The idea that bringing in new directors is a mistake is hilarious. The only thing they've done right is appoint Ten Hag (an obvious decision) and give him some money for players he wants. He's basically changed the club single handedly with the profile of player he wants and how he develops them on the training pitch. None of the suits can claim responsibility for that.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Come on man. The club is for sale.. so obviously this is inevitable. The local man can’t afford us, it’s just the time we are in.
Nothing changes about the club… we are so established as it is that it’s hard to create drastic change.. like we seen with Chelsea or City.
As a local fan I guarantee your experience will only improve.
Just as a quick one mate - how do you know all of this? Whereabouts in the world are you that you’re able to ignore all this propaganda?
Projects like City and PSG, and even Chelsea were "testing the waters".
If United are bought by a similar group, this changes everything. Even under the Glazers, United has been the "main character" of football, with a 10 year drought.
The United commercial brand combined with crazy money backing can be a european superpower, as long as they trust and protect Ten Haag.
If United are bought by a similar group, this changes everything. Even under the Glazers, United has been the "main character" of football, with a 10 year drought.
The United commercial brand combined with crazy money backing can be a european superpower, as long as they trust and protect Ten Haag.
Harsh. They probably should have won one or two CL titles with the money injected but they pretty much went from a relegation candidate to winning League 1 constantly. As I said: That's to be expected with the money injected but still. Hardly completely dysfunctional.
And just to add: Their need for statement signings might also have to do with the status of the French league. They might have wanted to get more attention and make it more popular. Hardly needed at United.
Suspect UEFA would be happy with the Qataris took over, would be another nail to the coffin of the ESL
Think all new owners will want their own guy in place.
So the rumoured offer from INEOS is a billion less than what Qatar is ready to offer for their first bid (if rumours are to be believed). Well...
Ten Hag has his shit together for sure. But above him? Messed about chasing de Jong all summer only to end up going for panic signings in Rabiot and Arnautovic before somehow getting Casemiro. Also due to de Jong we held off on Antony and Martinez before then over paying by about 50m for the 2 then realising there was no money left for January so had to settle for Weghorst and Sabitzer.
How Ten Hag didnt lose his head in January I dont know.
I guess the concerns are if they go to replace CEO and then just replace everything including ETH. But I dont think that will be a worry.
I love the idea but I'm very skeptical of that. It seems that new potential income will be hard to come by, the need for investment is huge, stadium, servicing the debt, the team. Offers of billions in cash are IMO a far more realistic reason rather then fan protests. We had the mother of all protests at the buy out and it mattered f all. As bad as it might feel I think fans grievances are irrelevant to them, it's all about the money.
surely the decision to chase FDJ for that long was largely ETH's to make
what is the point of this bid?
Is Radcliffe trying to show he “tried” like he did with Chelsea
Yup, definitely. I would have preferred a super-rich billionaire like Musk, Bezos if they would have bough the club with their own money, or a corporate like Apple compared to a state entity. But a company who is worth just 10 times as much as the club, won't spend 5-6B in United just to have it as its plaything. The shareholders will want their money back one way or another. No shareholder will be happy with the company getting 5-6B in debt to buy United and then run it as a non profitable business, instead they would prefer stock buybacks or dividends. Which is why the likes of Radcliffe buying United (together with Glazers keeping it) are by far the worst options IMO.
It's just the soft deadline for indicative offers. Qualifying bidders will then receive more detailed financial information about the club, before the proper bidding process begins. We're a long way off yet and today's deadline may well be shifted by Raine if it is thought additional bidders are likely to come in.
The only way INEOS' investment is justified is if the value of the club increases quite a lot over the coming years, so perhaps some form of future payments tied to some measure of that?
Aye people need to separate the good work Ten Hag has done with what we still see off the field.
I’m a bit worried with Qatar owners. PSG has been a circus the last years, lot of managers, lot of PR signings, big players have the power at the club, fans not happy and no togetherness or connection between fans and club.
For the first time since Fergie you can feel the connection between the fans and the club again. I’m a bit worried we will lose the values instilled in our club by Matt Busby and Ferguson. Will our youth academy stay important or are we just buying everyone. Yes we will compete with the best clubs in the world, but at what price?
I’m not totally against an owner like Qatar, but i’m also not convinced it is the right step yet.
For the first time since Fergie you can feel the connection between the fans and the club again. I’m a bit worried we will lose the values instilled in our club by Matt Busby and Ferguson. Will our youth academy stay important or are we just buying everyone. Yes we will compete with the best clubs in the world, but at what price?
I’m not totally against an owner like Qatar, but i’m also not convinced it is the right step yet.
He's the monitoring FC version of bids.
