The Saudi’s didn’t own a big football club. They took a chance at one. Qatar own PSG. It’s abit different.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
The Saudi’s didn’t own a big football club. They took a chance at one. Qatar own PSG. It’s abit different.
Just another step in your evolution. Can't wait until you actually start travelling back and forth in time.
That's clearly bollocks, though, isn't it?
United represent the potential of Liverpool around 2015 times X.
We need owners who appoint the right people and use the wealth generated by the club itself wisely.
We do not need to copy City's "model" in order to best them. There's nothing suggesting this under the current conditions.
We have spent a shitload of money, more than most, under non-state owners since Fergie retired. If we had spent that money wisely, under competent management, we absolutely would have challenged City.
I see where you’re coming from. It’s hard not to be overly pessimistic given what’s happened this last decade.
Having said that, I don’t think a well run Manchester United plays second fiddle to anyone, not as dominant as under Sir Alex yes, but there’s definitely scope for us to be right up there.
Whether success happens with Jim is another question, but I think it’s important to remember that it’s not completely out of the realm of possibility that we can be successful. We are a huge club. Barca, Real and Bayern are all more than capable of beating the oil clubs in the CL. We will be too (if) we get our thumb out.
There’s no real point in supporting us if you can’t hold onto that. Football is dead if what you say is true (which it may well be, and I’m just being incredibly naive).
Bet you he doesn't.
It’s not bollocks though you all harp back to years when football was fundamentally different. Footballs changed and people love to romanticise about it,
The reality from the past 10 or so years of football is a few clubs have broken the mould like Liverpool but they have had to have the seasons of their lives twice in a row and only just got something to show for it.
Because a massive state backed juggernaut even at 70% of their level due to their financial power still require a near perfect season to get past them.
I don't give a feck if we aren't Southampton or Spurs. He was in an influential role that brought up both clubs multiple levels to what they were.
What did Cruyff win and where?
I knew someone would pick up on that. Come to think of it, so did he.
He’s at Barcelona. Did that go over your head.
That’s the point, I think it is the sport sold its soul to the devil and it will play out over the next x amount of years.
However key issues are here that if Radcliffe’s valuation of £5.35 billion only £1.4bn of that is guaranteed, the remaining £3.95 billion is all based on financial levers, it’s just as likely for the co ownership to not work and the club falls out of Europe like Nice and the club’s financial performance declines dramatically and then club might even face potential European transfer bans, unless very real questions regarding club debt, Director investment and transfer funds for the manager are answered?
Right now the Glazers can cash out £5 billion with the debt rumoured to be paid off in a 6th bid that was last week muted to be £5.6 billion so deduct the debt and they receive £5 billion now cash, if they all invest there £825 million or $1 billion each in certain very high interest rate accounts in the Cayman Islands where They receive huge tax benefits.
Assuming 6.5% investment on those sort of sums then $1 billion left on account would be worth $1.2 (£1) billion after 3 years each which is the £6 billion they wanted now, which bid is now the best offer, we could have a third world war, no football and their proposal go up in flames in the matter of days. The Glazers are playing high risk poker and they don’t seem the Gambling type ?
This is why most business orientated media outlets and fans just don’t understand the Glazers decisions, Kaveh Solhekol, gave an in depth report afew days ago on why financially from the greediest of all people that this just doesn’t make sense. There’s more going on here than is being reported!
Lots of assumptions there that he'd never buy 100% but even if that's true it really doesn't matter.
Once he and Ineos own majority shares it's as good as owning 100%.
From a decision and running of the club standpoint buying the remaining shares could essentially be classed as a waste of money.
Full sale in reality = New majority owner. Wether you own 51% or 100% is of lottle relevance.
Even more so if the remaining percentage is just the shares floated on the stock market.
Honestly Sheikh Jassim should have been more flexible with his bid.
His 100% or nothing approach was a needless misstep, sometimes you have to play the long game.
The money isn't made on dividends - it's the asset valuation that is projected to go up. His 1.5bn could transform into 4bn in a few years.
And then there's side agreements he can get going. It makes perfect sense to invest in UTD or any football club. Much like it made sense a.few years ago to invest in the NBA.
Barcelona are atrociously run. You are hanging your hat on current Barcelona?
Tell me what he won as a footballing head where. Just that one Barcelona season? A two horse race
And tell me what Mitchell was expected to do, win the PL with spurs and Southampton or beat psg to the title with Monaco?
Until we get further details we have no idea if the remaining 3.95 billion is guaranteed or not. It very well might be. Only time will tell.
Good interview with Jacobs
I wouldn't call PSG a big football club to be honest.
More than likely. A bit of peacock our luckyscout is.
It just shows the many ways this all could go wrong based on obligation/option to buy remaining shares; voting power distribution; who gets the 1.4b?
People seem to be okay that a football club is treated this way. You all could play mental gymnastics and normalise what is going on, but we all know this not okay for the fact we will never know exactly how this all plays out unless there is transparency.
It’s bigger than owning Everton let’s be very honest.
What's the latest? My big bro G Jim got tha keys to tha castle yet?
Barcelona are atrociously run. You are hanging your hat on current Barcelona?
Tell me what he won as a footballing head where. Just that one Barcelona season? A two horse race
And tell me what Mitchell was expected to do, win the PL with spurs and Southampton or beat psg to the title with Monaco?
Well he could be part of a Barcelona that doesn’t win the league. That’s easily done too.
Like I keep saying all this good work but yet no big club takes him. Make it make sense.
Barcelona as a Business are poorly ran. The football institution has never been in question. It currently runs Manchester City but you know.
