Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I never understood the hype around Leonardo. He was appointed technical director despite playing just 4 years with Milan. He then moved to manager despite not even having the qualifications to cover the role and after tanking it big time and news leaked out of having problems with Berlusconi, he fount himself managing another top club aka Inter. It the equivalent of Ole becoming City manager after tanking with us. He then did meah at Inter only to resign and become a director at PSG. But that's not all. After getting banned for 13 months which I think lead to his sacking he fount himself back to Milan as sporting director. But that is not all. He then leaves Milan again on mutual consent only to return to PSG again. That's astounding when you consider that he was a good player, a mediocre manager and an even worse Director. Now either this guy is the most fortunate man on earth or else he happens to have nude pictures of most top football people of the time.

He initially did a very good job with PSG, he built a balanced team in terms of skills, age and mentality but his comeback was a disaster.
 
What now? Are we talking about United here or do you mean some other club?

Nowhere just saying theres plenty of charges you could throw at your own government/how ridiculous the statement was.
 
Has there been any new updates or is everyone here still fighting and that's why there's been so many pages today?

No updates. We hope we'll hear something next week regarding prospective buyers (there should be 5+ of them). There are unlikely to be updates of any significance before then. The Glazers will then start reducing the number down to three or four preferred bidders.
 
Yes, I am being serious.

So you have an issue with how the country is run and politics of it all, you know exactly how each person in middle east feels? Its like you are saying there is nothing politically wrong with America or the UK? Is that how you feel? It is your opinion that UK and America have the best politics and laws, other people will not share the same thinking.
When one person or one family controls everything in a country for life and power goes in heretige, I don't have an issue with that, I have a huge problem with that. It's wrong from the bottom and up. Do you think dictatorships, absolute monarchies or other totalitarian regimes are ok?

The President of America or Primeminister of the UK isn't selfappointed for life or personally buying this club. While I disagree with a lot of US and UK politics, they have some fundamentally important things in place, such as free elections, freedom of speach, religion and sexuality. It's not perfect, but you don't get prosecuted for speaking against your government or not believing or believing in the "wrong" god.
 
I agree, which is why this oil money takeover is pointless and probably damaging in the long term. Whatever we win beyond the point of them taking over will be tarred with the same brush as any of city’s titles.

The stadium is the long term issue, but I’d rather give up naming rights for OT for ten years or so to fund its renovation than go down this route.

Edit: I still want the Glazers gone, but I’d be happier with a consortium who are competent and able to clear the debt and allow us to spend our own money, even if they’re not as flush with cash.
In that case they can't buy the club, because the Glazers demand huge money.
 
Nowhere just saying theres plenty of charges you could throw at your own government/how ridiculous the statement was.
Your post made it look like you were blaming the Glazers - the people who actually govern the club - for the UK's (or the US's, who knows) COVID response. I was confused.
 
Then answer me this,
How is women rights in Qatar?
Can women report or get help after being raped?

Who is in charge of said laws in Qatar?
Are you ok with said laws and practices?

Why are ok with us getting owned by someone who force and make the rules above, but letting a player who hasnt been convicted for anything shouldnt be let back? Is it ok to do stuff like that over there, but not here?
I don't want us to have state ownership. I have 0 say in it though and it wouldn't impact me supporting the club or impact any of the players on the pitch who I actually support. Would go from one owner that I dislike to another, for different reasons.

The fans actually do however have a say in if a player who we know did not good things comes back into the fold. It is much more direct to what we support, and how we support. The owners aren't paraded around the field, seen as role models to youth, celebrated every day. That's the players.

Being a player of Man United is a position of privilege where you are representing the shirt to hundreds of millions ever day. I think it's understandable to feel stronger about doing the right things with the players who everyone here supports vs putting the owners on the back burner and feeling you don't support them but they don't represent the club.
 
I don't want us to have state ownership. I have 0 say in it though and it wouldn't impact me supporting the club or impact any of the players on the pitch who I actually support. Would go from one owner that I dislike to another, for different reasons.

