Very, very well said.
Could Utd be sold soon?
- Thread starter wolvored
- Start date
Tbf though, the current owners are pro Trump and pro israel/Zionism, not exactly top of the humanitarin polls themselves.
If anyone was going to lose their hands without Saudi ownership, It'd probably be Phil Jones in some horrible clumsy accident trying to make a sandwich.
Well said. The attempts some people are making to morally justify the Saudis because of the United States' bombing of Japan or British foreign policy are absolutely ridiculous.
Most of the people who are criticising the Saudis are also openly critical of the Glazers. I loathe the Glazers and want them nowhere near United. But they're not as bad as the House of Saud
Interesting thread and some really good posts (some silly ones too!)
1. For those supporting a buy out by the Saudi Royal family, the amount of derision I've seen on the caf for City aimed at the fact that they have bought their success, have no history of success without oil money etc. I am amazed that people suddenly want that for Utd especially given the amount of threads and posts around the disconnect that is already there from the owners and the pride in the club's unique history.
2. Lots of stuff around Utd's sponsors, claims that some already are Saudi and others have shady dealings and backgrounds, I'd be really interested if someone with knowledge around these started a thread detailing some of them as I haven't seen any firm examples here, though that doesn't mean they don't exist. Also there's a huge difference between being sponsored by a Saudi company and being owned by the Royal family.
3. It's worth remembering that the Saudi Royal family, do not need money, they need decent public relations and that in my ind is exactly what would be behind this, do people on here really want their club used as a PR tool for what everyone agrees is a corrupt and barbaric regime?
4. Personally I'd be horrified if the Saudi Royals decided to buy my club (Brighton - so therefore very unlikely!) regardless of cash and transfers. I can completely understand people struggling with the dilemna of supporting the club they love while it's intimately associated with a ruling family that stands for everything they abhor.
1. For those supporting a buy out by the Saudi Royal family, the amount of derision I've seen on the caf for City aimed at the fact that they have bought their success, have no history of success without oil money etc. I am amazed that people suddenly want that for Utd especially given the amount of threads and posts around the disconnect that is already there from the owners and the pride in the club's unique history.
2. Lots of stuff around Utd's sponsors, claims that some already are Saudi and others have shady dealings and backgrounds, I'd be really interested if someone with knowledge around these started a thread detailing some of them as I haven't seen any firm examples here, though that doesn't mean they don't exist. Also there's a huge difference between being sponsored by a Saudi company and being owned by the Royal family.
3. It's worth remembering that the Saudi Royal family, do not need money, they need decent public relations and that in my ind is exactly what would be behind this, do people on here really want their club used as a PR tool for what everyone agrees is a corrupt and barbaric regime?
4. Personally I'd be horrified if the Saudi Royals decided to buy my club (Brighton - so therefore very unlikely!) regardless of cash and transfers. I can completely understand people struggling with the dilemna of supporting the club they love while it's intimately associated with a ruling family that stands for everything they abhor.
The Glazers will have to sell at some point. It’s always been about profit for them and they will realise that whilst the club isn’t challenging for major trophies “the brand” becomes less saleable.
It would be an easy decision to make. Invest £500-£1BN to catch City with no guarentee of a return or sell the club for £4BN to an oil nation who lose that kind of money down the back of the sofa?
It would be an easy decision to make. Invest £500-£1BN to catch City with no guarentee of a return or sell the club for £4BN to an oil nation who lose that kind of money down the back of the sofa?
So the majority do not want the immoral Saudis while the same lot are quite happy to be strung along by a family from the only country to have used a nuclear bomb...
There is a difference between having owners from a hated country with questionable political views (but lack political power) and having owners who actually wield political power and do so in a gravely immoral manner.
If it is someone rich from Saudi that’s is one thing but if it is someone within the current Saudi Royal circle with close ties or on behest of the Prince himself - we would be right to be concerned.
I would be just as concerned if it was Trump or Kim. I’m sure there is enough rich businessman out there we can seek out without having to resort to sell to political leaders.
The links with the Saudis came about from the Daily Star. But there have been reports of their interest in us for quite awhile. So, their preliminary interest could well be genuine.
Currently, the Royal Family is trying to present a more "moderate" face to the world, allowing women to drive and shit like that. It stems from their realization that oil won't last forever and strong global trade relations as well as some tourism opportunities (besides the lucrative annual Mecca pilgrimage) is the way forward.
In such a context, news such as the Khashoggi murder don't do them a whole lot of good. So what better way to improve their image and mask their atrocities than buying Manchester United, and making it a vehicle for their propaganda? Salman would probably appear at OT, stylishly dressed and projecting himself as "just a fan".
If given a choice between the Glazers' incompetence and greed, or the Middle Eastern version of Stalin, I'd probably choose the former. It's like choosing between cat shit or dog shit though.
Currently, the Royal Family is trying to present a more "moderate" face to the world, allowing women to drive and shit like that. It stems from their realization that oil won't last forever and strong global trade relations as well as some tourism opportunities (besides the lucrative annual Mecca pilgrimage) is the way forward.
