Spoony
The People's President
I've seen that. He's also suspicious of the rumours about the 5 to 8 bidders. Seems to think there's only two. I think he's right.
It's mental, isn't it? It's one thing having moral reservations about Qatar (I personally don't care at this point ) but to so foolishly push an agenda based on wrongful information and misrepresent just how much shit we are in financially is infuriating.If you're going to google something, then maybe you should actually make sure you know that the bonds matured in 2017.
Why don't you open up our 20-F and actually look up our current situation.
Why are you even trying to argue with someone who clearly knows a feck lot more than you about these topics?
Are you that fecking stubborn?
Not really even sure why you're being an arse to people on this board, when they clearly have valid opinions and facts.
Big difference. They will not invest in infrastructure, build a new stadium, new training ground with their own money while the other 31% take a free ride.
If you want Ratcliffe you’re absolutely insane. Those shareholders are going to demand return.
If you want Ratcliffe you’re absolutely insane. Those shareholders are going to demand return.
I've seen that. He's also suspicious of the rumours about the 5 to 8 bidders. Seems to think there's only two. I think he's right.
If you want Ratcliffe you’re absolutely insane. Those shareholders are going to demand return.
The only people in Manchester as angry as you are support Cityhttps://www.sheffield.ac.uk/crafic/research/manchester-centripetal-city
I’m from Manchester mate, so I ”talk to Mancs on the ground” pretty fecking often.
And are you actually pretending Manchester hasn’t received feck tonne of government investment? Have you not been to Manchester the past 10 years man?
It’s pretty obvious there’s only two bidders.
Glazers are trying to extrapolate the highest bid from either party.
Ask yourself if there are other bidders why haven’t they been to visit OT and Carrington in a convoy of SUVs pretty hard to avoid the press at the moment around this.
If you want Ratcliffe you’re absolutely insane. Those shareholders are going to demand return.
Practically speaking it’s a huge difference because the club’s status has been achieved without being solely propped up by independent wealth.This goes back to a question I keep asking. If a huge investment isn't expected (call it infinite spend or whatever you like) why even back the Qatari bid?
So state-ownership is fine as long as it's a big club? That's quite an odd line to draw.
City's success was slated before the accusations of cheating ever came out.
For the record, I'm not anti-Qatar or pro-INEOS. Either could suck as owners or be amazing. You also won't see me making any moral arguments against either party. What I'm trying to understand is the hypocrisy and mental gymnastics behind wanting Qatar ownership and the constant bashing of INEOS.
I think both SJR and Sheik Jassim will buy 100% of the club eventually before starting any big project with the infrastructure.Well maybe but the Glazers shares gives them 100% control either way and there is probably a process in place that any new owner has to buy all the other shares anyway.
But even if there isnt I don't realistically see either party spending £5-6b on United and then not looking to get ownership of the other 31% at some point. There would be no massive rush as any new infrastructure would still take a few years to get started.
Maybe. I an not sure.Could they do a rights issue to raise capital?
I doubt there would be.
Howsen is such a wanker. Is there anything he won’t pretend to know about?
No I mean INEOS.You mean the two guys who went to Old Trafford with him? I’m sure they know the only return from this transaction is long term, apart from any prestige or greenwashing elements.
Why are you even trying to argue with someone who clearly knows a feck lot more than you about these topics?
Are you that fecking stubborn?
Not really even sure why you're being an arse to people on this board, when they clearly have valid opinions and facts.
Clueless
Not the brightest bulb are you?
Imagine thinking our loans were fixed term rates
You're borrowing from a fecking investment bank not your local regional bank mortgage
We have entered into an interest rate swap related to a portion of our secured term loan facility that involves the exchange of floating for fixed rate interest payments in order to reduce interest rate volatility.
It's mental, isn't it? It's one thing having moral reservations about Qatar (I personally don't care at this point ) but to so foolishly push an agenda based on wrongful information and misrepresent just how much shit we are in financially is infuriating.
Fair enough you want some kind of organic fairytale but we should be under no illusion what this means for United. One thing it does mean is no PL title anytime soon.
Can't stand the prick.Howsen is such a wanker. Is there anything he won’t pretend to know about?
No I mean INEOS.
Facepalm.gifIf you want Ratcliffe you’re absolutely insane. Those shareholders are going to demand return.
No I mean INEOS.
It's mental, isn't it?
It’s pretty mental that a poster just 4 posts back laughed at the idea we have fixed term rates as this is “investment banks not your regional bank mortgage” then posting a passage confirming that United did a deal to swap for fixed rates to reduce interest rate volatility, and both that poster and yourself have not even realised what he posted.
Aye, that’s mental, but that’s this thread for ya.
Why on earth would you need an interest rate swap to reduce interest rate volatility if YOU HAVE FIXED RATES?
When they made the 1st bid and said they won't be putting any new debt on the club but didn't say anything about clearing the debt that's already there. There's also been multiple reports that they won't be paying it off as part of the takeoverWhen did Ratcliffe/Ineos reveal this?
Its obviously state backed. Just like almost everything else of worth in Qatar.
But I suppose to appease the FA they still have to make an effort to at least seem independent. Appearances and all that.
Its no different from what the saudis did.
Not sure which countries don't have thousands of deaths behind its wealth and prohibitive laws for gay people and women at some point in time?
What has that got to do with the Qatari bidders anyways? Is this Sheikh Jassim guy imparting these rules? Was he responsible for these deaths? Or shall we just lump them all together. Qataris are all one and the same.
We entered a deal to swap to fixed rates for a portion of our loan that was on variable rates, exactly as it states.
Are you now gonna pretend you didn’t laugh your head off a few posts back at the idea of us having fixed rates?
Oh my fecking days indeed.
And you're the guy who thought we were on fixed rates
Again.
Wow.
Do we have loans on fixed rates?
Simple answer, yes or no? the clue is in the passage you posted.