Could Utd be sold soon?

BluesJr said:
As a club this would be great for us and would ensure our place at the top table. That’s all I really care about.
Click to expand...
exactly. The Glazers have been milking money from the club for years, something I'd like to think someone who is worth £850b won't do. Instead the city will turn red again as currently it's looking purple leaning more towards blue with what they've done over there.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
So much morality here. Is money which is currently in club 100% clean? For example young kids worked for one dollar, 12 hours per day in bad conditions for adidas. Who knows what is happening with our other sponsors? GM sacked lots of workers in last few years while giving to us 50 mil per year. We can raise the stakes here and say that it is not moral to spend 10,20,100 mil for a player while people are starving in the world, in England, in Manchester.
Yes, Saudi regime is bad and it is something which we can't understand but if western democratic countries can accept their money and oil, then why we fans are so bothered with that?
Click to expand...

This.
 
To be fair football has been morally bankrupt in most areas for quite a long time, so this would just be a natural extension.
 
Look over at what teams like PSG are capable of in terms of spending power, just imagine what we could go and achieve with even more money. I understand there’s issues with where the money is coming from and that it makes us look like hypocrites but we are the richest club in the world already isn’t it time we properly show it?
 
Are the saudi’s the perfect fit for anyone? No and yes, do we want United to be great again? Yes, under the glazer ownership I don’t see that ever happening, when their vision for the club is how much they can make, with no real ambition then they are never the right owners for this club. We have city looking to be the biggest club in the world, while we have owners looking to make a pretty penny for themselves and have done since 2005 who managed to ride a storm under the great Scot.

To this day how they were allowed to buy the club will always anger me, for me I don’t think united have ever reaped the rewards of our success only the glazers, and that for me is why I want them gone. In a way I don’t mind us selling our soul to the devil, because what we have is snakes in the grass taking out the money we make, and putting very little in. Our ambition we want for the club, and what they see is two different things which is why we will never be great again with them owning us, and why they are the wrong owners for this club full stop. All the glazers are is a anchor weighing us down, and stopping us getting to where we should be
 
Last edited:
Generally these regimes look at buying football clubs (or other well known businesses) in order to (1) publicise their own countries (2) publicise themselves and, most worryingly (3) become more important on the global stage to avoid legitimate criticism of their regimes.

Whilst I don't particularly like the way the Glazers are running the club, I am against the Saudi Arabian ruling family taking over. What message does it send to our homosexual/female/religious etc fans knowing that the owners of the club they love would quite happily discriminate (or worse) against them?
 
reddaz71 said:
FROM A FOOTBALL PERSPECTIVE, we should all hope this deal goes ahead as Utd will go from being a huge club to an absolute colossus!
Click to expand...

More than anything else that appeals to me about such a take over is, that we wouldn't have to penny pinch as much. The SA's would want us to be the biggest and shiniest toy in the world. Hopefully, they'd spend money on our facilities etc.
 
J_XO said:
Is there any credible links with this happening??
Click to expand...

Depends what you mean credible? I've seen Independent report on this and the shares at the NYSE have increased on the back of the rumours. So I'd say has some credibility.
 
red thru&thru said:
More than anything else that appeals to me about such a take over is, that we wouldn't have to penny pinch as much. The SA's would want us to be the biggest and shiniest toy in the world. Hopefully, they'd spend money on our facilities etc.
Click to expand...

Have United been penny pinching recently?

United have spent £600m in the last 5 years, 2nd only to City in terms of spending. Now could United have spent more? Yes no doubt but theres a big difference between not spending to your limits and penny pinching.
 
I oppose a Saudi takeover. Not because of their morals, but because I believe the sport would be better off if the fans held majority stakes in the clubs they supported.
 
Qahir Makhani said:
You think that the EU isn't democratic ? Compared to Westminster?
You do know that there are credible rumours about paedophilia in Westminster among the Tories in particular. You think that this Tory government with their misogyny, human rights abuses and deployment of the term "final solution" are better than an institution that gives us rights?
Better than one which is cracking down hard on White Collar Crime? My word are you dense
Click to expand...

The public can vote the Conservatives out if they’re deemed unfit to rule, and they have won the past 2 elections, that’s how Democracy works - we have no say over who makes up the EU Commission, and the policy they dictate.

Europe needs to trade with Britain; the fact they’ve spent over two years making sensationalist threats and projecting such laughable doomsday propaganda supports that. We are an Economic superpower who’s fiscal capacity is being subdued by the Eurocrats, as will be proven in time.

Choosing between Corbyn and May is like opting to have your cock sawn or bitten off though - both need to be exiled.
 
The more I read comments about this topic online (via Daily Mail, Twitter, Redcafe..etc) I find it laughable that we (the fans) think we have any say in the club been sold to SA Royals or anyone for that matter. Do you honestly think the Glazers care about the club? if Jim Jong Un came in with a £4-5bn bid we'd be sold in the morning.
 
