Club Sale | It’s done!

[RedDevil@84]

Why are half the posts on this thread about Qatar, like it or not its over stop moaning about it and fecking move on already

Because lot of Ratcliffe fanboys keep bringing up Jassim and Qatar in every discussion. They view it as a "We won, they lost" argument on the internet and want to rub it in in every reply.

I think the title of the thread should be modified and Jassim removed from it, now that he is no longer relevant.

 

[Gavinb33]

There never was a full bid from Jim though, it was for 69% of the club.

The Glazers can only sell and walk away from the part of the club they owned, the rest is on the open market.

 

[Redstain]

Provisionally they still have to prove themselves. But I have stated throughout summer that a proper structure in place should change the clubs fortunes depending on how diligent the reformed hierarchy are in their positions. It's even more influential than having money to spend in the market so INEOS and Jassim would have been beneficial from a sporting perspective because they are for advocating change in the positions that are superior to the management.

 

[putzmcgee123]

It's pointless, certain people have points of view that just won't be changed and won't even try to engage with anything that may challenge those views.

Genuinely bizarre. We don't even know the details of a deal and people have pitchforks out because he is not buying 100% now. Jassim was unwilling or unable to offer a sum to entice the Glazers to sell in full right now. Not sure why Ratcliffe is being blamed for that.

I was strongly in favour of Jassim's bid. It's over though. If Ratcliffe has a defined path to a majority stake in the foreseeable future, I don't see how that can possibly be viewed as a negative. If he is just taking 25% for significant control of football operations and nothing but "hope" to get control later, that's very underwhelming for me. Regardless, the Qatari bid is not even in the picture anymore so truly stunning to see some people still hung up on it as it pertains to whatever kind of deal Ratcliffe and the Glazers agree to.

 

[Mickeza]

Worrying to see no clear timeline for when Ratcliffe can increase stake to majority owner. That's not a good start when you are trying to get doubters on board

Why would we know a clear timeline? It hasn’t been announced yet.

 

[fallengt]

SJR has fanboys?

 

[Tom Van Persie]

Provisionally they still have to prove themselves. But I have stated throughout summer that a proper structure in place should change the clubs fortunes depending on how diligent the reformed hierarchy are in their positions. It's even more influential than having money to spend in the market so INEOS and Jassim would have been beneficial from a sporting perspective because they are for advocating change in the positions that are superior to the management.

It was reported that Jassim's camp were more open to keeping the current structure in place while INEOS were not and openly questioned Arnold/Murtough at the meeting at OT earlier this year.

 

[Zora]

Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe FIChemE has fanboys?

No. Apparently, anyone who didn't fancy us having human rights abusing state ownership automatically qualifies as a "Jim Fanboy".

It's all very silly.

 

[RedSky]

Because lot of Ratcliffe fanboys keep bringing up Jassim and Qatar in every discussion. They view it as a "We won, they lost" argument on the internet and want to rub it in in every reply.

I think the title of the thread should be modified and Jassim removed from it, now that he is no longer relevant.

Can you quote some of these posts? Don't think I've seen a single post recently as you describe. Agree on the thread title change.

@Castia - I know you're throwing shade at Nice, but they're still undefeated and top of Ligue 1 right now. Whatever the shake ups that occurred in the Summer it seems to have helped elevate them, doubtful they'll mount a proper title challenge, but if they can finish Top 4 then it's a good step up.

 

[Ahmer Baig]

I really struggle with the nonsense that one guy is going to save us which is why I never buy into the hipster DOF names or midfield signings that everyone thinks will be the messiah. Is Paul Mitchell actually any good?

Some consider him the saviour but can someone tell me how successful was his last stint or when was the last time he was successful?

 

[RedSky]

No. Apparently, anyone who didn't fancy us having human rights abusing state ownership automatically qualifies as a "Jim Fanboy".

It's all very silly.

Speak for yourself, I have the Sir Jim duvet cover!

 

[putzmcgee123]

This is such a lie

I have it on good authority that the Glazer siblings are now all homeless and using the Tampa Bay Buccaneers stadium for shelter. To eat, they have to steal food from the concessions in the stadium. The only clothing they have is the used, dirty player uniforms.

