Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
What is going on? Is this transaction happening or not? And is it likely Ratcliffe / INEOS going to gain majority control in the future ?
The last paragraph is biggest concern
I don't think he's lying but if anyone has to knowingly deceive their own creditors it means huge legal problems. Or Corporate fraud would be so so easy. Can't just syphon stakeholder money through mechanisms this blatant.
I honestly cant believe people think SJR is going to stump up Billions to fund tbe stadium, training ground, and transfers at a club he owns only 25% of.
Agree. Was madness to think he'd do so, at least before bagging majority rights. For one the debt is why the Glazers need to sell the club. Let's say he's naive and waves his wand and pays off the debt for the glazers, there becomes literally no incentive to sell a penny more of their ownership. The debt was why they were selling in the first place. People also need to understand net worth as 5 billion worth doesn't mean we can spend a billion on transfers every summer. Most of that worth are assets that can't easily be turned to cash.
Never really believed it but was just trying to find some positive crumbs of comfort
No I don’t mean that he is lying, I’m saying he’s just clever with wording he is INEOS so saying he doesn’t need to pull on the credit facility is fine.
He can pull on the company when and how he wishes without impacting the companies borrowing.
And I can't believe how many people are jumping to conclusions before we even see a deal announced. If he's just taking 25% to line Glazer pockets and live out a fantasy of playing Football Manager with his boyhood club, absolutely, I am right with you and that is unacceptable.
There is a scenario I can easily envision where he takes 25% now, they do a subsequent capital raise within the near-term to sell Ratcliffe newly issued shares and put that money towards the necessary infrastructure renovations, and then later, there is a binding agreement in place for Ratcliffe to take a majority. I am reserving judgment on this until we know what the deal is.
Not much excitement. Matchday up 23.4% (thanks to 7 extra home games), commercial revenues up 17.5%, wages down 13.7% (no CL in 2022/23 = pay cut).
Total debt (including Glazer acquisition debt, revolving credit facility and transfer debt) now stands at about £1bn. On the plus side though, the club gained 2.7 million followers and generated more than 318 million digital interactions and 1.5 billion video views across all global social platforms in the fourth quarter.
Yep. As per though they're creating scenarios in their heads and then getting wound up about them
The post you quoted is literally the guy/girl who gets told “I only like you as a friend” but thinks it’s some secret code for let’s go jump into bed
What baffles me is that there are a lot of crazy football opinions on here, but intelligent people seem to believe this is what will happen and have actually been willing this outcome over a full takeover.
I really don't know what world people are living in or whether they understand how money works or how people like Ratcliffe end up with lots of it.
Well it's not really pretending though is it. They were willing to sell but for some reason weren't desperate to sell (or at least wanted it to appear that way). They obvioulsy wanted way over the market price and to be fair both parties made bids way over the NYSE listed price.
Indeed, Qatar (whoever was funding it) couldn't appear to be paing way over the asking price. For the same reason it's not a good idea for United to pay way pver the asking price for players. Had they done so every other deal they were involved in for the next few years people would be quoting them silly prices expecting them to be stupid enough to pay it.
Personally I think the Glazers were hgolding out for £6b+ but they fecked the Qatari's about for too long.
Its crazy that after 18 years of Glazers Out protests there are so many people backing a bid that will keep the Glazers in, no genuine Man Utd fan should be backing a bid that keeps the Glaxers In.
Its no wonder that rival fans laugh at the Glazers Out movrment when a lot of the people pushing it are also backing a bid that would keep the Glazers In instead of demanding a full sale.
#FullSaleOnly
#GlazersOut
I think nobody is really backing this bid and nobody knows the exact details yet. Glazers didn’t want a full sale or nobody bid the amount they wanted. Everybody wants Glazers out I guess, but maybe this is the only step towards a full sale because the other bidder didn’t want to pay more and dropped out after making only promises but no more money to actually buy the club.
I really can’t see this move leading to a full sale of the club - not by Sir Jim anyway.
I mean in a sense, yes. The more people engaging with our socials and general content the more sponsors will pay.Awesome news, can they pay the debt off?
