Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
backofthenet said:
Will be not as much when taking into account Sabitzer, Weghorst and Butland... still better than a poke in the eye I suppose
Click to expand...

Presumably a bonus for the League Cup win to factor in, too, but getting rid of Ronaldo has been a blessing on and off the pitch.
 
stevoc said:
I'd be willing to believe it could be higher than 40b mate. You just don't know with guys like that.

Now hypothetically if this isn't a state bid, then realistically Jassim and his Dad even at that level of wealth aren't funding this takeover and proposed investment from cash reserves. So either a lot of the funding will be coming from a consortium, borrowing or somewhere else. Or a mix of all 3 along with some of their own money.

And I think this is what a lot of United fans would like to know. Where exactly is the money coming from.
Click to expand...

Ye I'd love to know too and same for the INEOS bid where there are questions about debt finance

But it's only Raine and the Glazers who will get the full details - in fact maybe they won't even get the fine details, the bidders just need a proof of funds to back up their offer
 
Infra-red said:
The players no doubt hate it, but it probably incentivises performance, too. Will be a further reduction in Q3 (no Ronaldo).
Click to expand...

It's a good thing if they hate as you say. It should give them a kick up the backside.

Ronaldo apparently wasn't happy at all with the terms. A man worth a reported £700m. Hahaha
 
Beachryan said:
I'm not sure if it's a Q2 thing, but aren't we really seasonal in terms of cash flow as a business? I seem to remember someone sensible like Swiss Ramble writing up something on it, where it doesn't make sense to look outside of the full year view.

Having non-stop home games in every cup has got to help too.
Click to expand...

Ye absolutely because all the ST money comes in over one quarter

Then there are other quarters affected by transfer windows
 
Bosws87 said:
Genuine affinity to a club they have been to see a handful of times which is met with chants about killing the owner and chopping him into pieces. :lol:
Click to expand...
I think genuine affinity is the wrong phrase, I personally think they like the prestige of owning the club and arn’t keen on losing that prestige
 
Nytram Shakes said:
I think genuine affinity is the wrong phrase, I personally think they like the prestige of owning the club and arn’t keen on losing that prestige
Click to expand...

No they have an affinity to huge amounts of cash its really that simple.
 
Beachryan said:
I'm not sure if it's a Q2 thing, but aren't we really seasonal in terms of cash flow as a business? I seem to remember someone sensible like Swiss Ramble writing up something on it, where it doesn't make sense to look outside of the full year view.

Having non-stop home games in every cup has got to help too.
Click to expand...

That's correct. Big cash influx in summer each year (ST renewals + TV distribution + upfront sponsorship payments). United's cash balance is therefore always high in June.
 
backofthenet said:
Numbers definitely look like we cannot continue in the current path we have with the Glazers. Our incomes are not matching our outgoings currently. I can understand why, after quite a few years, they've decided to up ticket costs, as that drawdown facility cannot be cheap on interest. Whilst overall wages to turnover looks reasonably healthy, I think its clear that we need some fairly sizeable transfer incomings to do pretty much anything in the summer.
Click to expand...
I think your right, club will need to sell at least £80-100m worth of players to have a transfer budget of £200m. I estimated that our wages would reduce from £385m last year to £315m which looks in line with recent reports. Turnover will reduce from £593m last year to £550m this year in spite of cup runs because of no CL football. With the 90% sustainability rule for FFP this year we should be ok providing we sell well this summer.
 
Woziak said:
Didn’t know about the cricket team, they will obviously tour Qatar as the Middle East is a growing cricket market. The fact the Glaziers will have paid off their Credit Card line of £100m by June actually suggests they are preparing the club for some sort of takeover let’s hope it’s a full one.
Click to expand...

Yes. Without going through each line item, Arnold may have been instructed to polish up the books to look good for the sale.
 
