Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
whitbyviking said:
I see this thread is still full of the same mental gymnastics to justify the Qataris over Jim Ratcliffe. “But he’s not very good at running a football club” are the Qataris? “But he doesn’t have enough money” if we stuck to FFP so we need unlimited funds? Has he said he can’t afford the stadium? Can the Qataris? “But he’s involved with banks” every financial transaction of this size needs banks, it doesn’t mean it’s leveraged debt on horrendous interest rates like the Glazers.
Click to expand...

From what we know though that last point will still be in play. They aren't clearing the existing debt. So we will be paying those interest payments and have the debt meaning we can't spend what we make.

I don't think people want someone to spend unlimited funds. Just free us from the debt to allow us to spend what we earn on the football side rather than going to banks.

If INEOS said they would pay that off then I think people would he a lot more positive. The stadium would be debt but in something which has value and will earn money. But the statement said they wouldn't be adding to existing debt.
 
justsomebloke said:
Yes, that is exactly what it does mean. A wait and see approach needs to be justified by something more than a pretense that anything could happen. "Wait and see" is the appropriate attitude to a candidate that has enough going for it that they deserve a shot at running this club. Could you give your reasons for why it would be reasonable to assume that the Qatari group could be a good option? Because that is not the case a priori.
Click to expand...
That's the thing, you're assuming I'm seeing them as a good option already. I'm betting on no horses in this race. I don't a give a shit who's the next owner as long as it's not the Glazers anymore. I don't wanna waste energy with elements that are way out of my control.
 
GoonerInPeace said:
Its called sportswashing. Foremost they are dictators and want to keep power by establishing good relations with the west. Investment in the west is the best for this. most recently we have seen gulf states invest in sport, spending big money to get the F1 to Saudi Arabia, competing with the PGA tour by having an alternate tour where the money is better.

Sure they will hang homosexuals in their home country and whip women who leave the house with their knees showing. But they will gladly invest in women's football and allow the vessel club to promote LGBTQ rights, even if it is disingenuous.

Money goes a long way in having someone forfeit their moral conviction. Although after City and Newcastle accepted got taken over by Arabian dictatorships, its pretty much cut the grass for other premier league clubs to have their own dictator.

As for me, never will I surrender to the taliban. Arsenal & British till I die. No shit 350m for Neymar would ever cause me to forget who I am.
Click to expand...

If you believe in that by reading news papers from western media/ journalists, Kindly read for yourself about the various investments made by Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, China etc in UK and US. Be surprised that most of the big businesses, buildings, ports, airports etc which we know are all owned by them.

Investments are done by people who have money on assets which they deem worth its value or for entertainment.

I dont think anyone with right perspective will believe that F1, PGA are brought to SA for western approval to keep power, sportwashing etc

Other than the argument that big spending by rich owners will make the competitiveness in sport as redundant hence needs curtailing, everything else like sportwashing, the laws in their own countries etc are clutching at straws.
 
Denis79 said:
Sad day when the Qatari own us but there aren't many options with our price tag I guess. Ethics and values aside, I really hope they don't get too involved in footballing matters, go the PSG route but that's a tall order.
Click to expand...

Give me them over the Americans any day.
 
You do have to laugh at the PSG 'shit show' bashing.

Yes they are going through a bad moment right now, but they've been a *far* better team than us for the bulk of the last 8/9 years despite the huge structural disadvantage of playing in Ligue 1.

I actually view the PSG experience as a positive because there is now institutional Qatari knowledge of building a club that competes at the highest level in Europe. There's an opportunity to build on the things they did right and learn from mistakes. They won't be the exact same people but it'd be naive to think the PSG experience won't be used as a reference point for many decisions.

I would honestly prefer this rather than a novice at this level rocking up and taking several years to learn the ropes (like it took FSG for eg. - and look at Boehly now).
 
Wumminator said:
I don’t know, I think stuff like this is always worth pointing out.







leading to this week:
Click to expand...

This is so cringe. I expect this kind of shit from 14 year olds on Twitter trying to cancel random celebrities but an adult trawling through feck knows how many posts just so he can go gotcha is unbelievably sad.
 
I don’t think Radcliffe will run Utd like Nice and would be fine if he ends up owning us as long as there is no debt and he pays for the stadium

We generate enough money, we don’t really need a sugar daddy.
 
The media will go for United whatever happens.

I’ve seen the Greenwashing v Sportswashing comments already in terms of JR v Qatar.
 
Suv666 said:
I don’t think Radcliffe will run Utd like Nice and would be fine if he ends up owning us as long as there is no debt and he pays for the stadium

We generate enough money, we don’t really need a sugar daddy.
Click to expand...
Hasn’t he said there wouldn’t be any extra debt on the club? I don’t think he'll be able to pay the existing debt off
 
How much money would people find it acceptable for us to spend on transfers etc every year? As by far the biggest club in by far the biggest league can we not all agree that we should be spending more than anyone else anyway? People are not realising how constrained we have been by the Glazers and their bloodsucking debt during the period that the PL has ballooned. It almost makes me sad that people don't think we deserve to have the best players in the world at our club, because of how the leeches have been sucking us dry. We are the biggest club in a league that has exploded with TV revenues. Of course we do. Free of the Glazer debt we can probably spend hundreds of millions a year off our own back. But now when we do people will see it as Qatar being the sugar daddy, which is a shame.

