Club Sale | It’s done!

[red thru&thru]

Nobody has because absolutely nothing about this story has been confirmed by anyone.

Writing articles that says "Dubai has rich people" isn't breaking a story

Yep, Matt Dickinson is your answer. A sports journalist.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...fe-i-want-to-buy-manchester-united-bjqk2bfrx?

 

[Marcelinho87]

Ineos sounds like just another glazer situation. Clearly Jim needs to borrow money in order to fund the purchase of our club. That’s If he can even meet the asking price, let alone inject the required capital into improving us. He will need to fellate JP and Goldman quite a bit to get a full loan. I’d imagine they won’t loan him the entire sum and he would need to come up with a B or two to make up the difference.

At the prices that the Glazers are asking (at least publicly), there really are only nation states or private equity who would be realistic options.

This is wrong.

The cost of the club would be paid in a one by INEOS, no borrowing required

The "loan" would be a restructure of our current debt to refinance it over to INEOS and off of the club.

 

[Bert_]

If you want the club to be run purely as a business then you should support a US consortium. There is no risk of sportwashing or vanity projects there

I'd rather us be run as a community asset. If that's not possible then I'd rather us be ran an actual business rather than a hedge fund.

Either of those would be preferable to whoring ourselves out to a feudal overlord who will never let us go.

 

[LARulz]

Which journalist first broke the interest of SJR wanting to buy the club?

Didn't the FT say it in one of their talks or The Times or something?

Also in the same vein - Sky News broke the United potential sale, not Sky Sports or Fabrizio Romano etc. Usually for more actual serious stuff business/people who know the right people will report first. The sports journo's jump on that and usually have a bigger platform because more people follow what's happening in football than they are about some investment fund

 

[devilish]

Ridiculous to think they are. Sports journalists have sporting contacts. Agents, pros, managers, ex-players, pundits. Good sources for finding out why the left back has been frozen out or gossip about whose been sounded out to take over if the result at the weekend doesn't go there way.

Beyond that? No.

Just look at the actual substance behind the articles. They're barely more than "this person is also rich so in theory could buy the club if they wanted". Mike Kegan has written at least six of those in recent weeks.

This. Also most discussions are probably done in New York (Raine HQ) and at Tampa Bay not within the circles of these sports journalists

 

[red thru&thru]

Didn't the FT say it in one of their talks or The Times or something?

Times Sports, Matt Dickinson.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

This is my thoughts exactly, not much I can do about it if the royal families buy the club. That being said I would prefer Ratcliffe because he's a fan, he's british, and he's not got the human rights atrocities that the royal families have.

I love the he's a fan angle, a fan who watches Chelsea not us. He lives in London, it is more convenient. He is a multi billionaire, I am sure he could afford comfortable transport to watch United. He wants to mix with the tories and their hangers on. He was quite happy to poison the water for the locals of the team he supports.

 

[Rake]

Sadly, whoever can come up with such amount of money will be a vile cnut. .Yes, their cnutness might vary from exploiting / scamming people and workers, to actual murder, but there won't be a single bidder out there that is even somewhat respectable.

 

[Marcelinho87]

So let me ask you a question, because you are obviously so much cleverer than me

Why is it you would protest being taken over by a bid backed by a ME state, because it seems to me that most peoples aversion to it just have so much racial overtones

Ignore them, you're mostly right.

Yes it isn't the American government bidding for us but plenty in here were twerking for Tim Cook of apple whilst conveniently ignoring that they used Uyghur Muslims who spent (and still do) countless years imprisoned, raped, beat and discarded like common rubbish.

The fact of the matter is, for someone to buy United they need a lot of dough.

To get to the level of dough required you're going to be a scummy parasitical stain on the earth.

All we as fans can do is hope that once at the helm the club comes first.

 

[red thru&thru]

This. Also most discussions are probably done in New York (Raine HQ) and at Tampa Bay not within the circles of these sports journalists

So, what you're saying is, the likes of Simon Stone, Laurie Whitwell, David Ornstein, are lying and have no idea of what is going on?

