Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
LordSpud said:
A basic summing up of the SJR and Qatar bids for those wanting to catch up:

Click to expand...

It’s so fecking bad, it’s as if Jim doesn’t want to win.
He’s have been better off shitting on a page and getting it published
 
Wibble said:
Even assuming they were the same thing (and they aren't) the US government aren't trying to buy United.

And sports washing is all about improving your image while changing as little as possible. With added playing with shiny toys.
Click to expand...
Im finding this conflation of comparing an individual in a country to an entire state quite irksome.
 
BluesJr said:
Putting Qatar to one side, if Ratcliffe was the only bid I don’t think I’d be keen at all. It’s just more of the same in a different skin.
Click to expand...

I'd still prefer him to the Glazers because we know they definitely want to bleed the club dry whereas Ratcliffe just probably would do itt
 
thegregster said:
He owns a company that has an annual turnover 50bn and has assests of 17bn.

It wouldn't be anything like the Glazers takeover IMO. We need to wait and see what is his plan. Probably all irrelevant in the end as the Qataris can and will easily outbid him.
Click to expand...
The Glazers also owned companies. I think before quoting INEOS £50b turnover people need to look beyond the wiki page to find INEOS actual yearly and average yearly turnover and look at profits.

Once someone does that get back to me. Might show a different picture, I’m just guessing.
 
Regarding sportswashing.

Qatar just held the world cup. The most succesful leagues in the world have changed their entire league schedules to accomodate it.

Qatar has the right reputation with the people that matter to them already.

They give not a single shite about what you or I think about them.
 
Considering how big the bid is (around 4-5bn), dont think any consortium will not publicly announce their bid.



Think it will be settled by next bidding process
 
onemanarmy said:
People actually thinking those 4 lines of text represent the full SJR bid, and are not happy with it? :lol:
Click to expand...
If he was going to clear the debt he’d have said so. That’s one of the biggest PR points in relation to the club.
 
adexkola said:
For the nth time, sportswashing is bullshit.
.

It's enough to oppose them owning the club for being cnuts. Sportswashing though? Please
Click to expand...
But we already have people disregarding their human rights record and treatment of LGBT+, basically normalizing this behavior. And they haven't even taken over.
 
adexkola said:
For the nth time, sportswashing is bullshit.

Rich people do rich people shit, like buy football clubs. They don't give a feck how they look to United fans or any other fan base. They don't need advocates or people wearing turbans in front of stadiums. They buy rich clubs for the same reason they buy huge yachts and expensive shit no one else can buy; to show off their wealth and tell their harems/mistresses: "his yacht doesn't have an igloo outside the jacuzzi". They aren't trying to "launder their reputation", they don't need to. Their reputation (to those who matter) is already "great", great enough to do business with and take money from. They have access to your economies, defense industries, real estate, politicians... already. Before the club buying started.

But some idiots at Amnesty International believe some Arab scion is desperate for love and attention and is willing to buy a football club to have people on the internet arguing in his favor?? Ignoring the fact that idiots on the internet who suddenly love Saudi embassies, are vastly outweighed by the ton of negative press and attention on their bigoted and archaic laws, literal slave labor, women relegated to second class citizens...

It's enough to oppose them owning the club for being cnuts. Sportswashing though? Please
Click to expand...

How can you be so certain? There can be several reasons at once
 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64684703

"...There are also expected to be at least two offers for United from the United States, while there have been suggestions of interest from Saudi Arabia.

That means there could be up to five parties trying to negotiate a full sale, with others looking to make a smaller investment in return for a partial stake in the 20-time English league champions....."
 
Nogbadthebad said:
Regarding sportswashing.

Qatar just held the world cup. The most succesful leagues in the world have changed their entire league schedules to accomodate it.

Qatar has the right reputation with the people that matter to them already.

They give not a single shite about what you or I think about them.
Click to expand...
I think being associated with Manchester united brings far more scrutiny than it will help wash their image. And as you said, dont Qatar gives two fecks about their image. They already do what they want to do anyway.
 
