Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
VorZakone said:
Wait, aren't Dubai and Abu Dhabi both cities of the same country UAE? What's the difference in ownership?
Click to expand...

They are separate and somewhat independent emirates in United Arab Emirates - which consists of seven emirates. Abu Dhabi is the main emirate due to having UAE's oil income. Abu Dhabi have funded the other emirates for decades (and even bailed out Dubai after the last financial crisis) but the last decade or so has seen Dubai becoming more independent due to being a major tourist and financial hub. Also Dubai is the most western-oriented emirate by far - Abu Dhabi is way more conservative.
 
2cents said:
They are distinct emirates in a state that incorporates seven different emirates, governed by different families. The most powerful and wealthy emirate of the seven is Abu Dhabi by far.
Click to expand...

Relatively speaking, Dubai do not have that much money or power but the Abu Dhabi Dooooooo
 
devilish said:
I am part of a minority in here who would rather be owned by Dubai/Saudi/Qatari guys then by American consortiums. The reason is that they seem to know how football operate, they have the right attitude and quite frankly they are doing nothing morally wise that the typical US billionaire wouldn't do if allowed to. I agree with your line however we can't deny that at least City is being well run as well. Which means that if everything goes according to script in the end this will be reduced to very fine margins ie who has the most money to spend.
Click to expand...

Not quite. City and PSG have spent so much and have yet to win the CL. We've also spent a lot, without any input from the owners, and have had basically no presence at all in that competition. Clubs with a lot less money have won it during that time. The margins that play a part at the highest level are many. Competence, competitive drive, and culture are as equally important as money. There are many other factors, not the least bit luck. But we've severely, severely lacked competence and competitive drive for the past decade. They've been nonexistent. The culture has also been too focused on what was, than what is. I want the new owners to offer these things more than money. Of course, also to have money. But this is why I don't trust Americans.
 
ZolaWasMagic said:
It'll be Americans i suspect. If a full sale happens
Click to expand...
The Americans would only buy an asset to make a return and at 5bn they will never see one.
The Arabs will buy it for political gain and to improve the reputation of their cities and countries. Its not a massive sum to put Dubai on the sporting map.
 
Very promising news but difficult to get too excited until we know who's interested and it actually looks like happening.
 
glazed said:
The question I have is why now? Why are both Liverpool and Manchester United being put up for sale at the same time? Seems to me that there are a few things in play:

Failure of European Superleague makes UCL qualification uncertain
Resurgiance of Arsenal and Newcastle makes UCL qualification even more uncertain
Return of high interest rates makes it financially impossible to compete with oil clubs or even lucky clubs on a run of form
Global recession means financially exposed American sports franchises have to contract and retrench

All of this points to the urgent need to finacially restructure the English game or these instabilities start looking like a bubble...
Click to expand...
Simple for me. Failure of the much anticipated Super league has blown all their financial forecasting out the window. It makes more sense for them to sell up and make a ridiculous profit than take dividends for many more years.
 
JJ12 said:
People keep saying that - what’s this based on
Click to expand...

He doesn't lean left, ruffles feathers, is eccentric, and hasn't given away his riches freely. That's enough to make him crazy and supremely evil in some people's eyes. I'm largely indifferent to him, though I admit him owning us will be quiet unorthodox. But the man has managed to create juggernaut businesses in niche industries and doesn't seem to tolerate incompetence, so a part of me is curious.
 
Giggsyking said:
Yeah, they actually do, they are close friends with the previous PM of Isael. They openly supported Busch and Trump with thier donations.
Click to expand...
You can connect any mega rich people to questionable entities. But there are degrees of awfulness and the Glazers are clearly much cleaner than the owners of City, PSG and Abramovich.

I would bite your hand off if you offered me new owners with the moral compass of the Glazers (as long as they are competent - committed to wiping the dept, improving the club infrastructure and investing competitively).

I don't want Utd to be owned by a Middle Eastern state.
 
BarstoolProphet said:
Way behind the two main ones, but they got some oil reserves. But very conservative emirate though, unlikely to even be interested in investing in sports.
Click to expand...

Yeah they don't strike me as they type of Emirate to show any interest in self promotion. Dubai seems to be the likely ones - all boxes are well truly ticked.
 
Giggsyking said:
Yeah, they actually do, they are close friends with the previous PM of Isael. They openly supported Busch and Trump with thier donations.
Click to expand...
So Is everybody who donated to, or voted Tory, akin to middle Eastern opression?
 
devilish said:
Do you think so? US buyers are mostly on the way out (Hicks, Gillett, the Glazers, Liverpool owners etc). Its evident that football is not paying off as it used to do
Click to expand...

