Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I know all debt isn't bad debt and it's not an automatic deal breaker. But the idea Ineos or its shareholders are going to just pay it all off, whilst simultaneously taking nothing out of the club and investing vast sums in the stadium baffles me.
 
I find a British bid very appealing. Whilst its different to the Glazer approach, I still find the idea of being billions in debt to a foreign bank like goldman sachs somewhat less of a romantic ideal
I know. If we can’t invest in the stadium when £500m in debt and directors taking out dividends, imagine when billions in debt with investors who demand a profit every year.
 
I said months ago that a Jim Ratcliffe owned Manchester United would fall into midtable hell within a few years.

Whats the amount of the bid?
If its low, are you then borrowing a further 1 or 2 billion for the stadium? What about infrastructure etc?

It will just be more borrowed money from Wall Street and... well.. we've seen how the tale goes first hand.
 
Nonsense. City are an old great club, (who I hate). Success is what defines glory hunters, not football clubs, most win nothing.

That is what we call double standards.
Spot on
 
The first thing that comes to mind from those alleged Ratcliffe PR comments is "no money or value in the January window....but hey at least we are British*"

*Wall street funded British :lol:
You know this is going to happen. :lol:

Hey we are using American banks to allow a Chelsea season ticket holder born in london to buy United so that we can bring “Manchester back into Manchester United”:lol:

What the hell that catchphrase even mean? Its like Make America great again catchphrase of Donald Trump
 
Ratcliffe from saviour has turned into a persona non grata on here.
I'd be more than fine with Ratcliffe if it wasn't actual banks behind him, lending money. You just know those vultures will want return of their investment, and fairly quickly. Best case scenario - we'd be sold again for a small profit (to an oil state), worse - sucked dry by the new Megaglazers.
 
You need to have a look at your own club, donkey. Don't you play in the Emirates stadium?
Morality lessons from supporters of a club that plays at Emirates stadium, wearing Emirates sponsored kits with Rwanda on the sleeves owned by an unscrupulous character with Walmart money ties known to have defrauded the taxpayers of a whole major city, you can't make it up :lol:
 
A Musk style Twitter poll is by far the most accurate representation :lol:
It's for damn sure more representative than a fecking Athletic poll behind a paywall.

Looking around social media, which OK is dominated by younger demographic but that's the future anyway, it's usually 70-80% in favour of Qatar.

Of course, you're free to live in denial.
 
SJR also need to clear existing club debt or no bueno
 
Really going for this 'British' and 'Manchester back into Manchester' approach isn't he

He's got this one completely wrong the vast majority of fans give no fecks where the money is coming from and won't back that stance when there's an offer on the table from a company/state worth upwards of 300B

However he tries dressing it up he's bringing debt with his bid no thanks

Taking a page off the Farage playbook.
 
Seems everyone has made up their mind Qatar or nothing.

I'm pretty sure it's been explained in great detail on here about Ineos they definitely have the money.Personally, I'd prefer Jim Ratcliffe which I'll probably get pelters for but hey ho.

I would too for sure

they won’t put as much cash into the club but it’s not really needed

a minuscule price to pay to not be state owned
 
Couldn't give a feck about City or Newcastle. So where are your facts? What are your sources? Or is it just the usual bluster being spouted left, right and centre?


Oh how convenient. It's the exact same playbook, man.

There isn't a chance there's an independent businessman spending 3-5% of the GDP of an absolute monarchy like Qatar without said Monarchy being heavily involved.

Anyone believing that is either naive or being willfully ignorant.
 
Torn on this but a fan for 40 years, I will follow the team not the owners. They will get scrutinized x10 by just being associated with the Utd brand.
 
Ratcliffe from saviour has turned into a persona non grata on here.

Not for me, I'd still United be owned by him than by a country that imprisons gay people and requires women to ask the permission of their 'male guardian' before seeking adult education.
 
Yeah, let's just stick with owners who come from a country that routinely mows down kids while they are learning 2 + 2 and still support law enforcement that just love to use black people as target practice whilst our own people regularly abuse black players on social media.

This is just an idiotic point. Im not going to engage much further than to say that if you cant differentiate between citizens of a country, ie the glazers, and the flaws of a nation (Every nation is flawed. literally all of them) and any ownership where the actual murderous, homophobic, brutal state has a hand in ownership as a form of using this historic club to sanitise itself (hint, they dont need the money), then you're less worth engaging than this post suggests. I'm not even going to get into how just woefully vague and abstract the sweeping statements you made are. Its like teenage level stuff.

As I said I'm not wasting much time having these types of discussions online. I dont believe they lead to anything.

Support qatar all you like. I wont. Theyre our individual choices. Thank god we live in countries where we're free to make them
 
It because his company doesnt have billions lying around in cash ffs.

The Qatari crowd will have billions lying around in US dollars.

People need to wait to see more info on JM bid before condemning it.
.
Just like the Glazers didn’t have £800m in cash ffs. How blind can you be? We heard about US investors wanting a piece of United when United got put for sale… they are doing it through a “friendly face”
 
He is deceiving the fans already. “Wallstreet” backing? I guarantee you that phrase was used because they researched “US investors” had a negative reaction amongst the fan base. I’d respect him if he didn’t exploit most peoples inability to assess situations for what they are.

Yes the Qatari guy probably needed approval to bid. But Jim Ratcliff will be tied in chains to the US investors who will want a return & profit on the billions they are putting up.
I don’t disagree with you Ratcliffe’s bid could turn out to be really bad for the club in long term. That’s why I don’t want him successful in his bid.
 
Absolutely no one should be supporting that bid from Ratcliffe, regardless of the Qatar interest. Red flags everywhere.
 
I said months ago that a Jim Ratcliffe owned Manchester United would fall into midtable hell within a few years.

Whats the amount of the bid?
If its low, are you then borrowing a further 1 or 2 billion for the stadium? What about infrastructure etc?

It will just be more borrowed money from Wall Street and... well.. we've seen how the tale goes first hand.
We don't know the first statement.

But I agree, Qatar all the way, they will spend 10b if need be on where this club need to be after decades of rotting. I have no faith on any other owners that will do that especially if they are linked to Wall Street, it's all business for them.
 
Ratcliffe from saviour has turned into a persona non grata on here.

Feel like we have to qualify every quote with "i'd prefer to not have Qatari or Saudi owners"

But Ratcliffe's PR is absolute dog shite....."Trust me i'm British and basically reusing his Chelsea bid PR release document" vs "This is exactly what we will do, no debt, heavy investment, comments about the stadium"
 
Anyone else feel a bit gutted?

Yep. I mean nothing is official yet obviously. But pretty resigned to it. Not sure if to find another club or just knock football on the head, I only really watch United matches these days. Not sure it could be the same anyway.
 
Seems everyone has made up their mind Qatar or nothing.

I'm pretty sure it's been explained in great detail on here about Ineos they definitely have the money.Personally, I'd prefer Jim Ratcliffe which I'll probably get pelters for but hey ho.

It's preferable to the alternative alright.
 
It's for damn sure more representative than a fecking Athletic poll behind a paywall.

Looking around social media, which OK is dominated by younger demographic but that's the future anyway, it's usually 70-80% in favour of Qatar.

Of course, you're free to live in denial.

If social media is representative for our fanbase we are truly fecked.
 
I can’t decide if that gooner chap genuinely thinks Qatar is the taliban or is just being a bit racist in a “Well they’re all terrorists innit” kinda way.. or it’s an amazing wum ( least likely )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.