Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Señor Sloppy said:
When thinking about the Manchester United vs Liverpool peacock dance to attract Middle Eastern investors, it's worth remembering just how popular Liverpool are throughout the region due to Mo Salah.
Click to expand...

United still vastly more popular around the world which is what sportswashing is about. They aren't trying to wash their image in their own region, they are trying to wash it globally.
 
JustinC00 said:
United still vastly more popular around the world which is what sportswashing is about. They aren't trying to wash their image in their own region, they are trying to wash it globally.
Click to expand...

When you read that article it sounds to me like there is a suggestion Qatar want out of PSG,no chance Saudi's will buy because only just bought Newcastle last year

One thing I would say is will the Premier League allow another middle Eastern ownership. Only need to look at the hoops that geordies had to go through before accepted
 
With the strength of the Dollar and sport being seen as a business the most likely buyers have always been Americans. Fact there seems to be little concrete interest from Middle East isn’t really a surprise.
 
Roboc7 said:
With the strength of the Dollar and sport being seen as a business the most likely buyers have always been Americans. Fact there seems to be little concrete interest from Middle East isn’t really a surprise.
Click to expand...

Give me Ratcliffe over them if that's only option
 
Ideally we need an owner to just let us spend the money we make. but with the required investment in the stadium / infrastructure, that might not be enough.

So while i really don't want state ownership, it might be the only way to get the club back to where it should be. From what i read, Radcliffe may buy the club, but he won't have the money to fund the major overhaul / rebuild of Old Trafford, right?
 
phelans shorts said:
I’m not going to pretend to know. I could very much see me not immediately doing but my feelings towards the club (and to be honest the sport in general) would likely wear off as time passes
Click to expand...
For me, giving up United means giving up football in general, so it's quite a big choice. Let's hope we get whatever least-worst option there is.

Edit: as you say, it's hard to know what we'll feel isn't it.
 
Last edited:
croadyman said:
Still believe there will be ME ownership
Click to expand...

The issue with ME ownership is not just the sums required it’s the attention. Buying Utd is too much attention, too much negativity as opposed to buying Newcastle for instance. Starting off with a smaller club and going under the radar is more beneficial for them. Gives time to let people forget who owners are and is accepted much easier.
 
kafta said:
Ideally we need an owner to just let us spend the money we make. but with the required investment in the stadium / infrastructure, that might not be enough.

So while i really don't want state ownership, it might be the only way to get the club back to where it should be. From what i read, Radcliffe may buy the club, but he won't have the money to fund the major overhaul / rebuild of Old Trafford, right?
Click to expand...

Ideally we want an owner that will (A) clear some or all of the 300m transfer debt, so we have no FFP restrictions. (B) Allow us to spend freely our income on transfers. (C) Run it as a sustainable business. (D) Fund the redevelopment of our infrastructure, both stadium build or regeneration, and training ground upgrade. (E) Develop new revenue streams through ancillary infrastructure development (sports village, hospitality etc). (F) Stimulate new growth in our commercial department. (G) Develop new strategic partnerships/ownership models, perhaps through multi-club ownership in talent rich markets. (H) Improve fan engagement in key strategic decision making. (I) Not use the club as a political sports washing tool for an oppressive/morally bankrupt nation state. (J) Separate the business and football sides of the business, and leave the sporting project to those with domain experience. (K) Bring a true “best in class” mentality to all areas of recruitment; and (J) Have a long term consistent strategic intent in the sporting plan that is independent of managerial turnover.

I am fully supportive of the infrastructure costs being loaded onto the club as a debt obligation, but only if the current unproductive debt burden is cleared during the buyout. Having both sets of debt would likely result in us being over leveraged, and cripple our spending ability in the transfer market.

To get all of those things is likely a pipe dream, but those are the lists of desirable traits that I can most readily identify off the top of my head.
 
Roboc7 said:
The issue with ME ownership is not just the sums required it’s the attention. Buying Utd is too much attention, too much negativity as opposed to buying Newcastle for instance. Starting off with a smaller club and going under the radar is more beneficial for them. Gives time to let people forget who owners are and is accepted much easier.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

The three ME states I believe who wouldn't be as bad as Qatar and Saudi, would be Kuwait, Dubai and Bahrain.
 
A new American bunch might not be too bad if they're as generous as that dim-witted bohely is.
 
JustinC00 said:
United still vastly more popular around the world which is what sportswashing is about. They aren't trying to wash their image in their own region, they are trying to wash it globally.
Click to expand...
Setting aside that I don't really agree with the term "sportswashing" (what exactly, for example, about Qatar's reputation has ever been "washed" by their involvement in football?), there's numerous reasons why states purchase high-profile sports clubs, with reputational improvement in the eyes of the world's general population being just one.

Other reasons would obviously include improved commercial/political links within the target countries, enhanced standing/prestige within that state's wider region and cementing support for its regime amongst its own population.

Given those factors, I'd say there's a very good chance that such an entity would examine all aspects of deals to purchase Manchester United vs Liverpool, before concluding that Liverpool's superior costings/sporting structure/popularity in ME outweighs the extent to which Manchester United is the "bigger" club globally.
 
kafta said:
Ideally we need an owner to just let us spend the money we make. but with the required investment in the stadium / infrastructure, that might not be enough.

So while i really don't want state ownership, it might be the only way to get the club back to where it should be. From what i read, Radcliffe may buy the club, but he won't have the money to fund the major overhaul / rebuild of Old Trafford, right?
Click to expand...

