Serious journalists would have multiple sources and wouldn't report anything unless all these sources say the same thing. Unfortunately I don't see that happening in football. We are linked with hundreds of players each year and most of the so called tier 1-2 journalists got their fingers burnt with this bid no bid mess.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Serious journalists would have multiple sources and wouldn't report anything unless all these sources say the same thing. Unfortunately I don't see that happening in football. We are linked with hundreds of players each year and most of the so called tier 1-2 journalists got their fingers burnt with this bid no bid mess.
Are you deliberately avoiding the word “consistently”? Neither Arsenal, nor Leicester have consistently challenged. No body has except Man City.
Yes Man City are better managed but that’s a must have with or without money. But having the financial stability allowed them to make far many mistakes that well-run self sustaining clubs can’t afford to. They have hundreds of millions of dollars worth of players on the bench.
Given our debt situation, we are playing with fire. A few wrong decisions, which is normal, will throw us over the edge.
I think they feel the Glazers or Raine are getting them to bid higher against themselves by making out there is more bidders.
The only reliable information we have is the one issued by the initial statements and TBF SJR's IS was far more vague then Jassim's (we don't even know if INEOS will make us debt free or not). Then there's a SJR's interview at the wall street journal where he insisted that he would not pay silly money and where he likened United to a painting or a house. The rest are all leaks.
Sorry, probably a dull question but, what has Barclays got to do with the league?
Title sponsors
The bid may be vague but who they are is not. And again I'm really not talking about Ineos. Them being bad, if they are, does not make the Jassim bid good. Sure they have said all the things people would want to hear but that doesn't mean it's true. There are huge question marks. Like who exactly are the Nine Two foundation? Where is the money coming from?
Deflecting back on SJR doesn't make the issues with what we don't know about the Qatari bidders go away.
Didn't that end a long time ago?
Title sponsors for 15 years or so (ended in 2018 iirc) and now the official banking partner. But whatever it is they write on paper, their partnership has been successful commercially for both parties. I can't see Barclays not wanting to be associated with Premier League, ever, so if we look deeper into that, QIA is also associated with the Premier League. Not that I'm annoyed by that or anything. It just shows how wide the Qatari has been spreading their investments.
Which would signify that INEOS bid is higher, if it's circa the same amount but for a lesser percentage originally than the Qatari bid.
The WSJ is a worthless thing to quote nowadays. It just reports what rich people want to say, nothing more than that.
I’ve said this multiple times in this thread but QIA have pumped over £34b into the UK economy via investments in British companies, Barclays being one of them. They already own part of your banks, your housing, your petrol, where you shop etc.
No other foreign country has invested more than they have in the UK economy.
They’re already here and they’re not leaving.
both the bids are for the Glazer shares only
if Qatar want the rest that will be a seperate transaction
So did SJR and Qatar put the new bids in?
Ah Ok that wasn't abundantly clear in the reports,
so there is no guarantee that Qatar will ever own the 100% they are targeting, which adds an extra level of intrigue on that bid.
Neither he nor the Jassim put in new bids.
Are they actually allowed to do that? Because it sounds like a breach of fair market competition if there's such a thing for these bidding processes. Also would be really detrimental to Raine's reputation as a middleman if it surfaces that they made up bidders. Glazers probably doesn't care about their own reputation I guess.
They will probably do a squeeze-out if it comes to that.
You'd think, but there's no guarantee that they'd be able to do so, as I doubt the ruling that allowed the Glazers to do so still exists?
Ah yes, so they did, apologies!
They are still the 'official bank' of the Premier League
https://www.premierleague.com/partners/barclays
There is no guarantee outside of them being called liars if they don't follow through on their promise, but then there's no guarantee of either following through on anything they say. However buying the rest of shares after they buy glazer shares is pretty straightforward and will most likely see utd become a private company again.
The rest are mostly leaks ie the same leaks that made most so called journalists look silly when told that sjr and jassim had placed bids when it wasn't the case
Bids going in today then or what?
Best and final offers from two utterly garbage bidders
Apparently not, Qatar and JSR still havent put in new bids.
I'm saying nothing :tapsnoseandwinks:
Seems bizarre that two bidders are given more time than the others, presumably to gather more information about the other bids. Hardly a fair bidding process
I don’t understand we know nothing from the other supposedly bids. Could one of the other supposedly six bids be Avram and Joel themselves trying to get all the shares of their siblings with some investors? That would be a horror show!
Seems like a shit show.
Still a bit odd. I'm firmly in the Glazer stay camp now, for shits and giggles and all that.
Your last line sums it up perfectly. MOST of the journalists. To be fair, there's not one journalist, who has been reporting on this takeover, commented that the bid hadn't gone in. Even the likes of Rob Harris got it wrong.
And, just like any transfer, things can change rapidly. There's always moving parts. As a consumer of news, you have to do your part and understand not everything is always gospel.
To say journalists don't have a clue is disingenuous to their craft. Of course, there are some chancers. However, not all of them.
I would guess that INEOS and Qatar bids are the only ones for a full acquisition while the other 5 or 6 are for a minority stake. Presumably the Glazers would prefer a full sale and are keeping those minority stake offers as a backup plan in case they cannot agree on a deal with either INEOS or Qatar. Those 2 would obviously need more time to prepare an offer too compared to the others.
The journos who waited until 8:30 to blindly claim bids went in to look like they have a source in the process
Perhaps they were the last two bids to have the meetings, and were at a disadvantage time wise because of that. It could be that simple.
Thats why I suspect the other bidders were financing, ghost or minority stake bidders (at best)
Last Thursday was the first time Raine has opened up the books -- current financial, legal obligations etc and future projections. There will be communication going back & forth between the bidding teams and the folks inside United to clarify things -- and over a weekend.
That's a lot of due diligence to push through and come up with an offer in 7 days.
Pretty obvious that both bids were trying to get an idea of what the other bid was before going in themselves.
This is a good one. How it Jim Ratcliffe a "generational recipient of success on the backs of English Slavery and colonialism"
He grew up in a council house, with a father who was a joiner and a mother who worked in an accounts office.
- Status