Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Jim Jim Jim....
You'd think with coming in at a lower bid, he'd damn well make sure he gets the fans on side.
Clearing the debt, regenerating the stadium etc.
What does he give us? A brexit bid and putting the... Manchester back in Manchester? what exactly does that mean?
it just feels so lack luster. He needs to clear up whether the debt will be cleared or left on the club ASAP.
If its staying, he can get fecked.
You'd think with coming in at a lower bid, he'd damn well make sure he gets the fans on side.
Clearing the debt, regenerating the stadium etc.
What does he give us? A brexit bid and putting the... Manchester back in Manchester? what exactly does that mean?
it just feels so lack luster. He needs to clear up whether the debt will be cleared or left on the club ASAP.
If its staying, he can get fecked.
Why are they spending 5bn on a club when they could buy Harry Kane for 100m? Shocking I tell ya. Shocking.
It couldn't be more true, and yet you seem very sensitive to this "message" when any person with a bit of sense knows it's BS. If Qatar doesn't want to benefit from the profits made by United, it means they want the PR. And for PR purposes, they'll make absurd choices like creating a team full of big names that makes no sense, exactly the way they did at PSG. I'm not saying Ratcliffe is better but the "display of willingness" means sh*t. I'm sure you'll all love having a 35 years old De Bruyne bought for the sole reason that sheikh Al Tani's brother in law was a fan a decade ago.
On here on one of the tweets
Ratcliffe statement is terrible. Qatar wins.
Have you got a link?
That's it, there are layers around the 90 minutes that made the game what it was. The fact it needed feck all equipment meant it could be played by people with very little. That's what made it globally so popular and thus so ripe for commidifying. And in this age of commodify everything this was visibly inevitable for a depressingly long time.
Like I said in my original post. We aren't Nice, but maybe I'm being naive. I understand your point of view though. Atleast you have an argument other than someone in another thread that hated Radcliffe purely because of Brexit
Qatar bid is obviously designed to bring fans to Qatar's side and therefore pressure the Glazers to sell to Qatar/deter other bidders (or fans will riot). Substantively, all profits going back to the club us huge (and profits will be bigger because no interest payments on debt!).
Radcliffe's bid says that there will be debt at holding company level, i.e., the same thing the Glazers are doing. Where do you think the money will come from to service the debt?
I remain anti-oil money, but am coming around to thinking that succumbing to it may be the only way for United to become a top team once again. When in Rome...
Radcliffe's bid says that there will be debt at holding company level, i.e., the same thing the Glazers are doing. Where do you think the money will come from to service the debt?
I remain anti-oil money, but am coming around to thinking that succumbing to it may be the only way for United to become a top team once again. When in Rome...
It's brutal, sad and scary. Lots of bad about this thread but this is the worst part to me.
What's sad is people not comprehending simple statements. I'm talking about the adequacy of a backfired PR statement made by a potential bidder not the club's roots. Even if I wasn't being local doesn't dismiss substantial concerns like bringing more debt. This is narrow minded nationalist stupidity. Being born somewhere shouldn't even be the first topic of conversation.
I think Jim Ratcliff bid means he has more questions to answer. People should be asking.
1) How much debt is he taking on to buy the club?
2) Who is he getting it from?
3) What are the repayment terms and how much profit do they expect ?
4) How much of the clubs revenue will go to paying off the debt over the next decades and decades and decades
5) What about redevelopment of the stadium?
These are all very simple questions that no one is asking, not even “so called journalist” yet I bet you if it was Qatar bidding under these conditions they’d be asked and the negatives answered for Qatar because they are so obvious
Quality control
Again, shut up. Not much interested in your bozo responses nor your understanding. You could have ignored my posts much like you suggested, but somehow me presenting a simple solution for simpathy fishing activated your cheer leader routine. I don't even care to ask you to check why. Move
Based on what? Even with the Glazer family we've spent more than enough to compete in the last decade but we've been incompetent in our spending. If that continues under any new owners than the amount spent won't matter. I'm not sure the people who run a team who play in a league where they are totally dominant financially (to an extent we will never be in England) and yet have still failed to win the title twice in recent years and have made no real impact in Europe are definitely going to be competent. Plus they're complete cnuts for an added bonus.
You can bet your boots some will comment on the matchday or player forums!
All his pony tail points that he is just a rat.
JR "any profits will be paid as a percentage on an annual basis to wall street "
Qatar are very good at this sportswashing lark, but Jim's made it easy for them. It's been unconvincing all along, but that statement is just.....imagine there's that much money being thrown around and that's the best you can do to sell it to the public?
we already are with a good coach
You've literally just made this up.
I challenged someone else earlier about Ratcliffe being the better choice. He's running Nice like a proper circus full of PL rejects that looks no better than PSG. Basically a pauper's version really.
So given the choice of two ownership proposals with questionable track record with their current clubs in the same league, who would you choose?
Or, these are very rich people who have spent the last couple of decades one upping each other with the size of their yachts, and now have a new dick swinging contest with football clubs.
Qatar just hosted the world cup. Their reputation is already lily white to the people that matter.
You must be new here. Americans are always fair game
Hahaha, not new and as an American I know., This one seemed a reach even for that poster.
Theb debt would go to INEOS. If he said he wouldn't take money out to service the debt then he won't, it therefore must be in writing with his partners, why are people willing to believe the Qatari bid came from a private citizen separate from the state but not this?!
I thought psg has changed the strategy, no? Everything tried in psg will benefit the decision making for manutd if they learn from it.
Ah yes the city where the cotton processing trade happened and many people died to inadequate housing
Let's not forgot our British history too
I'm fine with the Qataris bringing us back to the top again
Ineos is probably more oil than Qatar.
I actually prefer Qatar over brexit ratcliffe. Just get the feeling that he’s reaching a bit.
I take it you don't set foot in the CE forum much, then?
Reported for quality control.
Not adding any fresh debt doesn't mean he is clearing the current that is crippling us.
Honestly this bid sounds awful for the club.
The statement says nothing about the existing debt either. What happens when Jim gets too old? You better believe INEOS will want access to the clubs profits to service costs.
we all know why
Inios is a publicly listed company.
By Law, they MUST seek to maximize shareholder profits at all times, in everything they do.
That means the clubs profits paying the purchase debt, and minimizing operating costs.
If Jim is a real fan, he should buy Scousepool and fire that Klopp and install King Kenny again.
Has he, in fact, said that he won't take out money to service the debt? All I've seen is that the debt is at INEOS level, and not at club level.
I have just gone back to page 500 and its gone! It was on here and when I tried to put the Ole message on it said oops something went wrong. thats why I didnt link in the first place.
Principles. Right. Doesn’t apply whilst united being sponsored by Saudi telecom. Just like that Goonerinpeace fella said sponsors not owners. Right?
If course it applies, but it's not absolute, there are tipping points. Thats the way humans operate.
- Status