There’s always a profit maybe just not financial having your company associated with United will be of great benefit to a business that isn’t exactly great for our environment.
Will more then likely grow the revenue of his business.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
There’s always a profit maybe just not financial having your company associated with United will be of great benefit to a business that isn’t exactly great for our environment.
Will more then likely grow the revenue of his business.
The logic therefore must be that every owner of a football club is looking for a way to sell it for a profit
why you banging on about the CL again?
I’m talking about 1.5bn to dominate France being an absurd waste of money. A well run club could do it for a fraction of the cost, just as Lyon did pre PSG.
Nothing about spunking the sums they did for Neymar and Mbappe is “impressive”, they spunked 1.5bn mostly out of vanity.
Maybe.
To me, however, there's something - let's say - not quite right about ridiculing the "half assed" nature of a protest by Amnesty. They showed up at Old Trafford with a banner, and the take on that, by certain people, is to ridicule them because the banner wasn't very large. I dunno, to me that says something.
It's indicative of a certain mindset, let's say.
(I mean, let's be honest here: how likely is it that someone who actually either a) agrees with the message or b) at least genuinely respects it, reacts by ridiculing the effort? Not that likely, is it? Sure, there may be one or two who just couldn't help themselves because the banner was that tiny...but on the whole, nah, come on.)
Neither party interested in buying United will give a flying fiddlers what fans think they can hold them to, let's be honest. They can promise the moon but once they're feet are under the table they can change their minds all they like and there's feck all we can realistically do about it.
For balance. Would do to have an echo chamber now would it?!
Oh please, you do exactly the same about the Jassim bid.
Look at the Swedish Rumble Twitter thread I linked - it has the docs on there.
Hahaha, of course not. Look at the Glazers. We've been protesting for 18 years, and they've not cared one iota.
Still, for fans, we can only go off by the prospective buyers words. That's what we have to hold on to. That is our way of keeping them accountable.
True Ineos's bid could well have a greenwashing motivation behind it.
Having said that Qatar haven't been great for the environment either given the amount of Gas they export every year.
Perhaps.
Not made up. Please see the Kieran McKenna interview about Sir Jim on the Stretford paddock. He wants a legacy.
Well fair enough but personally I wouldn't put too much stock into the promises made by any potential buyer.
It’s not indicative of mindset, let’s just say it’s indicative of how pathetic the enterprise was imo.
They either couldn’t get the numbers to make it a proper protest or it was a token protest to tick a we did it box.
It honestly looked as if the United fanbase weren’t really bothered by it all and that’s the exact opposite of what they would have wanted. I can’t understand what they were thinking with that.
Cheers I'll check it out.
It was something mentioned by Lord O’Neill in his interview with UWS on their podcast, but it’s an idea that could be in INEOS thinking given their fan centred statement when they bid.
Amazes me how many struggle with this.
Would you prefer to go to your grave super rich, remembered for nothing more than being Britain’s richest man and Brexit?
Or would you prefer to bit a tiny bit less rich, and spend your final years doing shit you love? Having fun with sailing, cycling, football, running wins every time for me.
Couldn't agree more you beautiful man
My grandad took up Jigsaw Puzzles in his 70's and I've never seen him happier.
You’re speculating who’s the owner and that’s fair but I’m talking about the bid and the following statement from Sheikh Jassim. We can question where the money come from but the bid is straightforward.
Maybe you’re right but it’s still speculation from your part.
Maybe Sheikh Jassim has the blessing from of the royal family because they see this as beneficial to Qatar but Sheikh Jassim and his family/friends still make this bid as a private investor. Does it mean that United is state owned if that’s the scenario?
Aye, some start building model trains, and it gives them joy beyond belief.
What doesn’t give you joy is cash in the bank when you’re brown bread.
It's different magnitudes as buying United, and we can't divine SJR's intentions, but that's what the follow-up sub-2hr marathon distance attempt he financed suggests. Just passionate about that sport and human achievement.
If the source of funds and therefore ultimately ownership is unknown to the public, then it can't be said that it is a straightforward bid. It's an opaque bid, and yet you were trying to contrast it favorably vs a company that has a majority shareholder that is known to the public and 2 other owners that are also known to the public, as if that is excessive complexity.
Exactly, plus for £5bn quid I’m sure there are literally thousands of better ways to make money if that is your sole motivation than buy a fecking football club, which then needs billions investing in infrastructure and staff costs.
And Qatar do not leave the same both here and in Qatar? interesting
No, that doesn't follow from the premise (I suspect you probably understand this, but whatever).
Most owners do not seek to make a (direct) profit from owning the club. Football clubs are not profitable to own, they have never been that: the cost involved in running them is (relatively) huge. And most owners do not speculate with regard to growing the sell-on value of the club either. The Glazers are quite exceptional in that regard: they were allowed to acquire United in a leveraged takeover/buyout, and - yes - their likely endgame has always been to sell at some point. But they are not normal owners.
