Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
stepic said:
who do you propose as the owners then, greenpeace?

not saying you're wrong with your criticism of apple, but samsung do the same, and all of us here use one of their phones. there is culpability for all of us just participating in the modern world.
Click to expand...

All large companies have major moral issues. This is why all this talk of choosing an owner on moral grounds sounds pointless to me. Bloody hell, the demand average people create for clothing and beauty products creates demand for major exploitation of human labour and puts animals through pretty terrible and painful treatments and testing. People driving creates the demand for oil and gas, which is causing major issues to the climate, which is affecting many people around the world and endangering huge numbers of species. People seem to pick very random things to draw the line over. I'm similarly perplexed why people suffering from war in the likes of Ethiopia, Yemen and Cambodia seem to get no coverage in the west. There's no consistency in the way people treat all these moral topics. For me, I just want the best owner for United, while accepting that whoever takes over is going to be extremely morally questionable. That's just the way things are.
 
Mr. Robot said:
Nonsense. The ridiculous posts in here today are something to behold.

Woodward will be a conduit for the Glazer family and potential buyer.

The highest bidder will buy the club. So Woodward isn’t going to just sell to some random guy for a Twix and packet of Hob Nobs.

The party who offer the most money will purchase Utd. And it’s going to be an organisation who is absolutely loaded because they’ll need to have deep pockets.

This isn’t buying Chelsea. The opportunity to buy a historic club the size of Utd rarely, if ever, comes along. There are going to be behemoths like Apple and Saudis lining up to start a bidding war.

We might not like who eventually does end up buying the club due to ethical reasons but in no way does Ed Woodward have the means to ‘feck over Utd’ and why would he anyway? The club were good to him and paid him a fortune in his time here.
Click to expand...

Wow. Some people learn nothing from history. Woodward is, and always will be, a Glazer man. He will make sure they (and he on a lovely commission) get the best deal. Who said anything about selling to some random guy? Of course they will go for the biggest bid, who said anything different? They will not care about the fate of United after that, just as JP et al didn't when they took the Glazer "money."

Some monumentally naïve posts here today.
 
Loon said:
Wow. Some people learn nothing from history. Woodward is, and always will be, a Glazer man. He will make sure they (and he on a lovely commission) get the best deal. Who said anything about selling to some random guy? Of course they will go for the biggest bid, who said anything different? They will not care about the fate of United after that, just as JP et al didn't when they took the Glazer "money."

Some monumentally naïve posts here today.
Click to expand...
What owner would care about who buys their product or brand though? Money talks and the highest bidder wins.

The new owner will already be aware that there’s no money to be made for personal gain now. This isn’t 2005. You can’t buy Utd with a leveraged takeover. If anything, you are being naive and negative for the sake of it.

Someone will be buying the club and clearing the debt. Woodward will get a cut, so what? It doesn’t effect Utd or us as fans anymore.

I couldn’t care less what the Glazers make. The new owners won’t be able to drain money from the club for their own personal gain anymore - it just won’t happen. Quote me on that.

The main issue is the likes of human right’s abusers buying us. That’s what I don’t want happening.
 
Mr. Robot said:
Nonsense. The ridiculous posts in here today are something to behold.

Woodward will be a conduit for the Glazer family and potential buyer.

The highest bidder will buy the club. So Woodward isn’t going to just sell to some random guy for a Twix and packet of Hob Nobs.

The party who offer the most money will purchase Utd. And it’s going to be an organisation who is absolutely loaded because they’ll be required to have deep pockets.

This isn’t the same situation as buying Chelsea. The opportunity to buy a historic club the size of Utd rarely, if ever, comes along. There are going to be behemoths like Apple and Saudis lining up resulting in a bidding war. Ironically, both the fans AND the Glazers will get what they want this time.

Saying that, a portion of our fanbase won’t like who ends up owning Utd due to ethical reasons but in no way does Ed Woodward have the means to ‘feck over Utd’ and why would he anyway? The club were good to him and paid him a fortune in his time here. Sure, a few idiots visited his house but in general, EW was given a lot of money and power for his role as Chief Executive of Manchester United.

