Exactly. And I think that sort of imbalance is much more likely at clubs that operate the sort of money no object, status obsessed environment you get when nation states try their hand at sportswashing.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Exactly. And I think that sort of imbalance is much more likely at clubs that operate the sort of money no object, status obsessed environment you get when nation states try their hand at sportswashing.
I've always seen it as a desperate move to generate attention to what is a relatively poor non competitive competition.
I don't think any such approach would be taken, there would be no such worries at United.
The same thing has happened at Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern. You are jumping to strange conclusions here, Football clubs are rarely perfect all the time, in fact more often than not they are not perfect, they are not balanced which is why sustained success has been very difficult especially at the higher level which is represented by the Champions League.
They are buying us because we are the most glamorous, iconic club out there. If you think there's no chance of that desire to be associated with eminence being reflected in our general operations I think you are being optimistic.
It baffles me as that some can't pin point the real problem. Instead they laugh and call it what aboutism. Hypocrite people are the worst.
The rumours are that the French president approached Qatar about creating a super club in France and if they did he would support a Qatar World Cup. Couple that with the rumours of a sale last year and investment now ( how ridiculous is that) it looks as if they have one foot out the door.
It looks like a project winding down in all honesty.
From a sporting view they just can’t attract the players needed to win a CL to their league so they have to overspend on the big names who have done it before when they’re available. Problem is you have to question the motivation for going to France in the first place.
Good shouts.
I'm not sure why people would feel that we wouldn't deserve our success if we were owned by a (let's say) rich benefactor.
We're Manchester United. Our success has been earned over many years and we generated huge revenues. In recent years we were hamstrung by parasitic owners and an injection from new investors would simply be redressing the balance.
We're Manchester United. Our success has been earned over many years and we generated huge revenues. In recent years we were hamstrung by parasitic owners and an injection from new investors would simply be redressing the balance.
I just mean there would be no need for the messi, neymar, mbappe signings en mass, thats specific to PSG because the interest in French football and the league is low.
Its a strategy being used to try and gather attention, a failed one at that.
Fair. To your first point I agree my use of the phrase 'not a peep' is inaccurate, but I recall 'United are not for sale' banners, placards and even wristbands knocking around Old Trafford in 2004, the founding of FC United and having chills down my spine years later (I can't remember the specific season but Malcolm Glazer was still alive and reviled by the fans, so whenever that was) when near enough the whole of the stadium rose to chant 'Green and Gold until the club is sold' while thousands of coloured scarves spun through the air. I'm not a regular at Old Trafford and I didn't take part in organising and attending protests so I mean no disrespect to anyone who had far more skin in that struggle but what did any of that achieve? The Glazers have ridden out all the bumps in the road and are set to make an absolute packet when they sell the club, just as they set out to do from the first. My point isn't that protesting and dissenting against state/gangster/crony capitalist owners is inherently wrong, as who the feck am I to make such a declaration, but that it is little more than a backdrop against which football continues to slide further away from fans.
I'm resigned to football continuing to change for the worse. If people continue to protest these changes loudly power to them, if I come across as a doomsaying hypocritical bellend whinging on a fan forum while doing nothing that's fair enough, but I think it's gone and I've come to the conclusion I may as well go along for the ride while knowing in my heart it all means so much less these days. I pity youngsters growing up in this era compared to what previous generations had, imperfect in many ways though it was.
Or they signed good players? The same way Real Madrid signed Ronaldo, Bale or Kaka during a 5 years span. Or like Barcelona signed Suarez, Neymar or Fabregas during a similar span. Teams try to sign good players, sometimes it works most times it doesn't.
They are treated the same in every Gulf country and are very important parts of our community. I have 4 sisters who are doing great and have a great status in our society.
Hmmm. That‘s not a bad theory.
They were also part of the most popular league of the time and top of European football.
Honestly, I think regardless of who takes over our transfer business this summer should be pretty much the same. Go megabucks on a striker. Also get in a quality no.8 for a hefty fee and then get a backup DM. If we sell a few squad players like Maguire and Martial we can replace them with others for a similar fee.
Most important part to our immediate future is that a sale goes through in time. All of the prospective bidders are likely to be able to offer the above, it just requires the debt being cleared from the club. Can't wait for the parasites to be gone once and for all. I will focus on celebrating their departure more than whoever is coming in.
Most important part to our immediate future is that a sale goes through in time. All of the prospective bidders are likely to be able to offer the above, it just requires the debt being cleared from the club. Can't wait for the parasites to be gone once and for all. I will focus on celebrating their departure more than whoever is coming in.
