Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rojofiam said:
You most certainly have no idea whether Mitchell would be a success at United or how well he did at previous clubs.
Click to expand...

He’s damaged goods. His Monaco stint didn’t go well and 3 years in football is a long time. They’ve improved this season since he left his role.

I’ll also add to the fact that he’s never been in a role where the club is expected to win, he’s got zero trophies to his name.
 
JPRouve said:
He wasn't the sporting director at Southampton, it was Les Reed, he wasn't Spurs DOF but head of recruitment and their recruitment was subpar, he wasn't a DOF for Leipzig either. His first job as a Director of Football was for Monaco before that he was essentially in charge of scouting, the analysts or development.

For Monaco his work can only be described as directionless. He has generally done a good job at a level below the main football decision makers but it's a mystery if he can do the job of the main man.
Click to expand...
Seems I was mistaken. Haven't Monaco been doing well recently producing players like Tchouameni, Badiashile, Disasi, Fofana and Vanderson or were they already in the pipeline?
 
Castia said:
He’s damaged goods. His Monaco stint didn’t go well and 3 years in football is a long time. They’ve improved this season since he left his role.

I’ll also add to the fact that he’s never been in a role where the club is expected to win, he’s got zero trophies to his name.
Click to expand...

So we're not only judging players and managers by trophies, which is nonsensical enough as it is, now it's sporting directors too?

All the info you know and provided to me is very surface level knowledge. I don't think anyone on this forum can claim to know for sure what Mitchell or any other DoF brings to the table, be it Edwards/Berta/Monchi etc.
 
Castia said:
He’s damaged goods. His Monaco stint didn’t go well and 3 years in football is a long time. They’ve improved this season since he left his role.

I’ll also add to the fact that he’s never been in a role where the club is expected to win, he’s got zero trophies to his name.
Click to expand...
Monaco finished 3rd, 3rd and 6th after Paul Mitchell came in. Before they had finished 17th and 9th the previous seasons.
Either way I don't feel the effect of a Sporting Director or DOF or even a CEO is not exactly to be felt immediately unlike positions like a manager, coaches or players.
 
3KDré said:
Seems I was mistaken. Haven't Monaco been doing well recently producing players like Tchouameni, Badiashile, Disasi, Fofana and Vanderson or were they already in the pipeline?
Click to expand...

Badiashile was in the team years before Mitchell joined Monaco. Tchouaméni comes from Bordeaux and Fofana from Strasbourg both were signed 6 months before Mitchell joined, Disasi isn't a product of Monaco he was one of the best defender in Ligue 1 for Reims for several several years. Now Vanderson was a good find by Mitchell and Stewart.

The team that has turned things around was built by Petrov.
 
Rojofiam said:
So we're not only judging players and managers by trophies, which is nonsensical enough as it is, now it's sporting directors too?

All the info you know and provided to me is very surface level knowledge. I don't think anyone on this forum can claim to know for sure what Mitchell or any other DoF brings to the table, be it Edwards/Berta/Monchi etc.
Click to expand...
I agree nobody knows what they do, how they do it, or what the actual value of their contribution is.

This is actually the reason I’m not too keen on DoFs with significant power. Responsibility for success is then split between the coach and the DoF and it’s always unclear who should be carrying the can. I prefer the manager to be in charge and the rest of the football department, including DoF, to work for the manager. That way, if we fail, it is the manager responsible.
 
mitchmouse said:
maybe the gap between the debt and income will be better with the investment... but this is why I'm not an accountant (along with a lot of other reasons)
Click to expand...

Same here mate, but I don't imagine Ratcliffe finalising his 25% purchase before the window would affect our ability to spend in January much.
 
Rojofiam said:
You most certainly have no idea whether Mitchell would be a success at United or how well he did at previous clubs.
Click to expand...
He still hasn't explained specifically what so terrible about him.
 
JPRouve said:
Badiashile was in the team years before Mitchell joined Monaco. Tchouaméni comes from Bordeaux and Fofana from Strasbourg both were signed 6 months before Mitchell joined, Disasi isn't a product of Monaco he was one of the best defender in Ligue 1 for Reims for several several years. Now Vanderson was a good find by Mitchell and Stewart.

