Could Utd be sold soon?

Mike Oxard said:
What? We outspent everybody in English football from the 1960’s onwards until Abramovich came along in 2005. We maybe didn’t do it on a European basis, but we broke the British transfer record time and time again (and we still do).
Click to expand...

We didn't though mate if you actually look into it. I don't know about the 60's but then the 60's are not part of the last 5 decades, 70's, 80's, 90's, 00's plus the last decade 2010-present. Theres a common perception that we outspent everyone in the 90's because we broke the transfer record a few times, but that narrative was mostly spun by people bitter at United's success and in an effort to take the shine off Fergusons achievements.

We could spend big in certain windows on certain players basically because of the class of 92 being a mix of world class players and very good squad players costing nothing allowed us to do so. Along with shrewd purchases like Irwin, Schmeichel and Cantona. Liverpool, Arsenal and Newcastle regularly outspent United in most summers, they just spent it on more players.

Also don't ignore the wage issue i mentioned in my last post, transfer fees are one thing but many, many teams were able to offer 2-3 times what United could per week in wages back then. As i said even the likes of Middlesbrough had Ravanelli on £40k per week in 1997. Keane's new contract in 2000 broke the wage structure, which enabled us to spend big. We went out in 2001 and 2002 and bought the likes Veron and RVN and then Ferdinand the following summer. So yes United were able to blow everyone out of the water in terms of wages and fees for a grand total of 2 years up until Roman bought Chelsea.. Chelsea were spending £100-130m every summer after Abramovich back in 2003-05. United have only got to that level of spending the last few years. Have a read of these two links mate, it gives you an idea of who the biggest spenders in English football have been.

https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/3nva0g/an_overview_of_the_top_spending_english_clubs_by/

http://therepublikofmancunia.com/did-united-buy-success-like-chelsea-and-city-course-not/

United's success was never based on spending big money alone. I don't think we need Saudi Oil money to compete, we are very rich as it is. We just need to spend the money we do have much more wisely. Van Gaal and Mourinho's wasteful spending has cost us. They both have done the same thing our rivals did in the 90's buying lots of decent/good players for lots of money instead of buying quality in key areas.
 
reddaz71 said:
Spot on this. Utd would probably be given a £500m transfer kitty every window!! No brainer.
Click to expand...

It's all a bit hollow isn't it?

I despise the Glazers but these lot wouldn't be better.

The soul of the club started to be ripped out in May 2005. This would be another nail in the coffin.

I have no idea what the other route would be though which makes the whole situation around modern football just depressing.
 
Last edited:
MancunianAngels said:
It's all a bit hollow isn't it?

I despise the Glazers but these lot wouldn't be better.

The soul of the club started to be ripped out in May 2005. This would be another mail in the coffin.

I have no idea what the other route would be though which makes the whole situation around modern football just depressing.
Click to expand...
My thoughts exactly.
 
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...

Nothing you’ve said even remotely compares to mass murders and oppression.

The opposite side of argument to your post is, would you happily have Hitler as our club owner? You wouldn’t because the man killed millions. So yeah morality is in fact a big deal.
 
MancunianAngels said:
I have no idea what the other route would be though which makes the whole situation around modern football just depressing.
Click to expand...

A good start would be to stop state run businesses from owning football clubs. There's only two such clubs, not hard to kick them out of major tournaments till they are sold to non-government entities.
 
RedCurry said:
Nothing you’ve said even remotely compares to mass murders and oppression.

The opposite side of argument to your post is, would you happily have Hitler as our club owner? You wouldn’t because the man killed millions. So yeah morality is in fact a big deal.
Click to expand...
And we're back to whataboutery...
 
Lets say that MBS buys up United and spends $4Billion in doing so. Would it be possible to pass the FFP test?

Under the FFP doesnt he have to have a business case to ensure that its a legit business ie ROI?

If so, wouldnt that start to throttle our spendings/operational budget without actually increasing revenues tremendously?

The City's method of bloating up their sponsorship deals can only go so far with that sort of investment levels. Saudia Airlines sponsorship of 200million per year?
 
Jippy said:
And we're back to whataboutery...
Click to expand...

How is that whataboutery? I'll give you benefit of the doubt and assume you just don't know how to use that term.

Saudi regime is mass murderers on a smaller scale than the worst human being of all times. Recent UN study warns as much as 13 million people could starve in Yemen due to the constant war that Saudi's royal family in part is directly responsible for.

It would be whataboutism if now you turned around and said "but what about US military constantly killing people?". Yes killing innocent humans is objectively bad and I wouldn't want our club to be owned by mass murderers. No one should want that.
 
sglowrider said:
Lets say that MBS buys up United and spends $4Billion in doing so. Would it be possible to pass the FFP test?

Under the FFP doesnt he have to have a business case to ensure that its a legit business ie ROI?

If so, wouldnt that start to throttle our spendings/operational budget without actually increasing revenues tremendously?