When they started the strategic review of Man United, they were on their hands and knees, begging for anyone to buy all of their shares so that they may have the money needed to live with some semblance of dignity again. Then, out of nowhere, Sheikh Jassim rode in on a white horse in his Man United shirt after a rigorous match of 7-a-side. He told the Glazers he was willing to offer them around $34 per share and buy all of their shares now, leaving them all with hundreds of million dollars each. The concessions had run out of food and the Glazers were forced to either accept or risk starvation.

Just as the Sheikh was dismounting from his white horse to sign the agreement, he was gruesomely shot by an arrow through the eye by none other than Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe and left incapacitated. Sir James gathered the Glazers in a circle around him, and a malevolent grin appeared across his face. He explained to the Glazers that he was willing to offer them more money per share, allow them to keep control of Man United, and make even more money in the future. He proceeded to tell them he was willing to give them a $300M trust fund to be split between them equally, but that he had to lie to the public and tell them it would be invested into Man United.

Tears of joy streamed down the faces of the Glazer siblings. It was like a dream come true. Sir James took the Glazers aboard his private jet (specially designed to emit as much pollution as possible) for a celebration at Monaco's finest gentlemen's club.

Sheikh Jassim, seemingly unbothered by the arrow still lodged in his eye, finally arose. A single tear rolled down his face, out of the still intact eye, not for the physical pain he had endured, but for what could have been. He saddled up his white horse, riding into the sunset, hopeful to emerge from the abyss again one day, for he is the hero Manchester deserves, but not the one it needs right now.

 

[Mickeza]

Sir James Arthur Ratcliffe FIChemE has fanboys?

He definitely did 13 months ago when he was the face of the protests.

 

[OleGunnar20]

That's the only thing I'm willing to accept

This would be transformative for the club.

 

[Oldyella]

There never was a full bid from Jim though, it was for 69% of the club.

Nice

Speak for yourself, I have the Sir Jim duvet cover!

Now then now then.

 

[Fts 74]

Positive news which hopefully will go someway to lifting the gloom that's been surrounding us.
It's not perfect we all wanted the Glazers gone completely but if the stories are true, that the football structure is getting overhauled, then we should be delighted I know I am.

It'll be interesting to hear directly from Ratcliffe which I'm sure we will once it's confirmed, as we all want as much detail as possible.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Interesting, if true it’s a complete departure from the ‘INEOS will swallow the debt’ narrative that was being parroted for months.

If it’s genuinely Ratcliffe’s just own money it’ll be crucial to hear what’s happening with the debt and how that’s going to be cleared.

This is far more important than many of the ‘sugar coat’, short term fixes being bandied about.

Hopefully the debt situation is made crystal clear upon the official announcement of the deal Ratcliffe has made with the scum.

 

[GreatDane]

No. Apparently, anyone who didn't fancy us having human rights abusing state ownership automatically qualifies as a "Jim Fanboy".

It's all very silly.

Both sides are very silly. Just look below.

qatards

 

[gaffs]

I really struggle with the nonsense that one guy is going to save us which is why I never buy into the hipster DOF names or midfield signings that everyone thinks will be the messiah. Is Paul Mitchell actually any good?

It is a good point. I would agree, I don't think any one man will save us.

It will take a number of good people, investment, the right manager and player recruitment. And a lot of luck.

Mitchell does look to have a good track record at Southampton, Spurs, Red Bull group and Monaco. A lot stronger than our current DoF.

We have to take into account that fact that the Premier League landscape has changed since the 90's and 00's. There is far more competition, plus the limits of FFP. Even if we get the right people in, it doesnt guarantee league titles as other clubs are equally well equipped. I just hope we become consistently competitive.

 

[Garethw]

Agree. I don't want to win titles and for the credit to go to Qatari money.
We did it organically under Sir Matt and Sir Alex.

Does the credit for the CL win in 2008 go to the Glazers then?

Qatar would not have had to stick a cheat code in. We just needed unshackling from the Glazers debt and antiquated football structure.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

Does the credit for the CL win in 2008 go to the Glazers then?

Qatar would not have had to stick a cheat code in. We just needed unshackling from the Glazers debt and antiquated football structure.

Correct. This is the crux of it.

 

[gaffs]

Interesting, if true it’s a complete departure from the ‘INEOS will swallow the debt’ narrative that was being parroted for months.

