Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rightnr said:
To give some people a bit of a break from my whining, here's a good video of a French journo talking to Saeed about what we can expect from Ratcliffe. Particularly interesting was the start from 10:00 to 15:00.

This same journo also had insight on Todibo versus Disasi in the summer which made turned me off the latter and made me want us to sign the latter.

https://www.youtube.com/ISMKFEeqv8ojoM15
Click to expand...
So to clarify, did you or did you not want us to sign Disasi?
 
VP89 said:
Qatar owned PSG's chairman is an ex tennis player - what's your point?

Jim appears to be far more likely to get it right than Qatari owners.
Click to expand...
There is no point, but people are presuming men that have shown nothing but total incompetence have now allowed someone with competence to come on board and sort shit out, which would be possibly the only good decision they’ve ever made to date.
 
VP89 said:
--> Staff will be cut
--> Murtough and Arnold might be dead men walking
--> Board will be restructured to give the INEOS members control to for sporting autonomy
--> Paul Mitchell looks likely - Michael Edwards admired but unclear if he's open for a PL return.
--> Jean-Claude Blanc could be the CEO

From The Athletic:

" Ratcliffe wants control of sporting decisions immediately and is proposing a new structure where INEOS representatives have seats on the board, thus granting definitive influence on such matters. But the exact nature of this arrangement still needs to be worked out. Ratcliffe is not concerned with having oversight on United’s commercial arm straightaway, but he has been negotiating the mechanism for eventually buying the majority of shares and completing a full takeover.



It is anticipated that Ratcliffe would wish to make his own appointments on the football side and plans have been discussed.

Paul Mitchell, who has left his role as Monaco’s sporting director and moved back home to Manchester, is thought to be under consideration. Mitchell established his reputation for recruitment work at Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur and RB Leipzig and has a good relationship with senior INEOS figures. Monaco were top of Ligue 1 when he left after what was regarded as a successful transfer window and the building of a new management setup.

Michael Edwards and Julian Ward, who enjoyed success in helping build Liverpool’s squad under Jurgen Klopp, have been discussed, but it is unclear if either is open to a Premier League return imminently. United held talks with Dan Ashworth before he took up the position as Newcastle United’s sporting director and any approach would now cost significant money in compensation. There is speculation about what any restructuring would mean for football director John Murtough, with Ratcliffe tending to want his own people in positions of power.

Sir Dave Brailsford, the former head of British Cycling and INEOS Grenadiers before becoming Ratcliffe’s director of sport in late 2021, would be expected to head up the sporting operation at United.

The position of Richard Arnold as United’s chief executive would come into doubt should Ratcliffe succeed. Jean-Claude Blanc, the former Paris Saint-Germain chief executive who joined INEOS in February, is a potential candidate to step in. Ratcliffe, who toured Old Trafford and the training ground at Carrington in March, is said to feel that United’s operation can be more streamlined given the club employs more than 1,000 staff members. "
Click to expand...
Sounds promising.
 
Chesterlestreet said:
He won't do that. Not even short term. If part of this deal is that he - with immediate effect - takes control over the "football side" or the "football operation" or however it's phrased, he obviously won't take any orders from the Glazers.

They won't "maintain control" - and they have zero interest in doing so. If they could clone Fergie, they would salivate at the prospect of leaving all "control" of the actual football club to him.
Click to expand...
This is still their club. People reading those tweets and not thinking about logic in them. Ineos are minority owners. So, even if they get control for football stuff (which is again strange that Glazers are fine with that), they will still need to get approval from Glazers/Arnold regarding every signing, every appointment and every single new contract.
And there you will get Game of thrones shit. Glazers, Arnold and Ineos. 3 parties which have their own interest.
 
OleGunnar20 said:
You're fun.

I don't know where I said I expected any of those things to happen. I'm glad we aren't being soaked in oil money and hope the Glazers feck off ASAP.

I'd rather support my club in mid table than watch us win champions leagues as a play thing of some Sheik.

That's my opinion. You're welcome to yours.
Click to expand...
I’d rather support is winning the league under a Sheikh than being rinsed by our current owners. I will however always support the club despite ownership. I just want us to be the best possible.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
This is still their club. People reading those tweets and not thinking about logic in them. Ineos are minority owners. So, even if they get control for football stuff (which is again strange that Glazers are fine with that), they will still need to get approval from Glazers/Arnold regarding every signing, every appointment and every single new contract.
And there you will get Game of thrones shit. Glazers, Arnold and Ineos. 3 parties which have their own interest.
Click to expand...

INEOS would actually be the largest single holder, the rest of the Glazers holdings aren't combined.
 