The City's method of bloating up their sponsorship deals can only go so far with that sort of investment levels. Saudia Airlines sponsorship of 200million per year?
Click to expand...

Ffp isnt perfect. It's not aimed at preventing sugar daddies. And yes we can have saudi royal kebab shop as sponsor donating 400m per month on sponsorship deals. Anyone can tell what it is, a doping but it's financial stupidity isnt against the law.

Besides, football club is a business, not a government entity. They are not obliged to play in a level playing field, at the end of the days it's just a sport themed showbiz
 
sglowrider said:
Lets say that MBS buys up United and spends $4Billion in doing so. Would it be possible to pass the FFP test?
Click to expand...

FFP is more concerned with revenue vs expenditure. Our revenues wouldn't change much and our expenditures shouldn't be affected much either. That's my understanding anyway.

Hypothetically if some owner bought the club for, say $4 billion, they would in return gain an asset worth $4 billion.
 
RedCurry said:
How is that whataboutery? I'll give you benefit of the doubt and assume you just don't know how to use that term.

Saudi regime is mass murderers on a smaller scale than the worst human being of all times. Recent UN study warns as much as 13 million people could starve in Yemen due to the constant war that Saudi's royal family in part is directly responsible for.

It would be whataboutism if now you turned around and said "but what about US military constantly killing people?". Yes killing innocent humans is objectively bad and I wouldn't want our club to be owned by mass murderers. No one should want that.
Click to expand...
It's a whataboutism in that it's not Hitler potentially taking over the club. I get it that you're trying to get your point across about how vile you find this regime, but ultimately this is a football forum.
Discussion on Saudi foreign picy re Yemen is for the CE.
feck me I hope this is just a rumour.
 
RedCurry said:
A good start would be to stop state run businesses from owning football clubs. There's only two such clubs, not hard to kick them out of major tournaments till they are sold to non-government entities.
Click to expand...

Er... you really can't. They're de jure a consortium. Fifa has no jurisdiction on asking where they got their money. A bank robber can use his money to buy shares of a plc company, it's not against the law. The robbery yes, but the spending, nope.

A state owned football club while not fair isn't a crime in the grand scheme of things.
 
Minimalist said:
It's frightening the amount of people who seem to know what a new Saudi group as owners would do with the club or what their interests are. All good things of course.

Saudis good.

Americans bad.
Click to expand...

My view as well.
Some may not like our American owners and there are many reasons why they feel like that.

However, most of us know very little about Saudi Arabia culture or the way they do business. Let's just say that there is a lot of smoke and mirrors and not everything is above board.

Two very apt sayings.
- better the devil you know
- be careful what you wish for

We simply don't know enough about this to really know whether it would be better or worse. However one thing is clear; none of us has a say in the matter. It will happen or not whether we like it or not.
 
RedCurry said:
Nothing you’ve said even remotely compares to mass murders and oppression.

The opposite side of argument to your post is, would you happily have Hitler as our club owner? You wouldn’t because the man killed millions. So yeah morality is in fact a big deal.
Click to expand...

Mass murderers? As a state I doubt Saudi comes close to league leaders in state sanctioned murder. US are runaway leaders I imagine.

As bad as the Saudi state is some of the comments in this thread are so over the top. The middle eastern bogey men. Western nations have had a far more damaging affect on the world for their own gain than any of these 'barbaric' middle eastern states everyone so loves to look down upon.
 
Buster15 said:
My view as well.
Some may not like our American owners and there are many reasons why they feel like that.

However, most of us know very little about Saudi Arabia culture or the way they do business. Let's just say that there is a lot of smoke and mirrors and not everything is above board.

Two very apt sayings.
- better the devil you know
- be careful what you wish for

We simply don't know enough about this to really know whether it would be better or worse. However one thing is clear; none of us has a say in the matter. It will happen or not whether we like it or not.
Click to expand...

You're right, we're simple football fans who have zero direct influence over club affairs. However, that should not prevent us from voicing our opinions. I'm confident that should this proposed takeover amount to anything more than pure fabrication, there will be a protest outside Old Trafford.
 
Jippy said:
It's a whataboutism in that it's not Hitler potentially taking over the club. I get it that you're trying to get your point across about how vile you find this regime, but ultimately this is a football forum.
Discussion on Saudi foreign picy re Yemen is for the CE.
feck me I hope this is just a rumour.
Click to expand...

I am giving a valid reason that on it's own merit should be a good enough reason for us to never want them to own our club. Comparing them to hitler is quite apt as like hitler, they are dictators who kill innocent people based on their family of birth.

It belongs in this thread since we are expressing our views on the idea of United being sold to this Saudi regime. It's not much of a debate if we just look at it from "football" perceptive. Yeah they are sugardaddies and we will have more transfer budget under any sugardaddy owner, what's to discuss about that?
 