The fans actually do however have a say in if a player who we know did not good things comes back into the fold. It is much more direct to what we support, and how we support. The owners aren't paraded around the field, seen as role models to youth, celebrated every day. That's the players.

Being a player of Man United is a position of privilege where you are representing the shirt to hundreds of millions ever day. I think it's understandable to feel stronger about doing the right things with the players who everyone here supports vs putting the owners on the back burner and feeling you don't support them but they don't represent the club.
You honestly feel stronger about the actions of 1 single player than about the actions of those who own and profit from the entire thing!?
 
I don't want us to have state ownership. I have 0 say in it though and it wouldn't impact me supporting the club or impact any of the players on the pitch who I actually support. Would go from one owner that I dislike to another, for different reasons.

The fans actually do however have a say in if a player who we know did not good things comes back into the fold. It is much more direct to what we support, and how we support. The owners aren't paraded around the field, seen as role models to youth, celebrated every day. That's the players.

Being a player of Man United is a position of privilege where you are representing the shirt to hundreds of millions ever day. I think it's understandable to feel stronger about doing the right things with the players who everyone here supports vs putting the owners on the back burner and feeling you don't support them but they don't represent the club.

Simply put no ones running around with the Emir of Qatar on the back of their shirt but you take your own daughter to a match and explain to her why everyone has Masons.
 
City are owned by Abu Dabhi group. - A sovereign fund.

So you all have made up that its the QIA that are bidding for the club? I hope you all have done this much research on all the bidders.
Yes, they are. And it's an abomination which should never have been allowed.

There's no source of money in Qatar which isn't dependent on sovereign wealth which could afford Man Utd. If you have to lie to yourself about where the money is coming from and who is ultimately in change then that's your call, but please don't try and force your delusional fantasy on me.
 
That said if we do get Americans I'll give them a completely fair shake before I judge them. Same for anyone else.

It's just right now if you asked my preference I'd rather someone else.

Ok I see what you're saying mate fair enough, an American consortium of vulture capitalists wouldn't be my first choice either if I'm honest. The Glazers have did a number on most of us but I'm more concerned about a potential buyers plans for the club than where they're from.
 
You honestly feel stronger about the actions of 1 single player than about the actions of those who own and profit from the entire thing!?
When it comes to United, yes. What do you think of when you think of the football club you support? What do you support a football Club for? The players, the football they play, the coaching staff is it for me. Everything else is just noise. If a player has committed crimes, then they shouldn't be representing the club. You don't want random kids to be wearing Greenwoods shirt around. They don't know better. All they see are the players on the pitch who are hero's for them. They don't know anything about ownership or care about it. Nobody supports a football Club because of an owner. Nobody watches football because of the owner. The owner is irrelevant to the core aspect of football, the reasons we watch it. We watch it to watch people who are really good at playing the support we all grew up loving.

The player is very relevant to all of that. And it is far more within the control of the fans and the coaching staff. Ownership of a club is exclusively handled among the 0.00001% of billionaires around the world. How they manage it, how long, what decisions they make, who they sell to, how the new owner decides to run... There is literally 0 input in any of those decisions from anyone actually part of the reason anyone watches football. So while yes, I don't want state ownership, and if I were going to old Trafford regularly I would do my bit to protest the issues they have... I also just can't bring myself to care more than that. As I'm not supporting the owners. I'm not watching because of owners. I'm not even watching the owner. I'm watching the players.

A player is in a position of honor. Based on the justice system, Greenwood is a free man. He is free to live his life. I'm not disputing that. I hope he makes a decent man out of himself and makes up for what he did. I don't think he should ever go back to a position of power, of celebrity status like he had being a United player. Theres a massive difference between the 2.
 
If what we read about the Emir re his wealth, his supporting of United and his determination to buy us, logically he's the one buying us.

I'm sure after this soft deadline in two days there'll be some posturing and negotiating. We'll hear five times how the Glazer's aren't sure of selling part or all of the club. Then they'll want more than the Qatari offers.

