Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Berbaclass said:
You're saying the ownership bears no responsibility for letting the team be relegated when they were 5 points above the relegation spot at the halfway point and when the transfer window opened and made signings?

They were mid-table when he bought them. Literally :lol:
Click to expand...

I would give them the first relegation, it's not easy to come into a club midseason and not only spot the issues and fix them. Now there is a bigger issue with the club basically being in the same context 5 years later.
 
JPRouve said:
I would give them the first relegation, it's not easy to come into a club midseason and not only spot the issues and fix them. Now there is a bigger issue with the club basically being in the same context 5 years later.
Click to expand...
I get that but they weren't exactly in dire straits. They came in and in their statement after buying the club were talking about European football

INEOS believes that Lausanne Sport has the potential to develop to the top of the Swiss league and has set out its ambition of qualifying for European football. INEOS has been impressed by the potential delivered to date through Team Vaud and looks forward to further enhancing the success based on junior player development and close links with the community.
Click to expand...
 
JPRouve said:
They have a bunch of other sport investments and they are all about PR.
Click to expand...

As I said, I concede the point.

I do think if their intentions were greenwashing as is often thrown at them, there are better and cheaper options though, such as investing in green technologies, committing to reducing their impact etc.
 
Berbaclass said:
I get that but they weren't exactly in dire straits. They came in and in their statement after buying the club were talking about European football
Click to expand...

Okay but unless you can point me to something that Ineos did during the first months that followed the purchase, then the reasons behind the relegation more than likely predated Ineos. I don't mind being critical of their ownership but that seeems over the top.
 
VP89 said:
It's not pessimistic because you keep writing if.

It's taking a worst case scenario. There's little to suggest they won't go for a middle ground. It's all posturing.

In fact there's more to suggest the opposite. They aren't going to piss off strategic partners and potential full investors for the sake of fishing for a future bid.

You can't say "we all know it will be rejected" just because Glazers want 6bn. They would obviously brief their top valuation. They aren't going to brief the valuation they'd settle for, for obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
It’s not me writing it, it’s the journalist and I can only see “if” once?

Well I hope you’re right and they find middle ground but the line there about Ineos and Qatar being out the running if their bids aren’t deemed high enough, added to the bit about him expecting their bids won’t be high enough, is quite negative in hopes

I think it’s clear a winner won’t be picked from this round of bidding and neither bid will be accepted. But we’ll see

Out of interest, what do you personally see happening next?
 
JPRouve said:
Okay but unless you can point me to something that Ineos did during the first months that followed the purchase, then the reasons behind the relegation more than likely predated Ineos. I don't mind being critical of their ownership but that seeems over the top.
Click to expand...
If you're buying a club mid-way through the season with them in mid-table and you get relegated it does kinda look like you don't know what you are doing.

To have that repeat itself a few years later certainly doesn't reflect well on the ownership.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
It’s not me writing it, it’s the journalist and I can only see “if” once?

Well I hope you’re right and they find middle ground but the line there about Ineos and Qatar being out the running if their bids aren’t deemed high enough, added to the bit about him expecting their bids won’t be high enough, is quite negative in hopes

I think it’s clear a winner won’t be picked from this round of bidding and neither bid will be accepted. But we’ll see

Out of interest, what do you personally see happening next?
Click to expand...
You're basing the whole pessimism around one if in that case :lol:
Literally from that premise you can't claim "we know the bid will be rejected".

I think it can go either way, we can't say with any remote conviction one way or another. If I were to guess I'd say a full sale
 
LawCharltonBest said:
Keegan

“While either would easily break the world record sum for buying a sports club, the Glazers are seeking much more. Insiders say that the Americans expect ‘well above £6billion’.

If the Glazers refuse to budge, the likelihood of a full sale going through is minimal. Indeed, there are growing concerns that those seeking to buy the club are wasting their time. Such a stand-off would leave the door open for offers of partial investment.

Those involved in the process expect to hear back in about seven days. However, there is a feeling that their bids may not be deemed high enough and both Sheik Jassim and Ratcliffe could be out of the running by the next stage.”

How is that not pessimistic?
Click to expand...
They would be bonkers to not take £5bn plus and do a runner. They are getting lowballed because of their dreadful mismanagement of the club. I can’t see any scenario where they will get more if they hang onto it because of the investment needed. Their ego’s may take a bit of a battering but they will still make a fortune for very little input.
 
Berbaclass said:
If you're buying a club mid-way through the season with them in mid-table and you get relegated it does kinda look like you don't know what you are doing.

To have that repeat itself a few years later certainly doesn't reflect well on the ownership.
Click to expand...

