Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
mono-math said:
Pre world cup bid, hardly anyone knew anything about Qatar. Foreign Direct Investment in Qatar has more than tripled since 2020, and in per capita terms, it is currently 4th in the world for FDI. It has jumped from 10th to 3rd for Middle Eastern and North African countries since 2021.

US companies are investing 5 times as much as they did pre pandemic. You just have to switch your TV on and you'll see visit Qatar adverts on during every single ad break. Who would have visited Qatar 10 years ago? There is a massive campaign going on to make Qatar seem like a lovely place to visit (which I'm sure it is for Westerns) while migrant workers are treated like slaves and native LGBTQ+ people hide "underground". None of this would have happened without the world cup hype or PSG ownership, at least not to this extent. Buying Man Utd is, as you rightfully point out, the next step as they look to, in my view, launder their reputation internationally, and acquire more soft power.

I completely understand why they are doing it. It's helping them diversify their economy and bringing significant foregin investment in to the country. My issue is, based on how they treat a significant proportion of their population, I'm not sure if we should be doing business with them and I certainly don't think Man Utd should be the friendly face of Qatar.
Click to expand...

Clearly their investments in football are part of a wider strategy of diversifying their economy in preparation for the day the gas runs out. I don't think we're disagreeing on anything here, just on the whether their aims satisfy the definition of sports washing.

Like I've said, as far as I know the definition of sports washing is a PR exercise to hide, for example, human rights abuses, with positive media coverage brought by being associated with a sports team. That clearly isn't their aim, and even if it was the World Cup demonstrated that investing in sports is counter productive as the World Cup brought huge media coverage of their exploitation of migrant workers, and they must know that owning a club the size of United will bring increased media scrutiny.
 
I’ve caught up a bit.

Im very very concerned by the American Hedge fund but hopefully Qatar can outprice them
 
Chief123 said:


“Sheikh Jassim Bin Hamad Al Thani today confirmed his submission of a bid for 100 percent of Manchester Utd football club”.

At least do some research before speaking with so much conviction. You’ve spent the whole day rambling on for pages arguing something you have very little information on like a disturbed teenager with condescending posts at anyone who disagrees with you. You’re like a bumble bee stuck in a honey jar frustrated with no wings. Take a break.
Click to expand...


Keep your hair on lad….


bosnian_red said:
Click to expand...



The Qataris may well make a bid for the remaining A shares, but they aren’t part of this bidding process was all I said.
 
Inappropriate meme image
jm99 said:
"INEOS' 36 businesses produce a huge variety of products related to and used in oil and gas, chemicals and polymers"
Click to expand...

To add to this

DELETED.

Reminder - No memes in the football forums
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jm99 said:
"INEOS' 36 businesses produce a huge variety of products related to and used in oil and gas, chemicals and polymers"
Click to expand...

That's dishonest Ineos also provided them with their EPS technology. It's a real partnership.
 
owlo said:
I think fresh equity can be injected to cover them. (Else you could never build anything unless you take it as a loan which you pay back over decades with the deviation allowed.)

his next tweet says:

Click to expand...


Thanks. Yeah, makes more sense. Otherwise, it would be really hard for new owners.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I read that there will be 2-3 more rounds of bidding?

Didn’t they want to sell the club by April?
Click to expand...
I think a reporter said there could be 2-3 rounds in total, but to be honest this whole process is so opaque to the extent that it's a day later and we don't know how many bids were even made, it's hard to be sure of anything at the moment.
 
jm99 said:
It's a much larger opportunity cost because of the quality capitalism works, the returns you can get on 6bn is enormous if put in safe, steady investments. Like I said this is a guy who was a brexiteer, he promoted a policy that's fecked the country but might help the super rich make a bit more. When you reach that level of money you're greedy, because anyone normal would retire with a couple hundred million to their own private island. They wouldn't use their wealth to push for policies that make every one else poorer while making themselves richer.

So no, the opportunity cost on 6bn is fecking massive, and it means he expects to profit from united
Click to expand...

You're missing the point, still claiming massive opportunity cost, which to be fair for a 6b investment there certainly is under normal circumstances. The problem for your argument here is these are not normal circumstances.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
I know, I’m just making a wider point that people likely wouldn’t be against BP buying us either. It’s state ownership that many struggle with, like myself.
Click to expand...

I think there would be serious pushback against BP, maybe not previously but in light of all the articles about record profits while our energy bills skyrocket, I'd wager right now most brits hate them way more than qatar
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
You're missing the point, still claiming massive opportunity cost, which to be fair for a 6b investment there certainly is under normal circumstances. The problem for your argument here is these are not normal circumstances.
Click to expand...

Yeah but you're thinking like a regular person not a billionaire. These are people with more money than you can spend in 1000 lifetimes and yet like in america they lobby Congress to keep minimum wage lower, to make things worse for poor people, all to make themselves the tiniest bit richer
 
So seriously speaking, what is our best option?

- Qatar is fecking qatar
- Americans are mostly leeches and idiots
- Rattclife is basically an undercover American like Richard Hammond
- Glazers seem to not give a feck anymore or not have enough money to take us further
- Musk is a madman

However you look at it, we're in deep shit.
 