The team that has turned things around was built by Petrov.
Click to expand...
Damn, must you kill all my joy? Who would you have instead?
 
3KDré said:
Damn, must you kill all my joy? Who would you have instead?
Click to expand...

I don't have any name and I don't exclude Mitchell. Also people should really stop with this idea of names and lists when it comes DOFs, it's not how it works. DOFs are rarely successful imports, most club find success by hiring internally someone that fit a very specific context that is already established. Think Edwards, Zorc, Monchi and many others.

So for an outsider it's a pointless exercise, we don't' know the people enough to have an opinion that isn't fantasist. Sometimes some profiles are theoretically interesting but that's about it.
 
I thought it was just a meme. Why do so many of the rumoured changes feel Brexity. Hopefully a nothing sentiment because we have enough regional bias from ETH as it stands.
 
Last edited:
Hate this arrangement. How are control and boardroom voting supposed to work when one brings all the money and makes it clear they are eventually going to push the other one out? Even without the paranoia one will naturally be more short term focused than the other. Glazer boy shouldn't even be asking for any kind of football control. I think they just want a sugardaddy investor.
 
Greck said:
Hate this arrangement. How are control and boardroom voting supposed to work when one brings all the money and makes it clear they are eventually going to push the other one out? Even without the paranoia one will naturally be more short term focused than the other. Glazer boy shouldn't even be asking for any kind of football control. I think they just want a sugardaddy investor.
Click to expand...

It will be a miracle how it's going to work expediently especially in investments like transfers or infra -- with conflicting objectives?

Glazers wil always want to maximise their profits whether in the short, medium or long term. This will include maximising costs savings while doing minimal investments.

Ineos will want to make serious investments if they are to improve the footballing performance. But being minority owners how much should you invest that ultimately mainly benefits the majority?
 
Andy_Cole said:
Yeh there were links when Snapdragon got announced seems pretty obvious that Jim won at that point.
Click to expand...

Back on 12th September.
That was the sign that the Glazers weren’t going anywhere by cashing in on new sponsor. Rather than leaving sponsorship open for new owners to decide.
 
Brophs said:

I know his bid had bigger problems but I can’t help but feel happy we don’t have this absolute fanny owning our football club. Cast iron certainty he’d have gotten in a ruck with Mark Hughes about handshakes within a fortnight of arriving.
Click to expand...


A strongly worded letter, that'll show'em!
 
Bert_ said:
A strongly worded letter, that'll show'em!
Click to expand...

I would imagine the Glazers’ blatant share manipulation and disrespect of a powerful Qatari consortium will have lasting business consequences for them that will arise at some point in the future - quite possibly without the public knowing about it. We all saw the power that Qatar holds in the new football World during the World Cup.

In fact, the whole ‘sale’ saga will have seen the Glazers’ image and standing within business circles damaged significantly on a global scale.

I understand that there were a very vocal minority on here that ‘didn’t want Qatar’, but, from a business and sport business POV, Qatar are a rising force of significant clout, and the Glazers are a laughing stock.

While on the face of it, a ‘scathing letter’ may sound small-time, the lasting ramifications that I imagine will go on for decades will be the actual consequence.

Also, needing to go running to another ‘rich daddy’ figure to bail them out and wipe their bums is deeply humiliating and then giving up ‘sporting control’ (of a sporting institution) is again very weak - almost like they’re cuckold husbands who can’t satisfy their partner so need to bring in someone else to do it for them… and their partner (the club) also publicly hates them.

The lasting consequences of the Glazers’ weird business behaviour in recent times will certainly be felt.

Sadly for Man Utd, it’s very likely that the club will continue to bear the brunt of the bad decisions made by a group of clueless, geriatric, Floridian nepo babies who have absolutely no business owning any PL club - let alone a giant institution like Manchester United.

On an aside, I recently watched the David Beckham documentary series on Netflix, and, while watching the rise (not even the zenith) of ‘90s Utd, it really dawned on me just how far the club has fallen in the Glazers’ hands… it’s incredible. It really is just a shell now. It isn’t Manchester United.

