MF1138
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2004
- Messages
- 421
What if Jassim doesn't actually have backing from the Qatari state... and it just turns out he is the Qatari Michael Knighton 

Then he definitely needs to do an act in front of the StrettyWhat if Jassim doesn't actually have backing from the Qatari state... and it just turns out he is the Qatari Michael Knighton![]()
That sort of stuff is in the data room, which has been available since ~ January.
That doesn't mean the club will be debt free. That suggests that the existing debt will remain.It’s nothing like what the Glazers did - INEOS have clearly stated no new debt will be leveraged against the club. The club will be debt free.
I didn't dismiss it. I just said I don't think it's as important as people are leading on. I already explained my reasons why I believe this (i.e. the negativity toward INEOS with so little information about the details of their bid and the dismissal of the things they said they would do like invest in infrastructure and not place more debt on the club for starters)You said the following, " I believe the over-the-top pro-Qatar rhetoric has more to do with the belief in having more transfer funds than anything else mentioned."
The "pro-Qatar" rhetoric is purely about transfers, as per what I just quoted you. You dismiss everything else which has been the reason for people wanting Qatar. But as I stated, under the Glazers post SAF we've, spent the most, and we still want them out. So, could it be more than just transfer for the pro-Qatar people?
It’s a rock and a hard place. SJR is playing the community card to create a bit of artificial romance in the media, and likely brings debt, financing, and a similar situation to what we have now with the Glazers. Qatar on the other hand bring sportswashing alongside a shedload of cash.
I don’t really want either of them, but then again I can’t really think of anyone I would want in an ideal world.
I doubt many, if any, businesses would let their financial books off the premises and especially not via electronic meansHow is any of this stopping them from just sending an encrypted email? It's a bit silly that due diligence must be done at their offices in such a short time span.
Phase 2 refers to more than just the meeting that have been happening these past 2 weeks. Anyone who has progressed past phase 1 and is invited to submit a more concrete bid is in phase 2.All that detective work and you didn't read the original post he was referring to when I first responded.
Phase 2 was referring to the meeting. Try again
No they are not. Multiple reports have said that prospective bidders have lamented the fact that the the info available in the data room during the initial stage of the sale process is “very limited”. Only those who get past phase 1 and proceed to phase 2 which only started in March are allowed access to more detailed financial info.That sort of stuff is in the data room, which has been available since ~ January.
It's a company, not a CIA operation. There's decreasing returns in terms of impact to valuation x new information. The most relevant pieces of information are in the public financial statements. People invest billions of dollars everyday in listed companies without access to more than the public documents.At each stage more sensitive financial data is given. The first phase was meant for clubs to place indicative bids ie to weed our the chancers from serious bidders. The data room provided bidders to place such bid. Now the real dance begin
Not when we know a) INEOS has put £800m funding for the debt in place with GS and JPM; and b) there is a change of control clause which means the debt must be cleared within 10 days of a takeover.That doesn't mean the club will be debt free. That suggests that the existing debt will remain.
It's a company, not a CIA operation. There's decreasing returns in terms of impact to valuation x new information. The most relevant pieces of information are in the public financial statements. People invest billions of dollars everyday in listed companies without access to more than the public documents.
Then he definitely needs to do an act in front of the Stretty
https://ir.manutd.com/~/media/Files/M/Manutd-IR/documents/Man Utd-20f-2022-09-24.pdfNo company like their sensitive financial details to be aired in public especially if the company in question is making a loss and is on sale
I don’t think this can be emphasised enough.It’s ok to prefer Qatari oil money without having to post absolute nonsense regarding INEOS bid.
I didn't dismiss it. I just said I don't think it's as important as people are leading on. I already explained my reasons why I believe this (i.e. the negativity toward INEOS with so little information about the details of their bid and the dismissal of the things they said they would do like invest in infrastructure and not place more debt on the club for starters)
Nothing has been publically stated about the debt by INEOSNot when we know a) INEOS has put £800m funding for the debt in place with GS and JPM; and b) there is a change of control clause which means the debt must be cleared within 10 days of a takeover.
It’s based on a twitter thread by @Messier1994. Maybe he can explain a little bit more here.Nothing has been publically stated about the debt by INEOS
Who says there is a change of control clause?
Same if you’re spending 5bn why only spend 30 minutes at the potential new place.
At least Jassim advisors spent most of the day there doing due diligence. INEOS went for a photo op it seems, more than happy to pose for the cameras.
It’s nothing like what the Glazers did - INEOS have clearly stated no new debt will be leveraged against the club. The club will be debt free.
I imagine because Jim has been to OT quite a lot in his lifetime and probably didn't need the tour??? He did go on to Carrington as well. Wasn't like he went home. Hahaha
So how do you know the Qataris have never been to OT?
It's in the debt contracts, which are public. Covered here:Nothing has been publically stated about the debt by INEOS
Who says there is a change of control clause?
Surely Ratcliffe can't compete with that? Insane amount.
It's strange that nothing was leaked from SJR camp yet
It's in the debt contracts, which are public. Covered here:
Yeah, but they don't want to just burn money. They are a business.Ineos is rich enough
Ineos is rich enough
Indeed. But surely £6b doesn't make financial sense. Qatar aren't in it for monies.
Yes it has been reported.Nothing has been publically stated about the debt by INEOS
Who says there is a change of control clause?