Some of the negativity and paranoia in here over the last 48 hours is ridiculous. Some of you are never, ever happy.
Click to expand...

Middle East ownerships will be lining up but tend to believe what that guy from the Apple fan site says about no interest in buying
 
Mr. Robot said:
What owner would care about who buys their product or brand though? Money talks and the highest bidder wins.

The new owner will already be aware that there’s no money to be made for personal gain now. This isn’t 2005. You can’t buy Utd with a leveraged purchase.

Someone will be buying the club and clearing the debt. Woodward will get a cut, so what? It doesn’t effect Utd or us as fans anymore.

I couldn’t care less what the Glazers make. The new owners won’t be able to drain money from the club for their own personal gain anymore - if just won’t happen. Quote me on that.

The main issue is the likes of human right’s abusers buying us. That’s what I don’t want happening.
Click to expand...

See you edited your previous post, so I'll take it you were addressing people in this thread in general rather than me personally as my post was not negative, it's was about the reality of business, which you have just reiterated.

My ONLY point was Woodward has no duty of care to see United end up with the wonderful owners you are predicting (and I hope you're right with every beat of my heart).
 
croadyman said:
Middle East ownerships will be lining up but tend to believe what that guy from the Apple fan site says about no interest in buying
Click to expand...

It remains to be seen if any kind of frantic bidding war will manifest itself too.
 
Scottynaldinho said:
Easy to negate that by coming through a semi government company like STC, Sabic, Riyad Bank etc. Primarily owned by the government but they can differentiate based on Newcastle being directly owned by the PIF.
Click to expand...
That would be even worse. Two entity from Saudi government buying multiple clubs. Might as well rename it to Gulf nation PL
 
Webbie & O`neil show this morning support middle eastern buyers rather than US investors, Goldbridge wants buyers with deep pockets, their reasons makes sense to me.
 
I just want a new owner who can take Utd private and not take money out of the club. Hire top man to run Utd that can generate revenue to reinvest in the club for 7-8 years. Hopefully, he can start paying himself after that.
 
r0663664 said:
I just want a new owner who can take Utd private and not take money out of the club. Hire top man to run Utd that can generate revenue to reinvest in the club for 7-8 years. Hopefully, he can start paying himself after that.
Click to expand...

You want someone to invest 4-5 billion and not take a penny out for 8 years? Sure they'll be lining up for that type of return.
 
UnofficialDevil said:
They should have decided to sell before the Newcastle take over. Bloody idiots. Cant do anything right.
Click to expand...


That's the one thing I'm glad off the fact we missed out on Saudi and knowing now how mad they will be that they could have waited
 
I guess iTrafford is the new stadium name.

I can't see Apple going through with this. It seems a bit random.
 
The debates about Apple Inc. buying Man Utd is a pure waste of time and every post suspecting a Man Utd buyout by Apple isn't worth the CO2 emission that's released by the energy it takes to post it.

Btw beyond the sensationalist (I'm sorry to say that - with all respect) national dulling English sports media, there are also more reliable sources that deliver (at least in my opinion) a more consistent & more credible coverage:

No, Apple Isn't Planning to Buy Manchester United
https://www.macrumors.com/2022/11/24/apple-not-planning-to-buy-manchester-united/

But the most reasonable in-depth coverage (even though it is not actually deep as well) referring to the topic that I've read so far is a seeking alpha article that outlines as follows:

"The Manchester United rumor is a rumor at best. The likelihood of AAPL jeopardizing its profit margins is unlikely, given these uncertain economic condition."

and

"It is evident that Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) is in the hot seat now, due to the rumored Manchester United takeover and the riot in Foxconn's factory in Zhengzhou. While almost impossible, we suppose the massively popular soccer team may add some advertising and marketing value to the company, especially in the Apple TV segment. However, due to the potential cash burn and the odd timing coinciding with World Cup excitement, it is unlikely that the rumor is true. We'll see, since Daily Star has also speculated Amazon (AMZN) and Meta (META) as prospective buyers."