I would compare it to an historical restaurant that rose up serving great food and wine, achieved Michelin stars and was celebrated the World over with tourists travelling overseas just to dine there…

But then, the restaurant is gradually hollowed out and slowly, year by year, gradually begins introducing fast food to it’s menu - until eventually all it serves is junk food and fizzy drinks… but then it slips even further and even the STANDARD of the junk food is below par…!

The only thing remaining the same being the name and logo of the restaurant.

And, tragically, rather than truly boycotting this sham, or tearing it apart, the patrons continue to pay to eat there, bleating meekly about how they’re ‘loyal to the logo’, all the while never realising that their ‘loyalty’ is what’s allowing this demolition job to take place.

Ho hum.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
I would imagine the Glazers’ blatant share manipulation and disrespect of a powerful Qatari consortium will have lasting business consequences for them that will arise at some point in the future - quite possibly without the public knowing about it. We all saw the power that Qatar holds in the new football World during the World Cup.

In fact, the whole ‘sale’ saga will have seen the Glazers’ image and standing within business circles damaged significantly on a global scale.

I understand that there were a very vocal minority on here that ‘didn’t want Qatar’, but, from a business and sport business POV, Qatar are a rising force of significant clout, and the Glazers are a laughing stock.

While on the face of it, a ‘scathing letter’ may sound small-time, the lasting ramifications that I imagine will go on for decades will be the actual consequence.

Also, needing to go running to another ‘rich daddy’ figure to bail them out and wipe their bums is deeply humiliating and then giving up ‘sporting control’ (of a sporting institution) is again very weak - almost like they’re cuckold husbands who can’t satisfy their partner so need to bring in someone else to do it for them… and their partner (the club) also publicly hates them.

The lasting consequences of the Glazers’ weird business behaviour in recent times will certainly be felt.

Sadly for Man Utd, it’s very likely that the club will continue to bear the brunt of the bad decisions made by a group of clueless, geriatric, Floridian nepo babies who have absolutely no business owning any PL club - let alone a giant institution like Manchester United.

On an aside, I recently watched the David Beckham documentary series on Netflix, and, while watching the rise (not even the zenith) of ‘90s Utd, it really dawned on me just how far the club has fallen in the Glazers’ hands… it’s incredible. It really is just a shell now. It isn’t Manchester United.

I would compare it to an historical restaurant that rose up serving great food and wine, achieved Michelin stars and was celebrated the World over with tourists travelling overseas just to dine there…

But then, the restaurant is gradually hollowed out and slowly, year by year, gradually begins introducing fast food to it’s menu - until eventually all it serves is junk food and fizzy drinks… but then it slips even further and even the STANDARD of the junk food is below par…!

The only thing remaining the same being the name and logo of the restaurant.

And, tragically, rather than truly boycotting this sham, or tearing it apart, the patrons continue to pay to eat there, bleating meekly about how they’re ‘loyal to the logo’, all the while never realising that their ‘loyalty’ is what’s allowing this demolition job to take place.

Ho hum.
Click to expand...

Keiren Maguire has also delivered a verdict from the Qatari side:
I’m not surprised that Qatar completely withdrew,” Maguire told Football Insider’s Sean Fisher.
“Senior sources close to the Sheikh Jassim bid have indicated to me that there was increased frustration towards the conduct of the Glazers.
“On more than one occasion, they had agreed to increase the bid.
“They had agreed to some concessions as far as the demands of the Glazers were concerned.
“Yet every time that they felt that they were close to shaking hands on a deal, the terms were changed.
“In the end, they didn’t want to be taken advantage of.
“I think there was a huge sense of frustration because the Jassim team had spent huge sums of money employing bankers, a legal team and accountants to come up with an appropriate valuation.
“All of that money is now being wasted.
“So I think there’s no good blood between Jassim and the Glazers.“

Romano has also said the past that Jassim thought at one stage he was close. Very strange process and conduct by Glazers and the Raine Group. Quite insulting really.

I spoke to a fellow United supporter who is an engineer and worked Brighton and hove Albions stadium (when it was first being developed) and he told me as others on here who are financial experts it costs millions to put a package together for an acquisition this size.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
I would imagine the Glazers’ blatant share manipulation and disrespect of a powerful Qatari consortium will have lasting business consequences for them that will arise at some point in the future - quite possibly without the public knowing about it. We all saw the power that Qatar holds in the new football World during the World Cup.