In such a context, news such as the Khashoggi murder don't do them a whole lot of good. So what better way to improve their image and mask their atrocities than buying Manchester United, and making it a vehicle for their propaganda? Salman would probably appear at OT, stylishly dressed and projecting himself as "just a fan".
If given a choice between the Glazers' incompetence and greed, or the Middle Eastern version of Stalin, I'd probably choose the former. It's like choosing between cat shit or dog shit though.
Actually there aren't. It would have to be a consortium. And in that consortium there would no doubt be individuals with question marks over them - you don't get that rich without stepping on people along the way.
The Glazers' only criteria as businessmen would be to sell the club to a buyer who has the wherewithal to purchase it and take it forward. I very much doubt political considerations would be an issue for them.
I’m not saying that we need to sell to angels - every businessman or group of them, there will always be some skeletons in the closet.
I just think the current Saudi regime would be a step too far. It would just leave a bitter taste in the mouth.
I’d feel more disgusted fwiw if it was a consortium led by Trump and some alt right wing republicans.
Goodness - did you write that while wearing your Antifa balaclava?
What a silly thing to say, I'd be bloody disgusted if it was Trump too. Or did you type that wearing your MAGA cap?
wow ..
I didn't expect to see such hatred and buffoonery towards the Saudis. such a shame ..What made me chuckle though somebody was calling us out on for crime against humanity. Get a grip.
I'm a Saudi, not your typical kind.
It'll be just like City as you see Mansour flexing for the benefit of the good fortunately. Muhammed bin Salman is a sophisticated man with a vision and he has what it takes to be the best.
It'll be a fresh start. Why so pessimistic ?
I didn't expect to see such hatred and buffoonery towards the Saudis. such a shame ..What made me chuckle though somebody was calling us out on for crime against humanity. Get a grip.
I'm a Saudi, not your typical kind.
It'll be just like City as you see Mansour flexing for the benefit of the good fortunately. Muhammed bin Salman is a sophisticated man with a vision and he has what it takes to be the best.
It'll be a fresh start. Why so pessimistic ?
Last edited:
I know they are. They don't seem fair, but ask people who have been at the end of those wars your country waged, and you will find people thinking what a bunch of hypocrites they are. I for one, partly understand, not everyone is in favor of governments doings but also 80% don't really give a feck until it knocks on their door step.
If I could choose, then fine, I'd want some lesser crooks and better men to own my favorite football club, but at the end of the day, what can we as fans really do? Nothing is the answer. So to stop supporting my football club is out of question for me.
The issue isn't the Saudi people, but primarily the ruling family as has been expressed by quite a few posters here. There the problem is how the Kingdom is run. Amnesty in their 2017-2018 report on KSA sum it up like this:
The authorities severely restricted freedoms of expression, association and assembly. Many human rights defenders and critics were detained and some were sentenced to lengthy prison terms after unfair trials. Several Shi’a activists were executed, and many more were sentenced to death following grossly unfair trials before the Specialized Criminal Court (SCC). Torture and other ill-treatment of detainees remained common. Despite limited reforms, women faced systemic discrimination in law and practice and were inadequately protected against sexual and other violence. The authorities used the death penalty extensively, carrying out scores of executions. The Saudi-led coalition continued to commit serious violations of international law in Yemen.
A lot of people here don't want Manchester United owned by a family that allows this to happen.
It's not that I don't give a feck, just stopped giving as much. I'm fecking appalled by lots of things but shit happens everyday around us and people don't care to do the least that they are able, never mind greater good. We are in an era when a regular chap, would firstly take out his phone and record someone dying rather than help.
And that last part, if I could choose, I'd rather some better men to own the club, but if not I can't just give up on it. Fergie deserves better than that, countless of other legends who have been heroes of mine fought for this club better than that. It's out of question for me.
I just have problems how people fecking choose when to have morals and when not. I agree that most of the time, we just can't do anything really.
I will remind you of this post in a few weeks
Why would you be "bloody disgusted" if it were Trump?
I'm bloody disgusted by first touches.
Bugs me too
Could depend on the knowledge you have on the certain subject aswell. I always try not to discuss if I feel I don't have enough knowledge about the subject to do so.
I think it's inevitable that we're being sold. In a couple of decades all football clubs will be owned by arabs unless some rules are put in place.
When Mbappe bangs in a hat-trick in the CL final, are you going to not celebrate due to the poor human rights record of a country?
I'd be ballooning about, giving zero fecks...
So the majority do not want the immoral Saudis while the same lot are quite happy to be strung along by a family from the only country to have used a nuclear bomb...
If ever there was a case to use the bomb against an enemy who didn’t have it, it was against the Japanese in 1945. It saved countless Allied lives against an enemy who had slaughtered civilians for the previous 20 years. Meanwhile, it was 73 years ago, so I’m struggling with the relevance.
Fair enough, I'm not going to to tell you what to think, if you're happy with your club being owned by people like that it's your call.