 

[stw2022]

“Arbitrary Deadline”

Well they have and they did. “They” being the Raine Group who are handing the sale.

Says who?

Wheres statements? Where's the press release?

There's been nothing confirmed by anyone but sports journalists know their audience so deadline it is. Sky might even wheel out Jim White. Have someone outside Carrington with an inflatable cock and a yellow ticker on screen

 

[stevoc]

I have no feelings about the morals of our next owners. Pretty much everyone at that level is no saint. All I want is for our debt to be zero after a sale. Based on reports coming out that Ratcliffe does not have all the cash for a realistic bid and is planning to part-fund his bid with big loans from some American banks, I don't want him anywhere near the club. That is exactly the type of bid we should be aggressively trying to avoid.

It should almost be a stipulation for anyone bidding that all our debt will be zeroed out. If they don't have the cash to make that happen, then the bid shouldn't even be considered.

Yeah I'm sure the Glazers have very strong feelings about that sort of thing and only want what's best for the club.

You'd like to think if anyone was buying a football club for £5b, removing the debts on the club would be part of the purchase.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

With Ineos, at least we know who our dodgy owner are and know that they will at least run us as a business. Not a vanity project to be used and abused at a whim and discarded once we have lost any usefulness for our new masters.

We are run as a business not, not very well but we are. We want to be run as a football club.

 

[stw2022]

These are serious people negotiating a serious deal for a serious amount of money. The whole football transferification about how "news" about this story is being disseminated should be huge red flags about its credibility and yet fans lap it up. I don't understand it

 

[Bert_]

If this is your main concern then we are fine as we are right now. The Glazers have run the club exactly as a business should be run. They have grown revenue sources (most notably commercial revenue) and they have optimized the capital structure of the club to include debt which lowers the club's cost of capital.

But we all know that all the things i've mentioned should not be the primary concerns for a football club.

The Glazers have barely ran the club. They have just extracted money from it year on year and watched their asset grow exponentially without breaking a sweat or putting up any of their own wealth. If you had someone who bought the club without loading it with debt and taking dividends each year, you would have a club with as much financial muscle as anyone in the league without having to do anything.

 

[Spoony]

Big day today?

 

[AndySmith1990]

Ignore them, you're mostly right.

Yes it isn't the American government bidding for us but plenty in here were twerking for Tim Cook of apple whilst conveniently ignoring that they used Uyghur Muslims who spent (and still do) countless years imprisoned, raped, beat and discarded like common rubbish.

The fact of the matter is, for someone to buy United they need a lot of dough.

To get to the level of dough required you're going to be a scummy parasitical stain on the earth.

All we as fans can do is hope that once at the helm the club comes first.

I know Bill Gates gave the world Windows Vista, but its a bit unfair to refer to him as a scummy parasitical stain on earth

 

[devilish]

I'd rather us be run as a community asset. If that's not possible then I'd rather us be ran an actual business rather than a hedge fund.

Either of those would be preferable to whoring ourselves out to a feudal overlord who will never let us go.

I am not arguing what is good and what is wrong. Quite frankly it doesn't matter. The Glazers can sell it to Souness, Putin and Steve G and we will have zero say on it.

What I do suggest is for us to remove the bias specs. Ineos had been involved in sportwashing and it will also run us like a business just like the Americans would do especially once Jimmy kicked the bucket. Ineos track record in football is meah at best. Quite frankly I'd rather have an FSG type of ownership (with more cash) then him

 

[Bert_]

We are run as a business not, not very well but we are. We want to be run as a football club.

Unless we have community/fan ownership, that ain't happening. It's run as a business or a sports washing vanity project. Take your pick.

 

[Rake]

So, what you're saying is, the likes of Simon Stone, Laurie Whitwell, David Ornstein, are lying and have no idea of what is going on?

They don't have to be lying, just fed a side of a story that might not be true. Mitten said the other day that he has heard 3 different versions of things going on with the sale and it would appear that most people on our side (even Murthough) aren't fully aware of what is going on.

At this point, any leaks coming through might as well be the Glazers trying to hike up the price and attract more interest. Other possibility is a leak on the bidder's side in which case I doubt the sport journos would be the ones spreading the news.

