You can say that for any transfer dealing. It's always judged on the last sale -- so everyone has to judge it on the Chelsea deal.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
You can say that for any transfer dealing. It's always judged on the last sale -- so everyone has to judge it on the Chelsea deal.
There is the £1.4 billion (players & infrastructure) commitment too.
You have to remember that Chelsea were sold in completely different circumstances, Abramovich was hounded out and forced to sell the club through pressure, not because he wanted to.
In addition, Chelsea's global reach must be (total estimate btw) no more than 10% at most of United. Completely different ballpark imo
Well as long as those buyers include middle east option and maybe Ballmer (apparently very different to Boehly)
One final point before I go to bed: based on Uniteds stature, global reach, stadium capacity etc etc etc; from a financial perspective, they should be topping every single metric around income and revenue and currently they are not.
I get that PL/CL performance impacts it massively, but we should honestly be miles in front of the other top teams around the world.
That's where the club/Glazers/Woodward failed. Agreeing over the top transfer fees and contracts, plus; failing to pull clear financially.
I get that PL/CL performance impacts it massively, but we should honestly be miles in front of the other top teams around the world.
That's where the club/Glazers/Woodward failed. Agreeing over the top transfer fees and contracts, plus; failing to pull clear financially.
Yeah despite what Slater might have said in podcast still find it hard to believe only Ratcliffe will declare interest before deadline
Goldbridge really needs to stop making videos based on such naff sources like this
INEOS would run it smartly, they’d clear the debts, invest in infrastructure, not wait 16 years to hire a DoF, they’d spend what the club can afford (which is shitloads).
United and Nice are two completely different businesses. One ran smartly is the biggest football club on the planet, the other ran smartly is a top 5 French side.
There is no doubt that Ratcliffe would have learnt from mistakes made running OGS Nice,however just hope INEOS wouldn't put any restrictions on infrastructure investment and how much Erik can spend on transfers.
Like the poster above said we could really do with hearing him outline his plans for how he wants to run the club,however suspect it's not possible for that information to be disclosed due to some confidentiality thing
I think my problem is I have seen at City how well middle east ownership can run things,admitted not straight away when you look at the Gary Cook era though.
Maybe if I had seen evidence at another club of how a Ratcliffe figure can run things effectively I would have more belief in it.
Last edited:
That's why the only way the Glazers get the £5-6billion will be the sports washers -- if you work it on based on pure financial numbers that target price doesn't make any sense. (If the new owners stick £5-6 billion in the bank that would be the minimum financial return.)
Dubai & co playing cards close to chest on this or been genuinely scared off by price?
More likely that they have to work out their numbers... unlike their richer cousin who could just sign the cheque for shits & giggles.
When I say co I am talking about their rich relatives too but looks near impossible when they already own high profile clubs
Fans would also do well to remember that a debt free United could’ve invested almost a billion on the stadium, that has instead been used simply to service debt and give the banks fat pockets.
If the Glazers had spent 1bn on the stadium, employed a DoF early after SAF’s retirement and then spent the billion + we’ve spent on transfers in the past decade, we’d be a feck load better state today as a club.
In short, United don’t need to be a billionaire’s play thing in order to be the best both on an off the pitch, they just need to be debt free and have owners that search out the best people rather than having a banker in charge of a decade of failure.
Nice on the other hand would need to be run daftly, as a billionaire’s toy, spending vastly above their means in order to quickly compete at the top of ligue 1. The only other option is a long term plan to build the club slowly.
If the Glazers had spent 1bn on the stadium, employed a DoF early after SAF’s retirement and then spent the billion + we’ve spent on transfers in the past decade, we’d be a feck load better state today as a club.
In short, United don’t need to be a billionaire’s play thing in order to be the best both on an off the pitch, they just need to be debt free and have owners that search out the best people rather than having a banker in charge of a decade of failure.
Nice on the other hand would need to be run daftly, as a billionaire’s toy, spending vastly above their means in order to quickly compete at the top of ligue 1. The only other option is a long term plan to build the club slowly.
Yeah I really hope our new owners will go and get a best in class DOF rather than keep Murtough
Yes. But the new owners buy up United at the projected £5-6billion, they may have cleared off the previous debt. But now they will either have debt of their own and/or would expect some basic returns on their investment, 3-4% annual on the 5-6billion quid investment?
Do you still think state ownership would want that
The problem with changing Murtough is that ETH will lose his support. And one would expect ETH to go through a dip or a bad run at some point. So Murtough's support would be critical then.
A new DOF may not see ETH in the same light since it wasn't his hire and may not have the same sense of loyalty to ETH.
State ownership would have other factors in play and not pure financial ROI. They may be able to wait for 20yrs for any return. I doubt if Ratcliffe can.
Not this old chestnut again. Chelsea sold for 2.75bn. An additional 1.5bn was promised for investment but it wasn’t part of the sale price. Sigh.
I doubt that’s true. I think we’ll go for a minimum of 4.5bn, but probably closer to 5.5 or even 6.