If it’s genuinely Ratcliffe’s just own money it’ll be crucial to hear what’s happening with the debt and how that’s going to be cleared.

This is far more important than many of the ‘sugar coat’, short term fixes being bandied about.

Hopefully the debt situation is made crystal clear upon the official announcement of the deal Ratcliffe has made with the scum.

It wont be. I think Ratcliffe will tread very carefully and not speak on areas that he doesn't have control over. I don't think he will say anything about a potential increase in his holdings, as not to impact the publicly traded stock.

 

[gaffs]

Does the credit for the CL win in 2008 go to the Glazers then?

Qatar would not have had to stick a cheat code in. We just needed unshackling from the Glazers debt and antiquated football structure.

Not quite as they didnt pump billions in, like Abramovich did for Chelsea.

We have won everything since the Glazer takeover despite them, not because of them.

So you wouldn't give Saudi any credit for Newcastle then? As they have unshackled NUFC from Ashley and the debt he put on the club.

 

[Pes6Monster]

Does the credit for the CL win in 2008 go to the Glazers then?

Qatar would not have had to stick a cheat code in. We just needed unshackling from the Glazers debt and antiquated football structure.

Clearing the Glazer debt would be the 'Qatari cheat code', however, ditto the 'antiquated football structure'.

The real crux of it too many of its proponents are unwilling to accept.

 

[buchansleftleg]

All of this pro-Ratcliffe PR is basically just the Vampire's familiar changing the curtains and shutters in the haunted Mansion. Rather than drive the Glazers out with stakes and sunlight he will keep them in place, and be a new teat for them to suckle at.

I'm just glad Sir Bobby didn't live to see the club in the hands of people like Brailsford.

Hoping they give due attention to his funeral before making their announcement but I suspect they will want to "capitalize" on the coverage.

 

[Solius]

All of this pro-Ratcliffe PR is basically just the Vampire's familiar changing the curtains and shutters in the haunted Mansion. Rather than drive the Glazers out with stakes and sunlight he will keep them in place, and be a new teat for them to suckle at.

I'm just glad Sir Bobby didn't live to see the club in the hands of people like Brailsford.

Hoping they give due attention to his funeral before making their announcement but I suspect they will want to "capitalize" on the coverage.

Cheery stuff. Then what happens?

 

[gaffs]

If and it’s still a big if SIr Jim is using his own money, then he’s not the sort to throw it away and therefore the level of due diligence taken to sign new players could be beyond frustrating to start with, we may go backwards yes backwards before we go forwards.

This might be worth the pain however, because I genuinely believe the recruitment policy will change significantly.

We will see a significant change to a Anglo French policy and Ratcliffe will only sanction a huge mega fee for an absolute sure thing like Mbappe for £150m, our spending policy will be to target either up and coming young South American or Asian talent for £10-25m or Young established European players like John Clause Todibo for £35-55m and only on a very rare occasion purchasing players of £65-100m.

We will no longer buy players over 28 and give them 4-5 year contracts, this is 100% changing especially on £300-350k per week. I honestly think Whoever bought the club of a significant influence in the club believed that this was the easiest thing to fix because the wages to revenue ratio are far too bloated for such mediocrity.

You are talking like transfer spend is coming out of Jim's back pocket? It wont, just like it didn't come out of The Glazers moth ridden wallets.

Will he / his team scrutinize transfer fee's and salaries further? I would hope so. I think all can agree that the current and prior regimes have been wasteful.

First thing Sir Jim will say to all the players is I’m going to interview you 1 by 1 then my new DOF will be given my notes and we will compare them in 6 weeks with the manager. Not speaking English is not going to help players like Antony and I can see Sir Jim, the new CEO and sporting Director making a List of about 10-12 players to sell in January and June.

I mean. Come on man. What makes you think this?

He will be hands on and people thinking he’ll stay Way for tax reasons he can do 46 days before the three Tier Test and then he can still go to all the away games in Europe, even though that might only be one more this season?

Some of our entities overpaid players may be sold or loaned to Nice just so he can produce s cultural reset.

Does the French league allow that? I know the Premier League are looking to ban multi ownership loans coming in.

 

[Rood]

This is why I always thought it was weird when people said Ratcliffe keeping the Glazers was the "worst possible outcome". Surely the worst possible outcome would be maintaining the status quo and inevitably running the club into the dirt?

