Just the worst unethical cnuts to ever own a PL club!
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
If it ain't the Qatari state and just Jassim, then he can't afford to buy the club or do up Miles Platting.
There's your first bother.
That's just whataboutery, chief.
America aint perfect and is in a dark place politically sure but it can go the other way. I mean the 'social murderer' of like George Floyd is doing life. You can remove the president legally. You can criticise religion openly. Try that in Qatar you'd be arrested and likely executed, most likely without trial.
Of course there are people involved who want to change things significantly but these dudes look at Qatar and fancy a bit of it.
Been like such forever.
Love OT though and donmt want us to have some 'Ineos Bowl' monstrosity with big screen tellies and cheese rooms.
feckin hell…
Old Trafford is old as hell.
I'm struggling to see why in the hell he's going to put all this extra cash into the club when he will only own 25% of the club. Am I missing something?
Even the renovation of Old Trafford and expansion to 90,000 will cost £750m to £1billon so I look forward to hearing his ideas and plans.
Plenty of "structurally Stone Age" stadiums in Spain have been brought up to modern standards
I will give them 'credit' and suggest that, since they do occasionally adhere to the most minimal optics (attending a game once a year etc) that don't cost them anything out of pocket or involve any loss of power, it probably is more a fear that, at 'best' the funeral becomes site for a protest, and at 'worst' some particularly irate fan tries to [redacted] whichever one attends whilst they're out in the open - not in stadium- in a known location and on British soil.... .
Curious to how the 'sporting control' and 'commercial side' will work. I'm not hopeful at all. Regardless of the situation they've apparently come to an agreement over the Glazers will definitely still have the final say. What if the Glazers want a player for commercial reasons but the player isn't wanted by the sporting side, or what about these ridiculous pre season schedules we've had recently that are commercial but affect our start to the season which is the 'sporting' aspect...
Not optimistic in the slightest until they're gone.
Not optimistic in the slightest until they're gone.
The Glazers will bring in sponsors and take all the money.
He can leverage the investment by demanding a share split as part of the contract, every time Sir Jim/Ineos invest they will demand more shares are generated in return for investment, thus diluting the percentage of shares the Glazers and the minority own. They will see their share value initially reduce as more shares are generated then eventually increase.
The good news from the Glazers point of view is that Sir Jim with an initial investment of £245m for infrastructure plus maybe £200m in clearing some of the debt added to an awful lot of wheeling and dealing with the current squad getting rid of most of the high earners and signing much younger players.
Is this likely though? This doesn't sound like something the Glazers would be interested in, considering how much they currently value the club at. I'm struggling to see the upside for the Glazers in this deal.
You buy both?
Putting in £250m investment as 25% owner isn't strange though, is it? That plus improving the sporting side of things will only increase the valuation of his stake even if it's only 25% forever.
Renovate the stadium and call it New Trafford.
Don't they have to pay back 100s of millions through the club by early 2025 relating to the initial loan in order to bring down the debt , as well as having maxed-out personal-credit against their share in the club (finance isn't my area, but I've seen something along these lines reported)? The sporting side is very cost-inefficient, whilst their association with the football side is toxifying the brand.
I think they're crazy for not just negotiating a deal for the 4 to sell and the remaining two to have non-controlling amounts of shares in the club, then allowing competent and cash-flush enterprise (say SJR, or SJR plus investor, or a deal with Qatar for them to take ownership but with a number of shares to stay on the open market) to pump the value of the club up still further. That is, by investing in the big infrastructure stuff, new corporate/ VR/immersive fan opportunities and all the rest, along with ensuring club on a footing to keep qualifying for whatever further revised version of CL comes on the table. Glazers would then sell their remaining shares in a few years when it maxes. Just look at how other clubs have raised their value without bringing all the ordure or failing to invest in the 'architecture' of the club - development and stadium and hospitality alike; the biggest failing of the Glazers, as this sale seems to indicate from the outside, is a classical one... a lack of understanding of who they are, how they got to have the club, and how little of the club's rise in value was down to them, how much was, in certain regards, in spite of their judgement....
it would nice to have toilets without piss on the floor. Maybe one day
Have you tried holding your cock when you pee and keeping your eyes open?