Trizy said:
The more I read comments about this topic online (via Daily Mail, Twitter, Redcafe..etc) I find it laughable that we (the fans) think we have any say in the club been sold to SA Royals or anyone for that matter. Do you honestly think the Glazers care about the club? if Jim Jong Un came in with a £4-5bn bid we'd be sold in the morning.
Click to expand...
Well at least he'd be trying to go native.
 
Why would you want Saudi takeover anyway? Because of more funds for football operations?

Can never stop wqtchwat United but surprised at the criticism of fans who prefer relegation over Saudi investment. These fans are not saying they will throw away rather not winning is not important. Sometimes winning is not that important.
 
It'll all be fun and games until Klopp or Guardiola goes into the referees room in OT after the game and is never seen or heard from again.
 
septic said:
The same Liverpool and Spurs fans most of the caf give **** to for not winning anything?

Yes City have bought their way to the league but come on, it doesn’t nullify a City fan’s joy of winning. That argument means no Barca or Madrid fan enjoy their own success either. Or Bayern fan, or PSG. I guess when we were the richest club in England buying all the best players off other English teams, we can’t enjoy those years either.

Fergie’s dynasty also relied on being one of the richest clubs in the world, too.

I imagine most fans of ‘proper clubs’ (lol) who have won feck all wouldn’t say no to foreign investment if they can get a bit more success. And there’s nothing wrong with that, short of bringing in a salary or transfer cap to help even out the competition.
Click to expand...

It does indeed nullify it, because I’m a City fan (by default) who’s morality makes it impossible to enjoy the dubious victories facilitated by the charity of tyrants.

Fergie’s dynasty was primarily built upon academy integration, genuine investments like Ferdinand, Carrick or Rooney who spent over a decade at the club and developed into elite level footballers as a result, or shrewdly acquired imports; Evra and Vidic cost about £6m each and Van Der Sar was picked up for circa £2m. Plus for the final 10 years of his tenure he had City and Chelsea expensively stockpiling players (who were often United targets)....so to suggest his success was in any substantial way down to money is delusional.

I’d rather be a Spurs fan - competitive at the top of the table off their own back, playing Champions League football annually with an academy kid winning Golden Boots at club and international level, all achieved while self-financing a £1b stadium. Success is relative.

City ‘should’ win the league - the bench of Gundogan, Otamendi, Bernardo, Mahrez is ultimately a collection of players who’d start for practically every other club in the league, so only a primitive mind would view it as some form of sporting success. In comparison, Ferguson was winning titles and competing in Europe with Jonny Evans, O’Shea, Phil Neville, Welbeck and Cleverley etc as his squad players.

United could be succesful with a few key appointments - the current squad is underperforming, mostly due to incompatibility with the manager, but the money is and has been there to be competitive.

Embrace new ownership, by all means, but not when it involves affiliation with the most savage dictatorship currently inhabiting the planet. Sharia has no place in the modern world, and any takeover would simply be a platform upon which to project it.
 
stevoc said:
Have United been penny pinching recently?

United have spent £600m in the last 5 years, 2nd only to City in terms of spending. Now could United have spent more? Yes no doubt but theres a big difference between not spending to your limits and penny pinching.
Click to expand...

How much have they spent on a much needed revamp on Old Trafford?
 
Niall said:
This is not a political discussion about Saudi Arabia. Keep it on topic about the football aspects of this discussion or this thread will be closed.
Click to expand...
How is it not directly linked?
 
sam147 said:
Always an undertone of xenophobia. Its less about United and more about racism. Feck them. Hope it happens.
Click to expand...

People who have an issue with Tyrants who systematically enslave, torture, murder, subjugate and decapitate NON-WHITE people are, er, racist??

Do elaborate.....
 
fishfingers15 said:
Why would you want Saudi takeover anyway? Because of more funds for football operations?

Can never stop wqtchwat United but surprised at the criticism of fans who prefer relegation over Saudi investment. These fans are not saying they will throw away rather not winning is not important. Sometimes winning is not that important.
Click to expand...

I for one am not saying the Saudis would be my perfect owners. I understand everyone's reservations about it. But you may have not read everyone's posts, as there plenty on here who have said they would stop following United/football etc, if they took over.

I personally want owners who don't need us as a business, like the current regime. Yes it's healthy in one aspect that the Glazers need us to perform as a business and we are self sufficient, however, we have read and heard time and time again, the Glazers don't need us to perform on the pitch as long as the business off it is thriving...which it is. As a supporter, I want a combination of both but firstly, I'd rather see my team thrive on the pitch and then off of it. So with the Saudis taking over (or someone of the ilk), i'm hoping with the funds available, they would not object to players being signed because of the fees, as we saw this summer.
 
Kostov said:
You are right, they actually did, which I'm shocked, I didn't expect even those 12 lines of text. They were probably aired somewhere between weather and sports. My mistake though, I'm probably in the wrong to put BBC in the same bracket as CNN.
Click to expand...