But I'm sure if that's all true, he gets us.

My question is, once the bid is accepted, how long until he owns us and the Glazers have nothing to do with us?
 
Simply put no ones running around with the Emir of Qatar on the back of their shirt but you take your own daughter to a match and explain to her why everyone has Masons.
Yep. Players and the manager are the only part of a club who are in positions of celebrity status. Being in those positions come with social responsibilities, and you are judged by society. If Greenwood was a random accountant and was accused of sexual assault, nobody would know. The case would go on, if it went as it did, he'd simply remain in his role and that would be fair, whether it happened or not, because he is not in some celebrity status. He is not convicted of any crime. It's very different parading this person as a hero and celebrity as a United player. That's why I take issue with Arsenal doing it with Partey. You'll have kids wearing that players shirt on their back, despite that player being likely a
monster.
 
One thing it's very safe to say looking at this thread is that this potential ownership has divided fanbase again. Unfortunately there wasn't one that everyone was going to agree on.
 
Is Friday a hard date, or just a look at who is interested?



Apparently, a reported from Bloomberg reported that its a soft deadline.

Interested parties are to write a couple paragraphs about their interest.
 
No way will Qatar turn to Spurs... they will get us one way or the other if they really want us
 
What do people feel about a full Qatari takeover vs partial sale to investors with Glazers still in charge?

I don't think there are any other options. Musk is a pipe dream. Ratcliffe / INEOS isn't happening.
 
When it comes to United, yes. What do you think of when you think of the football club you support? What do you support a football Club for? The players, the football they play, the coaching staff is it for me. Everything else is just noise. If a player has committed crimes, then they shouldn't be representing the club. You don't want random kids to be wearing Greenwoods shirt around. They don't know better. All they see are the players on the pitch who are hero's for them. They don't know anything about ownership or care about it. Nobody supports a football Club because of an owner. Nobody watches football because of the owner. The owner is irrelevant to the core aspect of football, the reasons we watch it. We watch it to watch people who are really good at playing the support we all grew up loving.

The player is very relevant to all of that. And it is far more within the control of the fans and the coaching staff. Ownership of a club is exclusively handled among the 0.00001% of billionaires around the world. How they manage it, how long, what decisions they make, who they sell to, how the new owner decides to run... There is literally 0 input in any of those decisions from anyone actually part of the reason anyone watches football. So while yes, I don't want state ownership, and if I were going to old Trafford regularly I would do my bit to protest the issues they have... I also just can't bring myself to care more than that. As I'm not supporting the owners. I'm not watching because of owners. I'm not even watching the owner. I'm watching the players.

A player is in a position of honor. Based on the justice system, Greenwood is a free man. He is free to live his life. I'm not disputing that. I hope he makes a decent man out of himself and makes up for what he did. I don't think he should ever go back to a position of power, of celebrity status like he had being a United player. Theres a massive difference between the 2.
From my point of view it's the opposite. Players come and go, and with ~25 of them under contract any given year we are by sheer numbers bound to have some now and again that one can't be proud of (Or even detests because of his actions). Owners stay for decades. Their link to the club is a lot stronger than that of most of the players.

Whether we like it or not the club is going to remain an investment for someone for the foreseeable future. And we are cheering that investment. You can attempt to ignore that like one ignores that a movie is an investment for someone while watching it. But to keep watching movies week in week out without ever acknowledging that there's an interest behind it would be naive. Now we are all used to that interest being money, it's how our world works. But say someone bought the movie studios and had so much money they didn't need to care about financial interests. Their motivation would need to be something else. And to keep watching their movies without being aware of that would be beyond me.
 
Are you being serious?
You are comparing Ineos and American business owners to Dictators here? The difference in scrutiny levels might be because they are not the law, judge, jury, church or controlling 100% of the power and resources, oppressing millions of people while robbing them of religous freedom, freedom of speach, freedom of sexuality etc. in countries where they don't allow free elections..... I would love more negative media attention around it. Absolutely love it. Judging by this thread it's far to little of it.