We will not know actual details of what when on during the last months until sometime after the sale.

 

[stw2022]

The ONLY thing we've ever had confirmed is that the club are looking at options which may include a sale.

The fact everyone has gone full on "personal terms agreed and Sneijder's agent has chartered a flight to Manchester' and some are getting annoyed that others don't actually think any of that has happened, still doesn't make it true.

 

[pratyush_utd]

They don't have to be lying, just fed a side of a story that might not be true. Mitten said the other day that he has heard 3 different versions of things going on with the sale and it would appear that most people on our side (even Murthough) aren't fully aware of what is going on.

At this point, any leaks coming through might as well be the Glazers trying to hike up the price and attract more interest.

We will not know actual details of what when on during the last months until sometime after the sale.

Mitten always comes up “i have heard few different version” and then later say “see this is what i was told”. He has hardly ever broke any news.

If Stone and Laurie Whitwell are saying something its most likely true

 

[stw2022]

My preference would be to be run as a debt free business. Hefty pockets to fund the stadium. Beyond that maximise revenue and let the club sustain itself.

 

[devilish]

So, what you're saying is, the likes of Simon Stone, Laurie Whitwell, David Ornstein, are lying and have no idea of what is going on?

No. What I am saying is that this is a new territory for them, that mistakes are more likely to happen in such circumstances and that they are feeding on information which is probably being leaked on purpose to push an agenda

There is a massive difference between dealing with the likes of Jesse Lingard/Paul Pogba and Ratcliffe/Qatari/Glazers

 

[red thru&thru]

They don't have to be lying, just fed a side of a story that might not be true. Mitten said the other day that he has heard 3 different versions of things going on with the sale and it would appear that most people on our side (even Murthough) aren't fully aware of what is going on.

At this point, any leaks coming through might as well be the Glazers trying to hike up the price and attract more interest. Other possibility is a leak on the bidder's side in which case I doubt the sport journos would be the ones spreading the news.

We will not know actual details of what when on during the last months until sometime after the sale.

And this is my point. Journalists, any Journalists, will only be as credible as per their source. Be it sports or financial Journalists, will report on what their told. The aforementioned Journalists have been proven to have good sources. So when they report something, it is with good faith.

So this notion of sports journalists will know nothing, is ridiculous.

 

[stw2022]

Mitten always comes up “i have heard few different version” and then later say “see this is what i was told”. He has hardly ever broke any news.

If Stone and Laurie Whitwell are saying something its most likely true

On-field stuff and transfers sure. Mitten is more of a feature writer. Long articles that aren't actually terribly interesting padded with 300 words on what fabric softer the kit man uses.

 

[Bert_]

I am not arguing what is good and what is wrong. Quite frankly it doesn't matter. The Glazers can sell it to Souness, Putin and Steve G and we will have zero say on it.

What I do suggest is for us to remove the bias specs. Ineos had been involved in sportwashing and it will run us like a business just like the Americans would do especially once Jimmy kicked the bucket. Ineos track record in football is meah at best. Quite frankly I'd rather have an FSG type of ownership (with more cash) then him

Ignore right and wrong for a second. INEOS are more likely to leave us to run ourselves after initial interference (which could be constructive or a disaster). And we can carry on as normal, sans glazer debt and money syphoning.

A sportswashing ME outfit will interfere with everything and pump in tons of money to "make us great again". We win a league, then where are we. The pawn of that outfit dancing to whatever tune they demand.

 

[saivet]

I see Howson said on his weekly podcast called The Brew he doesn't want to be owned by state (Qatar) nor saddled with debt (Ratcliffe). Happy if there is a middle option but good luck with finding someone who fits that criteria. Personally I can't think of anyone whatsoever.

The two US consortium's might fit that brief? Similar to Todd at Chelsea, FSG at Liverpool but on a bigger scale.

 

[red thru&thru]

No. What I am saying is that this is a new territory for them, that mistakes are more likely to happen in such circumstances and that they are feeding on information which is probably being leaked on purpose to push an agenda

There is a massive difference between dealing with the likes of Jesse Lingard/Paul Pogba and Ratcliffe/Qatari/Glazers

Unless you're sitting in the meetings, you're not going to know. And these people in these meetings aren't going to do a write up themselves.

