I seriously doubt UK will try to feck with ME given the kind of investment they are doing there.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
You do that on a regular basis TR.
for what though?
This
If you think his fellow investors would go along with that you have a good point. If I were one of them I would look to sell in those circumstances though, pretty much any normal investor would. Unless of course the plan is to make money, then they might be happy with it.
Do which?
I would love to be in the board meeting where Sir Jim sold this to the Ineos directors
alright lads I know the practise runs with Nice and Lausanne didn't exactly go according to plan, but hear my out...
WUM, you cheeky little scamp. But I'll have a word in the scout forum.
Felix isn't a typical number 9 anyway and based on what we know about ten Hag, he prefers more physically imposing strikers. Short or long-term, Felix didn't make sense due his profile and the money involved. We all want a proper forward as soon as possible but it doesn't work like that. Kudus also isn't a striker.
So it seems that the Qatari interest isn't really concrete and INEOS probably don't intend to meet the Glazers' valuation - any idea who the other 3 supposed parties are?
True I do upset the oppo fans but I’m more reformed now and only target the ones that deserve it..
Besides this is our house!
some probably will if they go through with this purchase, surely?
it makes feckall sense from a business perspective
Where did you get this information? All sources are claiming that Qatar is a serious bidder while SJR is planning to rope in GS and JP for financing his acquisition bid.
Seems from where? That's the opposite of what is being reported.
You're living in 24 hours ago. Its Fri 10th Feb baby!
It's two US consortiums and the Saudis apparently
but Qatar look like front-runners from reports
It makes complete sense from a business perspective if they think the value of Manchester United will increase sufficiently in the future, as that's where the vast bulk of any return will come from.
How valid those projections of increasing value are, we have no idea. It's hard to tell what direction football will go in the future. But all that matters at this point is that that's what they project, as that would justify the purchase.
Let's start exploring the origins of sport washing first. The earliest case of sport washing I can think off was in 1923 when Eduardo Agnelli bought Juventus. The Agnelli of the time had a far better reputation then Ratcliffe could ever dream of achieve. They were the business equivalent of royalty in Turin. In fact even il Duce tiptoed around the guys. Juventus on the other hand were nowhere near to what they are now. The club was still licking it wounds from the rather painful split with Torino. So why did the Agnelli's bought them? He knew that the Italians had two idols ie football and God. Since Eduardo had no intention to become pope he opted in buying the rather unknown Juventus, turn it into a superpower and shift that success over his companies. If a car producer can enter football and dominate it with a meah squad then imagine what he can do in his line of expertise. Such strategy was so successful that decades later Berlusconi would use the same tactic to increase influence in the country He managed to first arm wrestle the government to change its TV media rules and then to end up in government.
INEOS is not FIAT. Its a major pollutant which are increasingly become unpopular in modern times. Case in point is
https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/03/23/ineos-chemicals-environment-pollution-eu-lobbying/
https://www.clientearth.org/projects/the-greenwashing-files/ineos/
https://theferret.scot/ineos-sse-exxon-carbon-polluter/
https://www.foodandwatereurope.org/...ReportIneosChequeredRecordinEuropeNov2017.pdf
https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/ineos-abs-usalanxess-clean-air-act-settlement
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...cking-firm-plans-dump-wastewater-in-sea-ineos
Its not just me who noticed it
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...cused-of-greenwashing-with-sports-sponsorship
https://www.manchestereveningnews.c...chester-united-jim-ratcliffe-glazers-26038425
These 'private consortiums' are nothing of the kind. They are spin offs designed to manage the state oil wealth at arm's length. And yes - they are morally repugnant.
Surely the value will only increase if they spend a load on the team to get it winning trophies again, spend money on a bigger better stadium and surrounding area to bring more paying customers in. Ticket prices might go up though.
Disappointing Gordon Gecko's lawyer didn't earn himself a tagline for this
Minority investment is totally off the table. The Glazers are the thing holding back the value of the club. Anyone can see this.
Sorry no disrespect to you as a person, but I can't take BM fans lecturing others, as remember you lot (while not fee wise) did the same, nah far worse for decades by taking players off other teams in the German league that started to pose a threat to your team's dominance by offering better wages in the Bunga, so BM fans need to get off that high horse as it sounds as pathetic as the non-stop whining from the Italians and Spanish about the spending power of the EPL given they were the ones who started high fees and wages back in the 80s.
You ask how we would feel about becoming (just another city) I'll ask you this, how does it feel to be winners of a one team league.
Depends on the price. United generate cash and their valuation rises so long as TV and sponsorship money rises. Liverpool, Chelsea and others, including us with the Glazers, were all bought by people wanting to make money.
If the bidding rises to the point Ineos think they won't make money they will drop out, which is what I expect.
I do get why people don't want oil money, but the twisting and turning to make the Ineos bid something it isn't has reached ludicrous proportions in places, if they prefer commercial owners to oil owners fine, just say so.
Personally I'll take the oil money, but each to their own.
It really doesn't. They are a chemicals company that don't specialise in professional sports. They don't have infrastructure or assets that synergise with it, they don't have employees with those skills.
They even tried an experiment of running smaller clubs first to see if they could do it, and unsurprisingly it hasn't gone well. So yeah, it doesn't make complete sense to then turn around and spend 6 billion on the biggest team in the UK just because you think it will go up in value.
Probably posted but sounds as if minds are made up
It may not have worked for them in football, but they're obviously trying to get into sport for the publicity. It's not just football, they're invested in cycling, F1, sailing, Rugby Union, and athletics. They're not all outright purchases (although some are).
maybe it is just sportswashing then?
Also sounds like a "takeover" agenda, not a minority investment. They want to make a statement.
Could be, but I don't think it is personally, I think Ratcliffe just has an interest in sport and sees it as a good way of getting the brand out there. Getting the INEOS name onto Mercedes cars in F1 would be seen everywhere, as it would if they are associated by United and that means more profits rather than sportswashing.
I'm sure they do have a team working on that side of things as it's not insignificant what they own in sports now.
So basically assuming stuff without knowing anything.
Last edited:
Sure, and their profit would come in the form of asset growth over time whenever they choose to sell it. Draining an investment for literal pennies compared to their revenue just isn't worth it for them. They would set us up to be in a good spot initially and then they would likely just leave us be as an asset. Yes they wouldn't pump money in either, but that's not needed IMO.
Where are you from? If you're from Munich could really stop following United? It's so easy to say you'd mose interest in something you've done all your life.
Unless the Saudis join the party, they'll(Qataris) be United owners.
I don't need to assume anything. I know exactly what this regimes are like and where the money comes from for this buy. It's from oil.
It does make sense, as investment in sport falls within their business model. As it stands they already invest to varying degress in football, formula 1, cycling, sailing, rugby, etc.
Whether, why and how that broader interest in being involved with sport makes sense for a chemicals company, we don't particularly need to care about from a business POV (though perhaps morally). All that matters is that they deem investment in a football club like United to fall within an investment profile that has already moved into the realm of sport.
Once they do then it simply becomes a question of whether this particular investment is justfied by the projected outcomes, just like any other investment that falls within that profile. If they project they can make billions on this asset over the coming years, making billions makes sense.
Firstly, it has been rumoured that the state will not own United. So, you are saying anyone who invests in something from Qatar should be tainted with the same thing?
Also, the reason we say plastic club is because they became big from when they got taken over.
Manutd, have history, are already a massive football club, they dont need rich owners to become big. We are one of the most decorated club in football without needing rich owners.
I hope you can see the difference.
Who are the utdplug?
- Status