He's more hoping thats the case I think
 
Spoony said:
Yeah they don't strike me as they type of Emirate to show any interest in self promotion. Dubai seems to be the likely ones - all boxes are well truly ticked.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Dubai is loving international attention and wants to be the biggest and most important city in the world (see financial centre, DXB, Burj Khalifa etc - they even made Dubai Eye slightly taller than London Eye just because:D ) can be tempted into buying perhaps the most globally well-known sporting institution. I knew the former crown prince was a United fan (the one who died a few years ago) but according to the cliff on here the current crown prince, Hamdan is also a United fan so you never know.
 
Telsim said:
We don't need them to be as rich. The club itself makes enough money on it's own to be fairly competitive when it's not getting robbed. The club's money together with Dubai's money will put every target within our reach.

But it's less about the money and more about the intent. Arabs love football, know football, and want the prestige that comes with winning. And will work towards that end. Likely they will seek out competent people to put in the club and hopefully end the jobs-for-the-boys policy. This is what we need a lot more than money - competitive drive and competence. Dubai is the best case scenario, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Dubai is probably the worst option. It has been on verge of economic meltdown for years since oil money ran out. Has been the main location for underworld drug syndicates in Asia for decades now.

All the issues of other monarchies without money. That would be disastrous option for us
 
Dubai looks like the best of the Middle Eastern money states and fits well with United's business power - less about investment and more about removing the Glazer debt shackles.

Then there's the American option which can go from Chelsea to a Glazer scumbag option and so I'd prefer to avoid that.

Finally, we have third sides like people from India and China who are yet to come forward.
 
There is absolutely zero chance of having some sort of benevolent individual come in and bet their net worth on Utd.

You're talking sports washing sovereign wealth funds or another private equity led enterprise (ie basically the same as Glazers).
 
trevor newnham said:
I will be uneasy if we are bought by any Middle Eastern buyer. Their record of human rights, treatment of women (women who have reported rape have been jailed for being drunk), workers rights etc etc in Dubai are almost on a par with Qatar or Saudi Arabia. As odious as the Glazers were, Dubai or Saudi will be worse
Click to expand...
We're talking about the same Dubai, right? There isn't a different Dubai where all the things you say happen?
 
cyberman said:
Maybe a few years ago at the height of Mbappe madness but I dont really see fees rising that much since?
Click to expand...

I hope you're right. Another thing that we need to consider is pride. Arab rich guys are very proud and will not take it lightly being outshined especially by some rival family who is poorer then them.
 
Rightnr said:
Dubai looks like the best of the Middle Eastern money states and fits well with United's business power - less about investment and more about removing the Glazer debt shackles.

Then there's the American option which can go from Chelsea to a Glazer scumbag option and so I'd prefer to avoid that.

Finally, we have third sides like people from India and China who are yet to come forward.
Click to expand...

The India option is scary, this board will be full of Sachin Tendulkar fans polluting all forums!

*that's racist.
 
trevor newnham said:
I will be uneasy if we are bought by any Middle Eastern buyer. Their record of human rights, treatment of women (women who have reported rape have been jailed for being drunk), workers rights etc etc in Dubai are almost on a par with Qatar or Saudi Arabia. As odious as the Glazers were, Dubai or Saudi will be worse
Click to expand...

Have you ever been to Dubai?

I think you might be painting an entire region with a pretty broad brush.
 
pratyush_utd said:
Dubai is probably the worst option. It has been on verge of economic meltdown for years since oil money ran out. Has been the main location for underworld drug syndicates in Asia for decades now.

All the issues of other monarchies without money. That would be disastrous option for us
Click to expand...

Their source of income in the past has mainly been Abu Dhabi's oil money, not their own. But they have been trying to stand on their own, by building up a major tourist and financial hub not only in the region, but in the world. Hard to tell how much money the DIC got, and their growth certainly been halted a bit by COVID (due to tourism industry and financial market the main affected by it) but on the surface it seems like a well-run state. Still used for whitewashing, but then again has London been for decades (more concerned about that city's future due to sanctions against Russia).
 
Telsim said:
Not quite. City and PSG have spent so much and have yet to win the CL. We've also spent a lot, without any input from the owners, and have had basically no presence at all in that competition. Clubs with a lot less money have won it during that time. The margins that play a part at the highest level are many. Competence, competitive drive, and culture are as equally important as money. There are many other factors, not the least bit luck. But we've severely, severely lacked competence and competitive drive for the past decade. They've been nonexistent. The culture has also been too focused on what was, than what is. I want the new owners to offer these things more than money. Of course, also to have money. But this is why I don't trust Americans.
Click to expand...

