They own 17.2% iirc. I posted a thread with a bit of a dive into the bid the other day. Should be good to go yes. Looks designed in a way that they've already consulted UEFA etc.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
They own 17.2% iirc. I posted a thread with a bit of a dive into the bid the other day. Should be good to go yes. Looks designed in a way that they've already consulted UEFA etc.
I’m almost 60 years old and I want what’s best for the club from a financial standpoint.
That means no debt. No dividends. A owner who owns 100% of the club and see this as a long term investment. A owner with visions about our academy, men and women’s team and a detailed plan regarding building a new stadium and invest in our infrastructure.
With that in mind only one bid is attractive and the second bid is frankly underwhelming and bad from so many perspectives.
Everything I read about Ratcliffe turns me off.
He just seems like a greedy businessman with questionable morals and a person who has a history of being not trustworthy. Living in Monaco and talking about Manchester back to Manchester United is what a real hypocrite does.
From everything I read and understand the bid from Qatar is by far the best from a financial perspective. There’re issues regarding how they look at our HBQTI community but on the other hand if we look at PSG then this questions shouldn’t be a problem.
We can’t expect every citizen in Qatar to be hold accountable for their country’s history and laws. We don’t expect that from ourselves. We have no idea where they stand in these questions. Let’s wait and see how they answer all the critical questions that will follow if they end up as new owners. After that we can judge them.
My vote goes 100% to Qatar. Not even one second of hesitation.
That means no debt. No dividends. A owner who owns 100% of the club and see this as a long term investment. A owner with visions about our academy, men and women’s team and a detailed plan regarding building a new stadium and invest in our infrastructure.
With that in mind only one bid is attractive and the second bid is frankly underwhelming and bad from so many perspectives.
Everything I read about Ratcliffe turns me off.
He just seems like a greedy businessman with questionable morals and a person who has a history of being not trustworthy. Living in Monaco and talking about Manchester back to Manchester United is what a real hypocrite does.
From everything I read and understand the bid from Qatar is by far the best from a financial perspective. There’re issues regarding how they look at our HBQTI community but on the other hand if we look at PSG then this questions shouldn’t be a problem.
We can’t expect every citizen in Qatar to be hold accountable for their country’s history and laws. We don’t expect that from ourselves. We have no idea where they stand in these questions. Let’s wait and see how they answer all the critical questions that will follow if they end up as new owners. After that we can judge them.
My vote goes 100% to Qatar. Not even one second of hesitation.
People say this stuff but a large majority of our fans are on Twitter. Just because anonymity makes it a shit show doesn't mean it's not a fair reflection of what people want.
Agree fully.
United wouldn’t be servicing that debt though, hence it wouldn’t figure in any FFP regardless.
I think you've highlighted the point right there. If you want to fight for human rights in Qatar then good for you, but it should be treated separately from your support of Manchester United given the context mentioned above.
I think most of us feel this way to be honest. We will never condone the actions of a state that discriminates against people but it's ultimately nothing to do with us. I don't agree with it and never will, but I want what's best for United and what's best for United is the Qatar bid at the moment. INEOS and Jim have to clear up a lot of doubts before I'm onboard with their offer. I want clear plans of action that they can be held accountable to before I would agree to their ownership.
Are they? Twitter clearly isn't representative of any group of people, we know that by now.
People don’t, but the state itself is behind this so the point is moot.
Yes, for now. If he needs a loan to buy the debt out at 500m. Where is he going to get the money to improve the club? New Stadium, training ground, womens team, youth?
That’s not an issue apparently
Small-minded much you?
Plenty of us ex pats are still extremely affectionate of our roots, plenty of us still got teary eyed at Tony Walsh’s “The is the place” poem etc.
The subject of the conversation was whether we could stand on our own two feet when we were debt free. I was talking about a situation where we didn't have any debt and was using this season to show how that would be possible, given we'd be in a much better position without debt.
Ratcliffe isn’t though.
Nope. Happened to Burnley only 3-4 seasons ago
You know this how? Have you, by chance, done a poll on say... Twitter?
He's hardly an expat for Monaco is he. It's a perfectly valid point from him. Making this a British or Manchester thing when he personally fecked off is kind of... funny.
For those accusations that the Athletic aren’t being balanced.
One thing you have to wonder about this Qatari bid is who if anyone is supposed to be a part of the bid other than the Main guy reported.
Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?
Edit: I know the obvious answer I just mean I wonder where they are claiming it's coming from.
Only reason I ask this is because his Net Worth is apparently no where near enough to buy us outright. So where is the money coming from?
Edit: I know the obvious answer I just mean I wonder where they are claiming it's coming from.
Last edited:
That’s not an issue apparently
It’s obviously not for a company that generates revenues of 2bn-ish a year man. As mentioned previously, they could service debt to the tune of 4.5 times our current debt servicing and their bottomline would change from €2,100,000,000 to €2,020,000,000
I heard he used to work in a car wash and came into a little money so he bought it and now he’s fairly wealthy.
If you genuinely think this isn't a state backed bid then fair enough mate.
On a completely unrelated note I have a bridge I'm looking to sell. Would you be interested?
I wouldn’t know.
eh?
Take Ratcliffe out of the equation and just imagine INEOS we’re buying us themselves. Would people look at that deal any differently and any more sceptically?It’s obviously not for a company that generates revenues of 2bn-ish a year man. As mentioned previously, they could service debt to the tune of 4.5 times our current debt servicing and their bottomline would change from £2,100,000,000 to £2,020,000,000
Ratcliffe won’t be around for that much longer and then it becomes about profit for them just like a hedge fund or investment capital company.
You act like you do
I don’t think we need Jessica Fletcher for this one
You what? I'm saying that Twitter is not a representative sample of the views of people in general. Is that not fair?
INEOS and SJR were everyone’s knight in shining armour a year ago, the only thing that has changed is people are seduced by state ownership.
You made the point that, as an ex pat, you are still affectionate of your roots. My point is Ratcliffe isn't an ex pat. Nor did he have any other noble reason to leave England. He went to Monaco to save tax. The tory cnut. And now he is talking about bringing Manchester back to Manchester. Pretty bold.
Unquestionable that for the clubs finances and investment, Qatar is far and away the best option, morality aside.
If you want that which is best for the club ie no debt, investment in the local community, investment in all areas of the club then Qatar represents far and away the best option, it is essentially everything that anyone else cannot bring to the table, I get the feeling Utd will be Qatar's for around £5.8 billion in the next month or so, the glazers will not be refusing that kind of money.
Don’t worry about that pal, he’s good for money.
Not INEOS though. People are only not questioning that as much due to Ratcliffe. He’s an obvious bluffer.
Ratcliffe himself arguably goes against the ideals of Manchester United just as much as Qatar.
You'd maybe hesitate if you'd been employed as a migrant worker over there, to be fair.
I don’t, but plenty are adamant they do, just as per your previous post.
I’ve actually even said multiple times we don’t even know enough yet about the bids, I hold reservations, the INEOS bid may well turn out to be rubbish. We have no detail on any bid mind.
How do you know that? For politics, it's well established that Twitter is an echo chamber (because of actual polls being carried out called elections) but where's your evidence that this is the case for football and our fanbase, in particular.
You have shown no evidence, so I am asking you how you've made that assumption, unless, of course, it's just wishful thinking
Is this a genuine question mate?
If so then obviously it's coming from the Qatari state and it's being presented as a private endeavour to get around UEFA rules.
- Status