VP89 said:
--> Staff will be cut
--> Murtough and Arnold might be dead men walking
--> Board will be restructured to give the INEOS members control to for sporting autonomy
--> Paul Mitchell looks likely - Michael Edwards admired but unclear if he's open for a PL return.
--> Jean-Claude Blanc could be the CEO

From The Athletic:

" Ratcliffe wants control of sporting decisions immediately and is proposing a new structure where INEOS representatives have seats on the board, thus granting definitive influence on such matters. But the exact nature of this arrangement still needs to be worked out. Ratcliffe is not concerned with having oversight on United’s commercial arm straightaway, but he has been negotiating the mechanism for eventually buying the majority of shares and completing a full takeover.



It is anticipated that Ratcliffe would wish to make his own appointments on the football side and plans have been discussed.

Paul Mitchell, who has left his role as Monaco’s sporting director and moved back home to Manchester, is thought to be under consideration. Mitchell established his reputation for recruitment work at Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur and RB Leipzig and has a good relationship with senior INEOS figures. Monaco were top of Ligue 1 when he left after what was regarded as a successful transfer window and the building of a new management setup.

Michael Edwards and Julian Ward, who enjoyed success in helping build Liverpool’s squad under Jurgen Klopp, have been discussed, but it is unclear if either is open to a Premier League return imminently. United held talks with Dan Ashworth before he took up the position as Newcastle United’s sporting director and any approach would now cost significant money in compensation. There is speculation about what any restructuring would mean for football director John Murtough, with Ratcliffe tending to want his own people in positions of power.

Sir Dave Brailsford, the former head of British Cycling and INEOS Grenadiers before becoming Ratcliffe’s director of sport in late 2021, would be expected to head up the sporting operation at United.

The position of Richard Arnold as United’s chief executive would come into doubt should Ratcliffe succeed. Jean-Claude Blanc, the former Paris Saint-Germain chief executive who joined INEOS in February, is a potential candidate to step in. Ratcliffe, who toured Old Trafford and the training ground at Carrington in March, is said to feel that United’s operation can be more streamlined given the club employs more than 1,000 staff members. "
Click to expand...

Quite like the sound of that.
 
Any ITK have more insights on why Glazers rejected the bid ? Other than tax or some political reasons cant find a reason why bid got rejected.

Not sure how tax works on this sale but out of 7B Glazers might lose big chunk to tax probably and hence the resistance to sell whole club at once rather than a part of it?
 
So we keep the leeches on the payroll, add another shareholder who will head the sporting decisions. Where’s the money going to come from? How will the debt be cleared? The stadium renovated and the squad reinforced?
 
Last edited:
If Ratcliffe does go through with this 25% do we have any idea where the debt will be placed? At any point will previous debt be cleared and what on earth will we do about the stadium and training ground?
 
skc_18 said:
Any ITK have more insights on why Glazers rejected the bid ? Other than tax or some political reasons cant find a reason why bid got rejected.

Not sure how tax works on this sale but out of 7B Glazers might lose big chunk to tax probably and hence the resistance to sell whole club at once rather than a part of it?
Click to expand...

It was lower than what they were willing to accept.
 
Kostov said:
So we keep the leeches on the payroll, add another shareholder who will head the sporting decisions. Where’s the money going to come from? How will the debt be cleared? The stadium renovated and the swuad reinforced?
Click to expand...
Just typed the same :lol:
 
skc_18 said:
Any ITK have more insights on why Glazers rejected the bid ? Other than tax or some political reasons cant find a reason why bid got rejected.

Not sure how tax works on this sale but out of 7B Glazers might lose big chunk to tax probably and hence the resistance to sell whole club at once rather than a part of it?
Click to expand...
They based the club in the Cayman Islands, so minimum tax
 
Jeppers7 said:
If Ratcliffe does go through with this 25% do we have any idea where the debt will be placed? At any point will previous debt be cleared and what on earth will we do about the stadium and training ground?
Click to expand...

New debt if any will be placed on Ineos. We don't know if he is taking loans for this purchase all we know was loans where planned for his initial bigger bid. But this situation is nothing like the Glazers loans so a loan placed on Ineos has no bearing on United.

It will be safe to assume our previous debt will remain on the club until Ineos become majority owners.

A minority shareholder won't pay off the existing debt. Even if Ineos get majority control it's likely they won't pay off the debt imo. More than likely they'll transfer the debt to Ineos so it doesn't impact FFP and pay it off slowly from there.

Initial reports on the stadium said renovation and increase capacity to 90k.
 
