No that's just the fans when it rains
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
No that's just the fans when it rains
Which is more indication that the Glazers didn't actually want to sell the club fully at this point in time. Ornstein suggested on Vibe with Five that there are rumours in certain circles (he was very vague) that Qatari representatives had been in contact with Glazer representatives asking them to name their price - and coming away from it feeling like there wasn't really a price to meet.
Last edited:
I think this is a bit of a silly point really. Almost no owners come into a football club with a football track record. They are not like managers or players where you can assess their prior achievements.
I understand that Ratcliffe is a little different though, given his experience at Nice. First few years, Nice treaded water. This season, they seem to have got their act together.
If the reports are true, and Ratcliffe brings in a top class, CEO, Director of football and £250 million on infrastructure improvements, then that alone is a huge upgrade on The Glazers.
Would you also say The Glazers are better owners than Tony Bloom at Brighton because of trophies won? Probably not as they are swimming in different seas.
I would also argue that parity with Nice over the past few years is more of an achievement than The Glazers taking United from perennial title contenders to lucky to get into the top 4, despite spending a billy!
Last edited:
Can he afford to buy them out?
Unless part of the deal says the Glazer’s put in the same amount after he hands over his money
When what you are talking about is one of the biggest football clubs in the world then this isn’t viable. I’d rather the owners hands be forced than a patch up
1. Get 51% ASAP then give Joel a slap.
20 years of Glazer ownership has told us you can’t force them into anything.
If they are forced into making major infrastructure improvements, then you’re talking more debt on the club.
G Unit
And we pluralise their name because we are all to lazy to type all 6 out. And that's if you can even name all 6. Avram, Joel, Darcy, Keith, Rigobert and Little Tommy if anyone forgot.
Yeah my gut feeling is we won't get anything on the debt until official confirmation of the 25%,unfortunately it may not be until he has majority ownership which I know is so frustrating
Will Ratcliffe have a say in sacking and hiring managers even if he only owns 25%?
good one!
It’s not a silly point.
He’s being talked about as though he’s definitely a better owner - from a footballing success POV - than the Glazers, yet he’s actually less successful than them.
It’s very reminiscent of the Moyes hype imo… Someone who has absolutely no success in what they’re being tasked to do being spoken of as though it’s a given they’ll succeed and anyone pointing out that they’ve never done anything to suggest they’re capable of the task is laughed at or shouted down. ‘Groupthink’, I think it’s called.
It’s also being talked about that the Glazers will just ‘hand over sporting control’ of the entire club to him with a minority stake.
Why would they do that when he has less experience and success than them in football!? Wouldn’t that be potential business suicide? What if he’s crap at it? It’s ludicrous. And it’s blatantly obvious when you actually think about it logically that they will ALWAYS hold veto power over him for that reason.
‘Because Paul Mitchell’, seems to be the popular mantra, but then, why don’t the Glazers just hire Paul Mitchell?
They’re free to do so.
You're not real.
I’m realer than real deal Holyfield,
and now you Brexit Jim shills know how I feel
And he’s not rich enough to buy himself a majority chunk
So have another piece of some of that PR guff
Bottom 3 could happen one day,however the top two are only interested in Spain. Obviously Mbappe isn't there yet but that will definitely be where he ends up
I'd have finished this post with #makesyouthink
4/10
Guff was a shocking choice though when you had "junk" ready to go.
Do better.
Glazers have presided over PL titles, CL trophy, Europa trophy, FA Cup, League Cup…
Why would they yield all sporting control to a minority share holder who has won nothing, ever, in football?
To flip this back to you, and I'll apologise in advance for you being sick but why are you giving the Glazers credit?
Think about it
‘Guff’ rhymes with ‘stuff’ (check the actual song I’m parodying)
Ah. In that case pass my advice onto whoever the artist is, but knock half a point off
I’m not giving them credit, I’m questioning whether a more successful owner would yield all sporting control to a minority share holder who is less successful than themselves in football.
It isn’t realistic in any way, shape or form.
Ah. In that case pass my advice onto whoever the artist is, but knock half a point off
You don’t know who the original artist is…?
Cmon, fix up sunshine.
It works both ways. Everyone blames them for the footballing failure. So they must get credit for footballing success too.
So if Jim is really gifting the club 235 mil and it won't be a loan or an issue of new shares then surely he effectively is gifting 75% £184 mil to the Glazers and other shareholders. It makes no sense to structure it this way whatsoever. I've got a feeling there will be some sort of catch here.
If there's anything I know about chart music, and there isn't,.then I've a good chance of getting it right naming Ed Swift or Taylor Sheeran.
Regardless it's a suboptimal way to managing the club. This complex structure will lead to a lack of accountability and becoming a political cesspool.
He’s about 3 times as wealthy as Abramovic by the way
presided over meaning they were there? They had zero input,
You’re missing the point…
Obviously I think they’re clueless, but clearly they don’t.
And the point remains - they are more successful owners than Ratcliffe.
Handing over complete control of the football side to a minority shareholder who is less successful than them in football is a daft, fanciful notion.
Like many in here I would have preferred a full sale to Qatar,however after Jassim walked away I wanted to take a step back.
Yes, I have reservations about his plans to appoint CEO,Sporting Director and this €300m personal investment,however I want to give it a chance rather than writing him off like some have clearly done already. I can understand that mindset because it looked like we may be finally rid of those leeches after 18 years.
Also concerned about those two leeches and Ratcliffe wanting different things on the sporting side. Just have to hope the money rolling in keeps them on side.
I do think eventually he will get majority control,however of course there is concern about stadium investment and the biggest elephant in the room which is managing debt.
Yes, I have reservations about his plans to appoint CEO,Sporting Director and this €300m personal investment,however I want to give it a chance rather than writing him off like some have clearly done already. I can understand that mindset because it looked like we may be finally rid of those leeches after 18 years.
Also concerned about those two leeches and Ratcliffe wanting different things on the sporting side. Just have to hope the money rolling in keeps them on side.
I do think eventually he will get majority control,however of course there is concern about stadium investment and the biggest elephant in the room which is managing debt.
Last edited:
Then there are no issues with you if they stay for another 10-20 years then.
So what do you reckon Ratcliff's gameplan is?
Because according to reports the Glazers (or two of them) believe the club will grow a lot more in value over the next few years – and both Jassim and Ratcliff didn't. That's why the Glazers don't want to sell up now for less than a certain amount. Hence, it's claimed, them knocking back Jassim.
I think the theory with Ratcliff is that a deal is put in place with conditions. Money now for the 25%, based more closely to what the Glazers see the club as being worth (it's unclear what that's 25% of though – the Glazers 69%, or the total value of the club) and Ratcliff gets his spot at the table. Within that there's an agreement that he can buy further shares at a certain price/time. Added to this is that some Glazers do want out, and in all likelihood Ratcliff hasn't just thrown in 250 mill of his own cash by the end of the year for infrastructure just for getting a minority stake.
If the club does gain in value, Ratcliff has gained too, and the Glazers will sell to Ratcliff to give him the majority. If the club doesn't gain much in value the Glazers will see they got it wrong, but they get the overpayment from Ratcliff for his 25%. Other potential buyers will know the Glazers got it wrong too and so won't offer more, while Ratcliff still has his seat at the table and at least some Glazers are now very, very likely to sell.
I might not have got everything right, but that's the gist I think. It all depends I guess on whether there are conditions in place within the deal.
- Status