Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
cyberman said:
INEOS have nothing to do with us. Jim bought his shares with his own money with that new Trawler Ltd company or whatever he called it.
This is blatantly made up
Click to expand...
Is the problem not that SJR also has a controlling holding in Ineos so effectively owns both clubs?
 
Pexbo said:
I thought we’d already established that Ratcliffe and INEOS are as good as interchangeable?
Click to expand...
But they’re legally not? Wasn’t it specifically said he used his own money to buy the shares?
I can see the argument if there was a hint of truth to it but there’s no better proof of INEOS not controlling both clubs than INEOS having nothing to do with United? How’s that not better than giving assurances that they’re stepping away from the day to day of Nice?
Thats why this smells made up to me.
I mean if him went out and bought a car would that mean INEOS bought a car? I just can’t see how this wasn’t cleared many months ago even if it were an issue.
At the same time who am I to argue
 
parmenio said:
Is the problem not that SJR also has a controlling holding in Ineos so effectively owns both clubs?
Click to expand...
But Jim doesn’t effectively own United and is a minority shareholder?
From what I read wouldn’t Jim have to prove he’s stepping away from INEOS running of Nice rather than INEOS stepping back from Nice when they legally have nothing to do with United?
I’m sure this would have been cleared months ago anyway.
 
cyberman said:
INEOS have nothing to do with us. Jim bought his shares with his own money with that new Trawler Ltd company or whatever he called it.
This is blatantly made up
Click to expand...
Yeah I’m calling BS too. It’s only recently been reported that they want a group sporting director to work between United, Nice and Lausanne. That makes much more sense.

I’d also add that as long as one can prove we have a different controlling hierarchy to Nice it won’t matter that we are both effectively owned by INEOS. The whole ‘Trawlers Ltd’ thing is another layer of seperation too.
 
Might be announced in the next 35 mins if Twitter is to be believed.
 
Pexbo said:
I thought we’d already established that Ratcliffe and INEOS are as good as interchangeable?
Click to expand...
Not exactly.

He owns 51% of the ultimate holding company of the group I think and he was VERY clear the money was his. His businesses are very siloed (all separate limited companies, few holding cos leading to ultimate).

Down the line, he may create some hybrid thing but right now, just him.
 
Pexbo said:
I thought we’d already established that Ratcliffe and INEOS are as good as interchangeable?
Click to expand...
Indeed but that’s not the issue. As per Redbull we only need to prove that our Hierarchy is completely seperate and different to the hierarchy at Nice. It seems a fairly straightforward process to be honest.
 
Twitter is really going for it, they seem to think something big is coming at 9:15…but what ?
 
Plant0x84 said:
Indeed but that’s not the issue. As per Redbull we only need to prove that our Hierarchy is completely seperate and different to the hierarchy at Nice. It seems a fairly straightforward process to be honest.
Click to expand...
And rules state that the same owner cannot have "control or influence" over more than one club, which has been interpreted as a stake sitting below 50%.
 
The spin is off the charts regarding this investment. Glazers played an absolute blinder- all the pressure against them just disappeared when they gained control of the media narrative
 
Tiber said:
The spin is off the charts regarding this investment. Glazers played an absolute blinder all the pressure against them just disappeared when they gained control of the media narrative
Click to expand...
Forever in the wallow pit are Man Utd fans. Everything, even minority investment gets a ITS ALL PR tag. Nice. I applaud the dedication & commitment
 
Status
Not open for further replies.