He's trying to buy the club. He wouldn't have taken the time to secure financing from Goldman and JPM for some kind of half-arsed publicity stunt. He might fail, he might succeed.
I guess he feels they may accept it if they feel the Qatari bid won't get through the Premier League.
Out of interest, would people prefer a state backed ownership (Qatar, Saudi) with money pumped in or a “nicer“ alternative (Ratcliffe or whoever) based on debt and money being pumped out (as with the Glazers)?
Are some really mourning the potential departure of Richard Arnold and the rest of the bankers who were underlings to Woodward and the Glazers because of a few months of progress on the pitch?
Any new owner is going to get rid of the Glazers henchmen on the business side of the club and I will welcome it
Any new owner is going to get rid of the Glazers henchmen on the business side of the club and I will welcome it
Nobody is spending £5+ billion and not putting someone they trust to be in charge. Do you think Jim would keep our existing people? No chance. Replacing CEO is the logical step.
After reading the last 40 pages I'm starting to hope Musk buys us and we start playing games on Mars.
Save us Elon, you're out only hope.
Save us Elon, you're out only hope.
I think you’re on a different planet if you can’t grasp the difference between United and PSG, City. We won’t need to spend disproportionately because we generate that much. But yeah, City and PSG do it so that automatically means we will as well.
Well said Mockers.
You only need to look at city, psg and even newcastle to see how effective it has been.
Nobody (other than ETH) should be safe in their jobs.
Someone in Arnold or Murtough's role needed to have pulled rank when it was clear de Jong didnt want to come in the first place.
Didn't we already just have that? Where has that gotten us? Sure, I dislike the idea of state ownership more than anyone, but the league is already rigged and United already suffered for 20 years under one of the most incompetent football ownerships in all of history. On that note, can we also drop the 'sportswashing' narrative? Qataris don't need to sportswash, they're already very well integrated into the business sphere with the West. The purpose of buying United is simply exposure, mainly tourism as they diverse from fossil fuels.
I hope he does keep a role in the club though. He seems like a good executive from what we've heard/seen so far. Back to being a commercial director hopefully.
“don’t want these cnuts to own us”
brother, go and buy the club then
brother, go and buy the club then
That is what I worry about, they have to keep a link for him. Not all the new owners men who he has no relationship with. I would be keeping Murtough.
The club would be part of the group anyway no? So the loan is there regardless. If it's on the club it makes a shitstorm of PR, if it's on the mother company it's part of the investment.
I guess it comes down to how INEOS would view the club. If it's just like any other company, expecting profit, then it's terrible (are they in F1 for profit? I don't think so). If on the other hand is seen as a PR move that has the potential to grow other parts of the company, then it's much better, for us the fans. Feck knows how these things work though.
Yep. Arnold and Murtough will be straight out the door, one would think.
I'd expect any new owner to keep Ten Hag, but obviously the relationship with the future CEO/DoF will be key to whether he stays long term.
They are basically are a PR club. Man United arent. There's a world of difference. They slapped the Jordan logo on their kits to try and legitimize them across the world. They signed Messi, Neymar and gave Mbappe the world just to stay so people could think they're a brand in world football like Real, Barca or United. In United you are literally buying the exact opposite of PSG. A club who hasnt won anything for years and remains one of the biggest clubs on earth and the best supported.
The current football structure doesn't just happen to be in place above ETH, it actively appointed him and is invested in him as a result.
It's unlikely that anyone would look to replace him at the moment given how well he's doing. But if in the future things aren't going so well and he's under pressure, I think it's fair to think new appointees are probably less likely to show sustained patience than the people who actually hired him.
That doesn't mean new owners shouldn't make changes. Just that we shouldn't be so quick to delight in them doing so without cause. All it takes is for them to appoint some idiot as DOF and things can quickly go to shit.
It's unlikely that anyone would look to replace him at the moment given how well he's doing. But if in the future things aren't going so well and he's under pressure, I think it's fair to think new appointees are probably less likely to show sustained patience than the people who actually hired him.
That doesn't mean new owners shouldn't make changes. Just that we shouldn't be so quick to delight in them doing so without cause. All it takes is for them to appoint some idiot as DOF and things can quickly go to shit.
I think they'd have a hard time proving the club was worth 6bn in any sense, I mean it's not as if everyday people buy off them is it, they're business to business so all the good pr in the world won't make as much of a difference for them. It's almost certainly why there bid is a lot lower and I'd imagine that any interest on loans etc. Would be paid off the club, probably wouldn't take dividends, but interest rates are high and there's far more initial debt than with the Glazers, I can't see any situation where a buyout built in debt doesn't become a problem eventually
Shows you how easy it is to win people over. Hence why I’m skeptical of any boycott chat from people.
- Status