In fact, the whole ‘sale’ saga will have seen the Glazers’ image and standing within business circles damaged significantly on a global scale.

I understand that there were a very vocal minority on here that ‘didn’t want Qatar’, but, from a business and sport business POV, Qatar are a rising force of significant clout, and the Glazers are a laughing stock.

While on the face of it, a ‘scathing letter’ may sound small-time, the lasting ramifications that I imagine will go on for decades will be the actual consequence.

Also, needing to go running to another ‘rich daddy’ figure to bail them out and wipe their bums is deeply humiliating and then giving up ‘sporting control’ (of a sporting institution) is again very weak - almost like they’re cuckold husbands who can’t satisfy their partner so need to bring in someone else to do it for them… and their partner (the club) also publicly hates them.

The lasting consequences of the Glazers’ weird business behaviour in recent times will certainly be felt.

Sadly for Man Utd, it’s very likely that the club will continue to bear the brunt of the bad decisions made by a group of clueless, geriatric, Floridian nepo babies who have absolutely no business owning any PL club - let alone a giant institution like Manchester United.

On an aside, I recently watched the David Beckham documentary series on Netflix, and, while watching the rise (not even the zenith) of ‘90s Utd, it really dawned on me just how far the club has fallen in the Glazers’ hands… it’s incredible. It really is just a shell now. It isn’t Manchester United.

I would compare it to an historical restaurant that rose up serving great food and wine, achieved Michelin stars and was celebrated the World over with tourists travelling overseas just to dine there…

But then, the restaurant is gradually hollowed out and slowly, year by year, gradually begins introducing fast food to it’s menu - until eventually all it serves is junk food and fizzy drinks… but then it slips even further and even the STANDARD of the junk food is below par…!

The only thing remaining the same being the name and logo of the restaurant.

And, tragically, rather than truly boycotting this sham, or tearing it apart, the patrons continue to pay to eat there, bleating meekly about how they’re ‘loyal to the logo’, all the while never realising that their ‘loyalty’ is what’s allowing this demolition job to take place.

Ho hum.
Click to expand...

We all need a good rant sometimes mate. It's good for the soul.
 
Rhyme Animal said:
I would imagine the Glazers’ blatant share manipulation and disrespect of a powerful Qatari consortium will have lasting business consequences for them that will arise at some point in the future - quite possibly without the public knowing about it. We all saw the power that Qatar holds in the new football World during the World Cup.

In fact, the whole ‘sale’ saga will have seen the Glazers’ image and standing within business circles damaged significantly on a global scale.

I understand that there were a very vocal minority on here that ‘didn’t want Qatar’, but, from a business and sport business POV, Qatar are a rising force of significant clout, and the Glazers are a laughing stock.

While on the face of it, a ‘scathing letter’ may sound small-time, the lasting ramifications that I imagine will go on for decades will be the actual consequence.

Also, needing to go running to another ‘rich daddy’ figure to bail them out and wipe their bums is deeply humiliating and then giving up ‘sporting control’ (of a sporting institution) is again very weak - almost like they’re cuckold husbands who can’t satisfy their partner so need to bring in someone else to do it for them… and their partner (the club) also publicly hates them.

The lasting consequences of the Glazers’ weird business behaviour in recent times will certainly be felt.

Sadly for Man Utd, it’s very likely that the club will continue to bear the brunt of the bad decisions made by a group of clueless, geriatric, Floridian nepo babies who have absolutely no business owning any PL club - let alone a giant institution like Manchester United.

On an aside, I recently watched the David Beckham documentary series on Netflix, and, while watching the rise (not even the zenith) of ‘90s Utd, it really dawned on me just how far the club has fallen in the Glazers’ hands… it’s incredible. It really is just a shell now. It isn’t Manchester United.

I would compare it to an historical restaurant that rose up serving great food and wine, achieved Michelin stars and was celebrated the World over with tourists travelling overseas just to dine there…

But then, the restaurant is gradually hollowed out and slowly, year by year, gradually begins introducing fast food to it’s menu - until eventually all it serves is junk food and fizzy drinks… but then it slips even further and even the STANDARD of the junk food is below par…!