Or it looks like the club existing preparations were below par. And it looks like Ineos has no idea about how to upgrade them. To me it's fairly obvious that the answer that Lausanne were poorly run before Ineos and not better run after Ineos purchase. Which is different to suggest that Lausanne were relegated in 2017 due to Ineos.
 
Infra-red said:
If they stay, I expect they'll do so with minority investment, which should enable them to fund a refurb of the stadium/Carrington (or pay down the existing debt, which will give them the wriggle room to raise new debt for the refurbs).

If they hold out in the face of bids north of £5bn, it can only mean that they belive the value of the club hasn't peaked yet. They can have another go at exiting further down the road.
Click to expand...

But then they sell shares and receive nothing for them, and unless it’s a huge refurbishment it’s not going to add value. They’ll have effectively lost money they’ll have to get back and will get a smaller percentage of any future sale as they’ll own less of the club.

There’s no bidding war even at this price so any future sale at a significantly higher price is going to have to be a long way down the road. At the end of the day they are motivated by greed so they might not see past that but the club clearly isn’t as attractive at this kind of premium as some thought.
 
JPRouve said:
Or it looks like the club existing preparations were below par. And it looks like Ineos has no idea about how to upgrade them. To me it's fairly obvious that the answer that Lausanne were poorly run before Ineos and not better run after Ineos purchase. Which is different to suggest that Lausanne were relegated in 2017 due to Ineos.
Click to expand...
I don't agree as they have now shown this multiple times.

Might have deserved the benefit of the doubt had they not allowed the same thing to happen relatively quickly.
 
JPRouve said:
Not that's because they have been consistently outperformed by the likes of Lille, Lens or Rennes.
Click to expand...

The news reports at the time though basically pushed the notion Jim was going to plough millions in to take on PSG. They changed his name under this misguided belief.

It isn't possible for any other French side to compete financially with PSG no matter who the owner is.

Also, they're only 3 years in. We'd be better assessing where they are after 10.
 
VP89 said:
You're basing the whole pessimism around one if in that case :lol:
Literally from that premise you can't claim "we know the bid will be rejected".

I think it can go either way, we can't say with any remote conviction one way or another. If I were to guess I'd say a full sale
Click to expand...
I think our lines are getting crossed. Keegan
Says the bids are 5, Glazers want “well above” 6, that there’s a feeling the bids will be considered too low and then they’ll be out the running.

It’s a lot more to be pessimistic about than him saying “if” once
 
JagUTD said:
The news reports at the time though basically pushed the notion Jim was going to plough millions in to take on PSG. They changed his name under this misguided belief.

It isn't possible for any other French side to compete financially with PSG no matter who the owner is.

Also, they're only 3 years in. We'd be better assessing where they are after 10.
Click to expand...

You can try to twist it all you want, the reason they have been underwhelming is due to the everyone else but PSG. And the question is about what people think today, not in 10 years but if it take them 10 years to be better than the likes of Lens, Rennes or Lille then we already have our answer.
 
DownRiver said:
I know this is not specifically about the bids, but I feel there is so much bad rhetoric about Qatar. It would be nice balance the scales a little

Click to expand...

Probably getting one of those sweet retirement deals when he's ready to quit top level football (aged 53)
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I think our lines are getting crossed. Keegan
Says the bids are 5, Glazers want “well above” 6, that there’s a feeling the bids will be considered too low and then they’ll be out the running.

It’s a lot more to be pessimistic about than him saying “if” once
Click to expand...
I know that but my point is, glazers are going to brief their ideal solution, they won't be briefing Keegan the level they will settle at.

I wanted to sell my car at 8.5k minimum and a dealership asked what I wanted for it. I said 9k in to give my ideal figure and we met closer to what I'd settle for.

This is a similar thing. I know it's a big structured acquisition but by way of media briefs, sellers won't brief the media their bottom most acceptable figure. They'd go brief their best case scenario.

In fact Keegan doesn't once say Glazers won't sell for a penny less than 6bn. He just says they are looking for 6bn.
 
JPRouve said:
You can try to twist it all you want, the reason they have been underwhelming is due to the everyone else but PSG. And the question is about what people think today, not in 10 years but if it take them 10 years to be better than the likes of Lens, Rennes or Lille then we already have our answer.
Click to expand...

In the years prior to Ineos taking over, how did they perform? It's not a club I recall seeing very often in the Champions League so I presume top 3 finishes were rare.

I have seen their honours list before and it's something like 65 years since they won the League isn't it? So they're hardly a powerhouse of French football, past or present.

Also, weren't Lille champions the other year? Was that a Leicester level event in French football then? I presume you referencing these 3 clubs means they're all of similar stature and with the backing of Ineos, Nice should be outperforming them?
 
