Berbaclass
Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Probably notAgreed.
Perhaps this thread can now focus on what is going to happen with the club?
Probably notAgreed.
Perhaps this thread can now focus on what is going to happen with the club?
Could have :
- Wiped out all the existing debt and bought the club with no new debt
- Got rid of the glazers
- Build a new stadium
- Build a new training ground
- Not worry about FFP anymore and scramble for loans on deadline day
But we're stuck with brexit Jim overpaying for 25%, and then god knows what will happen. Does he even have the cash needed for the above stuff? I highly doubt it.
So we at least know that Sir Jim raised a good kid.Yes. I'm not sure about his eldest son - but I've met his youngest (who is around 30) and he's a Chelsea fan.
Good? Sure.So we at least know that Sir Jim raised a good kid.
Good? Sure.
Bright? Nope.
I’m not sure that’s true. If Jim had control of the clubs finances we would be hearing it right now. There’s a big difference between being in control of the sporting side and having the means and authority to stabilise the club.
Ed Woodward was in control of the sporting side and he had to run budgets, transfer fees etc past the Glazers.
That’s the club. We need money set aside for infrastructure as an example, that’s not in the sorting side. The club has to spend money elsewhere on the club apart from the sporting side. Phrasing it as if the Glazers are simply running the marketing department is bat shit insane and reads as a PR move
United already have a don in negotiations, the guy from addidas.Bring them both in. Mitchell as DOF and Edwards as head of transfer negotiations.
You’re doing something I mentioned earlier in this thread & instead of talking about the Ratcliffe bid you’re comparing it to the Jassim one which is gone now thus irrelevant.Well, we do have enough details about the Qatari bid to be fully aware of what a shit outcome that would’ve been for the club, the devil being Qatar state ownership. In terms of the Ratcliffe offer, do you genuinely believe it’s a £1,3b billion investment simply for a 25% stake of the club and that’s it?
Thank you for this.There have been like 100 articles written this weekend thus it's hard to remember exactly where I read everything, but they definitely said INEOS are proposing to buy a combination of Class A and B shares. INEOS would become the single largest shareholder with 25% (presently, it's Joel with 19%).
I've not seen it confirmed in any report what percentage of each class INEOS will buy. Some posters seem to think it will be 12.5pp each of Class A and B, while others stated (0.25 × 69%) + (0.25 × 31%). I did read somewhere that suggested the Glazer voting power will be diluted, so I suspect they will either create provisions to give all shares purchased by INEOS Class B status, or perhaps they will scrap the dual share structure altogether and give all shareholders the same voting rights per share.
The Board apparently meets on Thursday, so we may not know until then.
My point wasn’t that they are ‘the same’ though. My point is both come with massive Human Rights concerns yet a lot of posters seem to only be bothered about the Qatari ones.And I heavily condemn it, don't worry. However, it's still different than an actual state taking over the club.
It's not difficult to believe at all, there are many people in the world with the money to buy us without state funding (there are undeniably links to governments however)V difficult to believe it wasn't with the size of the offer and context about the country.
We'll never know for certain, but I don't think Jassim losing the bid necessarily means it was not state-backed. We all know there is no way Jassim put up the entire 6 odd billion USD from his personal wealth. The 92 Foundation would have been a consortium with him as the head, but where the money was coming from seemed ambiguous. At bare minimum, I don't think something of this magnitude (i.e. bidding on Man Utd) happens without at least the blessing of the people at the top.All that would have taken a lot of money, and the fact that Jassim didn't go any higher than he did indicates he was at the limit of what he was willing to spend. Indeed, him pulling out makes it more likely that it truly was just him as a businessman (possibly alongside a couple of others) that tried to take us over, rather than the state of Qatar using him as a front. In which case Ratcliffe is probably richer than Jassim.
This sentence kind of contradicts your opinion it was private don’t you think?It's not difficult to believe at all, there are many people in the world with the money to buy us without state funding (there are undeniably links to governments however)
Yeah there's just no way of spinning Jassim as anything other than a front for state ownership. The guys a member of the royal family, who's dad used to run the country and brother currently runs the country, while he runs the national bank. It's about as well hidden as Newcastle's charitable foundation or whatever it was.All that would have taken a lot of money, and the fact that Jassim didn't go any higher than he did indicates he was at the limit of what he was willing to spend. Indeed, him pulling out makes it more likely that it truly was just him as a businessman (possibly alongside a couple of others) that tried to take us over, rather than the state of Qatar using him as a front. In which case Ratcliffe is probably richer than Jassim.
How were they magically about to make FFP no longer a problem?
FTFYAnd I heavily cheerlead and kiss the arse of the guy it, don't worry. However, it is propah Brexit, so much better than a private businessman from the same region directly taking over the club.
I guess this changes nothing in United servicing the Glazers' debt though right?
You are rated on this forum and I like you but you seriously need to take yourself out of this thread if you're going to be baiting United fans like this.So we at least know that Sir Jim raised a good kid.
Not sure he can do that with 25 percent?Probably taking out a massive loan on Ineos' books that United will need to service on top of the Glazer debt
Probably taking out a massive loan on Ineos' books that United will need to service on top of the Glazer debt
BehaveYou are rated on this forum and I like you but you seriously need to take yourself out of this thread if you're going to be baiting United fans like this.