The CL is a poor yardstick to measure success. SAF turned United into a perfect machine and yet he was able to win it just twice in 26 years, one under the bastards. Juventus were historically the best run club in Serie A history and that pursuit of that cup up drove them mad. I think that City are very well run. Don't take me wrong. I agree with all you said. However if we end up being owned by these Dubai guys then the EPL will probably become the most competitive league in football history. That means there will be very small margins between failure and success and money can become a deciding factor.
 
The UAE is a country in its own right I always thought otherwise, you learn something everyday. Never been that interested in them.

I guess the states are more akin to the counties here in the UK rather than England, Scotland, Wales and NI
 
Gavinb33 said:
I guess the states are more akin to the counties here in the UK rather than England, Scotland, Wales and NI
Click to expand...

There’s not much point in drawing these comparisons, they’ll only add to the confusion. It’s a unique state system that is pretty easy to understand on its own terms.
 
Messier1994 said:
I work with public M&A and have a few thoughts on what is going on here, that I think are indisputable:

*”As part of this process, the Board will consider all strategic alternatives, including new investment into the club, a sale, or other transactions involving the Company.”

What does this means?
(a) Look, the board has a fiduciary duty to act in the way that is best for all shareholders. If there is a sale of the club, there will be litigation in the US. If they sold the shares of the club — and someone sues them saying ‘you lost us money by not selling off the assets instead’, the board will be deemed negligible if it can’t show that they acted “with the care that an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances”. That includes not just ruling out options without looking into them.

I.e. it is perfectly possible that they are looking to sell 100% of close to 100% of the shares.

This is what the entire first half of the PR is about:
“We will evaluate all options … Throughout this process we will remain fully focused on serving the best interests of our fans, shareholders, and various stakeholders.”

(b) We are dealing with the Glazers here, they won’t waste money if they don’t have to.

If the Glazers want to explore selling their shares and hence wants to sign top financial and legal advisors — who pays the retainer? The Glazsers can’t ask the financial advisor to send the bill to the Club.

With this mission for the financial advisor, they are acting on behalf of the club and Glazers won’t be picking up the bill.

*Could the new buyer be worse than the Glazers?

I don’t know the answer to that, of course. But it’s not 2005 anymore, where football clubs weren’t seen as investments and the sale of our club to the Glazers was perhaps not handled properly.

What I do know is this — the offers to buy the club will 100% be established against the background of what a buyer think can be justified against economical data or other concerns. Since there of course will be plenty of interested buyers, as a result, the highest bid will come from the buyer who sees the brightest future for Manchester United financially, which in its turn can motivate the highest price tag. At worst. There could of course always come in a buyer looking for an alibi, expensive toy or whatever.

The Glazers brought a club that — from a financial POV — was ‘decline proof’ for what a decade and a half. We are United, one of the the biggest club in the world. But this will not continue if the club remains outside all real competitions for titles for another 17 years or whatever. Slowly but surely our position in the football world is eroding. And it can get a lot worse fast. Under the Glazers, we haven’t contended for the title [since SAF left] really, but we been in and out of the Champions league, been the runner up for the title and so forth. There is no guarantee that we will become a CL team over the coming 10 years.

Hence, our club — for a new buyer — is anything but decline proof. This buyer could 100% buy one of the biggest clubs in the world and in 15 years time he looking to sell a mediocre PL team with a great history.

As a consequence, I personally think it’s very very likely that a new buyer will be looking to invest in the club. I just cannot imagine a scenario where a buyer — who will be the one entity that sees the brightest future for the team — will be someone who won’t look to invest in the club.

*What is the time frame?

The market is very very sour right now. There are no guarantees for any deal to get made fast.

For the Glazers to sell of their holdings of shares in United — it could be done fast. Could take a month. But that does not include a proper vendor auction process. It’s someone calling them up asking for a number, being given one, and then acting on it instantly.

A more likely scenario is Q1 2023. I think that is what they are aiming for. Q2 2023 could also be an option.
Click to expand...
Thanks for this :)
 
Who do you think is rich enough out there without having some corruption?
Dubai is one of the least corrupt and havent we had enough of 'rich' businessmen that see the club as a money making machine and be at least as bad as the parasites we have now.
Put it another way, do you want to fight Arsenal Spurs and Chelsea for 4th place every season, without moaning, whilst Newcastle City and Liverpool (will probably have owners like the other 2) fight for the title?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.