Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Had some great names in their books over the years. Their subsidiary label ‘Harvest’ signed some interesting prog bands too.
Saying the City owners know how to run a club when there is a chance they will be getting relegated for cheating their finances is a stretch.
The possibilities for United are immense and almost limitless. Firstly on the pitch we seem to have landed the right manager with the right style of play, hunger to win and a deep understanding of not just tactics but the human side of players. If we can get the recruitment right then we can take on anyone on the pitch and besides our first team is one big transfer window away from becoming a top team.
Secondly, the fact that the stadium is up for redevelopment or rebuild presents numerous opportunities on the commercial side from naming rights to additional facilities that can turn a normal matchday out into a proper social outing that can earn money even when the football isn't on. Things like building a Manchester United village around Old Trafford with hotels, restaurants etc.
Finally on the media side, we will be part of whatever version of the Super League that will finally emerge. I can see us and other big teams pushing for a bigger chunk of the streaming income and the like in contrast to the collective nature of the PL. In five or so years the 8 billion or so needed to buy and modernize the club could look like a pittance. But all this needs someone willing to and capable of investing because the real money is at the top of the pyramid and the Glazer model has us stuck in midtable mediocrity.
What did we do to you?
We are not into sports washing and we would rather buy you some melkesjoklade and invite you to climb a mountain.Potato potahto.
The other benefit of Qatari owners that I haven't seen mentioned is their institutional knowledge of building high level football teams in the modern era.
I have confidence that Qatari owners would be more likely to study and use other Arab run clubs (City, PSG) as a blueprint rather than starting from scratch (ala Boehly). I think they'd get the right advice and acquire high level football people in key off field positions.
Having listened to Ratcliffe, he'd be far more in line with an FSG blueprint (trim the fat and create a lean operation, focus high value/low cost options). That has been his philosophy to creating value in all the companies he has bought - he says this himself. Nothing wrong with that per se but United would definitely be in a better place long term if they get owners with a more direct approach to achieving best in class and money was no object. I'm not just talking about players (FFP has to be complied with) but the stadium + training infrastructure. Expanding stadium facilities and improving infrastructure in general is one of the keys to boosting revenue and allowing the club to spend more under FFP.
I have confidence that Qatari owners would be more likely to study and use other Arab run clubs (City, PSG) as a blueprint rather than starting from scratch (ala Boehly). I think they'd get the right advice and acquire high level football people in key off field positions.
Having listened to Ratcliffe, he'd be far more in line with an FSG blueprint (trim the fat and create a lean operation, focus high value/low cost options). That has been his philosophy to creating value in all the companies he has bought - he says this himself. Nothing wrong with that per se but United would definitely be in a better place long term if they get owners with a more direct approach to achieving best in class and money was no object. I'm not just talking about players (FFP has to be complied with) but the stadium + training infrastructure. Expanding stadium facilities and improving infrastructure in general is one of the keys to boosting revenue and allowing the club to spend more under FFP.
thats even worse!What did we do to you?
Stan Collymore said earlier this week that Liverpool should try to get the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund to buy them as Norway is a "Liverpool" country and they could blow the ME states out of the water. He seemed to ignore that sovereign wealth funds in democratic countries can't spunk money on Mbappe and Neymar with the same ease as those from undemocratic states.What did we do to you?
PR campaigns to gauge public perception and condition the fans of a possible reality are also key aspects of the negotiation process. Qatar may have leaked their interest to assess the impact of their takeover or they are doing it to send a message to various stakeholders.
The Glazers did their bit last night when they told the world of the minimum amount below which they might end up staying. A lot of money is at stake so various tools, including journalists will be employed in this game. At the end of the day this is a football club and the value involved might not really interest the Wall Street journos and the football ones are really interested and have had three months to cultivate contacts and establish relations with interested parties now its becoming more clearer who is speaking for who.
He is out of his mind if he thinks that is a realistic possibility.
That’s why I dont think it’ll happen. A reason will be found somewhere.
It’s why Sky was blocked from the takeover when we were promised the worlds best but nobody had a problem with Glazers bending us over.
How would Ineos have even nearly close to the 6B in cash to buy our club? Wishful thinking.
And no, the loan would not be a restructuring. The new owners would still need to pay it off. It would be reflected in the sale price.