Absolutely - which why I could also never understand those who said they prefered to stick with the Glazers than to sell to Sheikh Jassim.

I wanted the 92F bid as I believe the full sale option was the best for the future of the club, but Im willing to give Sir Jim a chance to see what he can do - any kind of change is likely to be better than none at this point.

Not that excited about the likes of Brailsford, but proper football names like Blanc and Mitchell are reasons to be cheerful at least.

 

[TrebleChamp99]

Daddy Jim is using his own money and his own money is INEOS.

He owns over 60% of INEOS , 250m personal investment = more equity than 1.5bln in the club.

 

[Garethw]

Not quite as they didnt pump billions in, like Abramovich did for Chelsea.

We have won everything since the Glazer takeover despite them, not because of them.

So you wouldn't give Saudi any credit for Newcastle then? As they have unshackled NUFC from Ashley and the debt he put on the club.

Newcastle are not Manchester United mate. Despite being utterly shit our global reach is light years away from Newcastle.

The ME money is having to build the likes of City and Newcastle from the ground up From a reputational point of view.

The likes of us, Liverpool, Real Madrid etc don’t need to be built into global powerhouses. They already are.

 

[Skills]

If and it’s still a big if SIr Jim is using his own money, then he’s not the sort to throw it away and therefore the level of due diligence taken to sign new players could be beyond frustrating to start with, we may go backwards yes backwards before we go forwards.

This might be worth the pain however, because I genuinely believe the recruitment policy will change significantly.

We will see a significant change to a Anglo French policy and Ratcliffe will only sanction a huge mega fee for an absolute sure thing like Mbappe for £150m, our spending policy will be to target either up and coming young South American or Asian talent for £10-25m or Young established European players like John Clause Todibo for £35-55m and only on a very rare occasion purchasing players of £65-100m.

We will no longer buy players over 28 and give them 4-5 year contracts, this is 100% changing especially on £300-350k per week. I honestly think Whoever bought the club of a significant influence in the club believed that this was the easiest thing to fix because the wages to revenue ratio are far too bloated for such mediocrity.


First thing Sir Jim will say to all the players is I’m going to interview you 1 by 1 then my new DOF will be given my notes and we will compare them in 6 weeks with the manager. Not speaking English is not going to help players like Antony and I can see Sir Jim, the new CEO and sporting Director making a List of about 10-12 players to sell in January and June.

He will be hands on and people thinking he’ll stay Way for tax reasons he can do 46 days before the three Tier Test and then he can still go to all the away games in Europe, even though that might only be one more this season?

Some of our entities overpaid players may be sold or loaned to Nice just so he can produce s cultural reset.

This is so cringe, it makes me want to vomit.

 

[gaffs]

They qualified for Europe multiple times in the years before the takeover they’ve gone backwards

He bought them in 2019 they we’re a CL club in 2017

23-24 - currently 1st and unbeaten
22-23 - 9th
21-22 - 5th
20-21 - 9th
19-20 - 5th
INEOS Takeover
18-19 - 7th
17-18 - 8th
16-17 - 3rd
15-16 - 4th
14-15 11th
13-14 17th

From these league positions, its unfair to say they have gone "massively backwards" .

Had a good couple of years two years before the takeover, but were back to average in the years before.

 

[PoTMS]

Why Fletcher? His main role is just helping with the pipeline between the academy and the first team, helping the players themselves and also helping the management decide which ones are ready to step up. He's also the main one staying in communication with the kids we loan out.

The combination of his job title (the rather grandiose sounding 'Technical Director') and the fact he had to step into more of a coaching/advisory role when Rangnick took over seems to make people think he's got more influence than he does. He only did that since both Carrick and McKenna also left and Rangnick couldn't get all his preferred backroom staff in, so Fletcher stepped in to help out. Honestly, they should probably just change his job title so there's less confusion about what he's doing.

I think there's a fair chance that he's got an eye on a bigger role in the future, but as long as he proves that he deserves it that'll be a good thing. Other top clubs all over Europe have ex-players in important roles. Alternatively maybe he'll just stay where he is, focusing more on the kids in the academy.

Is he the best man for the job? If not, then get someone in properly qualified.