Can you really not see why people do not scrutinise INEOS/American owners to the same extent as tyrant dictators?

JP Morgan Chase, you know the company named as part of Ratcliffe's bid is responsible for probably directly, but most certainly indirectly, killing thousands of people, systematically destroying thousands of people's lives, massive corruption, facilitating criminal networks etc and getting away with it apart from useless fines at best.

I'm absolutely fine with people reacting more to human rights issues on a state level but atleast judge the morale compass of all potentiall part-owners/key institutions potentially behind a takeover. But it's no negative media attention on that at all, whilst they at the same time wastes no time in churning out only negative articles regarding the ME - like the ME is some sort of homogenous region that is completely regressive.
 
From the Ben Jacobs interview today, with United's People, I am a lot more reserved about a potential Qatar bid. As he says, sometimes the quietest are the most dangerous.

However, having said all that, I still believe Qatar will prevail. There's just so much that directs their way, such as, the free port access to Port Salford, and QIA already doing business there. The redevelopment of the area in and around the stadium.
 
City are owned by Abu Dabhi group. - A sovereign fund.

So you all have made up that its the QIA that are bidding for the club? I hope you all have done this much research on all the bidders.

Actually on paper City are owned by ADUG which is a private company owned by Sheikh Mansour and claims to be separate from the Abu Dhabi Government. Apart of course from it's owner being the Deputy Prime Minister of the UAE and the brother of the ruler of Abu Dhabi. It would largely be the same with Qatar and United I'd imagine.
 
I just harshly think its double standards. I dont know anyone on here and couldnt really be arsed.
The sport is fecked no matter what, and for me it has lost it charm.
During the 90’s when Sky came along and a load of money came with them, my grandad, a City fan, complained for years about the game being gone and how the money was ruining the game etc.

He’s 86 now and still watches the PL and all major competitions on a regular basis.

Football is going to change over the next 10 years whether we like it or not, and we can stay involved or moan about it, and we can moan and argue all we want but once they start kicking a ball that’s all we care about at that point.
 
I can't believe United fans are letting this happen. They'll go out and protest because of a Super League but will just happily watch us be bought by Qatar. We'll turn into City 2. People should be going mad. Everything this club stands for history and prestige won't mean anything, we'll just be the next Oil club. Titles won after that won't mean shit.

I believe Ten Hag would win us titles without any oil money. He would probably even win us titles under Glazer ownership. I would rather us win titles through the clubs own strength and against all odds with the Glazer's leeching on us than have these guys come in and take all the credit for making us win stuff again! We'll be winning stuff anyway with ten Hag. We're rich enough as it is. We just need an owner that will let us spend our own money the way we want to.

The hysterics :lol:

go network and find us that billionaire buyer then

you want people to go protest about prospective buyers after they’ve spent years protesting for the club to be sold?

while you’re talking about the miracles you think Ten Hag will be capable of pulling - he’s telling you he’s very much looking forward for an acquisition because more money
 
What do people feel about a full Qatari takeover vs partial sale to investors with Glazers still in charge?

I don't think there are any other options. Musk is a pipe dream. Ratcliffe / INEOS isn't happening.
nobody it appears will give the Glazers money to stay, thankfully. if they do they would be viewed as in bed with them and unwelcome
 
One thing that's clear is those in fully in favour are willing to shut down any criticism against, irrespective of how ridiculous their support becomes.

The hypocrisy and whataboutary is incredible.

You can acknowledge their shortcomings even if you support their bifold to purchase the club you know. You don't need to be the Qatari PR campaign on Redcafe.
 
What do people feel about a full Qatari takeover vs partial sale to investors with Glazers still in charge?

I don't think there are any other options. Musk is a pipe dream. Ratcliffe / INEOS isn't happening.

*pipe nightmare. Tempted to say he’s the worst option of the lot.
 