The very valid reason to oppose Qatar is the human, women, lgbt rights issues. The criticism of them coming in and splashing cash is a non-issue as far as I'm concerned because we should be the biggest spenders in the world anyway.
 
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
 
justboy68 said:
How much money would people find it acceptable for us to spend on transfers etc every year? As by far the biggest club in by far the biggest league can we not all agree that we should be spending more than anyone else anyway? People are not realising how constrained we have been by the Glazers and their bloodsucking debt during the period that the PL has ballooned. It almost makes me sad that people don't think we deserve to have the best players in the world at our club, because of how the leeches have been sucking us dry. We are the biggest club in a league that has exploded with TV revenues. Of course we do. Free of the Glazer debt we can probably spend hundreds of millions a year off our own back. But now when we do people will see it as Qatar being the sugar daddy, which is a shame.

The very valid reason to oppose Qatar is the human, women, lgbt rights issues. The criticism of them coming in and splashing cash is a non-issue as far as I'm concerned because we should be the biggest spenders in the world anyway.
Click to expand...

The real cap is FFP.
 
stw2022 said:
I never got the outrage at the Glazers taking dividends. So did the shareholders under the PLC. The Edwards would skim off the top before this. Yet with the Glazers it was treated like some unprecedented, egregious act that shouldn't be tolerated.
Click to expand...
Dividends are Ok although we are the only club that pay to owners not the other way around. For me it is the debt repayments that crippled the club.
 
Last edited:
Ten Lasso said:
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
Click to expand...


Promote this member.
 
Who is offering the biggest bid? That is all that matters
 
Ten Lasso said:
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
Click to expand...

This
 
I’m sick at the thought of United being state owned by that shower. What can I do ? F**k all, but it’s a joke it’s allowed to happen.

I’d prefer Radcliffe and we work our way back to the top. It’s a cheat code getting dirty oil money , as far as I’m concerned any succes under them is tainted.

I was really looking forward to the club rebuild under ETH. It is far more satisfying to win the right way, which is having no question marks over your success and doing it in a way where you earned it. City and PSG earned nothing, their legacies are nothing.

I can’t say I have the moral courage to stop supporting United (not easy after over 33 years) but this really spoils things for me.

F*ck the football authorities for allowing this to happen. I hope the whole league implodes on itself so I don’t have to hate myself for not being able to walk away from supporting the club.
 
TheReligion said:
The media will go for United whatever happens.

I’ve seen the Greenwashing v Sportswashing comments already in terms of JR v Qatar.
Click to expand...
Correct, that is certain. They will also go after any success or any failure regardless of who buys us.
 
kouroux said:
That's the thing, you're assuming I'm seeing them as a good option already. I'm betting on no horses in this race. I don't a give a shit who's the next owner as long as it's not the Glazers anymore. I don't wanna waste energy with elements that are way out of my control.
Click to expand...
Can’t see the glazers remaining, the fans protests will start up again until they are gone.

Especially with two good offers on the table, one more appealing than the other for the future of the club.
 
Suv666 said:
I don’t think Radcliffe will run Utd like Nice and would be fine if he ends up owning us as long as there is no debt and he pays for the stadium

We generate enough money, we don’t really need a sugar daddy.
Click to expand...

The part that I don't understand with this is that it makes no sense. Do we really think that Ratcliffe or Ineos are going to spend around 6bn on something without obvious returns and while paying everything from their own pockets with interests? Unless their goal is to sell the club in the near future for a profit, something is missing.

For qataris it is relatively simple, they are specializing in hospitality and real estate, their modus operandi is often to purchase something big in a locality and then spread in that area, they don't give a damn about people's opinion about their culture, they don't need small people like us, they already have the wealthiest people and countries dealing daily and amicably with them. And in their case we already have rumors about their potential investments around Manchester.

So what are Ineos, Ratcliffe and JP Morgan actual plans? The ones supposed to bring them money.
 
Ten Lasso said:
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
Click to expand...

This 1000 times over
 
Ten Lasso said:
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
Click to expand...
Yep, people need to see it for what it is.
 
At this point, I want Qatar. Nothing about Jim’s bid fills me with any confidence it won’t be Glazer 2.0
 
Ratcliffes INEOS are taking out loans to buy the club. That's before you even consider the cost of improving the stadium, regenerating the area + new training facilities. What will the end debt be? £2B? £3B? It will make the Glazers £500m look like a joke.

Moving that debt to INEOS is irrelevant. It still needs to be paid....slowly and with lots of interest. With United practically becoming part of the same group, you'd be crazy to think we won't be affected.

I fear Ratcliffe isn't the saviour many people have made him out to be. The whole "I'm a United fan" thing means nothing. Im a Ferrari fan, doesn't mean I'm best qualified to run their F1 team. He's seen an opportunity to own a once in a life time asset and will do anything to get it.
 
Ten Lasso said:
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
Click to expand...
Amen to this.
 
Ten Lasso said:
Is that Ratcliffe's manifesto?

"We'll put the Manchester, back in Manchester United!"

It's reminiscent of his "This is a British bid, for a British club" statement for Chelsea. I expect no less from a Tory supporting tax-dodger.

No mention of improving any of the facilities etc, but a specific mention of "no fresh debt" being placed on the club. In other words, we'll still be saddled with what the bastards leave behind.

And to top it all off, he's backed by two of the most grotesque firms on Wall Street.

Get fecked, Jim.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear. You are worried about the links to the Tories and Wall Street but currently have no qualms about the political ideology of the Qatari ruling elite?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.