If we promise Harald that Ole can be president then would that work?
It’s semantics. It would still be on Ineos’s books which would still need to be serviced over a long period.
Jim would need to find a way to repay that loan and it’s likely going to come from the club, or possibly through his own means such as share sales of Ineos.
Either way it’s a far cry from private equity or nation state funds who have the capital to deploy immediately and with minimal borrowing.
Ha! That Qatar Sports Investment and Qatar Investment Authority tweet reminds me of The Life of Brian...
"Excuse me. Are you the Judean People's Front?"
"F*** off! We're the People's Front of Judea!"
"Excuse me. Are you the Judean People's Front?"
"F*** off! We're the People's Front of Judea!"
I don't think it will be a straight forward dominance. There are already clubs in the league that's well funded. It will trigger other club owners to sell out as they know they can't compete against the top 6.
This will invite other uber billionaires/entities into the league.
In a few years time, we won't care who the owners are as the league will be officially the super league, draining put resources outside the PL.
They will form the ESL to compete with the PL when the A22 folks team up with uefa.
They have precedent with City and Newcastle. All the Qataris need to do is just create some form of plausible deniability so that it doesnt look like the government is the one taking over and the PL won't stand a chance in court. Qatar looks to be all in on us and after they get us don't be shocked if the Saudis create another front to go after Liverpool. They opened the door with City, they cant pick and choose when to close it.
Judging by the leaks coming from their side the Qataris are more concerned with convincing UEFA than they are with acquiring United or being allowed to take it over by the authorities in England. They have investments in England, their royal family has over a thousand members and all they would need to do is use one of those to buy United.
At this point it’s pretty obvious that ratcliffe is a non factor/issue
There are far more aggressive bidders who will easily surpass anything he can come up with.
I bet this journos was laughing at us like the rest of them for many years. We didn’t want the Glazers, we protested the entire way. Even when we won CL and leagues we wanted them out. Now they’ve set us back God knows how many years and are in the process a sale that it’s now, somehow, the clubs fault?
What a Cnut
They would be purchasing an asset that probably will increase exponentially in value over the next decade. The debt they shifted on to their books will be small change once the yield in factored in.
I’ve already accepted that and while it won’t affect my support for the team, I still think it’s important we continue the conversation about state backed consortiums buying up sports teams.
The obscene amounts of money involved invariably come from the exploitation of something, be it individuals or the planet and it’s important this is spoken about, irrespective of who our owners turn out to be. Supporting the club and calling out the owners are not incompatible.
What did we do to you?
ha ha, I should clarify I love Norway, but the idea of a state owning a club just doesn’t sit, it’s wrong on so many levels.
Not least just the fan perspective and the simple fact that Liverpool’s recent success and Arsenal potential success means a million times more than City’s nonsense ever could. I don’t see any achievement in a state owning a club and winning shit, it’s simply an inevitability.
ABU’s are terrified at the prospect of Utd being owned by someone who’s main goal is to make us the best team in the world. So they’re praying either UEFA stop the Qatari’s taking over or the fans will kick up enough shit it puts them off buying us. It’s as simple as that really.
The fact Ratcliffe has gone to american bankers should be a big red warning sign. This means he has to borrow to acquire Utd, leading to more debt. We need to be debt free and not adding more to it. Even with jiggery pokery he takes the debt on himself and says the club is cleared, this will still hamper any monies into the club for stadium build transfers etc
For Ineos shareholders it would be a significant risk taken to purchase what is seen as a trophy asset. We are also in a high interest rate environment where the cost of Jim/Ineos borrowing to fund the purchase will be higher than it’s ever been in the last decade or so. In essence, we would be beholden to the investment banks as we are now.
Asset appreciation is obviously a possibility, but I think it’s no coincidence that both fsg and the glazers have chosen now to sell. With the failed super league, rising interest rates and having to compete in a ever inflated transfer market against nation states, it’s no wonder they don’t see revenue or profit margins increasing much in the future.
While my own opinion of Jim is neutral, as he is after all a true fan of the club, I just don’t think he is in the bracket of potential owners who could afford to buy the club, rebuild its infrastructure and inject significant capital each year for transfers.