Which makes the point that you made kind of weak. Wealthy teams purchase great players and big names, that's how it works and how it has always worked, there is no need to imagine a theory that isn't coherent especially when you are talking about 3 signings across half a decade.
Your right, Itsnot about politics and ETH is incredibly private, however his family are more republican than democrat, that’s clear. No true fan of united is 100% behind a Middle East take over, but at the same time, maybe in reality only 5% of those fans will stay away from the club because of a Qatari takeover and then a new 5% will replace them.
I don’t condone or agree, enfact it really worries me how some of the LGBTQ ladies will be affected in the women’s team, will they immediately quit , ask for a transfer but then I look at City ladies and they were well supported by Abu Dhabi finances and they have been a constant top 3/4 club of WSL.
Do I agree ? No, deep down does ETH agree with the beliefs of Qatar, I doubt that he does however would he love the opportunity of spending their money to build a super club that dominates at home and abroad, we both know the answer to that question!
Whoever own us I hope we continue trying to develop stars and catch players on the way up. From what I’ve seen over the last years as the money has gone up in football and every team has a few really good technical players - buying stars or paying stupid wages does not guarantee any kind of success. In fact it’s the opposite. Unless you’re real who can cherry pick the very best most well suited young player in the world for each position that opens up in their team. Otherwise you’re always taking a huge risk bringing in big egos and something that can easily destroy a good dressing room.
In short I hope we don’t become psg 2.0 or even more soulless (on the pitch at least) than we had become just as things seemed like they were improving again.
In short I hope we don’t become psg 2.0 or even more soulless (on the pitch at least) than we had become just as things seemed like they were improving again.
Well news that Spurs part of a £3.7 bn take over bid surely means that Utd's valuation needs to be increased, if Spurs worth 3.7 bn then we have to be what 30 bn??? 
Add some more zeroesWell news that Spurs part of a £3.7 bn take over bid surely means that Utd's valuation needs to be increased, if Spurs worth 3.7 bn then we have to be what 30 bn???
Cheese room is worth £3b alone which we don't have.Well news that Spurs part of a £3.7 bn take over bid surely means that Utd's valuation needs to be increased, if Spurs worth 3.7 bn then we have to be what 30 bn???
I haven't been posting in this thread, just reading - but I would suggest that the two things are intrinsically linked and you can't really have a discussion about Qatar buying the club without discussing the moral ramifications of such a sale. But that's just my opinion
Yes you can. Besides everything you wanted to hear about the 'moral ramifications' started 390 pages ago. Please invest in the time to read the past 390 pages. Its boring as feck to repeat the same ol' shite over & over again after 300 pages of the same dull comments. Plus there are 2 other threads that discuss the same ol' crap.
Th
That's dollars to be fair. It's a tad over £3b. They've got a billion quid stadium, so unlike United there's not much more that's needed to be invested in the infrastructure. But yeah lads it's Tottenham.
Well news that Spurs part of a £3.7 bn take over bid surely means that Utd's valuation needs to be increased, if Spurs worth 3.7 bn then we have to be what 30 bn???
That's dollars to be fair. It's a tad over £3b. They've got a billion quid stadium, so unlike United there's not much more that's needed to be invested in the infrastructure. But yeah lads it's Tottenham.
You really wanted to make your point obvious, didn't you.
Well news that Spurs part of a £3.7 bn take over bid surely means that Utd's valuation needs to be increased, if Spurs worth 3.7 bn then we have to be what 30 bn???
The bid is 3.75bn dollars. Them also having a world class stadium is worth a lot. That being said, I can't see the Glazers settling for anything less than £5bn now.
You must mistake me for somebody else. I don't want them buying up London real estate or other assets either. This type of foreign investor are chiefly responsible for the fecked up state of the UK property market and why we can't do a thing when they want to screw us on oil price, gas, weapons or any other business we do with them. We should never have let them become ingrained in our society. That goes for Qataris, Saudis, Russians and any other group that used London to park and launder money. Owning a football club is just another step along the way and Manchester United will be the first time anybody has gotten hold of an elite club.
And by the way if a country has backwards and barbaric laws and traditions, there is nothing wrong with pointing it out. We had similar 50, 100, 500 years ago. Learn from our mistakes, and if you want to be part of our society don't be surprised if we expect you to.
There will be no expenditure on a new trophy cabinet!
I don't think I have a conceptual problem with Utd being owned by Qatar.