For me it would sum up the clubs current direction in a nutshell. Zero values on the pitch and zero values off it. Worst top team in Europe in terms of aesthetics with zero fecks given about the fans and their enjoyment of the game and no respect for the traditions and principles this club was built on. Also sums up the current mindset of the fanbase - win at all costs mentality and deriding any fans who actually care about the bigger picture - well where has the have it all now mentality got us? Nowhere. More money will not guarantee more success, mo problems is more likely.
As a Muslim I would say having a Trump led consortium or any racist right wing politician take charge of the club would be unforgivable but whilst the Saudi buyout would bother me slightly less it’s still something we should try to avoid at all costs if possible. If the club is around 4BN - I’m sure there will be plenty of buyers out there who would be interested.
The only people left safe from dismembering would be those that frequent the is the United forum safe to go into yet.
Of course knowledge, but also perception of all things considered. But be sure that people in general are always more judging about the evil far away from home while turn a blind eye on the domestic evil. I'm not sure how it is perceived in these countries (US and UK), but outside especially in countries like mine, USA and UK are well known warmongers and two countries that violated every fecking law of international relations. Yet we all cherish the American dream, the majestic old Empire of Britain and what not else. They can't do no wrong. What I mean to say is, we are all fecking hypocrites, I just don't want to pretend that I am any different.
I guess, it's the way it is, and most of us must go with the flow.
And there's the problem in a nutshell. Once you start bringing politics into this particular equation everything goes haywire.
I'd be quite happy with whatever or whoever is best for the future of the club regardless of politics.
Absolutely agree, but that's why I'd also be horrified if Theresa May or Donald Trump wanted to take over my club
I really hope it is not the Saudis. I couldn't stop supporting the club but it would be a huge black mark. There could be few worse owners than them.
Some people don't give a feck sure, and the vast majority of us could do more to make the world a better place no doubt. But some people work very hard all their lives to combat injustices.
I've no idea what the world would be like today if everyone in the past just thought well the majority of people don't care about most things so i won't bother either.
Ferguson, Busby, Charlton and everyone who made United great over it's history deserve better than having the club they built being used as a PR tool for a brutal backward regime.
I really don't think majority of posters think in the way you are assuming (British or American - White?). They would be just as up in arms if it was the current republican regime trying to lead a consortium to buy the club.
This racial bias angle that is being used to defend the Saudi government in this thread is disingenuous IMO. I think most fans just want owners who are not tied to any questionable forms of political power. Quite frankly we should be avoiding anyone with strong political ties full stop.. the club should not be used as a pawn of a political head. Give me a shady businessman instead any day of the week than that.
No one is saying no Saudi's full stop.. that would be racism or more accurately xenophobic. They're just saying no to the actual Royal Family especially in its current form.
Well, Theresa May, Trump, Bush, Blair and whoever the feck is the latest mascot in charge were put in position of power by the people didn't they? The beacon of democracy and all. They represent a nation's will, they are not some Marvel villain. The owners of PSG and City seem like pretty good businessmen, Saudis might be as well.Absolutely agree, but that's why I'd also be horrified if Theresa May or Donald Trump wanted to take over my club
We (I'm from Serbia) in ex-yugoslavia have felt the "good" intentions of the west which in general are the UK and the US. I understand what you're talking about but you have to remember that many people only know what the media have shown or are showing. If you watched the BBC and RTS during the war they were polar opposites and the truth was probably somewhere in the middle. I've been to Skopje and seen the "American Embassy" it's a fecking army base built on the soil of a sovereign country. But since we don't have anything to fight with we have no choice but to roll over.
People need to understand the Guardian and the Green party don't have the funds to take over our football club. Momentum might if JC ever comes into power.
Until then it's going to be some rich bastard who made his money screwing someone, somewhere. Saudi/Chinese/American/Tory it's all the same.
Until then it's going to be some rich bastard who made his money screwing someone, somewhere. Saudi/Chinese/American/Tory it's all the same.
The moral equivalence arguments about the US or the UK are missing the point. United are currently owned by a family of private investors who happen to be American. The club is not owned by the US state nor used to promote the US. Therefore there is no meaningful link between United and the acts of the US government. If, on the other hand, you take Man City, there is a very clear link between the club and the state of which their owners form part of the ruling family - sponsorships with other UAE state conpanies, stadium names, Abu Dhabi tourism promotion, Etihad aircraft painted sky blue etc. So, even if you take the view that money doesn’t smell, many of us would be uncomfortable with United’s name/brand becoming intrinsically linked with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Yea you're correct, I hadn't read the whole thread, so maybe I came in at a bit of tangent. I still think there's a difference between a minor? sponsor and the owners being serial human rights abusers, to the point that it would justify people taking a different stance regarding their love for the club.
I see it kind of like this:
Minor sponsor: club is condoning it
Owners: club is effectively promoting it
Again though, it is possible for people to be passionate about human rights but simply unaware of our sponsors being suspect.