dove
New Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2013
- Messages
- 7,899
Maybe some people are being giddy but for me personally I just feel like it's the safest option to ensure that the club I support stays competitive for the years to come so out of all the bad options, state seems to be the "safest". All those US consortiums or Ratcliffe seems like a lottery to me with us having absolutely no idea what we would get. However I feel it's likely we would end up with another version of the Glazers which I don't know for how long more this club would be able to handle it as we have already been milked hard by current parasites. I don't know how can you 100% say that "Ratcliffe will without a question put in money" because there is a good chance that he will not. What then?I dont care about the money they will put in. Ratcliffe will without a question put in money, but there is no way that he is going to be able to put a competing offer against a Qatari investment group, so this is going to happen. Manchester United will be owned and controlled by the Emir of Qatar.
I will never not support the club, but Im more than a little dissapointed that so many of the Redcafe posters are happy about a state takeover just because they will put money into the club. One thing is still supporting the club, another is bieng giddy that the club we all love will be funded by a regime no one of us would want our daughters to grow up in. Thats where my problem is. This is just replacing one owner with another that I despise.