Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
AlPistacho said:
You think the loan is going to get paid off overnight or within a decade?

You’ve just seen a bid that actually has red flags all over it. Yet people are brushing those off? Do me a favour. Read the bid imagine Qatar’s bid is Jim, and Jim’s is Qatar. Then ask the questions that come to mind.
Click to expand...

Answer my question or don’t bother responding
 
RedPed said:
Somebody should do a roll call of all the members that have left Redcafe after the Qatari exodus. Would certainly make for interesting reading. By all accounts it sounds like a major culling.
Click to expand...

All humans are fickle and tbf most of them will revert back, very few people are of that ethical or moral standing that they will stand by their beliefs and not follow utd.

When you love or follow something so passionately it becomes an addiction, just like smoking or masturbation, it's very difficult to try to get rid of that habit.

Fair play to all those who will stop supporting utd because of their beliefs and views. For me even if somebody from Israel is taking over who has committed atrocities against Palestines, which I am very vocal about normally even that may not be enough for me to stop watching or supporting utd. It's sad but my moral compass is very low.
 
Hulme91 said:
You've read a 20 word twitter post and are jumping to the most extreme negative conclusions. Just sit down and wait until more information is published, it's not hard is it
Click to expand...
No. I’m reading it for what it is. It’s the people saying “INEOS will pay the debt” that are jumping to the most extreme positive conclusions. We heard US investors early on, and now we have Ratcliff with ‘Wallstreet backers’ are people so naive they don’t know what Wallstreet is about?

Where are all the the questions.
1) How much is being borrowed?
2) What are the repayment and interest terms, how long will the debt last?
3) How much will come from United’s revenue
4) What about the stadium
5) future transfers?
 
AlPistacho said:
Did I say any time soon! It’s here for decades and decades. Glazers debt of 500m has been going on for 17 years? Use some common sense.
Click to expand...

Yes and it has rarely shrunk because United could just about afford to service it while still being able to operate as a top level football club.

So now imagine instead of a £500-600m debt multiply it by 10. Now ask yourself how could United afford to service a debt of that magnitude.

Do you think the plan might be for a company that makes much more money than United annually to pay off that debt?
 
To Quatar. To nation states generally. To money dope sports washers in general; feck off. Go away. Hands off Manchester United. The club doesn’t need you. You will always be hated. Don’t invest. Go away. Goodbye. If you have anything to do with this club I’m out, and I can guarantee that thousands of fellow reds feel the same. Can’t use expletive here. But F off,
 
Scriblerus said:
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-be-a-disaster-just-look-at-the-state-of-psg

Just parking this here. Qatari ownership has allowed PSG to dominate a weak league, but created a team of egos who have crumbled under pressure in the CL every time. There's no guarantee that we would be run sensibly and not turned into a showcase for shiny toys.
Click to expand...

Tbf, PSG is a very different situation to United as there was a need to attract players who would otherwise never set foot in that league while also trying to raise its profile generally. That lends itself to being run in a very different way.

But yes, if we were run like that it would be a disaster.
 
Tincanalley said:
To Quatar. To nation states generally. To money dope sports washers in general; feck off. Go away. Hands off Manchester United. The club doesn’t need you. You will always be hated. Don’t invest. Go away. Goodbye. If you have anything to do with this club I’m out, and I can guarantee that thousands of fellow reds feel the same. Can’t use expletive here. But F off,
Click to expand...

A lot of hard-core reds said the same when the Glazers bought the club
 
I'd be fine with Jim and Ineos as our owners but I'm definitely leaning more towards Qatar now after that press release. Pretty much exactly what every United fan wanted to hear.
 
Tincanalley said:
To Quatar. To nation states generally. To money dope sports washers in general; feck off. Go away. Hands off Manchester United. The club doesn’t need you. You will always be hated. Don’t invest. Go away. Goodbye. If you have anything to do with this club I’m out, and I can guarantee that thousands of fellow reds feel the same. Can’t use expletive here. But F off,
Click to expand...
Completely agree, I might be naive a hypocrite or both but this would ruin any connection I have with the club.
 
