Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
- Status
This one is done, lads.
Well if they're in direct conversations with glazers, it likely is.
States have no business owning football clubs.
Member or privately owned please.
Member or privately owned please.
You talk from a position of strength.
Let's ask you the same question when you've not won the league in many years and the rival clubs in your league are owned by Oil States/sugar daddies.
The share prices didn't budge after the Ratcliffe's about to bid rumours...yet went crazy before noises from Qatar. Surely some folk know what's going on.
Maybe the lines are somewhat blurry but it sounds as if this group from Qatar is a group of individual investors but that's probably the angle they want to get out. Recall those involved in Newcastle mentioning that this isn't the state buying them but some investment group from there.
I get your point and the Glazers are surely nobody I want to have at my club either.
On the other hand you can't say they didn't spend shitloads of money either. They spent but just didn't spend wisely.
Regarding to the stadium. If you don't have a sugar daddy billionaire or oil state owners, building a new stadium will hold you back many years as the money naturally missing for investments in the squad. Arsenal and Tottenham are good examples.
The Glazers spent (wasted) money on the squad but neglected infrastructure.
I don't think you can have both, except you have unlimited funds as Chelsea, Newcastle or City.
I see the development in England rather critical. Look at Chelsea's spending. Over 600 (!) million euros.
Over 300 million euros only this window. More than the Spanish, Italian, French and German leagues together.
If United and even Liverpool will get these unlimited funds as well where will it all end?
Transfer fees and salaries will only explode much further. For these owners, especially the oil states, 100 million or 10 billion don't matter. It's just peanuts for them.
However, there is natural limit. Even with all the money there will be only 4 CL places for English teams. If in 5 or 10 years you have 7, 8 or more of these plastic clubs, whatever they can and will spend, there are only 4 slots for international fame available. The owners of the teams who don't make it will be disappointed and might eventually walk away. Then the whole bubble will burst.
This is done. If the Qatar interest is legit, which it looks like it is, the question of who will be our new owners is answered.
Simple answers. Then I won't watch football anymore.
Of course Bayern is affected as well as we have compete with these plastic clubs in the CL.
The fact that there are problems in the UK and in football does not justify nor excuse the problems I alluded to and those described in other posts here.
Until the EPL came back up in Europe none of you cared. As soon as CL football is effected the moral high ground becomes occupied.
We warned everybody about oil money but City were held up as an example to laugh at United about.
Everybody is shitting themselves because of the rise in transfer fees, influx of players in England etc but imagine battling that week in, week out.
Bayern would become oil money tomorrow if you were in our position. You have no qualms about weakening other teams in your league when they become the slightest bit of a threat by using your advantage as the power house in Germany, no way you’d give that up
The Qataris seem set on getting United to our glory days.
Money for Ten Hag is there for his choosing.
Let's only hope that we don't end up like City,
Bring them along.
Money for Ten Hag is there for his choosing.
Let's only hope that we don't end up like City,
Bring them along.
Yeah but that's just the story. If it's the Qataris we'll be state owned.
The big difference between Utd and City apart from history and size ahem! is that if they take over the Qataris will not need to cook the books in order to make us more competitive, they just need to run the club properly instead of using it as an asset to leverage debts against
In regards to the conflict of interests owning PSG, I can see them being side lined, if the Emir is as reported a Utd fan, the PSG project has been relatively unsuccessful, given that they have failed to increase their dominance a league in which they were already dominant and have failed in the CL
In regards to the conflict of interests owning PSG, I can see them being side lined, if the Emir is as reported a Utd fan, the PSG project has been relatively unsuccessful, given that they have failed to increase their dominance a league in which they were already dominant and have failed in the CL
They'd want to win everything. For that, they'd need money, and lots of it. Don't kid yourself, the books will inevitably be cooked - inside a couple of years, most of our headline sponsors would be Qatari companies.
Too much smoke without fire.
Carrington is crumbling?
Time to start another day with a clarification.
Qatar Private Investment is NOT QSI or QIA and therefore not affiliated with state ownership.
Enjoy your day everyone.
Qatar Private Investment is NOT QSI or QIA and therefore not affiliated with state ownership.
Enjoy your day everyone.
Surprised I guess none of the Indian billionaire's like Ambani etc. have been seriously linked
Saudi Arabia own Newcastle, if this went through it would be the same. I don't see a scenario where wealthy individuals in Qatar would be spending 4-5b to buy a football club without the state being involved.
Ambani currently shrouded in controversy and stick price plummeting.
They will likely have a stake 10% rumoured and therefore would have a line of funding to the group BUT we would not be outright state owned.
Private Investors from Qatar, private investors from the states what’s the difference?
and you believe that?
Nobody actually believes that though. Of course they are affiliated with the state. One of the reports I saw yesterday detailed that they had to ask permission of the state to bid!
Interesting, doubt he'd have been interested anyway but the lack of links to him and others from there surprised me
I would have no problem with private individuals from any country owning United as long as their motivation in buying us is to get United to the top.
All I'm saying is I don't believe for a second that a group of wealthy individuals in Qatar could buy United without state involvement. And I don't mean financially, I mean I don't see them being allowed to buy and fund a club that would compete directly with the state owned PSG.
That's Adani, not Ambani
I can only speak for myself of course. I always want clubs like City, PSG, Chelsea or now Newcastle to lose.
I never laughed at United. United, Arsenal and Liverpool are still real clubs, the others are just plastics.
Look at Chelsea they have a squad of 38 players only 25 can be registered for EPL and CL. Top players will rott in the stands instead of being in the pitch for another team.
If in the future there will be even more of these teams with unlimited funds, the beautiful game will be destroyed.
I understand the frustration. On the other hand United has been one of the few clubs that could still compete with the plastics until recently. You haven't been successful not because of not enough funds but if poor management decisions.
I don't really get your point though. You are saying United have to deal with clubs cheating financially for years. And now, after ridiculing these plastics clubs for many years and saying so their titles are worth nothing, you suddenly don't mind to become an oil state club yourself. Mean all your future success, titles and trophies will be worth nothing.
Going into this will only derail the thread. So I'm just answering very briefly.
Even if our management wanted (which they don't) they wouldn't be able to give a majority stake to any investor. The 50+1 rule will prevent this.
Bayern is in strong decision due to many decades of outstanding success and management. Like United has been under Ferguson. This is completely different than City, Chelsea or now Newcastle. These clubs will be able to outspent any traditional club as long as their owners are willing too splash the cash, irrespectively of the success on the pitch.
Anyway I feel I'm derailing the thread. I'm just surprised how many here don't mind a Qatari takeover after bashing City & Co for many years.
Said gay footballer might not feel comfortable in coming out - nobody is denying we don’t have work to do in that regard in the UK - but at least privately they are free to be gay and not be criminalised and incarcerated for it. The two scenarios are not comparable.
Thats Adani. Different conglomerate.
Linked to royal family = state funded takeover
Of course the initial report was too good to be true.
This excites me more than it probably should.
Yep. The glazer regime is coming to an end. All of this feels like a dream.
That’s not what is being reported today.
Sorry I've probably missed this in the thread, but have Sky not massively gone against the grain and said these Qatari's would only be interested in 10%?
That's a bit of a worry.
That's a bit of a worry.
Yup, and the fact we know Joel and Avi are reluctant sellers, and have held direct talks with Qatar means we have the very real threat of becoming a sportwashing tool and still being owned and drained by the Glazers. Scary stuff
- Status