Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
and your 'facts' have so much meaning, right? To call others opinion meaninglessRatcliffe is paying 25% BECAUSE HE CAN NOT AFFORD TO PAY 100% now.. If he had, he would, why wait.
So Mr Clever person, tell us how will Ratcliffe afford to pay MORE ( in value and in monetary terms) in future what he can't pay now?
Please educate us in meaningful facts
Why
1. Ratcliffe is unable to AFFORD 100% United now, so the 25% is the magic number.
2. If Ratcliffe can not pay 100% today, what guarantees is there, that he will pay the remaining 75% in future?
3. If the club succeeds, (we all hope that), means Glazers will value the club higher, what makes you believe Ratcliffe will afford us in that future VALUE.
4. How are you preempting Glazers are heading out of the door? Have they told you so, how do you know? At what point will they head out? At what price?..
As you can see you know nothing about Glazers going.. So argue with what you know, instead of calling other opinions meaningless
Ratcliffe is paying 25% BECAUSE HE CAN NOT AFFORD TO PAY 100% now.. If he had, he would, why wait.
So Mr Clever person, tell us how will Ratcliffe afford to pay MORE ( in value and in monetary terms) in future what he can't pay now?
Please educate us in meaningful facts
Why
1. Ratcliffe is unable to AFFORD 100% United now, so the 25% is the magic number.
2. If Ratcliffe can not pay 100% today, what guarantees is there, that he will pay the remaining 75% in future?
3. If the club succeeds, (we all hope that), means Glazers will value the club higher, what makes you believe Ratcliffe will afford us in that future VALUE.
4. How are you preempting Glazers are heading out of the door? Have they told you so, how do you know? At what point will they head out? At what price?..
As you can see you know nothing about Glazers going.. So argue with what you know, instead of calling other opinions meaningless
Because 2 of the Glazers don't want to sell, it's that simple.
Didn't we know in either scenario we'd get this though? The PSG chairman is an ex tennis player isn't he?
Qatar would have got some nonce to run the club anyway I reckon.
It's probably a committee designed to take decisions on football quicker. It's very typical Ratcliffe actually. The least ammount of people necessary to take decisions. If I were to speculate Brailsford will in time be replaced with a permanent CEO. The actual direction (obviously with a remit det by the board) and day to day decisions will probably be down to the CEO and DOF they decide on not the two "owners".
Why people are dumbfounded a Glazer will have some say on matters doesn’t make sense. I mean they own 75 percent of the club. Like why would they just say yeah sure Jim you do everything? That would be madness from their perspective while they still own a huge percentage.
The other guy has a history in sport too so it’s much better than a banker for example.
The other guy has a history in sport too so it’s much better than a banker for example.
Because that was supposed to be the core of the arrangement they had reportedly agreed on but then turned out to not have agreed on anyway.
Nothing senseless about that. If there is a deal in place for a gradual INEOS takeover, why wouldn't they allow them to run the football part of the business. They'd still be accountable to the board, where the Glazers retain a majority, so in any case it's not like it's a carte blanche.
IF there is such a deal. Apparently, there isn't.
Last edited:
You think it’s just one Glazer? It’s one Glazer for PR. Joel isn’t doing shit without others approval on top
I don't see the panic in getting this done before the January window, not many players worth getting for a decent fee will be available. Let the new people get accustomed to the club, get their principles and ideas in place ready to go for the summer.
I am just happy he is bald
The problem isn't so much that there's a rush, the problem is the increasingly obvious unclarity about the direction of travel and ultimate result.
Yeaaaaaaaah he's been absolutely shite at Nice. Although he's best placed for us to compete with Anfield's inhalers.
Those who have been pro Jim for the last 12 months because of the politics around Qatar, now their bid is dead how do you honestly see this Jim bid? It looks like you are getting what you wanted are you happy with what you’ve read thus far?
Ratcliffe is paying 25% BECAUSE HE CAN NOT AFFORD TO PAY 100% now.. If he had, he would, why wait.
So Mr Clever person, tell us how will Ratcliffe afford to pay MORE ( in value and in monetary terms) in future what he can't pay now?
Please educate us in meaningful facts
Why
1. Ratcliffe is unable to AFFORD 100% United now, so the 25% is the magic number.
2. If Ratcliffe can not pay 100% today, what guarantees is there, that he will pay the remaining 75% in future?
3. If the club succeeds, (we all hope that), means Glazers will value the club higher, what makes you believe Ratcliffe will afford us in that future VALUE.
4. How are you preempting Glazers are heading out of the door? Have they told you so, how do you know? At what point will they head out? At what price?..
As you can see you know nothing about Glazers going.. So argue with what you know, instead of calling other opinions meaningless
I mean whether you like him or not, clearly he could afford to buy United. He's a multi-billionaire who owns a multi-billion dollar company. He should have no problem getting financing to buy United.
And that's not happening for next 5 years. Probably will never happen either.
Is this the worst saga in the history of United.