Never wanted a new stadium, it’s too iconic of a stadium to knock down, expand it to 90,000 and renovate it, much more appealing.
If the rumours of Blanc and Mitchell coming in are true then he’s making all the right moves on Paper, Blanc turned Juventus around after Calciopol and Mitchell has a proven track record in Recruitment. We’ve never had a problem spending money, we’ve just had people who are incapable of spending it correctly.
Put a structure and identity in place and let people who know how to implement it do their jobs
If the rumours of Blanc and Mitchell coming in are true then he’s making all the right moves on Paper, Blanc turned Juventus around after Calciopol and Mitchell has a proven track record in Recruitment. We’ve never had a problem spending money, we’ve just had people who are incapable of spending it correctly.
Put a structure and identity in place and let people who know how to implement it do their jobs
But then i'd piss in my eyes
The football's shite but no need to go that far
Kind of is when the 75% aren't going to put a dime in. You're surely just making it more expensive to buy out the majority shareholders and what's to say they even sell to you?
I'm not totally sure, if that is the case then makes sense.
I think the real issue is the overvaluing of the club by Raine. They could be riding off into the sunset by now, but they are now in an extremely protracted exit route, which requires a lot of hope for the club to finally reach the over inflated valuation and a willing buyer. Will Ineos and co even give a shit about buying the rest of the club if they get sporting control? All seems very odd.
This is just like buying a shared ownership house, buy and initial 25 %, and then each extra percentage you buy later on cost you even more as the market value goes up.
So there is very little incentive to improve the house too much early on if your intention is to ultimately own the whole thing one day.
I just hope we get told the full plan this week, as without detail it's a bit odd.
So there is very little incentive to improve the house too much early on if your intention is to ultimately own the whole thing one day.
I just hope we get told the full plan this week, as without detail it's a bit odd.
It's very strange. Usually when the board want investment without diluting shareholdings; they'll take a loan. Or the minority investment itself being used as the cash injection. Or the shareholder loaning the company the money.
Two questions about this Glazers / Ratcliffe coalition…
1. Why invest in something and thus drive up the value massively if you supposedly plan to soon buy it?
2. If you already have ‘complete sporting control’, why would you be bothered to pay 6/7/8bn in order to buy the whole thing?
1. Why invest in something and thus drive up the value massively if you supposedly plan to soon buy it?
2. If you already have ‘complete sporting control’, why would you be bothered to pay 6/7/8bn in order to buy the whole thing?
questions nobody has the answer to.
1 we can assume that Ratcliffe and his team will have putt/call options so there is a limit up and down for what both accept.
rest is anybody’s guess.
Most Pubs are like that unfortunately, not just OT.
So he has to improve it by enough to get at least his £250m back, so £1bn added value as he only has 25%. That could work if he gets it right.
I'm interested to see how it all pans out, but there's definitely something we're missing, because it doesn't seem to benefit anyone but the glazers at this point.
Get the piano back out
“Right get yourself down to Homebase. We need 500 buckets of paint. See if you can get discount for a bulk order”
INEOS will not invest unless there is a benefit to them if you look earlier in this thread I explain how this benefits them, catch 22 - no investment - No potential growth on in value of the club.
I think (just a guess) any money he puts in and the value rises from a set time say when he arrives we are worth £5 a share to say after his investment £9 he will get that difference equity. The money he puts in from his own pocket will not raise the value of the Glazers share, no chance.
At the amount specified. both in terms of initial purchase and investment, I don't think INEOS needs to be formally involved, or at least this is what's been reported in certain quarters...
I know we've been shite but double digit thrashings, you need to go to school and learn to count
Don't have time now but I can make a list for you, since apparently you find it too difficult yourself
- Status