LordSpud said:
Get out of here.
Click to expand...

What? He definitely wouldn't be as bad as the Glazers but taking loans for a big acquisition for something that requires huge amounts of investment in facilities, the stadium, the academy and the first team, but still having to make it profitable to INEOS shareholders doesn't fill me with optimism
 
adexkola said:
For the nth time, sportswashing is bullshit.

Rich people do rich people shit, like buy football clubs. They don't give a feck how they look to United fans or any other fan base. They don't need advocates or people wearing turbans in front of stadiums. They buy rich clubs for the same reason they buy huge yachts and expensive shit no one else can buy; to show off their wealth and tell their harems/mistresses: "his yacht doesn't have an igloo outside the jacuzzi". They aren't trying to "launder their reputation", they don't need to. Their reputation (to those who matter) is already "great", great enough to do business with and take money from. They have access to your economies, defense industries, real estate, politicians... already. Before the club buying started.

But some idiots at Amnesty International believe some Arab scion is desperate for love and attention and is willing to buy a football club to have people on the internet arguing in his favor?? Ignoring the fact that idiots on the internet who suddenly love Saudi embassies, are vastly outweighed by the ton of negative press and attention on their bigoted and archaic laws, literal slave labor, women relegated to second class citizens...

It's enough to oppose them owning the club for being cnuts. Sportswashing though? Please
Click to expand...
Incoming "This shows you know nothing about sportswashing...." comment in 3..2..1
 
Salwan said:
What you describe is the perfect owner (again, ignoring the dictatorship and the human rights aspects for the sake of argument). However, I am afraid that they are going to spend big and create an unfair competitive advantage for us, thus killing the romance and fabric of this club.
Click to expand...
I am just describing what their statement says.
 
pocco said:
You can read the logic like a book. First off they're angry that we're shit and our transfer window is a shambles, and see Ratcliffe as our saviour. Then 6 months later, guys with more money come along and promise to buy us titles, and Ratcliffe is in the gutter.

It's not about retaining any last semblance of what we once were, but more about being able to brag that your team just spent £300m on such and such a player, whilst winning trophies galore. It'll be hollow as feck but some people just won't care. Each to their own I guess, but when I stood next to fellow reds singing about Chelsea taking Roman's money etc, I never thought that deep down, these guys were just jealous. Now they're here, parting their cheeks for that oil money.
Click to expand...

You expect fans to be ok with an owner who's clearly not even going to remove our existing debt owning the club? Why even bother getting rid of the Glazers in the first place? At least we'd know that the current team is showing some signs of improvement. Who knows what a new owner will do. A statement to being debt-free should have been the minimal requirement for any new potential owner and INEOS haven't even provided that with their mention of not adding "fresh debt" to the club directly.
 
The British appeal feels a more like a plea to the Glazers, if Jim can match the Qatari based bid, at least in the early phase they could be inclined and feel they're doing the one right thing by some vocal fans selling to Jim/Ineos.

Glazers might be unsure to sell off such a high profile British club to Qatar if there's not much between the bids in what they collect. For some United fans it's a real problem of Glazers 2.0 or Qatar, neither will be compelling. We'd have to know much more about Sir Jim's bid as to me it seems many times more treacherous than the Glazers.
 
Seeing the tweets thread and Sir Ratcliffe won't be adding any new debt to buy the club. No chance of him coming in but leaning towards him to win the bid.
 
Berbasbullet said:
Im finding this conflation of comparing an individual in a country to an entire state quite irksome.
Click to expand...
I am heavily in favour of the Qatar bid (of the two publicly announced) but let's not kind ourselves. It's as state-backed as it gets.

The main Qatari guy is worth $1.3bn in total, so he's clearly getting huge support from somewhere. You don't have to guess from where.
 
If it's anyone besides Qatar or Saudis I'm going to be so disappointed. I don't know how people prefer Radcliffe over them, he's made a mess out of Nize.

I would rather stay with the Glazers than change to Radcliffe. For me it's either the Arabs or no one, want to see some serious investment and our club brought back to the very top in the short term.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.