Scriblerus said:
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-be-a-disaster-just-look-at-the-state-of-psg

Just parking this here. Qatari ownership has allowed PSG to dominate a weak league, but created a team of egos who have crumbled under pressure in the CL every time. There's no guarantee that we would be run sensibly and not turned into a showcase for shiny toys.
Click to expand...

There's a lot of nothingness in the article, and he seems to group not only all Qatari owners but all Middle Eastern owners in the same boat. Sure he's not GoonerinPeace?
 
BeltUp said:
A lot of hard-core reds said the same when the Glazers bought the club
Click to expand...
There's actually a joke about this in the movie Looking For Eric. The fat mouthy United fan leaves the pub during Barca vs United in the Semi Final and says "feck this, I'm FCUM all day." And then they all cheer to take the piss and he runs back "eh have I missed it! Who scored!"
 
TsuWave said:
Shut up. Not every day pity party.

"Anybody else feels gutted?" is clearly an invitation for circle jerking about the supposed lost soul of Manchester United - the multinationally traded company, which fans have been protesting to be sold for damn near two decades.

Besides, there are simple solutions if you're feeling gutted. I presented one.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you just don't get it. Go to Manchester, or any town or city, and argue that Manchester United/Local club is just a multinationally traded company. Just because none of this ever mattered to you, it did matter to the majority of other people that weren't just interested in the success and big signings. Your posts are fecking horse shit and the way you try to dismiss others for not keeping sweet for the rich sugar daddies, like some gold digging slapper, says more about you.

It's laughable that you have the audacity to think you can tell somebody to support another club because they're not happy we're being bought by these clowns, even if it will make us incredibly rich. You just look an absolute cretin.
 
Scriblerus said:
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-be-a-disaster-just-look-at-the-state-of-psg

Just parking this here. Qatari ownership has allowed PSG to dominate a weak league, but created a team of egos who have crumbled under pressure in the CL every time. There's no guarantee that we would be run sensibly and not turned into a showcase for shiny toys.
Click to expand...

It’s a known fact the reason they crumble in the champions league is because their not challenged in the domestic league
 
Nogbadthebad said:
True.
We also don't know the amount of debt that will need to be serviced. It is very likely that it would be beyond the club's ability to pay it alone anyway.

My biggest concern with the debt based approach is having funds for the essential stadium renewal. There seems to be no avenue for that, and if the club is going to be funding it directly, then we are looking at, at best, a renovation.
Click to expand...

Plus another big factor which people are missing is the age of SJR, who is in line of succession, who knows the next person may have different views and want utd's earning to service debt. At that stage we would not be able to do anything to stop it happening.

Plus another factor is how much debt is obtained assuming if 50 percent is obtained, even that would be in north of 2 billion, and get let's say 2 percent interest rate we would be paying 40 million annually to service debt.

Even if they have very good cash flow position, they would have Statutory reserve requirements they can't let any entity utilizing their cash flows. So eventually we will have to cover it in the form of management fees or other expenses etc.
 
stevoc said:
Yes and it has rarely shrunk because United could just about afford to service it while still being able to operate as a top level football club.

So now imagine instead of a £500-600m debt multiply it by 10. Now ask yourself how could United afford to service a debt of that magnitude.

Do you think the plan might be for a company that makes much more money than United annually to pay off that debt?
Click to expand...
Now don’t you think Jim would have leaked that already to make his bid more appealing?

Now think of the reality of our club being bought on debt. Yes INEOS might cover the occasional payments in the early years or when we need transfers etc but a company that in its best year made £2b isn’t going to pay a £5b loan, sooner or later it’s going to pull money out of our revenue
 
stevoc said:
Yes and it has rarely shrunk because United could just about afford to service it while still being able to operate as a top level football club.

So now imagine instead of a £500-600m debt multiply it by 10. Now ask yourself how could United afford to service a debt of that magnitude.

Do you think the plan might be for a company that makes much more money than United annually to pay off that debt?
Click to expand...