That's quite an uncomfortable collar
We live in a world where everyone has an opinion without understanding or even attempting to research a topic.
Be better sticking it out with the glazers until the point their forced to sell, rather then even contemplate this mess of a deal.
It could go great but the odds with all the people involved don’t look great and if it isn’t all rosy we are in an incredible mess, post deal.
That's the cost of too many buffets catching up with him.
He's too plump for it. Needs to hit the training ground bigly.
Off topic, i would imagine having access to gym, Pool, spa, coaches would be enough to encurage him to lose weight
I mean when you put it like that United are a much much smaller brand than Mr Beast or Ed Sheeran.
The coming discussions drawing up division of powers between JR and the Glazers is going to be the corporate version of a CL final. I think the Glazers really did think they'd both get to eat and have that slice.
Neither can I, until there's further information. Can only see this being realistic with binding legislative assurances from the Glazers somehow woven into the agreement of the 25% but even then it's hard because of the stipulation of the club's future value (which will effect the share price and the lack of indicators to accurately project a forecast in that given time). So the second most important thing that needs to be answered outside of the "view" to full ownership, is how it corresponds to time.
Thus far it looks like everything is minority investment territory and nothing more, with Jim's sporting involvement as leverage for giving the Glazers more time.
Yup I think the same.
Without concrete assurances or actually written up procedures triggering x and y situations for sale of shares the notion this will lead to a full sale almost contradicts itself if one really sits down to think about it. The same delusion goes for thinking JR is going to pay off the debt for the glazers anytime soon. They aren't doing the other such favours, it runs against both player's long term plans by surrendering so much leverage.
Last edited:
You can almost understand the naivety and attribute it to wildly unsubstantiated positive thinking based on the fact that they like him. The equivalent of Maguire’s family thinking he can become a world class number 10.
But anyone who still thinks this deal has anything to do INEOS or will get INEOS funding is now in denial.
Also on whose name will debt to buy the 25% go on? It’s not going to be INEOS as many thought. Is Ratcliffe setting up a separate company ?
I don't know what the optimism is based on. Just this vague promise of investment in the squad and/or equally vague hope it will somehow force the Glazers out longer term (which makes no sense when their alternative is to fully sell the club).
We have invested a lot of money in the squad WITH the Glazers. That has never been the issue with them. The issue is its been invested badly and that they take money OUT of the club to the detriment of the club and fans. There is zero prospect of the latter changing under the Ratcliffe deal because he isnt going to be letting the Glazers take his money rather than the club's, and zero evidence to suggest the former would improve either since his expertise are in being a greedy cnut, not being good at running football clubs. There is more potential for bad than good here and that seems extremely obvious to me. What am I missing other than blind/ignorant hope?
The moral high ground against the Qatar bid also grates at me. Not because i disagree with the issues, but because whittling your apparently tremendous concern over human rights issues entirely down to who owns a specific football club, is fecking weird, useless, and suggests people care less about the issues than whether it might make them look bad. It is a very bad look.
The whole situation depresses me and reading some of the opinions on here just makes me not want to post every time I log on. People are completely lost as far as I can tell.
Could you summarise exactly what you believe is happening right now and what will happen?
Well this is obviously because the full takeover option came from a Qatari group and that always brings a moralistic outrage
Baffling to me that some United fans preferred we stick with the Glazers, who have mismanaged the club for at least a decade, rather than take the option that removed them, all their debts and built us a new stadium!
As ever, if people say things you don't want to be true, or 'don't sit right with me' because of some aesthetic, relatable or even prejudiced viewpoint, the only conclusion you can possibly generate is that they are lost, brainwashed, incapable of independent thought, whatever works to satisfy oneself.
Neither Ineos/Ratcliffe or Qatar, or even the Glazers for that matter, are in any way qualified to run a club like United, with all the attendant pressure and expectation.
People who want Qatar are obviously going to have a go at those highlighting legitimate human rights concerns. They have to.
It's equally baffling that people think their favourite footy team being tops is more important than human rights.
Me? Looks like Ratcliffe is probably close. I would go by what Bloomberg and others report. Certainly not Independent.
- Status