BarstoolProphet said:
It's hard to say, but judging by his official and non-official (PP leaks) investments, it's fair to say that the family company is worth "many multiples", as FT put it, than the Western estimate. Let's put it this way - Is a man "only" worth £1,2bn able to spend nearly half of that on a painting and a yacht?
Click to expand...

Definitely not mate but on the same token I also don't see a man worth even 40 times the Forbes estimate dropping £7-8 billion on a football club out of his own pocket without help from another source whether that's borrowed, consortium or state backing etc.
 
Berbaclass said:
Club is living off the revolving credit facility. They need to sell
Click to expand...
They don’t need to sell though, they are not interested in winning trophies or what the fans think of them or do, they have been here a long time and will be here for a lot longer than you think and that’s why they are inviting investment money.
I bet you a pound to a pinch of shit these wonderful owners of ours will still be here in ten years time.
 
stevoc said:
Definitely not mate but on the same token I also don't see a man worth even 40 times the Forbes estimate dropping £7-8 billion on a football club out of his own pocket without help from another source whether that's borrowed, consortium or state backing etc.
Click to expand...

That mainly being because their worth is not liquid?
 
strandty said:


Click to expand...


Due to the litany of human rights abuses that the state is guilty of, this would certainly prevent Qatar from purchasing United (or, one presumes, QIA/QSI). I am not aware of any alleged human rights abuses committed directly by Sheikh Jassim, though, so provided the Qataris can convince the Premier League that Jassim does not equal Qatar/QIA, they should be fine.

Newcastle could be in a spot of bother, though. They are officially owned by PIF (the Chairman of which is MBS).
 
Infra-red said:
Due to the litany of human rights abuses that the state is guilty of, this would certainly prevent Qatar from purchasing United (or, one presumes, QIA/QSI). I am not aware of any alleged human rights abuses committed directly by Sheikh Jassim, though, so provided the Qataris can convince the Premier League that Jassim does not equal Qatar/QIA, they should be fine.

Newcastle could be in a spot of bother, though. They are officially owned by PIF (the Chairman of which is MBS).
Click to expand...

His father, who is financing his bid, has several human rights abuses that have been posted about. I really don't know how they could distinguish accused vs proven as some of these people are untouchable in their countries?
 
Interesting timing. Not saying that the points are wrong but it's just funny it's being implemented just now, when we have a decent chance of being bought by Qataris. They suddenly got very interested in human rights after ignoring them for over a decade. What a coincidence.
 
dove said:
Interesting timing. Not saying that the points are wrong but it's just funny it's being implemented just now, when we have a decent chance of being bought by Qataris. They suddenly got very interested in human rights after ignoring them for over a decade. What a coincidence.
Click to expand...
Probably more due to the white paper than us specifically. PL sending out a message to the government saying "Look we can govern ourselves"
 
Zaphod2319 said:
His father, who is financing his bid, has several human rights abuses that have been posted about. I really don't know how they could distinguish accused vs proven as some of these people are untouchable in their countries?
Click to expand...

Unless his father is an owner/Director or, under these new rules, CEO, it would not be relevant.

To your second point, you don't actually need to have been convicted of any crime, as the legislation makes clear:

"A new power for the League to stop those who wish to become 'Directors' where they are under investigation for conduct that would result in a 'Disqualifying event' if proven."

Simply being under investigation is enough to block someone becoming a club Director.
 
Berbaclass said:
Probably more due to the white paper than us specifically. PL sending out a message to the government saying "Look we can govern ourselves"
Click to expand...

Indeed. The Premier League don't want a new football regulator coming in and taking significant powers away from them, so they are desperately trying to show that they can run things properly.
 
Infra-red said:
Unless his father is an owner/director or, under these new rules, CEO, it would not be relevant.