FriedClams said:
Why don't you just go away then. Being confused about people having moralistic tendencies just makes people think you aren't the nicest, for your information.
Click to expand...

You know what? I'm not the nicest and neither do I want to be

Moralistic isn't a positive term by the way, generally used to criticise OTT opinions so quite apt here

Interested to hear your thoughts on Sir Jim's BREXIT and greenwashing tendencies though
 
skc_18 said:
Any ITK have more insights on why Glazers rejected the bid ? Other than tax or some political reasons cant find a reason why bid got rejected.
Click to expand...
Not an ITK. They are expecting club valuation to go up and fetch them more money in future would be my guess.
 
gaffs said:
Mate. You're a bit late on this one. The club was sold to foreigners 20 years ago!

We are potentially about to be owned by a Manchester United fan, from Manchester.
Click to expand...

BobFromParva said:
The value they take from it is the way it’s value increases.
I’ve read that they bought it for a few hundred thousand, put in a capable management team and £1.5 billion and it’s now worth something north of £4 billion. And even if those numbers aren’t current it remains a solid truth that good management and reinvesting profits is what it takes to grow a business . . the better the management and the more of the profits that get fed back into the machine the bigger it gets.

I’m guessing that Ratcliffe understands this.

Why do people keep Quoting City as a model? 115 outstanding charges. Problem is other clubs are now competing against countries. Is it not a little ironic that City were in uproar against Newcastles ownership. City and Chelski for that matter got away with absolutely ridiculous financial bending of rules etc etc. what’s a few hundred million here and there when you have a nations resources to fund you latest toy. That’s why a lot of fans wanted Qatar fight fire with fire. No debt as level a playing field as possible. The Glazers are staying on because $5bn on a $250m investment by their Dad is not enough for them. don’t forget they also have other holdings. Even without United or the brand they are amazingly wealthy. They are not United Fans.
.
Click to expand...
 
pascell said:
And if he does, who cares? It's out of our control, just like Ratcliffe buying United.
Click to expand...
I care for one.
He would have got rid of our debt, arranged OT and Carrington etc etc .
He will be an angry man.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
This is still their club. People reading those tweets and not thinking about logic in them. Ineos are minority owners. So, even if they get control for football stuff (which is again strange that Glazers are fine with that), they will still need to get approval from Glazers/Arnold regarding every signing, every appointment and every single new contract.
And there you will get Game of thrones shit. Glazers, Arnold and Ineos. 3 parties which have their own interest.
Click to expand...
Yep, it's going to get very messy, very fast. If you think it takes forever for United to get anything done now, just wait.
 
VP89 said:
--> Staff will be cut
--> Murtough and Arnold might be dead men walking
--> Board will be restructured to give the INEOS members control to for sporting autonomy
--> Paul Mitchell looks likely - Michael Edwards admired but unclear if he's open for a PL return.
--> Jean-Claude Blanc could be the CEO

From The Athletic:

" Ratcliffe wants control of sporting decisions immediately and is proposing a new structure where INEOS representatives have seats on the board, thus granting definitive influence on such matters. But the exact nature of this arrangement still needs to be worked out. Ratcliffe is not concerned with having oversight on United’s commercial arm straightaway, but he has been negotiating the mechanism for eventually buying the majority of shares and completing a full takeover.



It is anticipated that Ratcliffe would wish to make his own appointments on the football side and plans have been discussed.

Paul Mitchell, who has left his role as Monaco’s sporting director and moved back home to Manchester, is thought to be under consideration. Mitchell established his reputation for recruitment work at Southampton, Tottenham Hotspur and RB Leipzig and has a good relationship with senior INEOS figures. Monaco were top of Ligue 1 when he left after what was regarded as a successful transfer window and the building of a new management setup.

Michael Edwards and Julian Ward, who enjoyed success in helping build Liverpool’s squad under Jurgen Klopp, have been discussed, but it is unclear if either is open to a Premier League return imminently. United held talks with Dan Ashworth before he took up the position as Newcastle United’s sporting director and any approach would now cost significant money in compensation. There is speculation about what any restructuring would mean for football director John Murtough, with Ratcliffe tending to want his own people in positions of power.

Sir Dave Brailsford, the former head of British Cycling and INEOS Grenadiers before becoming Ratcliffe’s director of sport in late 2021, would be expected to head up the sporting operation at United.

The position of Richard Arnold as United’s chief executive would come into doubt should Ratcliffe succeed. Jean-Claude Blanc, the former Paris Saint-Germain chief executive who joined INEOS in February, is a potential candidate to step in. Ratcliffe, who toured Old Trafford and the training ground at Carrington in March, is said to feel that United’s operation can be more streamlined given the club employs more than 1,000 staff members. "
Click to expand...

