Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
enghuei said:
Are you still undecided which bid you would favour?
Click to expand...

My default is to be absolutely 100% dead against state ownership.

But that said, we know next to nothing about either bid, despite the rumours & guesswork. No real bid can be made until due diligence is done. Maybe both look under the covers of Glazer ownership and think fuuuuuuuck that!!

INEOS may for all I know end up offering an absolutely terrible deal, so I can’t say I favour it. I can only say I don’t favour state ownership, should never have been allowed and absolutely has brought the game into disrepute.
 
stevoc said:
Maybe a final feck you from the Glazers to the fans that despise them?

Perhaps to fuel the idea that they are intending to stay to get the next round of bids a bit higher?

Who knows.
Click to expand...
Don’t think so. Every club is increasing, or most are. The club will operate as if it’s business as usual during the process.
 
stevoc said:
Maybe a final feck you from the Glazers to the fans that despise them?

Perhaps to fuel the idea that they are intending to stay to get the next round of bids a bit higher?

Who knows.
Click to expand...

Or maybe if you read the actual email that season tickets got it would make financial sense, just maybe....

40% increase in match day costs in the past 5 years obviously includes an even bigger jump with the Ukraine invasion and united pay the matchday staff the living wage not the national minimum wage and security costs in games have gone up 25% over the last 5 years.

On top of that united have covered 5% of the 10% inflation themselves.
 
stevoc said:
To be honest what evidence is there that any potential buyer will definitely wipe the clubs debt out beyond PR Guff?
Click to expand...
Absolutely, it is maybe only PR by the bidders. But even SJR PR could not guarantee nullifying the debt, in fact it was widely reported he will keep it.
I think after the Raine group statement, it will be difficult to know anything about the club's future plans by the bidders until everything is wrapped up. I am afraid we will be kept in the dark until then.
 
Bosws87 said:
Or maybe if you read the actual email that season tickets got it would make financial sense, just maybe....
Click to expand...

I didn't read that e-mail mate as I imagine they only sent it to season ticket holders.

Apologies if my criticism of the Glazers upset you.
 
cyberman said:
Because they still have to run the business like a business in case it isn’t sold. Plus you can add it to projected revenue to con some more from Qatar.
Big thinker is our Gary
Click to expand...
Precisely, if the Government, UEFA or the PL intervene and block Qatar's bid and Ineos (or these other private interested parties) don't raise their offer to what the Glazers deem acceptable then they will still be in charge. Think they have to just try to run things as BAU until the sale is complete or very near complete. Sale is still most likely but the process could collapse for a number of reasons.
 
Giggsyking said:
Absolutely, it is maybe only PR by the bidders. But even SJR PR could not guarantee nullifying the debt
Click to expand...

SJR/INEOS haven’t even had a chance to look at the club’s finances yet, they may be in fecking horrendous shape under this ownership.
It’d be serious malpractice for a Chairman or CEO of a bidding company to guarantee anything before doing due diligence. I’m sure people know this fact, but bizarrely want to ignore it because they see oil money money and want it so so badly.
 
Do you know what I think this thread really needs, another Twitter poll.
 
TrebleChamp99 said:


Sample Size - 55,000
Click to expand...

So to clarify 2/3 of voters are supporting a bid where we have no evidence of where the sufficient funds are coming from (unless those people are now willing to accept it is the state) and which is being made through a company that doesn't currently exist?
 
RORY65 said:
So to clarify 2/3 of voters are supporting a bid where we have no evidence of where the sufficient funds are coming from (unless those people are now willing to accept it is the state) and which is being made through a company that doesn't currently exist?
Click to expand...

:lol:

They are supporting it for the good of the club I’ll have you know.
 
RORY65 said:
So to clarify 2/3 of voters are supporting a bid where we have no evidence of where the sufficient funds are coming from (unless those people are now willing to accept it is the state) and which is being made through a company that doesn't currently exist?
Click to expand...

Yes, but MBAAAAPPEEEEEE!
 
Giggsyking said:
Yeah that is a very small sample and specifically designated to one geographical area. It is no representative of the global united fan base. I have seen large polls of 50 and 60k on known global fans accounts all in favor of Qatar.
Click to expand...

A Scandinavian poll of Scandinavian supporters paid Manchester United members isn’t representative of the global fanbase?
Are you the real Mr. Holmes?
 
owlo said:
How so? If these are peoples feelings, how is it ridiculous? How does it not further the conversation? Assuming you did believe he was a chancer and parasite who would saddle the club with debt, would it change your view on whether to support Qatar over him? Because there are logical and reasonable reasons to think he is both of those things. I don't see how it's 'ridiculous' or 'vitriolic,' any more than 'qatar are a horrible state' (reasonable opinion/true) and 'its state sportswashing (also reasonable/true) are.
Click to expand...
Because 1) that kind of childish name calling is coming mostly from the pro-Qatar types and is invariably followed by ‘oil me up!’ It’s immature.
2) The facts we do have directly disprove the claim that INEOS cannot afford us, and they would saddle the club with more debt - yet it is being repeated ad nauseum.