Worse than:
Vidal
Sneijder
Thiago
Fabregas
Ronaldinho
Worse than:
Vidal
Sneijder
Thiago
Fabregas
Ronaldinho
So they will sell in 1 years time? 5 years or when?
Then how do people say 'Glazers' are on their way out?
Thats why we say this deal has given Glazers 100% lifeline.
I give it to Gaitan.
We will see when the terms of the deal are confirmed. But a lot of rumbling when this was first floated a few months ago and since are that the glazers will have a floor that the share price can hit where they can force INEOS to buy / there is a ceiling it can hit so SJR doesn’t pay a massive premium.
I'm not a huge fan of Ratcliffe, but in a two-horse race with Qatar, I was hoping that Qatar's horse would fall at one of the fences and end up under a white sheet. I'm pleased that the state-owned, sportswashing spectre that has been hanging over the club for nearly 12 months, has finally been vanquished.
With Qatar out, it now seems like there are three possible outcomes remaining:
1) Ratcliffe takes 25% of the club with legally binding assurances in place of an unimpeded path to eventual full control
2) Ratcliffe takes 25% of the club, but purely as a minority investor, with a vague hope of one day maybe (or maybe not) taking full control
3) Ratcliffe deal collapses - the Glazers remain indefinitely, perhaps propped up by investment from Elliott or some other PE house.
I think United fans should be cautiously optimistic about 1, very disappointed by 2 and steadfastly opposed to 3.
Ultimately, what every United fan wants, whichever bid they supported, is the Glazers gone. Sadly, it does not look like any of us will be getting our wish in the short-term, but if there is a guarantee of that happening within a reasonable timeframe (perhaps 2-4 years), I can live with that.
Marginal Rogaines
Well according to what's being reported, Glazers will immediately have less footballing control.
Last edited:
Someone change @VP89 's tagline from 'Pogba's biggest fan' to 'Jim Ratcliffe's biggest fan'
It’s pretty well publicised that the other 4 have next to no interest in the day to day running of the club, they are non-factors beyond how willing they are to part with their shares to facilitate the eventual full takeover.
I wouldn’t say happy, because clearly Joel and Avram Glazer will only be parted from their shares kicking and screaming, hence the drawn out process and limited initial buy-in. However, now that he got a foot in the door I do expect a self made, experienced corporate shark to muscle those trust fund babies out of the club, and that’s still vastly better than what we had a year ago.
I also expect very little change in our sporting performance in the immediate future, it’s pretty clear that there will be a degree of uncertainty and infighting at boardroom level for the next few years so the team will suffer to some degrees. CL qualification would be our ceiling until we can finally sort out our structure so best case scenario is whoever Brexit Jim and Doping Dave get in to oversee the football operation would focus on youth and build a side with real potential that can grow together for the next few years.
Im not even a fan of Ratcliffe. I didnt want him at 25%.
But I'm also not going to act like a mug and bury my head in the sand on what's being reported. If he's tipped to get sporting control then that's the current state of play unless otherwise reported.
No one is happy that the Glazers are staying, obviously. I'm reserving my judgement for the deal and the consequences of it, until I see what INEOS can do and will do. It would surprise me greatly if we didn't see a new DOF come in and a new way of recruiting players as early as January. They can't brief the press that they have control and let the club do the same old, same old. Let's see what happens.
Care to explain what that means for people who don't know what it is and how that would apply to football?
Joel and Avram were only two glazers that ran United.
Dunno how much voting power does Joel have but surely it's more than sir Ratani's
What’s the alternative? It was Ineos or nothing, not Ineos or Qatar.
Almost anything that reduces the Glazer’s control and shareholding is a good thing imo.
Exactly.
I had no idea about the doping. Maybe not that excited anymore.
Sorry to break it to you but doping is very much widely used in the sport.
Joel actually has more voting power than any of the other Glazers, he has 19.11%
That I'm aware of, unfortunately. I meant it in the context of one of our impending trifecta if decision makers.
This is what the naysayers don’t get, never let the perfect be an enemy of the good.
We would’ve preferred an immediate full sale, or a partial sale that put the buyer in charge with majority control of the club, but that’s not feasible right now so 25% is better than nothing, it’s a foot in the door and with the division of opinions among the siblings, even if there’s no defined plan for put and call options right now, there’s a clear opportunity to eventually buy enough shares to force a full takeover.
At the end of the day, the club is still private property of the Glazers (69% of it, anyhow), so if they don’t want to sell, no amount of promises about shiny new stadium/signings, or fan protests, will matter.
The problem is that (1) is extremely unlikely - the very best we could hope for is some kind of agreement in principle of Sir Jim moving towards full ownership in the future. A cast iron guarantee on that is nearly impossible due to all the moving parts of such a deal over time.
As you rightly say, the majority of fans want the Glazers gone and it's now becoming clear that this will not happen anytime soon, if at all.
It's been obvious to me for sometime that the Qatari full sale bid was the best for the future of the club. The dream scenario of debt cleared, Glazers gone, new stadium was on offer - now it's unlikely that even one of these things will happen anytime soon under this minority investment deal.
- Status