As a mod has just mentioned. Can we stick to football only? In which case I imagine we all unanimously agree Qatar is the best and most desired bid by fans?
 
jm99 said:
Yeah but you're thinking like a regular person not a billionaire. These are people with more money than you can spend in 1000 lifetimes and yet like in america they lobby Congress to keep minimum wage lower, to make things worse for poor people, all to make themselves the tiniest bit richer
Click to expand...

Regular people would rightly recognize the very large opportunity cost of plunging 6b into a football club that's not going to deliver an acceptable return on investment rather than something more profitable.

Very wealthy people will encounter situations where the opportunity cost of not moving on a 6b investment, even one with little prospect of acceptable return on that investment, is the greater one despite their tendency to want to accumulate more wealth.
 
jm99 said:
The post I replied to literally said

"Not everyone is greedy for oil money"
Click to expand...
The term usually implied people or states who happen to be born or located on top of vast amounts. And have a tendency to do whatever they want with their own rules. Not just anyone who deals in oil.
 
jm99 said:
Yeah but you're thinking like a regular person not a billionaire. These are people with more money than you can spend in 1000 lifetimes and yet like in america they lobby Congress to keep minimum wage lower, to make things worse for poor people, all to make themselves the tiniest bit richer
Click to expand...

And all that so they can buy lavish yachts, expensive homes, and fund some daft hobbies or daft business. For the likes of Ballmer & Abramovich, it was/is sports teams, for Bransen it’s been “space travel”, for Musk it’s his favourite social media app etc.

Hell, Warren Buffet, George Soros, Julian Robertson jr. John Arnold, Amos Hostetter Jr., Gordon Moore, and Lynn Schusterman are among the most philanthropic billionaires, giving away 20% or more of their wealth.
 
well this Eliot news is a bit of a shitter to wake up to

but it’s really vague, they’re not bidding alone but getting involved in some way, potentially to finance the Glazers? Or something?

maybe this is just the Glazers getting their mates involved to get themselves a bit more leverage in negotiations?
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
Because so many are sooooo desperate for ME money, they are desperately trying to find anything wrong with the INEOS bid.
Doesn’t matter how many time it’s explained, they want to throw shit at INEOS.
Click to expand...
Let's face it, it doesn't take much to find things wrong with the Jimbo/Ineos bid.
 
Wumminator said:
Do we really have people claiming the fans at the games are not the most important fans? Is that where we are in this debate?
Click to expand...
In terms of financial opportunity they're not, they may be the heart and soul of the club but they're not the gold at the end of the rainbow
 
youmeletsfly said:
So seriously speaking, what is our best option?

- Qatar is fecking qatar
- Americans are mostly leeches and idiots
- Rattclife is basically an undercover American like Richard Hammond
- Glazers seem to not give a feck anymore or not have enough money to take us further
- Musk is a madman

However you look at it, we're in deep shit.
Click to expand...

Any of Qatar or Ratcliffe is 100000% better than now.
 
Dr. Dwayne said:
Regular people would rightly recognize the very large opportunity cost of plunging 6b into a football club that's not going to deliver an acceptable return on investment rather than something more profitable.

Very wealthy people will encounter situations where the opportunity cost of not moving on a 6b investment, even one with little prospect of acceptable return on that investment, is the greater one despite their tendency to want to accumulate more wealth.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't, look at Elon Musk. He massively overpaid for twitter because he was a big fan or for memes o whatever. Twitter represents far less of musks wealth than we would of Jim's and yet he's immediately started cost cutting in every area he can.

But what is the opportunity for Ratcliffe in not buying us, he wanted to buy Chelsea I'm sure Liverpool and Arsenal or spurs would be available for much less and more able to recoup his returns
 
Chief123 said:
As a mod has just mentioned. Can we stick to football only? In which case I imagine we all unanimously agree Qatar is the best and most desired bid by fans?
Click to expand...

It obviously isn't only about football, so I don't see why we should do that.
 
mu4c_20le said:
The term usually implied people or states who happen to be born or located on top of vast amounts. And have a tendency to do whatever they want with their own rules. Not just anyone who deals in oil.
Click to expand...

Yeah i just thought it was a bit funny that you wanted to avoid oil money by going with a company that deals in oil.
 
Nou_Camp99 said:
Ah that sounds like we're talking about serious intellectual debates then. Hahahaha.

Let's be honest.... people want Qatar because they are the richest. There's nothing else to it. If Jim was the richest everyone would want him.

I don't want to be a ME play thing personally but it's out of my hands.
Click to expand...
It is not (just) about who is the richest. People want Qatari because they will not put profit as priority. They will invest. Because they look at this as a "plaything" and i don't see why it is a bad thing.
Meanwhile Sir Jim bids for majority ownership and brings banks with him. He and they will seek for a profit. Just like Glazers did.

Sugar daddy》》businessman
 
jm99 said:
No one would have bid for Chelsea if it was 4.5bn plus an extra 1.5bn investment. Yes we're more valuable, but that extra 2bn makes it far more difficult to become profitable.
Click to expand...
Not really, United have a much larger fan base to profit from, they have a much larger stadium to generate income from
 
Status
Not open for further replies.