Other oppo fans would have felt the ban hammer for comments like this by now and you've made several.
Who do you think was paying for Jassim’s investment? Was they giving up billions because they liked us?
I expect he likely had some backing from the state, but if he was truly just a front I'd be surprised they didn't go higher with their offer. Also would have expected them to offer business benefits to the Glazer family under-the-table to put a bit extra into their pockets and encourage them to sell (and on the flipside put pressure on any business they do with Qatar if they refuse to sell).Yeah there's just no way of spinning Jassim as anything other than a front for state ownership. The guys a member of the royal family, who's dad used to run the country and brother currently runs the country, while he runs the national bank. It's about as well hidden as Newcastle's charitable foundation or whatever it was.
All that would have taken a lot of money, and the fact that Jassim didn't go any higher than he did indicates he was at the limit of what he was willing to spend. Indeed, him pulling out makes it more likely that it truly was just him as a businessman (possibly alongside a couple of others) that tried to take us over, rather than the state of Qatar using him as a front. In which case Ratcliffe is probably richer than Jassim.
Jesus. The whole point of wanting new owners is so the structure is torn out root and stem and replanted. Glazers make 0 change year on year unless they're forced to which I find infuriating. Had Jassim done the same then the takeover would've been pointless from a results perspective.Oof. So Jassim might have removed the Glazers but seemingly done nothing to address the other major problem, arguably the biggest issue of incompetence ruling the roost.
Wonder how this will go down with some.
“But, y’know, Jim will make one too many mistakes. They’ll see what I always knew and they’ll go in there, they’ll march in there, they’ll go ‘right, yeah, Jassim was right, you pissed off him, you pissed off him, y’know, right, you’re not the owner you think you are, right, so get out, we made the mistake’ and they’ll drag him out by his hair and that’s when the begging starts. Then they come to me and they’ll go ‘Ooh, Sheikh Jassim you were right all along, you were the right man for this job, you're the best man for this job. Will you come back?’ I'll be like, ‘Yeah sure how much money have you got? Because this is going to cost you, this is going to cost you.”
still doesn't address the 1b debt, the major overhaul/replacement of OT, the big expansion/upgrade of carrington and also signing suitable quality players for the team. INEOS has borrowed to put in the minority investment, where's the money coming for the billions needed spent to get United facility wise up their with the Citys and Spurs of the world?I know were all in shock and a bit confused but this idea that 92 would have kept Arnold and Murtough and is terrifying and to me may have dodged a bullet here, they were prattling on about signing Mbappe, Camavinga etc, what kind of transfer approach is that.
INEOS comes in, clears house and rebuilds staff and playing staff would be interesting and a much needed upgrade.
Jesus. The whole point of wanting new owners is so the structure is torn out root and stem and replanted. Glazers make 0 change year on year unless they're forced to which I find infuriating. Had Jassim done the same then the takeover would've been pointless from a results perspective.
Wasn't the Qatari bid all cash upfront whilst the Ratcliffe bid is all sorts of ifs and maybes spread over different time periods?
Look I'm surprised as well; state ownership of any kind was the last thing I wanted but I believe that if they really wanted United, they'd have got it. They just didn't want it as badly as they wanted to make everyone believe, as shown by the "United's loss will be someone else's gain" soundbites that are already coming out. At the end of the day the costs mount up quickly with the promises they were making, which also went to show the Glazers that they had more and more money, which we all know the Glazers would rather have in their own pocket than anywhere else.I expect he likely had some backing from the state, but if he was truly just a front I'd be surprised they didn't go higher with their offer. Also would have expected them to offer business benefits to the Glazer family under-the-table to put a bit extra into their pockets and encourage them to sell (and on the flipside put pressure on any business they do with Qatar if they refuse to sell).
It just feels they gave up too easily. I'm not saying the entire deal definitely wasn't state-backed, but I also don't think it's the certainty that some are making out.
But this is all about the 'feelings' of people. No one knows and now we'll never know in regards to what the Qatar bid would have done.Jesus. The whole point of wanting new owners is so the structure is torn out root and stem and replanted. Glazers make 0 change year on year unless they're forced to which I find infuriating. Had Jassim done the same then the takeover would've been pointless from a results perspective.
There's very very little chance of this, lets be fair.There must be a process in place after the supposed 25% buy inn...I can not belive that Ratcliff is buying into the club without having set out the plan of owning the majority of the shares soon or that being agreed on before hand. Him handing the Glazers money without a end game in sight is just not possible. Is he buying shares and then bringing in a loan that can be turned into shares at a given timepoint? I do not know but there is no chance that INEOS have not thought this through to the end...but we will have to wait an see.
What is this post!?You are rated on this forum and I like you but you seriously need to take yourself out of this thread if you're going to be baiting United fans like this.
Other oppo fans would have felt the ban hammer for comments like this by now and you've made several.
What does that even mean? Cash up front, how does that work? They wanted to pay 5bn now, while INEOS are willing to pay more now (per share) and even more down the line? Clearly the Ratcliffe bid is superior for the Glazers.