All this PSG talk is really detracting from the debate. Nobody can compete with them in a poor league unless another sovereign buyer comes in for another club. I also don’t buy into the correlation of wage bill v league position. Fulham and Brighton are doing really well this season, but I doubt they are the 7th or 8th highest payers. Arsenal may well win the league, without spending the most on wages. It’s all about how you manage the club and get your decisions right. We’ve spent fortunes since Sir Alex - and screwed it badly until this season. What we really need is an owner that is prepared to get the right people in and trust their judgement. No idea if that’s INEOS or Qatar - but doubt Glazers or Raine give a shit, unless the money is right.
 
Chief123 said:
Most of this ain’t discussions. It’s each other trying to convince the other who’s horse manure is better quality only for all parties to realise it was shat out by a dog.
Click to expand...
I tried pointing that out 50 pages ago, your response was ‘welcome to a forum…
 
George The Best said:
All this PSG talk is really detracting from the debate. Nobody can compete with them in a poor league unless another sovereign buyer comes in for another club. I also don’t buy into the correlation of wage bill v league position. Fulham and Brighton are doing really well this season, but I doubt they are the 7th or 8th highest payers. Arsenal may well win the league, without spending the most on wages. It’s all about how you manage the club and get your decisions right. We’ve spent fortunes since Sir Alex - and screwed it badly until this season. What we really need is an owner that is prepared to get the right people in and trust their judgement. No idea if that’s INEOS or Qatar - but doubt Glazers or Raine give a shit, unless the money is right.
Click to expand...

I've always said in England, the league is run by the best run club that season.

Money in the Premier League will only get you so far. The PSG discussion stems from this and how you can't operate like PSG in English football and expect success. Whether that's in the literal sense of spending 10 times your nearest rival (which would be billions per year) or by just taking their spending in France and transfering that to the English game.

Throughout this thread, much has been made about how Ineos run Nice and Lausanne. This has been used to dismiss the Ineos bid and as proof they would run United in the same way. So it's only fair to look at PSG and to a lesser extent, Malaga to see how Qatar may run United. Some of us don't like what we see and I suspect, if a certain forum member was inclined to do so, we'd find that many of those now defending PSG had very different opinions previously.

So the discussion isn't about PSG but about how they've been run, which in the context of the Qatari takeover bid is something to consider, just as it's fair to look at Nice and Lausanne.
 
JagUTD said:
I've always said in England, the league is run by the best run club that season.

So the discussion isn't about PSG but about how they've been run, which in the context of the Qatari takeover bid is something to consider, just as it's fair to look at Nice and Lausanne.
Click to expand...

I think that's all fair. If PSG is used as a bad stick against the Qatari's then I shudder to imagine what it would be like to if United were run like Nice and Lausanne. 5th in the league as an expectation and 10 year plans would become the norm of certain people in this thread.

Whatever you say about the Qataris taking us over, the expectation would be to directly competing with City head on. We may not win as you're right, the club would have to be run correctly but the expectation would be there.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
I think our lines are getting crossed. Keegan
Says the bids are 5, Glazers want “well above” 6, that there’s a feeling the bids will be considered too low and then they’ll be out the running.

It’s a lot more to be pessimistic about than him saying “if” once
Click to expand...

Will be bad news IF the likes of Ducker and Stone start doubting they will sell too
 
Rolaholic said:
Thread in a nutshell
Click to expand...
Internet in a nutshell more like. Everyone has become obsessed with their opinion being right. It destroys any meaningful discussion. Ricky Gervais got it right when he said we live in a world where people believe their opinion is worth as much as someone else's facts
 
JagUTD said:
In the years prior to Ineos taking over, how did they perform? It's not a club I recall seeing very often in the Champions League so I presume top 3 finishes were rare.

I have seen their honours list before and it's something like 65 years since they won the League isn't it? So they're hardly a powerhouse of French football, past or present.

Also, weren't Lille champions the other year? Was that a Leicester level event in French football then? I presume you referencing these 3 clubs means they're all of similar stature and with the backing of Ineos, Nice should be outperforming them?
Click to expand...

No one suggested that they are a powerhouse or expected to be a powerhouse, I told you that Nice have been seen as underwhelming. They haven't improved, they haven't really been a stable CL qualifier team, they have remained a team that is competing for the last EL spot which is underwhelming especially when you consider that during that period of time a promoted club that was in disarray for a long time managed to overtake them while Rennes stabilized above them.

So to go back to the nonsense that you want to sell, the reason Nice are seen as underwhelming isn't because they are compared to PSG, it's because they are compared to the other EL teams. Nice has failed to match Monaco and Marseille which is disappointing but somewhat okay but they are also barely matching the likes of Lens, Rennes or Lille. The only team that is even more underwhelming is Lyon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.