010's Arsenal.
If you seriously believe that, then more power to you mate. Unfortunately, real life doesn't work like that.Sir Jim has set aside around £4B from Ineos towards football operations at United. He is not expecting to profit from that £4B.
Jassim side from the beginning said they would not over pay
So Jassim is involved with Hamas? Who knew? Or do you think every arab is guilty as charged?
Sorry, but its just being racist what you had just stated.
For all the reports of Ratcliffe getting immediate sporting control, he'll still have to toe the party line with regards to the Glazers if he wants to acquire the club outright over the next few years. Everyone thinking that Ratcliffe getting "sporting control" with a 25% stake means he's going to come out and say the Glazers have done a shit job and restructure the club are probably wide of the mark.
Joel, is that you?If Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe FIChemE buys a 25% stake in man united I am done with the club I have supported my whole life. I will move on and spend my time with my family instead. No point watching football anymore.
It’s a bit anti-climactic, and it’s not ideal for us as a club or supporters. But at the same time I’m not completely against it at this point in time. The success of this transaction will come down to how well INEOS are able to uproot the sporting side and put the right people in charge, I don’t see the Glazers standing in their way as it’s not their money they are spending. What I am disappointed about with this transaction is that there is still question marks over the level of investment in the infra structure of the club, at this point I’m not sure where the money for that is going to come from other than the money paid to the Glazers for the club, but I’m not convinced that that will be going towards the stadium at this point.
The Glazers clearly intend to be involved until after the next WC which is primarily being hosted in the US. There will be an expected upside to valuations on premium clubs/shares after this.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?