The only thing remaining the same being the name and logo of the restaurant.

And, tragically, rather than truly boycotting this sham, or tearing it apart, the patrons continue to pay to eat there, bleating meekly about how they’re ‘loyal to the logo’, all the while never realising that their ‘loyalty’ is what’s allowing this demolition job to take place.

Ho hum.
Click to expand...
Boycott for Qatar :lol:
 
Rhyme Animal said:
I rant, therefore I am.
Click to expand...
I find your posts entertaining and appreciate that you speak your mind, but for the love of God, the mods need to correct the spelling of De Zerbi in the tagline you've been given. Been driving me absolutely nuts. :eek:
 
So depressingly, it seems like nothing will change. The Glazers still own the club. Ratcliffe just provided them with a more palatable way to get investment.

I get the feeling that the club is done for to be honest. It's a zombified version of what it was.
 
Castia said:
He’s damaged goods. His Monaco stint didn’t go well and 3 years in football is a long time. They’ve improved this season since he left his role.

I’ll also add to the fact that he’s never been in a role where the club is expected to win, he’s got zero trophies to his name.
Click to expand...
Maybe he has something to prove? A club is ran by multiple people so maybe he was just the best one at that club? One person cannot change everything on their own.

On another note I’m liking Jim’s decisions so far. I’m coming to the realisation Qatar not getting us might be good for United’s reputation long term.

A state owning us never fitted right. It felt completely off and ‘if’ state ownership in the future is looked back on as a dark era of the game they won’t look at our club in such a way as City, PSG even Milan and Chelsea.

People can forever say in history “you bought your success” if Qatar was to take over here. Whether we like it or not doesn't reflect well on our club once Qatar sell in the future.
 
Yorke to Cole said:
Keiren Maguire has also delivered a verdict from the Qatari side:
I’m not surprised that Qatar completely withdrew,” Maguire told Football Insider’s Sean Fisher.
“Senior sources close to the Sheikh Jassim bid have indicated to me that there was increased frustration towards the conduct of the Glazers.
“On more than one occasion, they had agreed to increase the bid.
“They had agreed to some concessions as far as the demands of the Glazers were concerned.
“Yet every time that they felt that they were close to shaking hands on a deal, the terms were changed.
“In the end, they didn’t want to be taken advantage of.
“I think there was a huge sense of frustration because the Jassim team had spent huge sums of money employing bankers, a legal team and accountants to come up with an appropriate valuation.
“All of that money is now being wasted.
“So I think there’s no good blood between Jassim and the Glazers.“

Romano has also said the past that Jassim thought at one stage he was close. Very strange process and conduct by Glazers and the Raine Group. Quite insulting really.

I spoke to a fellow United supporter who is an engineer and worked Brighton and hove Albions stadium (when it was first being developed) and he told me as others on here who are financial experts it costs millions to put a package together for an acquisition this size.
Click to expand...

To be honest it's just been amateur hour from Jassim from the start. The number of times he's said he won't be taken advantage of, then that he's waking away, only to come back with a slightly higher offer. I said many months ago that his conduct will not help him as the Glazers will rather not deal with him, and last week I saw articles that said exactly that. He's just gone about it all wrong, typical of an oil state billionaire who thinks they can just buy what they want. Unfortunately for him he was playing in the big leagues this time and nobody was having it.
 
pocco said:
To be honest it's just been amateur hour from Jassim from the start. The number of times he's said he won't be taken advantage of, then that he's waking away, only to come back with a slightly higher offer. I said many months ago that his conduct will not help him as the Glazers will rather not deal with him, and last week I saw articles that said exactly that. He's just gone about it all wrong, typical of an oil state billionaire who thinks they can just buy what they want. Unfortunately for him he was playing in the big leagues this time and nobody was having it.
Click to expand...

That's I doubt if it was state bid. If they can blow £220billion on a world cup, yet they are scrimping on 400million?
The lost of national pride would have been worth quite a lot more billions
 
sglowrider said:
That's I doubt if it was state bid. If they can blow £220billion on a world cup, yet they are scrimping on 400million?
The lost of national pride would have been worth quite a lot more billions
Click to expand...
This is why I am sure that this really wasn’t state backed and was likely funded with personal loans and deals with banks.