The Glazers actually made significant strides in reducing debt. At one point it was under £300m if I remember correctly. It was the pandemic borrowing and some refinancing that made it balloon again.

It actually makes a lot of sense for Ineos to borrow the money rather than using their entire cash reserves to fund a purchase. Let’s say you are worth $7bn. You don’t spend $4.5bn on a football club even if you had the cash. You take out a mortgage and pay for you big purchase over time.

If I was Jim Ratcliffe though why not sell 50% of the club to fans. The fans have shown interest in a an ownership scheme. Just make shares available to fans and sell 50% over a 10 year period or however long it takes. If they issued 2.25bn shares they could sell each one for £1 to fans. They could even have an ongoing tracker of shares sold so we could see that fan ownership has reached 10, 20, 30% as the years go by. What a gift that could be to your club?
 
AlPistacho said:
What a surprise you have not scrutinised Ratcliff’s bid.
Click to expand...

what is wrong with you? how can you have such a weak stance with so little knowledge about what you’re talking about and still be so confident?

it’s a simple question

like I said, either answer it or don’t reply. It’s not difficult
 
Serious question (and I haven't followed this all that closely), but from the seller's point of view do they care about all the extra details such as how its funded/stadium dev/future plans etc. or do they (and you could argue as investors "should they") only care about the best offer financially from their point of view??

Is all this marketing and positioning of the various offers just more acceptance of the fans AFTER any deal?
 
Flanders Devil said:
Serious question (and I haven't followed this all that closely), but from the seller's point of view do they care about all the extra details such as how its funded/stadium dev/future plans etc. or do they (and you could argue as investors "should they") only care about the best offer financially from their point of view??

Is all this marketing and positioning of the various offers just more acceptance of the fans AFTER any deal?
Click to expand...

pretty sure they don’t give a feck
 
Tarrou said:
what is wrong with you? how can you have such a weak stance with so little knowledge about what you’re talking about and still be so confident?

it’s a simple question

like I said, either answer it or don’t reply. It’s not difficult
Click to expand...
Why do you think I owe you anything?
 
Scriblerus said:
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-be-a-disaster-just-look-at-the-state-of-psg

Just parking this here. Qatari ownership has allowed PSG to dominate a weak league, but created a team of egos who have crumbled under pressure in the CL every time. There's no guarantee that we would be run sensibly and not turned into a showcase for shiny toys.
Click to expand...
That says more about the french league than the owners. Are you telling me you won't like Mbappe playing for us. Or Bellingham playing for us.
 
Scriblerus said:
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...d-be-a-disaster-just-look-at-the-state-of-psg

Just parking this here. Qatari ownership has allowed PSG to dominate a weak league, but created a team of egos who have crumbled under pressure in the CL every time. There's no guarantee that we would be run sensibly and not turned into a showcase for shiny toys.
Click to expand...
Manchester United is big enough that it doesn't need overrated a-hole superstars to build its
"brand recognition" and other bullsh*t. PSG, on the other hand, is just a blip on the map and needs as many shiny toys as possible for relevance.
 
One thing about Ratcliffe’s bid which is again a bit manipulative “ any money borrowed to fund the takeover of Man Utd will be borne by the INEOS group”

But leveraged takeovers, under a clubs name, are no longer allowed? So he can’t do that anyways. It’s like a player saying I won’t score with my hands
 
AlPistacho said:
Now don’t you think Jim would have leaked that already to make his bid more appealing?
Click to expand...

Appealing to whom? It's the Glazers that will decide who buys United. He doesn't need to release a statement to confirm he's not going to lump £5 billion worth of debt on a football club. It should be obvious.

Now think of the reality of our club being bought on debt. Yes INEOS might cover the occasional payments in the early years or when we need transfers etc but a company that in its best year made £2b isn’t going to pay a £5b loan, sooner or later it’s going to pull money out of our revenue
Click to expand...

So a company that makes £2-3 billion a year won't be able to service a £5b loan but a company that makes losses of £100m plus will be able to?

OK mate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.