You are blind and/or very biased if you ignore 100 other facets showing that City is very very well run as a club.
Nah don’t mind at all. But by don’t mind, I just think any new owner will be shite.
I understand why ineos sponsors F1, buy up smallish clubs. But what's their objective in risking at least 6billion quid and probably more to upgrade the infra?
It's not like some 20-30million no long term commitments.
Well run despite the fact that they cheated? I guess Lance Armstrong won despite cheating?
Out of curiosity how would people feel if an oil state came in sorted out the facilities, paid the debt off and then only spent the club’s own money on transfers, maybe the occasional £50m player as a gift, which most premier league owners could do?
Would that affect the moral stance of those against?
Also, the mental gymnastics, speculation and hot takes in here regarding JE/Ineos are embarrassing. Some people do not have a clue.
Would that affect the moral stance of those against?
Also, the mental gymnastics, speculation and hot takes in here regarding JE/Ineos are embarrassing. Some people do not have a clue.
This is basically what I expect oil money to do. Maybe a bit more to spend on transfers when a big boy is available potentially, but nothing too obscene.
Absolutely. Debt is debt. Unless there is some ironclad agreement that he will spend X amount on the club over a number of years (see: chels) and that he will not take money out of the club to service such debt.
But who would be stupid enough to do that. Even if he did, you wouldn’t be able to do anything if he deviates from such an agreement in the future.
Yep but I do think it’s overstated. When money was more spread out throughout Europe the best team in Europe still had a team behind them who were second best and weren’t that far in front of them.
The closest I can think of is Ronaldos Madrid and even then Barca routinely won leagues off them. Only test I can see is that they didn’t replace Ronaldo and failed to sign Mbappe. An Oil club Madrid could have just kept that dominating success going ( I know they won last year but feck me that was a let’s get outplayed for 80 minutes and Hail Mary it for the last 10 performance wise)
Having a monster United isn’t a problem in itself but it’s a problem when the still richer than the rest of Europe clubs behind us spend to keep up. Almost by default they need to sign the best players in the world behind a fully successful superpower which leaves talent thin on the ground for Europe’s other clubs.
That’s why I think UEFA will look to stop it somehow.
Ineos doesn't have shareholders. It's limited so basically it's all Jim! And I couldn't care less if he's a United fan or not. He's a business man out to make money.
We don't need capital injection each year to fund transfers or anything else for that matter. We make more money than any legit club in the world which is enough to handle he transfers and wages we need.
If we want to rebuild the stadium etc then we can easily get the finance to do that (Spurs didn't find a billion under the sofa).
Well considering there is a significant Qatari sitting on the management board of UEFA, i think it would be highly unlikely to be blocked
Also, I’d imagine it would be the English FA who vet the owners and not Uefa? Could be wrong.
But there isn’t a chance this gets blocked. On so many levels (above football) the middle eastern countries have significant investment, political power and soft influence in the UK already. Just look at how the Saudi deal for Newcastle went through. Absolute farce really.
Well said. I'm sorry but anybody looking to a Pro football club or any global business for a beacon of light is seriously deluded and frankly looking in the wrong place. The same guardian journalist will be tweeting this BS from his sweatshop made iPhone. It's a football club at the end of the day and as a fan I want to see the best and most successful outcome for the future of Utd within the laws of the land. For this reason, as I said before , I for one will welcome our new Qatari overlords. I am open to be enlightened as to the ideal owner but be it Apple, Amazon, Qatar, Glazers, Blitzers or even fan ownership, beacons of light they will not be.
They did, but is that the reason they don't spend like the fans would like as well, despite having a full stadium at astronomic prices and it being used for all sorts of other events as well. Arsenal also suffered for years by not being able to spend because they were paying off the money borrowed to build the Emirates.
You just use the word "cheating" to make faking sponsorship amount/salary of players sound like taking drugs or bribing the referees.
I just don't like how United fans love falsely attributing City's success to them splashing cash alone, ignoring their academy, facilities, scouting, etc and so on. United in the past 10 years and Chelsea in the last 1 year shows clearly that City's success more than just splashing cash. Pep would definitely have joined Man Utd 10 years ago and we would easily have won a couple more premierships if Glazers+Woodward did slightly better in running a club.
- Status