Firstly, there are only two people buying football clubs for several billions - private equity (more debt and hope to sell on for more in future) and sovereign wealth funds. That is the reality. At least the latter would probably actually want to invest in the infrastructure of the club (hard to justify a financial return on a £1bn new stadium).
Second, I think it's naive to draw the line of moral outrage at Qatar owning a football club. They already own big chunks of actually important infrastructure in the country (eg Heathrow) and globally. The UK sells fighter jets to Qatar. I suspect not many people know or care much about Gulf money in the economy in general.
As long as they aren't too ridiculously overt about it (ie no ridiculous sugar daddy spending, or Qatar Airways Stadium) - ie run the club in a sustainable way, forgo profits and invest in the facilities, and as their reward they can continue their sportswashing agenda quietly. I think that's the best we can ask for.
Firstly, there are only two people buying football clubs for several billions - private equity (more debt and hope to sell on for more in future) and sovereign wealth funds. That is the reality. At least the latter would probably actually want to invest in the infrastructure of the club (hard to justify a financial return on a £1bn new stadium).
Second, I think it's naive to draw the line of moral outrage at Qatar owning a football club. They already own big chunks of actually important infrastructure in the country (eg Heathrow) and globally. The UK sells fighter jets to Qatar. I suspect not many people know or care much about Gulf money in the economy in general.
As long as they aren't too ridiculously overt about it (ie no ridiculous sugar daddy spending, or Qatar Airways Stadium) - ie run the club in a sustainable way, forgo profits and invest in the facilities, and as their reward they can continue their sportswashing agenda quietly. I think that's the best we can ask for.
Might want to dig into that, many states are very conservative, I blanche at some of the things I see there, which would be scandalous in the Uk, Germany etc.
Yeah but surely new Spurs owners know the club isn't meant to win trophies.
PSG can get away with having three star players who do no defensive work in the French league because they are so far ahead of the competition. However, they will always get found out in the CL against good teams, as these teams have star players that work hard as well. The question is whether ETH would manage to get star players to put in the hard graft. I don't think he actually wants the type of player who doesn't work hard enough for the team, acts like a spoilt brat, and upsets the harmony of the dressing room. I'm not talking about any players in particular, but Alex Ferguson and Roy Keane wouldn't stand for this type of behaviour, and ultimately they got results. My concern is that a rich owner who treated Utd like a plaything would be too tempted and would satisfy his ego by signing superstar players, rather than building like ETH is currently doing. #GlazersIn
Is this true?
Rashford is the closest we have to a luxury player in the team, everyone else works very hard. Rashford will need to accommodate in case we sign a star like Kane who does not work hard much or press like a lunatic.
Otherwise we will start facing the same problem, even against Arsenal Saka was giving Shaw a torrid time and Rashford was not supporting him at all. So interesting times ahead. But I think Erik Ten Hag will prioritize hard working forward who is a slightly lesser player over luxury star player.
I guess we will have the answer to this question when in the summer we have the option of Kane or Osimhen.
Whereas I don't think the Qatari owners will override Ten Hag or I hope they don't. Because I believe they would not want to jeopardize relationship with the fans and in worst case if Ten Hag goes due to interference, it will be same level of protests as we have for Glazers or more.
edit: moved reply to other thread to stay on topic.
Last edited:
This, the fact that the line is being picked when they want to buy a football club whose importance in the grand scheme of things is minute makes me doubt the sincerity of these misgivings. As you and I said this previously they own more important things but people were silent because it impacted jobs and livelihoods. If they are so concerned why not protect the purchase of gas from Qatar - this is what gives them the money and power, after all?
Just scroll past until you see the next update. Don't waste your time on them. The club will be bought and everybody will move on. Even the busy bodies hiding under human rights concerns.
How are the City fans viewing all this? I imagine they think the allure of playing for City will diminish when the biggest club in Manchester can match their salaries...
That's fair enough but you are closing the barn door after the horses have already bolted. If United don't get a rich owner who is prepared to change the Glazer business model then the only way is down and the road back up is arduous and uncertain. We all know what happened to Leeds and the likes of Nottingham Forrest.
The funny thing is that most of these nasty pieces of shite have been enabled by Western governments. They were willing to overlook the barbarism as long as the oil kept flowing and the proceeds invested in Cities like London so its shocking to see the revulsion at the ownership of a football club by people who have more or less kept the wheels turning and who have been enabled and protected by governments your society votes for. Do you think the House of Saud would have survived this long without Western protection?
Wow this Spurs for 3.75 Billion seems real.
Glazers/Raine just got even more bargaining power
Glazers/Raine just got even more bargaining power
Good overview.
- Status