I agree, but the only measure of success the Qataris will want in their competition with the Saudis and Emiratis, is the actual acquisition of United. What happens after will be of lesser consequence. We will of course probably win more than City and Newcastle, but there will be little pressure on the Qataris to deliver on their rhetoric (infrastructure development, supporting the Women's team etc).
I mean that's what Ratcliffe/Ineos are doing yet they somehow already bottled it in their statement which has got people that were against Qatar saying "maybe Qatar would be better for the club'
Haven’ t Qateris bid 5b? And basically said it’ll go up after a closer look at our financials?They were never getting anywhere near £6-7b, so they either accept the highest offer on the table or they better prepare themselves for a shitstorm of monumental proportions that will be heading their way.
Honestly depends who and on what terms but for now I would say no. I wasn't a fan of us going to the stock market and the money we made mostly was blown on terrible ideas and transfers. We came back to where we were under Bosz and ETH because of smart decisions by Overmars and Cruijff helping to rejuvenate the academy. I rather have a smart new DoF than a few hundred million that is hard to spend on quality players because most don't want to play in the Eredivisie anyways so we should focus on creating them as we've always done.Would you be ok with a Dutch or European billionaire?
My best friend works at the Connaught in London and he said the glazers met the qataris there this morning
Yeah it was a terrible statement. The Qatari one was light years better imo.
I guess on the last point, from my POV, I would be happy for us to be purely self sufficient (apart from the initial investment to clear our debts, start the redevelopment of the infrastructure)... But generally I don't think United needs owner funding for transfers and am fine if an owner doesn't plan on doing that. I am fine if an owner plans on making us smartly managed, keeps all money within the club and doesn't invest his own money (past the initial getting us up to speed off the pitch). I think United are more than capable of seriously challenging in a setup like that.It's possible, but at least Qatar have made clear statements about investment in infrastructure, the stadium and all our football teams. INEOS have not mentioned any of that in their statement, simply a vague mention of investing which could mean anything. There has also been an article from a while ago mentioning that Qatar wanted to back ETH with big investment which would suggest he should at least be safe under Qatari ownership.
In terms of Nice they were already finishing in roughly the same positions in the league consistently before INEOS took over. You would expect with the money that company would put into the club that they would show some signs of improvement. Also, any Nice fans I've seen talk about Ratcliffe and INEOS don't like him at all and think he's done a poor job. They're better sources than you or me frankly.
It's not irrelevant if the owner of our club has significant debt to repay, because whether he's taking money directly out of Utd or not, he'll be losing money that he could have been investing into the club, its infrastructure, the women's team, the academy, the stadium, etc.
100% right. I'll vote for you.English football history is coming to an end. If Manchester United is bought by some of these dictators in the Middle East, our club is unfortunately 100% identical to Manchester City.
Absolutely all titles from the day a possible purchase is carried out belong to the dictators.
The FA can burn in he*l if they allow this purchase. English football is coming to an end, dictators in the Middle East are taking over.
Manchester City is dead and buried, it has become Mansour's. In the same way, Manchester United will be nothing more than Hamad's if the purchase goes through.
Haven’ t Qateris bid 5b? And basically said it’ll go up after a closer look at our financials?
I think you were missing my point, big man. It wasn't chest pumping. It was being honest and if you think Ajax was always doing well just look at us between 2000 and 2010 when we made loads of money by going to the stock market and all we got was PSV becoming champions for 5 or 6 times while we struggled to even qualify for CL football.I chuckled when that Ajax fan was thumping his chest as if he was making a winning point. They are the richest club in their league by a mile. They have excellent facilities and are run very well by their current establishment. They win their league more often than not while playing good football.
I think we should gift them a Glazers takeover once they get their billions from us. Would be fun watching that very lot.
@IWat is perfectly entitled to say that. I agree with him, and I agree with @Berbasbullet as regards the replies. A new low in the Caf. Horrible agendas in here.Sorry to hear that mate, and sorry about the replies you're getting. Completely understand why you would feel that way.
No, there's been an enormous amount of "they didn't complain about the Qatar WC but now they want to stop us" from prominent fan mouthpieces which has been repeated by the masses. There's no way you could have missed it.No, fans are simply reading the statements of both potential buyers outlining their plans and vision for the club and making their minds up based on that.
Haven’ t Qateris bid 5b? And basically said it’ll go up after a closer look at our financials?
Don't think so. IF the final valuation of the club is £5b, the winning bidder would "only" need to fork out £3.5b for the Glazer's 70% share (is this percentage correct?) of the club.So anyone a takes over will have a 70% majority. Essentially it's £5b for 70 odd percentage?
We'd have to press Jim on how the stadium and surrounding area can be improved/built, how this is financed and how will it affect summer spending.
Debt isn't inherently bad but there's lots of ways it can be depending on many factors. We had all this 101 business talk how this is normal, don't be scared of debt some fans said when the Glazers sunk the club into debt. It's had a huge effect and really when people talk about debt in purchases it's usually to the beneficiary of the owner to make use of money elsewhere and many people/companies get consumed with debt and go into administration or scrape along getting nowhere fast over decades. All depends how you end up paying in interest then the debt each year, the rates and how it affects your yearly operation. Success can offset that but United have been poor and missed out so much CL, sponsorship and other prize money while needing to spend more just to keep tabs with the increasing pressure of clubs around us.
We need a breakdown of how much the club is paying now, how much we'd be paying directly or indirectly through Ineos what kind of interest and debt do we need to pay for stadium/facility improvements, does this extend to the womens side.
I suspect we'd be heavily hampered and in 5-10 years time time we'll be holding the short straw while Pool and Spurs take on middle eastern backing.
To those who keep parroting debt is fine. United have paid around 800m in interest, once rising to 16% and pay around 20m per year today and still have 500m to pay back. United have been hugely hampered just so a family could own United. We've missed out on so much money that could've paid for 90k stadium and area revamp twice over in the last 17 years. We're also facing debt free state clubs that will probably increase. United currently pay around 40m per year in interest and dividends.
Debt has strangled Manchester United, we had no reason to go into debt unless someone that couldn't afford us had some selfish desire to and could convince the banks. Plunging us into debt and strangling us only helped the Glazer family funds elsewhere. We didn't need that type owner.
Used to own Milan. Not great I don’t thinkInteresting.
Did they look happy?
> Details of its proposal are as yet unclear but could involve Elliott taking a stake in the club, providing debt funding, or a mix of the two. The Raine Group is running the sales process on behalf of United’s owners, the Glazer family, who have come under pressure from fans to offload the club. The deal is being led by a small team in Elliott’s London office.
Don't think so. IF the final valuation of the club is £5b, the winning bidder would "only" need to fork out £3.5b for the Glazer's 70% share (is this percentage correct?) of the club.
That's simply not true and Ducker also confirmed it. Anyone buying from Raine group is buying majority ownership. The rest of the shares are purchased separately.Romano and his quest for clicks. If they wanted full control it would have said that. It was worded "majority" for a reason. Ratcliffe thinks he'll be able to win the bid by keeping the Glazers on with a minority stake.
It won’t be.Absolutely not. This mustn't be allowed to happen under any circumstances whatsoever.
Oh goodie, an American Hedge fund.
Please can they feck off.
What do you make of the INEOS bid?I agree, but the only measure of success the Qataris will want in their competition with the Saudis and Emiratis, is the actual acquisition of United. What happens after will be of lesser consequence. We will of course probably win more than City and Newcastle, but they will be under little pressure on the Qataris to deliver on their rhetoric (infrastructure development, supporting the Women's team etc).
Used to own Milan. Not great I don’t think