That said, even though he wouldn’t be the richest owner, and wouldn’t elevate us to the level of having the bottomless pit of cash some other teams have. It would be nice for the club to be owned by an actual fan of it, British too. And as long as it’s run well as a business and investment can be made in the infrastructure, then the club generates enough money to fund itself. I’d much prefer this to a state backed bid.
It's the same crap but in reverse -- he cost United £ 37-40 million!!
Conveniently leaving out that the bulk of it is in add-ons.
Wasn’t the original sale price quoted in USD? So $5-7bn? Obviously if that is the case then £4bn is potentially close to the $5bn low point, exchange rate/hedging dependent.
I haven’t bought a kit for over 20yrs but I’d consider that one, I think it’s the best I’ve ever seen, hard to think of better.
People are skeptical because they look at how Nice is run. So Ratcliffe is not painted in a good light among people on here.
I diaagree, you have a guy at Chelsea currently proving that not all investors think that way. Many investors will be in it for other reasons, not least the long term goal of increasing the value of the club/business.
Nice is being run just fine. They are 3 years in and doing ok, they spend according to their means and have done alright in the league, slightly better than the average league position for the 5 years prior to the takeover.
But in short, it’s absolutely daft to start drawing any conclusions on Nice after just 3 years. Unless of course you want an owner that just comes in and treats the club like a billionaires play thing, like the bloke at Chelsea.
Boehly is not spending anything which wasn't already committed as part of the deal. Once that number is reached, only then will we know how he is running the club and spending money. Currently all his crazy deals are just part of the initial price which has been put in the deal.
Unless you think the Glazers love the club so much that they will push that min spend clause in, we won't know how Ratcliffe intends to spend or run the club.
Currently all good things are based on assumptions while the bad ones have some sort of precedence in his running of Nice putting his brother in charge.
One can only hope. My best guess is at that price it will be a washer
Our rivals are buying up all the talent and we’re still no closer to getting rid of these leaches
Our rivals are buying up all the talent and we’re still no closer to getting rid of these leaches
They were never expected to spend in January anyway when in the middle of selling out
I think the trouble is whenever I hear the term ROI it makes me think Glazers taking dividends style ALERT and brings me out in cold sweat
if you think about it, if the glazers think that the club's worth 5billion quid, taking out 15million in dividends is reasonable. They must be wondering what all the fuss is about.
Oh yeah they don't think there is anything wrong in taking money out of the club,managed to fool the media clowns here into thinking they invested money too
I can understand Ratcliffe wanting a ROI just as long as he doesn't take money out the club like these leeches have for 18 years
Last edited:
Nice and the Swiss club are run smartly, no doubt. Our club would be run smartly, no doubt.
But what does "smartly" actually mean? Because all I can compare smartly to is, what they have done at their previous clubs. That's the only real data we have. Which equates to very little success on the pitch. We are Manchester United, we need to be winning trophies. INEOS have not shown this kind of success with the above two clubs.
And let's not forget, Manchester United are now in a league with many competitive teams, both on and off the pitch. A lot of investment is required to get us winning trophies.
There has to be some room to run the club better than what it is under new ownership. There is a lot commentated across decent media in recent months about the state of United
- Bloated Squad with a quite mind boggling transfer and contract renewal policy. In short, we usually get fleeced on transfers and usually sell a £5.00 note for £2.50
- Outdated Stadium: We are no longer on the list of venues UEFA would consider for Champions League, Europa League finals. When was the last time there was a decent gig, boxing match or concert at Old Trafford. Less revenue being generated from non footballing commercial activities like conferences etc
- Outdated Fan Experience: As one source in the Athletic commentated, United's pre match corporate entertainment has not changed much in a decade, maybe longer, it's stale. We are still on chicken dinners and Black Forrest Gateux's while other clubs have all sorts of Cafe's and experiences to cater for every taste. Other clubs are getting more $$$ per head per fan that comes through the turnstiles.
Ok some of that will require money invested to fix but once fixed there should be increased revenue and reduced costs ?
Is having someone whose sole attribute is originating from the same ball sack that you did as head of football smart? Is it smart to bring in the likes of Barkley and Ramsay? These players had struggled to remain motivated at clubs like Juve and yet somehow they are expected, in their late 20s/late 30s to do that for Nice. Is that smart?
Now we can debate that Ratcliffe is learning (and interested in learning) how to manage football clubs and tbh there's good arguments to back that up including hiring Jean Claude Blanc. But there's nothing around Nice or Lausanne that show that these clubs are being managed in a smart way. At least not yet
A shite basketball team in the US just sold for $4b, that is 13x their yearly revenue. United will go for $6b or more.
They don't give a feck, we'll have to really splash the cash in the summer to prove to the current lot we're not falling behindOur rivals are buying up all the talent and we’re still no closer to getting rid of these leaches
His previous and current engagements at football clubs is the only way to judge him at the moment so I've no idea how that is daft. To expect him to be the owner everyone dreams of when everything he is doing at other clubs points to a different direction is what I'd call naive.
Keep that guy away from us. He reeks as another leech
- Status