Which makes me think, why couldn't they just push through the sale when INEOS came in for majority ownership?
I know the minority shareholders were threatening to take legal action, but one would think they could threaten the same for only selling a portion of their shares to INEOS, as opposed to them all to Qatar.
I have to think there is something rock solid in place that guarantees the class A shareholders are made whole. If they hold onto class A shares indefinitely, they will go down the toilet.
Or, as i have suggested before, the 25% split is not equal between class B and A, and the 25% is a way to quash class A investor feats. You take them out of the picture and INEOS and Jim can cut their own deal.
We know Jim has the money to buy a larger % now, as per his earlier bid. And we know The Glazers were ready to accept. So why isn't he buying more now? There has to be a reason.
Stadium expenses have nothing to do with FFP, but increased revenue from a larger stadium will.
Jim won't do it just to increase the value of The Glazer stock, thus costing him more to buy them out down the line.
The only way INEOS loans or injects cash into the club is if there are future guarantees to buy the club.
If and when INEOS get full control/ownership, I expect a cut and paste job. Cut the loans from MUFC PLC and paste them over to INEOS. That way the club have more FFP headroom.
My guess, as i have said since the 25% news broke, that this is INEOS's first step to majority ownership and total control of the club.
Red alert in The Athletic today:
“In return for that investment, Ratcliffe wants control over and responsibility for sporting decisions at Old Trafford. Essentially, he wants to reshape the football part of this football club in the INEOS image.”
“In return for that investment, Ratcliffe wants control over and responsibility for sporting decisions at Old Trafford. Essentially, he wants to reshape the football part of this football club in the INEOS image.”
Barcelona as a footballing academy is great, but in terms of transfer business and sustainable teams are pretty shite in respect to their own standards in the past 5-6 years.
Your argument is no big club went in for Mitchell, really? The weird daft logic you hang your hat on to call him a myth
No one takes Ranieri over De Zerbi as a manager, but Raneiri has a PL. Good logic mate.
It seems you are too quick to dismiss Rangnick's impact at Red Bull on account of his failure here. In a Director you are not looking for the guy who will pick the next Caicedo - you want the guy who knows the scout who can pick up the next Caicedo, who can convince the scout to come in and then have the nous to negotiate and complete the signing. If he can identify and hire a good transfer negotiator then so he it.
Rangnick was the guy who helped build one of European football's premier moneyball clubs. Leipzig are good at what they do and in the brief period he was here the unheralded players he suggested we sign and what they have done since in the game shows that he still got the contacts.
But he is not the guy I would be going for and I am a bit apprehensive about Mitchell and Edwards too though I would prefer the latter despite his Liverpool links. They feel like yesterday's men and like Mourinho before we could be signing them on the decline. I'd rather we didn't go for the box office names but hire someone based on his ideals and previously displayed competencies even if at a lower level who can come in and do what Newcastle's DOF has done - quietly build a competitive team at sustainable outlays.
The Glazers are parasites first, vulture capitalists second, and Jewish comes in a distant third.
Worse: he becomes a human shield with control over sporting decisions.
How many CL titles have state-backed clubs won since it (being state-backed) became a thing?
It's not feckin' romanticism. The rule is that the team with the biggest wage bill wins the most trophies domestically. United is the one grand outlier in that respect. The reason we have let City win as many league titles as they have post-Fergie is not that we haven't been state-owned.
They are a one club city with oversubscribed stadium. Not only that but Ashley left them as one of the few clubs actually making profit - as a buiness investment they make a hell of a lot more sense than City. Re City the main reason Abu Dhabi bought them, is you get a derby versus United so you immediately get access indirectly to the biggest football fan base in the world. Same reason they have bought Girona, if they scale that they automatically get a derby versus Barcelona.
Newcastle could genuinely fill a 100k seater, that city is nuts for football
I have no idea what you base that on.
But let's say it's true that it could be the case.
What's more likely, in your opinion:
1) 70 year old super rich guy from Manchester wants to buy 25% of Glazer shares because he considers it a sound long-term investment that could make him some money (but surely not more money than investing the same amount in any number of other businesses could). Has no interest in how the club fares as such, just considers it a sound investment.
2) 70 year old super rich guy from Manchester wants to buy Manchester United and be associated with said club's comeback, possibly (nay, very likely) be considered the club's "saviour" if the comeback actually takes place in some shape or form. Needs to start by buying 25% of Glazer shares, because that's the only viable way in per now, but intends to buy further shares down the line and gain complete control.
I think Jim will have to believe that the investment will appreciate in value, or at least show a plan towards that to get the immense amount of money from lenders.
Why do i feel like "sporting control" means listening to his opinion and that's about it. At the end of the day the Glazers will be in control of the spend. Only hope is that Sir Jim comes in and brings more competent transfer people in.
Because the previous regime had everyone answering to the Glazers. From what we are led to believe here is Ratcliff won't answer to anyone on certain remits.
Every top young player in football we have scouted and spoke to. Our ability to get them to come has been down to the footballing sides preferences. Never lack of knowledge or awareness.
The truth is likely to be somewhat better than your guess and lower than some posters' "handing over the keys" guess.
He isn't investing over £1bn into this club just to be told what he can and can't do by the Glazers, lets be honest.
I agree, that’s why I called it a rubber stamping. But the vote will be in principle only, the very fine details have not even been discussed with the Board. There’s a lot of work still to be done, but I expect Ineos to be successful in the further negotiations - but that may take some time yet to finalise.
Neither is he investing 25% and saying, right lads I call the shots now.
The FA have a lot to answer for. Their crown jewel pimped about like an expensive hooker and they haven't said a peep. Useless fecks.
- Status