I have no problem with people doubting his bid, but those with genuine concerns express that without name calling and childish insults.
 
Giggsyking said:
Yeah that is a very small sample and specifically designated to one geographical area. It is no representative of the global united fan base. I have seen large polls of 50 and 60k on known global fans accounts all in favor of Qatar.
Click to expand...

I think a supporters group probably represents the wider fanbase better given we can be pretty sure they are actually United fans, while a twitter poll could include fans of any club and most likely involves people trolling.
 
Tom Van Persie said:
Click to expand...

Probably more to do with producing more optimistic forecasts for the club.

Neville thinks they’re not only going to stay which in itself would result in major protests but also put prices up at the same time?

The alternative is that this isn’t really a Glazer decision and is just down to the same cost of living crisis that has even seen McDonalds raising prices for the first time in 15 years.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
If anyone buys us that has 2bn-ish a year profits, on top of us already being the biggest club in the World, and FFP finally starting to do it’s job. Absolutely we can, we’d in fact be stronger than anyone.
Unless the states keep cheating of course.
Click to expand...

That's a very naive way to see things.

A- No business will just pump billions into a club especially after collecting 800m in debt. A solid business would re-invest its money wisely usually to remain competitive or to enter/consolidate into markets that have a huge ROI. United is simply a passion. Such action unless backed by solid plans (ex selling the investment in 2-3 year for twice the money) would spook the markets, INEOS shareholders (ok Ratcliffe is the majority shareholder but there are others) and it would spook the banks as well.

B- INEOS is involved into a lot of sports ventures including 2 other football clubs. The 'SJR' Passion/hobby fund will need to sustain them all.

C- INEOS has yet to show that amount of financial commitment to any football club. INEOS had poorly managed its football clubs and the investment was, quite frankly, meah

Until state ownership will remain then they'll be the top dogs. They have more money then everyone (bar the truly big guys like Amazon) and they have the influence to change things in a way that accommodates them. We've already seen how QATAR was able to bring a WC home.
 
devilish said:
That's a very naive way to see things.

A- No business will just pump billions into a club especially after collecting 800m in debt. A solid business would re-invest its money wisely usually to remain competitive or to enter/consolidate into markets that have a huge ROI. United is simply a passion. Such action unless backed by solid plans (ex selling the investment in 2-3 year for twice the money) would spook the markets, INEOS shareholders (ok Ratcliffe is the majority shareholder but there are others) and it would spook the banks as well.

B- INEOS is involved into a lot of sports ventures including 2 other football clubs. The 'SJR' Passion/hobby fund will need to sustain them all.

C- INEOS has yet to show that amount of financial commitment to any football club. INEOS had poorly managed its football clubs and the investment was, quite frankly, meah

Until state ownership will remain then they'll be the top dogs. They have more money then everyone (bar the truly big guys like Amazon) and they have the influence to change things in a way that accommodates them. We've already seen how QATAR was able to bring a WC home.
Click to expand...

I’ll stop you right there, feck me Dev…. This far in and you still think INEOS is a plc, as in public, with floated shares? :lol:
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
I’ll stop you right there, feck me Dev…. This far in and you still think INEOS is a plc, as in public, with floated shares? :lol:
Click to expand...

Its not a PLC but its still accountable to other shareholders. Do you think Andy Currie and John Reece will be happy with SJR playing football manager with their own money especially if they aren't Red/blue fans themselves.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
I’ll stop you right there, feck me Dev…. This far in and you still think INEOS is a plc, as in public, with floated shares? :lol:
Click to expand...
This is exactly what is winding me up so much. People assume they know what’s going on and make scenarios in their head to get irate about.
Worse still it then gets parroted all over social and becomes ‘fact’.:rolleyes:
 
Plant0x84 said:
This is exactly what is winding me up so much. People assume they know what’s going on and make scenarios in their head to get irate about.
Worse still it then gets parroted all over social and becomes ‘fact’.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Errm, devilish never said that they are a PLC, just that they have other shareholders, which is a fact.
 
Giggsyking said:
No, it is representative of one small geographical area.
Sorry but, but do you know what global means? Global means the whole globe, not one small geographic area. To make polls more accurate it should be inclusive. There is a reason the other polls that had no geographic barriers were in favor of Qatar. United have a fan base of about 650 m. Scandinavia represent less than 1% of the united fan count.
I live in Sweden, knowing them I am surprised that Qatar got even few votes.
Click to expand...

Are you lot playing stupid?

:lol:

no shit a Scandinavian poll is only representative of Scandinavia.

What the holy feck :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.