Again; once the owner spends 6billion quid to have ownership 9f the club, he will want some returns on it above T-bonds rate. If so then united will no longer be able to spend what he makes because that return is over & above what we currently make
 
Red the Bear said:
A new American bunch might not be too bad if they're as generous as that dim-witted bohely is.
Click to expand...

Boehly is there to make money, everything else is secondary to that, and every American owner will be the same.

You can only assume where Chelsea is concerned that they are confident the super league thing isn't dead, or that a ME investor will let them flip their investment for a profit pretty quickly, because they seem to be in a hurry to spend the £1.5 blilion pledge.
 
So basically it’s Ratcliffe or an American hedge fund

The level of the resistance against Ratcliffe baffles me. It won’t be run like Nice. Obviously
 
JustinC00 said:
"There won't be many that will spend 4-5bn+ on a sports club"


What absolutely top drawer journalism from him.
Click to expand...

You are missing what he is saying. He is saying there won't be many who can spend that and then not milk the club to the absolute limit to recoup it.
 
Last edited:
Telsim said:
Sickening...
Click to expand...

Tarring every American with the same brush I see. Niiiiiice.

…..& yet we have sections of the forum creaming themselves over Chelsea & posters claiming “theyre run smoothly”

JohnnyKills said:
Agreed. Better the devil we know
Click to expand...
LawCharltonBest said:
So basically it’s Ratcliffe or an American hedge fund

The level of the resistance against Ratcliffe baffles me. It won’t be run like Nice. Obviously
Click to expand...

Said that with your chest. How are you so confident about this? His track record of Nice and FC Lausanne-Sport don’t exactly fill me with confidence. Regardless of if he is a “fan” (how can one be a fan whilst simultaneously being a Chelsea season ticket holder I don’t know) his past experiences don’t sit well with me. But please do tell me how Jim is “obviously” going to do better, than his past two shambolic attempts?

C'est Moi Cantona said:
There's a reason we haven't heard anything from any bidder other than Ratcliffe so far, Americans aren't welcome, and they know it.
Click to expand...
No, that is not the case, you’re living in fantasy land. The reason you don’t know is because big sales like this are all done in private & water tight NDA’s are signed. Ratcliffe is an outsider in the sense that he has gone public before making a bid & he has been very vocal about wanting to buy Man Utd even before the Glazers went public about selling the club. If I remember correctly, we didn’t know the Chelsea bidders until they had actually made a bid.
 
UnitedSofa said:
Tarring every American with the same brush I see. Niiiiiice.

…..& yet we have sections of the forum creaming themselves over Chelsea & posters claiming “theyre run smoothly”




Said that with your chest. How are you so confident about this? His track record of Nice and FC Lausanne-Sport don’t exactly fill me with confidence. Regardless of if he is a “fan” (how can one be a fan whilst simultaneously being a Chelsea season ticket holder I don’t know) his past experiences don’t sit well with me. But please do tell me how Jim is “obviously” going to do better, than his past two shambolic attempts?


No, that is not the case, you’re living in fantasy land. The reason you don’t know is because big sales like this are all done in private & water tight NDA’s are signed. Ratcliffe is an outsider in the sense that he has gone public before making a bid & he has been very vocal about wanting to buy Man Utd even before the Glazers went public about selling the club. If I remember correctly, we didn’t know the Chelsea bidders until they had actually made a bid.
Click to expand...
That's the thing with Ratcliffe we do not know what he is going go bid. He might bid 3 billion as that is what he thinks we are valued and is not willing to pay more, until all the interested parties are named we will not know what their bids are or their plans, so maybe we just need to wait and see what happens instead of just speculating.
 
kafta said:
Ideally we need an owner to just let us spend the money we make. but with the required investment in the stadium / infrastructure, that might not be enough.

So while i really don't want state ownership, it might be the only way to get the club back to where it should be. From what i read, Radcliffe may buy the club, but he won't have the money to fund the major overhaul / rebuild of Old Trafford, right?
Click to expand...
If Radcliffe does bid I doubt it will be just his money. I think his only chance is to lead a consortium of wealthy investors.
 
UnitedSofa said:
No, that is not the case, you’re living in fantasy land. The reason you don’t know is because big sales like this are all done in private & water tight NDA’s are signed. Ratcliffe is an outsider in the sense that he has gone public before making a bid & he has been very vocal about wanting to buy Man Utd even before the Glazers went public about selling the club. If I remember correctly, we didn’t know the Chelsea bidders until they had actually made a bid.
Click to expand...
Actually, completely the opposite happened - nobody knew Chelsea was up for sale until Hansjorg Wyss (now current co-owner of Chelsea) gave an interview saying that he'd been offered the opportunity to buy Chelsea and was looking into the possibility of joining a consortium to do so:

Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich 'selling UK properties' as Swiss billionaire Hansjorg Wyss claims he has been offered the chance to buy the club | Football News | Sky Sports
 
MDFC Manager said:
So they haven't come to the table yet?
Click to expand...

Anyone can see the Glazers are just being greedy and asking for more than the club is worth commercially. Only a fool or a sportswasher would pay their valuation so they are holding out for one. If one doesn't come to the table they have to cut the price or not sell.
 
glazed said:
Anyone can see the Glazers are just being greedy and asking for more than the club is worth commercially. Only a fool or a sportswasher would pay their valuation so they are holding out for one. If one doesn't come to the table they have to cut the price or not sell.
Click to expand...

I don’t think anyone can see that at all, we’re pretty clearly in the dark but INEOS are interested for one.

Makes sense in any situation for an owner to be open to multiple bidders.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.