 

[Swedish_Plumber]

I always love the holier than thou proclamations in these big debates

 

[gaffs]

Newcastle are not Manchester United mate. Despite being utterly shit our global reach is light years away from Newcastle.

The ME money is having to build the likes of City and Newcastle from the ground up From a reputational point of view.

The likes of us, Liverpool, Real Madrid etc don’t need to be built into global powerhouses. They already are.

I accept that Qatar would have come in and within a few years put us back onto the track we would have likely been on without The Glazers. Debt free, new stadium etc.

But how is that different to what Saudi are doing at Newcastle?

Saudi are improving Newcastle by spending more in the transfer market, buying them a new training ground, being able to hire far better football people to manage transfers and club business. All things they may have already had now, had it not been for 10+ years of Ashley.

Although there are clearly different levels, there are parallels between MUFC and NUFC. Both have had owners dragging them down for years.

But in the opinion of most football fan, if United start winning under Qatari owners, then it would be see as Qatari driven and more Middle East money influencing football. In tht way way at that same people accuse Newcastle of getting a Saudi leg up.

No one takes into account that both clubs were crippled prior.

 

[Kaos]

This is why I always thought it was weird when people said Ratcliffe keeping the Glazers was the "worst possible outcome". Surely the worst possible outcome would be maintaining the status quo and inevitably running the club into the dirt?

I honestly think that some people who were originally on the Ratcliffe train had their heads turned by an unknown figurehead who kept saying he was going to spend billions on the club. A figurehead who appears to have the business mind of a spoon. He promised them a new Old Trafford on the moon without showing any proof that he even had a rocket, and folk thought "Yeah, this all sounds completely reasonable and he will solve all of our problems."

I think its slightly more nuanced than that.

I'd wager those who'd rather no sale than Jim partially buying in were under the expectation that the Glazers would become increasingly desperate and feel more inclined to a full sale - which is the ultimate hope. The reservation that some of us have is that Ratcliffe is essentially giving the Glazers a lifeline, prolonging their stranglehold at the club at a time where they're practically on their knees. It's not an endorsement of the Glazers but rather an objection to them being given a new lease of life to remain at a time where it looks increasingly unsustainable for them to do so. In essence its not entirely different to the Elliot proposal, albeit I'm sure with less insistence on overhauling the footballing operational side of things.

 

[Rhyme Animal]

I think its slightly more nuanced than that.

I'd wager those who'd rather no sale than Jim partially buying in were under the expectation that the Glazers would become increasingly desperate and feel more inclined to a full sale - which is the ultimate hope. The reservation that some of us have is that Ratcliffe is essentially giving the Glazers a lifeline, prolonging their stranglehold at the club at a time where they're practically on their knees. It's not an endorsement of the Glazers but rather an objection to them being given a new lease of life to remain at a time where it looks increasingly unsustainable for them to do so. In essence its not entirely different to the Elliot proposal, albeit I'm sure with less insistence on overhauling the footballing operational side of things.

Absolutely correct, well said.

Though I struggle to believe anyone genuinely didn’t already know this was the case.

It’s been spelled out thousands of times and is blatantly obvious.

 

[Laurencio]

It wont be. I think Ratcliffe will tread very carefully and not speak on areas that he doesn't have control over. I don't think he will say anything about a potential increase in his holdings, as not to impact the publicly traded stock.

It wouldn’t be beyond the realm of possibility, but it is very unlikely that Ratcliffe does anything about the debt before he's a majority share-holder.

 

[Castia]

23-24 - currently 1st and unbeaten
22-23 - 9th
21-22 - 5th
20-21 - 9th
19-20 - 5th
INEOS Takeover
18-19 - 7th
17-18 - 8th
16-17 - 3rd
15-16 - 4th
14-15 11th
13-14 17th

From these league positions, its unfair to say they have gone "massively backwards" .

Had a good couple of years two years before the takeover, but were back to average in the years before.

Ok fair point. Not sure it’s a good thing that floating around mid table after 4 years can be celebrated either way but

 

[gaffs]

It wouldn’t be beyond the realm of possibility, but it is very unlikely that Ratcliffe does anything about the debt before he's a majority share-holder.

I agree. Why would he clear the debts unless he is in total control?

But then again, he is reported to be putting in $300mil of his own cash for infrastructure investments when only owning 25%. So as you say, anything possible.