As I mentioned above, journalists are as good as their sources. The likes of journalists I've mentioned have built up a reputation for being credible.

So, to dispel the information they provide, is disrespectful to them, and their trade.

 

[Dannn411]

Yeah I'm sure the Glazers have very strong feelings about that sort of thing and only want what's best for the club.

You'd like to think if anyone was buying a football club for £5b, removing the debts on the club would be part of the purchase.

Not neccesarily. As the ratcliffe news has shown, not many people have 5 billion pounds in cash lying around.

 

[stw2022]

Unless you're sitting in the meetings, you're not going to know. And these people in these meetings aren't going to do a write up themselves.

As I mentioned above, journalists are as good as their sources. The likes of journalists I've mentioned have built up a reputation for being credible.

So, to dispel the information they provide, is disrespectful to them, and their trade.

If you're a music journalist who goes to gigs and reports on upcoming artists it isn't being disrespectful to their trade to doubt whether they're likely to be the most informed on the secret insider negotiations of an EMI corporate takeover

 

[DomesticTadpole]

The two US consortium's might fit that brief? Similar to Todd at Chelsea, FSG at Liverpool but on a bigger scale.

They are the mystery aren't they, what their plans are and how they are going to finance them.

 

[Leftback99]

These sports journalists prove every summer they don't have a clue about our transfers until they are basically done. I'll take any stories they write about the takeover of a £4bn+ business with a huge pinch of salt. What happened to Amazon bidding for us by the way?

Long way to go on this.

 

[Scriblerus]

Much as I hope we don't end up as the PR sports end of a repressive regime, I have no doubt that our current owners would sell us to Satan of he came up with the highest bid (and the Premier League would approve him after their fit and proper persons test as well).

 

[red thru&thru]

If you're a music journalist who goes to gigs and reports on upcoming artists it isn't being disrespectful to their trade to doubt whether they're likely to be the most informed on the secret insider negotiations of an EMI corporate takeover

Unless the people close to the EMI corporate takeover tells the journalists things.

 

[Bert_]

Unless the people close to the EMI corporate takeover tells the journalists things.

Thought they went bust years ago? Some comeback!

 

[red thru&thru]

Thought they went bust years ago? Some comeback!

Still going, apparently.

https://www.universalmusic.com/label/emi/

 

[saivet]

They are the mystery aren't they, what their plans are and how they are going to finance them.

Definitely a mystery but might be a middle ground, we'll have to wait and see.

 

[JeffFromHK]

Much as I hope we don't end up as the PR sports end of a repressive regime, I have no doubt that our current owners would sell us to Satan of he came up with the highest bid (and the Premier League would approve him after their fit and proper persons test as well).

But all 4 oil clubs in the Europe thus far (Chelsea, Man City, PSG, Newcastle) got every aspect of their clubs (results, fanbase, status in football realm...) boosted after the takeover, it is a 100% hit so far. Those middle eastern people seem to know how to run a club better than Americans (Glazers, FSG, Todd Boehly say hi). Jim Ratcliffe doesn't also seem to know how to run a football club either seeing how he is running Nice.

 

[georgieworst]

The Guardian writer Jonathan Liew was annyoing on the Sky Sports last night explaining his article, where he says Qatar ownership would take more from United than the Glazers ever have, saying we should be some sort of beacon of light against ownership like this, and take a moral stand, etc.

Now I'm not saying his point is wrong, but the powers that be have stood by and watched us languish away under the Glazers, whilst knowing full well they are robbing us blind, they have also allowed Chelsea to do as they please, and City to run riot, etc.

All any United fan ever wanted was a fair owner who allowed the club to get on without towing a lead weight behind them all the time, but now we need the £1 billion replacing that should have been spent on the infrastructure already just to get back to square one, where do people think this money is coming from? So I can see why morals are going out of the window and the Qatar option is seen as the only way out, even though it gives me a very uneasy feeling, and will probably harm us long term.

This.