This bid was nothing to do with QIA and QSI and the relationship between the two was very loose.

This was absolutely a very wealthy family/individuals bid.

I think the Glazers knew that and were never going to accept it.

Funny it’s been reported the glazers and Raine weren’t confident of the source of funding.

Imagine it got to a point where proof of funds was needed much like a mortgage and they kept saying “trust me bro” and the sellers were saying “no you need to prove you can buy this before moving forwards”.
 
Son said:
Maybe he has something to prove? A club is ran by multiple people so maybe he was just the best one at that club? One person cannot change everything on their own.

On another note I’m liking Jim’s decisions so far. I’m coming to the realisation Qatar not getting us might be good for United’s reputation long term.

A state owning us never fitted right. It felt completely off and ‘if’ state ownership in the future is looked back on as a dark era of the game they won’t look at our club in such a way as City, PSG even Milan and Chelsea.

People can forever say in history “you bought your success” if Qatar was to take over here. Whether we like it or not doesn't reflect well on our club once Qatar sell in the future.
Click to expand...

It was never a state bid, nobody ever proved this. Jassim has private (inherited) wealth. If it was a state bid they’d have won. Nobody ever proved that Jassim murdered people either, despite hearing about how he was killing gay people on a daily basis.
 
At least the new DoF would have experience as a DoF. It would be nice to have at least one person in a senior role at the club who wasn't learning on the job.
 
TrebleChamp99 said:
This is why I am sure that this really wasn’t state backed and was likely funded with personal loans and deals with banks.

This bid was nothing to do with QIA and QSI and the relationship between the two was very loose.

This was absolutely a very wealthy family/individuals bid.

I think the Glazers knew that and were never going to accept it.

Funny it’s been reported the glazers and Raine weren’t confident of the source of funding.

Imagine it got to a point where proof of funds was needed much like a mortgage and they kept saying “trust me bro” and the sellers were saying “no you need to prove you can buy this before moving forwards”.
Click to expand...

He is dad is reportedly worth only a hundred or two hundred billion. But he aint now sovereign fund money, must to the disappointment of Raine and the Glazers.

I guess Raine must have done some digging and found out that Jassim just wasn't the favourite son!!!
 
ForeverRed1 said:
No, we want a DOF that is up for a challenge.
Click to expand...

Most valued potential employees will always analyse to see whether it's a good fit.

Nobody will enter into a situation where he may see chances for success being jeopardised by a poor organisational setup -- unless its some entry-level job which this is not.
 
Brophs said:

I know his bid had bigger problems but I can’t help but feel happy we don’t have this absolute fanny owning our football club. Cast iron certainty he’d have gotten in a ruck with Mark Hughes about handshakes within a fortnight of arriving.
Click to expand...


So... He wrote them a strongly worded letter? That'll show 'em.
 
sglowrider said:
That's I doubt if it was state bid. If they can blow £220billion on a world cup, yet they are scrimping on 400million?
The lost of national pride would have been worth quite a lot more billions
Click to expand...

There are two theories which strongly imply it was a state bid.

1) The Abramovich Principle. Of course, RA did not buy Chelsea on behalf of Putin, but, considering his role within Putin's 'inner circle', essentially he did.

Same with Jassim who is clearly a state actor. All of his 'investments' are contingent on his role at QIB which is primarily a state-sanctioned institution.

2) The Qatari state cannot explicitly state they are buying the club, but cannot be found to have done so, either.

Therefore, they'll use an investment fund fronted by a compliant actor, their man so to speak. In this case it is 92F and Jassim.

This fund will be scrutinised to death so they can't just pump more and more and more state funds in. They'll reach a (very high) limit as they're pretending it is private individuals.
 
Typical Glazers to piss off one of the few who even had a chance of sniffing their unrealistic valuation for a full future sale. These guys will screw everyone and their grandma at the club's expense. How is this stupid dual-board arrangement supposed to be better? We practically have to fund a stadium and Ten Hag's re-rebuild because the clueless people they put in charge keep deferring their one job to the managers. These are kids who never had to spend their own money thinking JR is going to let them squat with his credit rating. Unless one person has an overriding veto we could be practically paralysed whenever there's a hostile deadlock.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.