Let's see what Al-Khelaifi said on the matter
" We received an offer of more than 4 billion (euros) but we are not going to sell, of course, just a percentage of the club, we'll think about it," he told to talksport
" We took the club at 70 million euros and today it's over 4 billion euros. It's a good project, We don't do everything right, of course we're not perfect. From where we bought the club I think we should be proud."
Meanwhile Forbes rate PSG at 3.2b dollars. Lyon is worth $368M while NICE FC (INEOS bought it for 100m euros) doesn't even make it to the Forbes list. Smart indeed.
So yeah, PSG's project is far from stupid.
Last edited:
United could be described as the ultimate Jigsaw puzzle!
Not sure why people are worried about Ineos not being able to provide what the club needs.
Ineos have €2.7bn in cash and equivalents as at 30/09/2022, which is their latest report. But they only have this amount because they continually invest in new businesses and property/plant, and give out large amounts of dividends to their three owners.
In the period from 2019 to the end of the last quarterly report, they have spent: €3.3bn in dividends, €4.4bn in property and plant investments, and €900m in acquisition of businesses and intangibles. That is €8.6bn in cash expenditure over a period that is less than four years, averaging €2.29bn per year on those alone. They are a cash rich company, but choose to use it rather than let it sit.
This isn't even a massive purchase for them, they spent $9bn on acquiring Innovene in 2005. That would be an equivalent of $13.8bn today.
Ineos have €2.7bn in cash and equivalents as at 30/09/2022, which is their latest report. But they only have this amount because they continually invest in new businesses and property/plant, and give out large amounts of dividends to their three owners.
In the period from 2019 to the end of the last quarterly report, they have spent: €3.3bn in dividends, €4.4bn in property and plant investments, and €900m in acquisition of businesses and intangibles. That is €8.6bn in cash expenditure over a period that is less than four years, averaging €2.29bn per year on those alone. They are a cash rich company, but choose to use it rather than let it sit.
This isn't even a massive purchase for them, they spent $9bn on acquiring Innovene in 2005. That would be an equivalent of $13.8bn today.
I don't think you understand what I'm saying:
The protest was made by Amnesty. Not random fans - Amnesty.
Do you think it was a "token protest" by Amnesty?
Are you concerned by the fact that Amnesty has a problem with our (potential, likely?) new owners?
That’s not true. You can buy a club for £5-6bn, reap profits from dividends for a number of years and sell the club at worst for the same price you bought it. In this instance, Utd would probably be worth more down the line.
We’ve no idea the intentions of prospective owners, however it’s a very easy PR win for Ratcliffe/INEOS to state early on they have no intention of taking out profits or dividends from the club. If they did, a lot more fans would be on board. They haven’t said that though.
Even better would be to have it contractually binding that no dividends can be taken out if that’s what their intentions are.
Manutd dividends are pathetic compared to Ineos. Ineos paid out €3.3bn in dividends over less than four years. Manutd's dividend is about $20m per year; there is no reaping dividends. It is a grain of sand compared to what the owners of Ineos already pull in.
Oh come on. I don't give a toss which ownership you model you prefer, but to pretend PSG has been anything other than a dysfunctional laughing stock is bizarre. Utterly toxic culture emanates from that place. The JORDAN branding sums them up. All fart no shit and billions spent.
Exactly.
I’ve hated PSG since that yellow ticker on sky sports said we had agreed a fee for Ronaldinho. 
Even if it was Barca’s fault!
Even if it was Barca’s fault!
Yeah IF Ratcliffe was more of an Abramovich type not obsessed with ROI than a Glazer then I would back his bid more
You might call it what you want but it had been successful both financially and football wise. All that eludes them is a CL win which isn't that tragic considering how unpredictable that cup can be.
But hey let's get the guys who own two clubs ie one who keeps getting relegated in the Swiss league and the others who are currently 7th in the French league. I am sure that they are smart too especially since they hire a cyclist guy to take football decisions.
Was it made by Amnesty though or just someone jumping on the bandwagon? I'm willing to be proved wrong but I don't think I've seen anything official and I'd be very surprised if that was the best Amnesty International could do.
I haven't even seen them outright say it shouldn't be sold to the Qataris, just that a more stringent process needs to be observed.
"We’re not necessarily opposed to the involvement of state-linked overseas financial consortia in English football, but the Premier League must urgently strengthen ownership rules to ensure they’re human rights-compliant and not an opportunity for more sportswashing."
Ratcliffe is a tinkerer based on what experience with Nice. Glazers seem to have stumbled onto something that works with Arnold and Murtough so I'm wary of new leadership coming in with INEOS and having to re-learn all those lessons again.
Assuming they're both equivalent propositions financially with a drain on club money for dividends or loan repayments or whatever.
Please stop. Nobody is going to invest £6bn in anything without wanting a return, but it doesnt mean that will be their sole or even main motivation. Sir Jim has said he wants to invest in the club, put us back at the top and win the champions league. Nowhere in his statement did he say he wants loads of money, and yet for some reason it is implied with INEOS but not Qatars bid.
- Status