Fair play Sir Jim, seems to be targeting the right areas.
 
edgecutter said:
Ineos planning to invest in the stadium and traing facilities makes zero sense when you plan on owning all of the club in the future. Why invest making the assets go up.in value when you plan on buying the last 3/4? This stinks to high heaven
Click to expand...

Maybe they already agreed a price for the shares in the future.
 
Does make some sense,

how does a person with 25% stake of a Football Club, control all footballing issues.

A football club main job is footballing issues :D. Very confusing. Glazers like 100%.


 
VP89 said:
Felt a bit weirded out by the Qatar interest when Jassim didn't even bother turning up to any of the rounds to negotiate while Ratcliffe did.

Then we heard annoying Qatar media soundbites saying Manchester United is Qatari.

Now we are hearing how it's our loss and they were our only shot at narrowing the gap.

I dont enjoy being claimed by a state and trying to be forced to feel like we depended on them for glory. Go feck yourselves, we are a big club and ultimately need owners with some money and some football sense. If INEOS can bring that then its worlds better than what we had. Go make PSG more of a circus, bellends.
Click to expand...
Easier said than done. Yes, we used to be a huge club who used to compete with Real for the most revenue & valued club. Are we anymore?

Another 10 years like this, we would be Liverpool of 90s and City will take the the spot of us with their endless money.

People are supporting Qatar not because they are state owned but they are buying 100% and have the money to invest on and off field. If it was someone else who is willing to do the same, people will support them too. End of the day we want out club back to top.

Now can Jim do that is a hypothetical question. He is a minority owner with the full takeover to take atleast 3-5 years. Ok, he may have the sporting control but that's just a fancy term. What does that actually mean ? We need investment on and off the field, right now. Not after some years.

If the debt is on INEOS, how will that be accepted by the INEOS board ? You have a group of shareholders to answer to. You just can't put a huge debt on some company just because you own it. Which mean, you will have a payment due to the parent company. Assuming it's interest free, it would be still be 50m for 20 years that's coming from our revenue.

To be honest I don't know. I am disappointed that Jassim didn't do enough to get this done but Glazers aren't easy to work with either. They never wanted to sell 100 %.
 
Licha-Vidic said:
Does make some sense,
how does a person with 25% stake of a Football Club, control all footballing issues.
A football club main job is footballing issues :D. Very confusing. Glazers like 100%.


Click to expand...

Glazers like money for nothing. They can sit back and let someone else do the work, like when SAF ran the club for them
 
Zed 101 said:
This whole thing just makes me want to walk away TBH, to be given the prospect of Glazer's out and real improvements incoming, to this sorry state of affairs, in 38 years of following Utd I have never felt more disenchanted with football and more like having a break from it! take a year or 2 out and see if the fire kindles, I know I won't but TBH right now it is more of an addiction than enjoyment
Click to expand...

Do you know the deal and all the plans they have already? Maybe you’re a bit of a drama queen in your reaction.
 
Amsterdam Devil said:
Maybe they already agreed a price for the shares in the future.
Click to expand...
That'll be a stupid and pointless move by Glazers. They could have taken all the money now from Jassim if that was the case.
The only reason they would sign up for a staggered take over (if they agreed to one) will be because they think that rest of the club will fetch them much more than the current numbers.
 
Licha-Vidic said:
Does make some sense,

how does a person with 25% stake of a Football Club, control all footballing issues.

A football club main job is footballing issues :D. Very confusing. Glazers like 100%.


Click to expand...


If any club would allow such a thing, it would the Glazer’s Man Utd. You need to understand they never had care about how the sporting department was run. This actually works great for them as they can just point at Sir Jim if it goes wrong on the pitch, and just focus on taking money from the brand.
 
Licha-Vidic said:
Does make some sense,

how does a person with 25% stake of a Football Club, control all footballing issues.

A football club main job is footballing issues :D. Very confusing. Glazers like 100%.


Click to expand...


Not confusing at all, could easily be sorted via (specific) voting rights to give INEOS control. Glazers get to keep the asset and don't get to absolve themselves of any responsibility.
 
skc_18 said:
Any ITK have more insights on why Glazers rejected the bid ? Other than tax or some political reasons cant find a reason why bid got rejected.

Not sure how tax works on this sale but out of 7B Glazers might lose big chunk to tax probably and hence the resistance to sell whole club at once rather than a part of it?
Click to expand...
Because they’re not planning on going anywhere any time soon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.