Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
:lol::lol::lol:

This is surely a piss take?
Maybe? But this is also true, if you believe it otherwise you just live in a top 5 league nation, and are totally unaware of how football is outside. Football isn’t a morally sound industry. But yeah, this above is more to do with having enough of this dumb unimportant drivel. I support united and will continue supporting no matter if the owners are Caritas or Kim Jong-un.
 
Agree. With all this stuff going on in the world, you’ve got to be kidding me. People are saying this and others are saying that, it’s unbelievable.

There’s no middle ground anymore, there’s folks over here and other folks somewhere else. I mean what are you supposed to do with that ?

When did everything get so extreme ? We’ve got one group saying it should be like this and another group saying it should be done differently, you can’t win with these people!
Whoa you really don’t sit on the fence. Well it’s not so much a fence as a curb. Can you even say fence any more? Either way, or one way, who knows. Well, they know, but the others don’t know.
 
Man, this thread is the dream of posters who love to tell us how moral they are and can expound their political ideals. It's like politics these days one side or the other, no in-between just get attacked by small percentage of people who ruin it for everyone else.
It’s mainly the dream of posters who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
 
Brilliant. You've gone from "most clubs are owned by mobsters" to one club that nobody has ever heard of and, by the sounds of your post, in the past.

As s more general comment, I honestly don't think that people realise how bad this is for the club. In fact, I think the concept of "club" is gone. Its just sad.

So? If its a club you didn’t hear about is it not real? Does it not have supporters? And what if it was in the past? I struggle to understand your point. I definitely won’t do research to further validate a forum opinion.

As a general question, can you honestly do anything about it? If not, just make a decision for yourself if you want to continue supporting who ever you support (club or sport in general) and be done with it if the takeover happens.
 
Not sure your point makes sense…How many times have Porto/inter/Chelsea been in the CL and how many times have they actually won it? That indicates it’s pretty hard.

That’s not the point the best team doesn’t always win the Champions league you don’t have to be good to be lucky!

PSG = None
City = None

SAF = 2 in his entire career
Pep = 2 in his entire career, none for over 12 years despite spending over a billion quid.
Klopp = 1 in his entire career

Arsenal = none in entire history of club
Juve = 2 in entire history of club

Safe to say it’s hard to win. That doesn’t mean you can’t have a season from nowhere where everything seems to just fall into place mind.

I mean, Inter in 2010 won everything, one of only 6 European team to ever win the treble, they were an incredible team so no idea why you idea them? And otherwise what? You’ve offered
3 examples from 30 years of CL football and think you’ve proven a point, you’ve in fact, with that, proven yourself wrong :confused:

Calling that Inter team "incredible" is a massive exaggeration. They parked the bus and it worked. I never said it wasn't hard to win the champions league, my point is the best team doesn't always win like Real last year. Is that a more recent example for you? Don't answer that I only get 3 messages a day and I don't want to hear more about Arsenal never winning the Champions league.. Honestly you should know better!!
 
Last edited:
We can be against them but unfortunately the club will go to the highest bidder be it Ineos, Qatar or US condominium. And thats because the Glazers are twats, they never cared much about the club so why should they now?
 
I wonder if the govt white paper is being studied by prospective bidders

Prospective bidders will be taking a close look. Along with the ESL stuff, this seems pertinent (from the BBC article):

The regulator will introduce an "enhanced" test which will replace the current process implemented by the Premier League, Football League and Football Association.

According to the government, it will lead to "ensuring good custodians of clubs, stronger due diligence on sources of wealth and a requirement for robust financial planning".

The suitability of Premier League's owners' and directors' test has been criticised in the past, most recently following the Saudi Arabian-backed takeover of Newcastle.

Amnesty International urged the league to change the test to address human rights issues, with the Saudi state accused of human rights abuses.

A bid for Manchester United by Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani, the chairman of one of Qatar's biggest banks, has also raised concerns among human rights and LGBTQ+ groups.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/64536218
 
I fecking hate this shit line that posters are peddling that us who don't want Qatar are just on our high horse and peddling morals.

