You forgot Taksin Shinawatra.
City are the first club to be bought twice by state money. First time it was embezzled.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
City are the first club to be bought twice by state money. First time it was embezzled.
I'm also totally not cynical about Gary Neville recently doing the rounds heavily defending Manchesters City's ownership and their structure, despite their 100+ charges of cheating, a structure that could be similar to the Qatar ownership model. Does he have any business interests over there?
This is the camp i'm in right now.
I think he’s probably just in favour of being able to do similar with his club.
At least you are honest.
Jeez I now realise how Kevin Keegan would had probably felt.
Wrong thread
I can appreciate those who care more about football than who owns the club and therefore welcome the richest bidder, in this case Qatar.
I do not appreciate those who are doing mental gymnastics and are throwing out allegations of rasicm and whataboutism to defend the regime. This is what they want from buying United. There are thousands of Newcastle fans defending Saudi Arabia. There are tens of City fans defending the UAE. There will be millions of United fans defending Qatar just because they buy us nice things.
If we end up state owned I will be done supporting the club.
I do not appreciate those who are doing mental gymnastics and are throwing out allegations of rasicm and whataboutism to defend the regime. This is what they want from buying United. There are thousands of Newcastle fans defending Saudi Arabia. There are tens of City fans defending the UAE. There will be millions of United fans defending Qatar just because they buy us nice things.
If we end up state owned I will be done supporting the club.
All this talk of sports washing.
How about social investing.... green washing?
How about social investing.... green washing?
Nobody thinks that any of the bidders will be good people (you don't have that wealth without almost certainly being a cnut) but there are varying degrees to it. Personally I don't think a state should own a football club and don't want them owning United.
There is no evidence a state has bid.
Apart from the guy who has bid being a relative of the emir, seemingly having nowhere near the assets to do so and the main shareholders of the bank of which he is the chairman being QIA.
You don't seriously believe this. Nobody does. It's the most transparent attempt to deny reality.
So no evidence of state bidding/ownership. Just you adding 2 + 2 together and getting way more than you should..
What you create in your mind is yours..
He’s separate from the state in the same way City’s sponsors are.
And you denying reality doesn't make it so.
A state actor, using state funds is state ownership. There's absolutely nothing about the absolute monarchy controlled economy of Qatar that makes private wealth on the scale required to buy United possible. It's a state bid obfuscated to get around dual ownership rules, even the most shameless of those who want the Qatar bid to succeed acknowledge this. You're kidding nobody.
Oh and @city-puma here's another one.
If he's not the state, then the bid should be dismissed from the off because he's a nobody who doesn't have 5 billy.
You're an expert in ME states and able to conduct comparison analysis?
You seem to be making this up as you go along.
Are we dismissing SJRs?
He's the son of the former PM, who works for a state owned bank, funded by a state owned SWF. You're lying to yourself because the truth is uncomfortable.
No, he's a somebody whose activities are in public record and have been for decades. This guy is just his dad's son.
You don't know me from Adam, pull your comment in.
Many people have networks.. SJR is close to the UK government. That isn't evidence of funding, it's suggestion of historical networks.
Worked for Madrid
Especially with Rashford as a 9 now. Both would finally have support on their breaks since someone else could keep up!
Which Madrid lineup are you referring to?
Nope, no can do. It's abundantly obvious.
Being the son of the former PM and current employee of the state owned bank isn't "having historical networks". You know this, the truth is simply too embarrassing for you to admit.
Hopefully we get decent owners and he doesn’t end up going to PSG
I really hope we get good owners to continue the progress we are seeing. INEOS to me just doesn’t feel right.
INEOS most profitable year was 2021, just when crude oil a key ingredient in 90% plus of its products were at lowest level prices due to the pandemic.
I’m curious to see how they do in 2022 and 2023 when Crude oil has been at highs.
I’m curious to see how they do in 2022 and 2023 when Crude oil has been at highs.
That's suggestion of historical networks nothing more..
Q3 reported profit is down approx. 500m
That's not even what the word "historical" means. Deep down you must think you're better than telling yourself this lie.
Ah yes, because relationships are static.
https://www.fitchratings.com/research/corporate-finance/ineos-quattro-holdings-limited-21-12-2022
2.1bn forecast.
That’s 4.3 bn euros in 2 years… absolutely rolling in it. Though listen to the caf & you’d think Jim’s a skint ”chancer”.
Those historical connections being currently being the main shareholders in the bank of which he is the chairman? Or historically, and in fact still currently, being a relative of the Emir?
Being a current employee of the fund which is providing the money for the deal is not a historical relationship. You know this, you just can't admit publicly that it's a deal funded and driven by a state because ethically you find that uncomfortable.
And you should, it's abhorrent
Can we have a simple poll please... Ratcliffe or Qatar?
- Status