Src: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4560473-apple-ignore-zero-covid-policy-manchester-united-noise

Especially the article at SEEKING ALPHA is an assessment that seems more plausible to me than the superficial assumptions that I've read in UK media (Daily Star) so far.
 
So if Apple take over, will they rebrand certain things such as:

Mac-chester United
Resign Pogba and rename him iPodba
Apple MacTominay

Sorry. Long week. Longer day.
 
crossy1686 said:
Apple is a PLC, they have shareholders. The CEO's job is to increase the value of the stock for said shareholders with smart business decisions.

1. It makes no sense for the biggest company in the world to buy a football team when they have zero experience of acquiring, managing, running sports teams, and even less experience in transfers.
2. They're a tech company, if they acquire anything, they acquire smaller tech companies who have done solid R&D into products they're looking to build upon.
3. They don't need the exposure. Apple don't even advertise through anyone else but themselves, that's how big they are. At a push they would maybe be open to buy stadium naming rights but it's not worth it for them.
4. The iPhone costs around £1k, how many United fans can afford it? How quickly would you drop the iPhone if you were a Liverpool fan or any other fan for that matter? You know what really kills a stock? Poor sales, missed earnings, poor revenue growth, bad direction. All of this happens if more than half the world don't buy an expensive phone that's tethered to the United name and brand.
5. What the feck are Apple geuinely going to do with Manchester United? Like seriously? What's in it for them?6
6. Apple are a company, they have budgets, and well planned budgets at that, they don't just have £10b doing nothing somewhere.
7. R&D is expensive and so is innovation.
8. Shareholders will lose their shit if Apple take on a liability such as Manchester United.
Click to expand...

Some of the points here are also the conclusions I came to when assessing such a purchasing decision. If Apple was owned by a parent company and was a subsidiary similar to Alphabet Inc / Google, I could see the rationale behind an ownership purchase. Because the purchase would reflect more on the holding company as opposed to the subsidiary.

There's no strong correlation between the benefits for Apple as a business with purchasing United.
 
Wait why the feck are we talking about Apple again? Is it Thursday again or something? The Apple rumour was shut down already!
 
Woody being involved probably means American investors, which will sting if Dubai or the Saudis buy Liverpool.
 
I don’t get this idea that Liverpool and City fans would start ditching apple products if they purchased us.
Were people ditching vodaphone as their mobile carrier when they had us as a sponsor? So much so that vodaphone pulled out?

Whether or not this happens, which tbh I don't think it will, Apple are a 2 trillion dollar company who know exactly what the feck they’re doing when it comes to making money. If they thought purchasing the biggest sports team in the world would damage their bottom dollar, they simply wouldn’t do it
 
How many Liverpool fans are there?

How many Macs and IPhones are they responsible for stealing?

Merseyside police must be delighted
 
I think people here are overestimating the number of potential bidders for United. They'd have to buy for a huge sum, then make sure to invest massively in the subsequent transfer windows, all while putting in huge sums for revamping the stadium and all its facilities.

Any hope of profits would be a long term thing. I just don't see the appeal for companies like Apple or Amazon to buy it, given that they are laying people off, and hiring freezing. Sinking billions of dollars into it while facing a possible recession doesn't sound good.
 
Glazers to buy Liverpool using funds raised from Utd sale, they expect to have 6bn in change
 
Ole'sattheWheel said:
I don’t get this idea that Liverpool and City fans would start ditching apple products if they purchased us.
Were people ditching vodaphone as their mobile carrier when they had us as a sponsor? So much so that vodaphone pulled out?

Whether or not this happens, which tbh I don't think it will, Apple are a 2 trillion dollar company who know exactly what the feck they’re doing when it comes to making money. If they thought purchasing the biggest sports team in the world would damage their bottom dollar, they simply wouldn’t do it
Click to expand...
I for one don’t touch crown paints
 
Status
Not open for further replies.