I would genuinely compare United being bought by Qatar to your only daughter marrying the local drug dealer. Its not that I have a moral thing against drugs, I just don't want my daughter being tainted by that shit.

And the idea that being against Qatar is expounding political ideals is, frankly, horseshit. Here's a great idea as to how to keep politics out of it - let's not sell the club to a fecking nation state.

I don't disagree. I'm fine with Qatar and the other bidders(no hedge funds though!) mate, just also fine with other people's opinions. Just don't enjoy the hard core from both sides.

Edit, sorry forgot to mention. i'm good with all sides.
 
The Athletic’s coverage of the bids has been equal parts amateurish and pretentious, which is like the majority of their work to date tbf.

Considered a new thread for this but think it’s my most disliked source of football news. Full of arrogant “intellectual”-type journos who have an incredibly limited understanding of the game, preferring instead to indulge in grand narratives and almost no insight in terms of actual news updates. Nothing but self-righteous, self-indulgent nonsense on there.
100% this. Bunch of narcissistic, RAWK-sounding arse-kissers.
 
As s more general comment, I honestly don't think that people realise how bad this is for the club. In fact, I think the concept of "club" is gone. Its just sad.

Dude... I think you over-idealise what a 'club' is supposed to be. That idea of what you think a club it's supposed to be, died decades ago. The idea of players doing it for the love of the game and then retiring gracefully, owning a pub or a record store too?

This sums up the last 600 pages. A discussion between folks who think what football/club is supposed to represent and actual reality. Idealism versus pragmatism.
 
Agree. With all this stuff going on in the world, you’ve got to be kidding me. People are saying this and others are saying that, it’s unbelievable.

There’s no middle ground anymore, there’s folks over here and other folks somewhere else. I mean what are you supposed to do with that ?

When did everything get so extreme ? We’ve got one group saying it should be like this and another group saying it should be done differently, you can’t win with these people!

Division also society today is becoming far weaker as a result of this hyper sensitivity. People think the agendas are favourable but it will cause further disarray. This is not mutually exclusive to this football ethics conversation but a generalisation of what's in the world today. Nothing but foolishness when you turn on social media, the news through the tell-lie-vision.
 
Agree. With all this stuff going on in the world, you’ve got to be kidding me. People are saying this and others are saying that, it’s unbelievable.

There’s no middle ground anymore, there’s folks over here and other folks somewhere else. I mean what are you supposed to do with that ?

When did everything get so extreme ? We’ve got one group saying it should be like this and another group saying it should be done differently, you can’t win with these people!

Its the world we are in -- everything has been simplified and converted to binary choices. This why its easier to get outraged by emotions rather than actually thinking about things.

Black & white when the reality of the world is 80% are shades of grey.There are nuances and no easy choices in life. Everything is tainted -- issues of degrees of separation or time bar.
 
I fecking hate this shit line that posters are peddling that us who don't want Qatar are just on our high horse and peddling morals.

I would genuinely compare United being bought by Qatar to your only daughter marrying the local drug dealer. Its not that I have a moral thing against drugs, I just don't want my daughter being tainted by that shit.

And the idea that being against Qatar is expounding political ideals is, frankly, horseshit. Here's a great idea as to how to keep politics out of it - let's not sell the club to a fecking nation state.
Here's a great idea...we as fans can do feck all about who buys our club. You'll understand that la
 
Cheers. I've seen that, but the total shareholder percentage is not 100%. I found the additional information below.

Qatar Holding LLC being wholly owned by QIA. Which would mean QIA with at least 34%.

It also suggests that Al Thani holds an additional 6.5% personally.

Thoughts?

https://simplywall.st/stocks/qa/ban...ank-qpscs-dsmqibk-biggest-owners-are-individu

Our data shows that Qatar Investment Authority is the largest shareholder with 17% of shares outstanding. Qatar Holding LLC is the second largest shareholder owning 17% of common stock, and Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Bin Al Thani holds about 6.5% of the company stock.
Well, we have 2 different sets of data and none of them shows that QIA owns 50% of QIB as you claimed.
 