Read it again there’s far more than 12 lines if you scroll down - there’s 10 incidents detailed with further links to more detail, it was a big deal at the time
 
If this happened, anyone know what their feelings about the devil on our crest would be?
 
marukomu said:
If this happened, anyone know what their feelings about the devil on our crest would be?
Click to expand...

New owners could do whatever they want, of course - change the badge, change the club nickname, disband the women's team, rename Old Trafford, ritual executions on the pitch etc etc anything they want, really.
 
adexkola said:
I oppose a Saudi takeover. Not because of their morals, but because I believe the sport would be better off if the fans held majority stakes in the clubs they supported.
Click to expand...
I fully agree with this?
Plus I really don´t like how the Saudis are operating around the world.
 
red thru&thru said:
I for one am not saying the Saudis would be my perfect owners. I understand everyone's reservations about it. But you may have not read everyone's posts, as there plenty on here who have said they would stop following United/football etc, if they took over.

I personally want owners who don't need us as a business, like the current regime. Yes it's healthy in one aspect that the Glazers need us to perform as a business and we are self sufficient, however, we have read and heard time and time again, the Glazers don't need us to perform on the pitch as long as the business off it is thriving...which it is. As a supporter, I want a combination of both but firstly, I'd rather see my team thrive on the pitch and then off of it. So with the Saudis taking over (or someone of the ilk), i'm hoping with the funds available, they would not object to players being signed because of the fees, as we saw this summer.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that United thriving on the pitch is essential to you supporting them? So if we won the treble last year, you wouldn't want the Saudis to take over?
 
arthurka said:
I fully agree with this?
Plus I really don´t like how the Saudis are operating around the world.
Click to expand...

I don't either. I hate how my government engages in saber-rattling with Iran, while cozying up with the Saudis.

I don't think the solution is to decide where to draw the line when determining what billionaire should own the club. No billionaire should own a football club. Plus it cuts out 20 pages of waffling about why the Glazers are cool and the Sauds aren't.

I think the Germans do it right. Let the fans own majority shares in the club. Obviously they wouldn't directly run the club... a board would do that.
 
Can you imagine how many players Mou would be able to sign only to lose interest in them few months later?
 
This would be terrible for us, because you have to ask the question, "What is in it for them?"

They would make us into marketing tool for their country. Everything will be on the table. Renaming the club, the stadium, the crest, the kit. Re-writing our history with multi-million pound marketing campaigns. The cringey stuff that happens over at City would be ramped up to the max. We'd be a laughing stock. A fake club.
 
red thru&thru said:
How much have they spent on a much needed revamp on Old Trafford?
Click to expand...

Nothing and you can criticize them for that, i wish they would upgrade OT. But you can't say they have been penny pinching when it comes to the football side. They have been spending more than any other legitimately run non gulf state backed football club in the world the last few years.

Our struggles are not because of lack of spending and our success in the past wasn't built upon excessive spending either.
 
Wheato said:
This would be terrible for us, because you have to ask the question, "What is in it for them?"

They would make us into marketing tool for their country. Everything will be on the table. Renaming the club, the stadium, the crest, the kit. Re-writing our history with multi-million pound marketing campaigns. The cringey stuff that happens over at City would be ramped up to the max. We'd be a laughing stock. A fake club.
Click to expand...

Yep. And, all the while, we'd know that the entire circus was all about providing PR cover for a murderous regime of human rights abusers.

Yay!
 
adexkola said:
I don't either. I hate how my government engages in saber-rattling with Iran, while cozying up with the Saudis.

I don't think the solution is to decide where to draw the line when determining what billionaire should own the club. No billionaire should own a football club. Plus it cuts out 20 pages of waffling about why the Glazers are cool and the Saudis aren't.

I think the Germans do it right. Let the fans own majority shares in the club. Obviously they wouldn't directly run the club... a board would do that.
Click to expand...

Neither option is particularly cool, as it were, but the Glazers are certainly the lesser of two evils.

The idea of the fans controlling the majority shares in the club is definitely appealing, but that will never happen at United. We were in danger of foreign ownership the very moment we became a PLC. Surprised it has taken this long to be fair. If the Saudi's don't buy the club, someone else will.
 
stevoc said:
Our struggles are not because of lack of spending and our success in the past wasn't built upon excessive spending either.
Click to expand...

This is exactly right. What our club is currently missing is competent people with football expertise in senior positions. We don't need a tyrant's blood money - we're plenty rich enough to achieve our goals already.
 
fishfingers15 said:
Are you saying that United thriving on the pitch is essential to you supporting them? So if we won the treble last year, you wouldn't want the Saudis to take over?
Click to expand...

Apologise if you didn't understand my post. I said I want a thriving football club both off and on the pitch. As a supporter, I want my club to be doing the best. I want to go and watch my team play, play entertaining football, win and go home happy. I then don't want to worry about my club going bust, because the off the off the field business has gone to pot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.