Honestly it would be absolutely tragic if the Glazers didn’t sell after all this.
 
It's not perfect, but you don't get prosecuted for speaking against your government or not believing or believing in the "wrong" god.
I get where you're coming from with the rest of your post, but this bit is not true.
 
Miguel is a clueless negative clown.
Absolute shit who had a mini meltdown about this very subject on Twitter last night.
Literally waits for everyone else to break news then repeats the same thing days later
 
And that wrong, cause Democrats are garbage as well, i as a non-american don't have any bias, Democrats have bombed/killed as many people in the ME region as Republicans (probably a bit more considering how many drones Obama and Biden dropped in Syria).

Choosing one side cause ones look more progressive at home seems clueless, both parties have history of bombing countries and putting dictators in power here and there, just cause ones wear rainbow flags doesn't make them any better, neither this will matter to the families of all the people they have murdered.
And that wrong, cause Democrats are garbage as well, i as a non-american don't have any bias, Democrats have bombed/killed as many people in the ME region as Republicans (probably a bit more considering how many drones Obama and Biden dropped in Syria).

Choosing one side cause ones look more progressive at home seems clueless, both parties have history of bombing countries and putting dictators in power here and there, just cause ones wear rainbow flags doesn't make them any better, neither this will matter to the families of all the people they have murdered.
I guess you'll have to add all the NATO countries to that list because the Americans, and I'm not one, are not the only ones, many of these events, whilst carried out by the US military are actually under the auspices of NATO

The majority of the discussions in the political threads are domestic issues though
 
If what we read about the Emir re his wealth, his supporting of United and his determination to buy us, logically he's the one buying us.

I'm sure after this soft deadline in two days there'll be some posturing and negotiating. We'll hear five times how the Glazer's aren't sure of selling part or all of the club. Then they'll want more than the Qatari offers.

But I'm sure if that's all true, he gets us.

My question is, once the bid is accepted, how long until he owns us and the Glazers have nothing to do with us?

Apparently it will be done by Q1 of this year, so optimistically no later than the end of March.
 
From my point of view it's the opposite. Players come and go, and with ~25 of them under contract any given year we are by sheer numbers bound to have some now and again that one can't be proud of (Or even detests because of his actions). Owners stay for decades. Their link to the club is a lot stronger than that of most of the players.

Whether we like it or not the club is going to remain an investment for someone for the foreseeable future. And we are cheering that investment. You can attempt to ignore that like one ignores that a movie is an investment for someone while watching it. But to keep watching movies week in week out without ever acknowledging that there's an interest behind it would be naive. Now we are all used to that interest being money, it's how our world works. But say someone bought the movie studios and had so much money they didn't need to care about financial interests. Their motivation would need to be something else. And to keep watching their movies without being aware of that would be beyond me.
Players come and go but they're the ones who represent the club. I'm not watching the club for some rich cnut to be richer. That's just a very side story to the main point of football which is the direct players and coaching staff. If it comes out that a player is scum, they shouldn't represent the club again. Because representing the club on the pitch is a position of celebrity power where you have countless people who look up to you. Nobody looks up to the owner of a football club. They're just the owner. Important role, but not a celebrity role, not the reason for any obsession. I couldn't even tell you the names of any owners before the Glazers because I was a kid who didn't care about that, and before 94 just not alive and who actually cares about what our history of owners is? Feels irrelevant. What is relevant, is the great players and managers we've had over the decades.

If you're bothered about what the exact purpose of an owner taking over the club, I still feel like Qatar here would be a grey area. There is a very real possibility that they want United because United is super popular there, the actual Emir is a United fan, and he just wants to swing his financial dick around and say he owns the club either for his people, or because he has enough money where he can just say that and make the club successful in his eyes. It's a very real possibility that that is simply the case. In general I disagree with state ownership and ME owners are their own special case of moral issues, but the reason for the ownership is a grey area IMO. In which case it is just a very rich fan who runs their country in a bad way/way we don't agree with.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.