Easier to manipulate IMO. Less thinking as they are governed by a simplistic set of rules.

This good. That is bad because of 1,2,3,4.

I agree and what's worse is that perceivably the rules give off the impression of being simplistic but they are disingenuous to being straightforward being embellished in complication and disillusionment. Reminds me of the book called the coddling of the American mind. It deals with the realities of fragile societies. It's getting progressively worse each year.
 
I agree and what's worse is that perceivably the rules give off the impression of being simplistic but they are disingenuous to being straightforward being embellished in complication and disillusionment. Reminds me of the book called the coddling of the American mind. It deals with the realities of fragile societies. It's getting progressively worse each year.

A simple trick in sales -- when you are initially pitching the product/proposal, offer 3-4 options.

But if you want to close the deal, offer 2 choices.
 
Its the world we are in -- everything has been simplified and converted to binary choices. This why its easier to get outraged by emotions rather than actually thinking about things.

Black & white when the reality of the world is 80% are shades of grey.There are nuances and no easy choices in life. Everything is tainted -- issues of degrees of separation or time bar.

Well said.
 
With the introduction of an independent regulatory body that has the power to prevent English clubs from joining any breakaway leagues such as the ESL, there’s one less reason for the Glazers stay now.
 
With the introduction of an independent regulatory body that has the power to prevent English clubs from joining any breakaway leagues such as the ESL, there’s one less reason for the Glazers stay now.

Firstly at the time, I don't think, at the moment there are enough incentives for clubs to break away from the PL --- unless the TV revenues start to level out and the EFL start to really eat into the Big Six's revenues.

Currently, the PL gives the EFL 16% or £400 million of its annual TV revenues. But the EFL wants up to 25% or another additional £250 million annually. (total of £650million annually)

The Big Six for obvious reasons are pushing back the most and have the biggest incentives to find additional revenue streams.

So I don't think its so clear cut. Besides, a Tory-appointee..... one that's susceptible to 'lobbying'.

What could go wrong?
 
There is another angle to it.
Qatar state and investment authority already invests in multiple businesses around the world. Many people use the products and businesses on a regular basis. Many govts., including the UK and US facilitate these businesses and welcome the money. So for people like me, this is just another business investment they are in. So if the Qatari deal is the better deal than Jim, in terms of investments and debts, then Qatar it is for me.

Blocking only the United deal on moral reasons, while other investments are ok, sounds a bit hypocritical for me. But I do understand if others don't feel the same.
Agreed.
 
I fecking hate this shit line that posters are peddling that us who don't want Qatar are just on our high horse and peddling morals.

I would genuinely compare United being bought by Qatar to your only daughter marrying the local drug dealer. Its not that I have a moral thing against drugs, I just don't want my daughter being tainted by that shit.

And the idea that being against Qatar is expounding political ideals is, frankly, horseshit. Here's a great idea as to how to keep politics out of it - let's not sell the club to a fecking nation state.

We have no say either way. You either figure out how to accept the new owners whoever they may be or you don’t. It’s not like Green & Gold or whatever campaign stopped the Glazers doing anything so it’s not going to stop them selling to whoever they want to.
 
The only reason I have doubts about Qatar bids is not really ethical reasons but more because PSG and City have still to win a Champions league.

So maybe it’s not going to be the best footballing investment.
 
There is another angle to it.
Qatar state and investment authority already invests in multiple businesses around the world. Many people use the products and businesses on a regular basis. Many govts., including the UK and US facilitate these businesses and welcome the money. So for people like me, this is just another business investment they are in. So if the Qatari deal is the better deal than Jim, in terms of investments and debts, then Qatar it is for me.

Blocking only the United deal on moral reasons, while other investments are ok, sounds a bit hypocritical for me. But I do understand if others don't feel the same.
Good point.

If they start doing a City on it and pumping us up beyond our level, I'll switch off but if we're still Man United I'll be happy.

It's the sporting side of this that concerns me with Qatar.

There would be owners who I couldn't stomach, but I don't really see what's so bad with these potential owners as long as they play by the rules. Eh City
 
Status
Not open for further replies.