To your second point, you don't actually need to have been convicted of any crime, as the legislation makes clear:

"A new power for the League to stop those who wish to become 'Directors' where they are under investigation for conduct that would result in a 'Disqualifying event' if proven."
Click to expand...
Based on the The Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020 which gives the U.K. government the power to sanction individuals on the basis of human rights. It has been used to freeze the assets of various Russian nationals. Obviously Al Thani isn’t on the list considering relations between the U.K. and Qatar. I doubt it has any relevance to the Qatari takeover bid and has likely been added due to the Chelsea situation with RA.
 
I am SURE City and Newcastle owners will be removed according to these "allegations"

Human rights in United Arab Emirates Amnesty International
Human rights in Saudi Arabia Amnesty International

Qatar State for comparison:
Human rights in Qatar Amnesty International

However shouldn't be an issue since Sheik Jassim does not equal Qatar state despite links this has never been a bid from QIA/QSI.

It is a bid from Nine Two Foundation which is backed by Sheik Jassim whos FATHER has links to QIA, I think that enough degrees of seperation to maybe see this go through if they win.
 
So they asked city and newcastle about the rules and they were all in favour.

some more box ticking exercise to make it look like their doing something
 
It is and it cannot be up to any Football Association decide whether some prospetive owner behaves against human rights or whatever… this is matter of governments at gov level, declaring an entity “persona non grata” (like Abramovich six months ago). The only way the FA can legally / objectively refuse Qatari’s bid is by enforcing their own fit and proper protocol.
 
Bepi said:
It is and it cannot be up to any Football Association decide whether some prospetive owner behaves against human rights or whatever… this is matter of governments at gov level, declaring an entity “persona non grata” (like Abramovich six months ago). The only way the FA can legally / objectively refuse Qatari’s bid is by enforcing their own fit and proper protocol.
Click to expand...
Not at all, this isnt necessarily an issue of legality, and Id like to think that the FA could hold people to a higher set of standards than the government.
 
mu4c_20le said:
Not at all, this isnt necessarily an issue of legality, and Id like to think that the FA could hold people to a higher set of standards than the government.
Click to expand...

So its basically, we can buy gas and oil from you, we sell you weapons and you can invest billions in the country but don't touch our football club clause?
 
devilish said:
So its basically, we can buy gas and oil from you, we sell you weapons and you can invest billions in the country but don't touch our football club clause?
Click to expand...
Football is seperate from the UK state and has a right to construct and enforce its own codes of conduct. This isn't a dictatorship/absolute monarchy/constitutional monarchy where the constitution is the sole responsiblity of the monarch.
 
webbthepostie said:
Football is seperate from the UK state and has a right to construct and enforce its own codes of conduct. This isn't a dictatorship/absolute monarchy/constitutional monarchy where the constitution is the sole responsiblity of the monarch.
Click to expand...

Ah that's an elegant way how to hide the hypocrisy. I wonder how the government would act towards the FA if these nations decide not to invest + sell oil and gas to the UK because of it
 
mu4c_20le said:
Not at all, this isnt necessarily an issue of legality, and Id like to think that the FA could hold people to a higher set of standards than the government.
Click to expand...
Except they’re quite literally using the list set out by the Government. This is the EPL saying if you’re on this U.K. government list you fail the fit and proper test - and crucially if you’re added after purchasing a club we can kick you out - a power I don’t think they had with RA. Currently 49 people have been added to the sanctions list via the The Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uk-sanctions-list
 
Yeah I'm not worried about the Qatar bid being blocked. I am worried that the Glazers won't accept it.
 
devilish said:
So its basically, we can buy gas and oil from you, we sell you weapons and you can invest billions in the country but don't touch our football club clause?
Click to expand...
Another reason the govt shouldn't get involved; there's a conflict of interest.
Mickeza said:
Except they’re quite literally using the list set out by the Government. This is the EPL saying if you’re on this U.K. government list you fail the fit and proper test - and crucially if you’re added after purchasing a club we can kick you out - a power I don’t think they had with RA.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-uk-sanctions-list
Click to expand...
My point is that it should be possible for the FA to have even stricter guidelines than the govt, not that they should be using a different set of rules
 
Status
Not open for further replies.