RussellWilson said:
As a state I doubt Saudi comes close to league leaders in state sanctioned murder. US are runaway leaders I imagine.
Click to expand...
Like 20+ times already clarified on this thread, no one is denying the role of US . Thankfully though we are not owned by the undemocratically chosen crown prince of US. We are just owned by a business family that happens to be Americans. I would also welcome a business family from the middle east. For god's sake I've lived half my life 50km from Saudi border. I am not anti-middle east like you would think.
 
Sky1981 said:
Er... you really can't. They're de jure a consortium. Fifa has no jurisdiction on asking where they got their money. A bank robber can use his money to buy shares of a plc company, it's not against the law. The robbery yes, but the spending, nope.

A state owned football club while not fair isn't a crime in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...

True. A state owned club is not a crime but Fifa is a private organization and can have it's own set of rules on what is allowed. Any significant stake by a nation could be made against the rules. Like FFP isn't a legality issue, it's just a ruling created by UEFA. It is against the rules for a player to wear anything political during the game but somehow political ownership of clubs is never questioned.
 
RedCurry said:
Like 20+ times already clarified on this thread, no one is denying the role of US . Thankfully though we are not owned by the undemocratically chosen crown prince of US. We are just owned by a business family that happens to be Americans. I would also welcome a business family from the middle east. For god's sake I've lived half my life 50km from Saudi border. I am not anti-middle east like you would think.
Click to expand...

My point is that a lot of the comments are over the top. You're comparing the Saudi state to Hitler a few posts up for goodness sake.
 
Random Task said:
You're right, we're simple football fans who have zero direct influence over club affairs. However, that should not prevent us from voicing our opinions. I'm confident that should this proposed takeover amount to anything more than pure fabrication, there will be a protest outside Old Trafford.
Click to expand...

Agreed and that is why not just me but an increasing number of football supporters are becoming disolutioned by the way our great clubs are becoming pawns for the rich.

No doubting there would be some protests in the event but as you well know money talks and both seller and buyer would tell the fans that cash would be splashed.

One interesting point is that since massive amounts of sponsorship money has flowed into the PL both City and Chelsea owners have spent £1bn or so on their teams. United owners have effectively spent nothing on us as the transfer money has been generated from revenue.
 
Schmeichel's Cartwheel said:
Hope so. Their culture won't effect anything on the pitch. We'll back where we belong & that's all that matters.
Click to expand...
Why do people think it would guarantee success. We're already an incredibly rich club able to afford high end players and compete.
 
RedCurry said:
Nothing you’ve said even remotely compares to mass murders and oppression.

The opposite side of argument to your post is, would you happily have Hitler as our club owner? You wouldn’t because the man killed millions. So yeah morality is in fact a big deal.
Click to expand...
Oh, we will use levels of morality now? Hitler is 10, Saudi Arabia is 9, Kim Jong Un is 8, ... little kids who make united shirts which you wear are 4....etc...
So 4 is ok then? You are right, feck those kids, they are getting payed for their job. Whole 1 dollar per day. Ungrateful bastards.

So yes, if you want to moralize about money in United today and Saudi money, then my previous post stands.
 
RussellWilson said:
My point is that a lot of the comments are over the top. You're comparing the Saudi state to Hitler a few posts up for goodness sake.
Click to expand...

They are not comparable. That would be absurd of me to suggest. But again, you don't have to be as bad as the worst guy ever for us to finally take a stand and say that we don't want to be associated with these lesser-evil-than-most-evil-ever regime.

Would we even want to be owned by some family that killed a dozen humans? How about just one murder? See, you wouldn't be comfortable with that. That is my whole point.
 
sglowrider said:
Lets say that MBS buys up United and spends $4Billion in doing so. Would it be possible to pass the FFP test?

Under the FFP doesnt he have to have a business case to ensure that its a legit business ie ROI?

If so, wouldnt that start to throttle our spendings/operational budget without actually increasing revenues tremendously?

The City's method of bloating up their sponsorship deals can only go so far with that sort of investment levels. Saudia Airlines sponsorship of 200million per year?
Click to expand...

United are already well within the FFP. Saudis would have no problems. The reason City have to bloat their figures is, because they have no genuine figures. Abu Dhabi finds ways of boating them. United don't need to. They make substantial amounts already hence being the joint number 1 sports brand in the world!
 
Andycoleno9 said:
Oh, we will use levels of morality now? Hitler is 10, Saudi Arabia is 9, Kim Jong Un is 8, ... little kids who make united shirts which you wear are 4....etc...
So 4 is ok then? You are right, feck those kids, they are getting payed for their job. Whole 1 dollar per day. Ungrateful bastards.

So yes, if you want to moralize about money in United today and Saudi money, then my previous post stands.
Click to expand...

Your previous post stands even lesser now that you have assigned random ratings whereby adidas is somehow 40% as evil as a dictator who killed millions of people.
 
while ethically it isn't great at all, they would at least allow us to spend what we earn and not have to worry about debt and repayments. If we were to say no to a takeover and refuse to allow them to buy us, they would more than likely turn there attentions to a rival of ours. They have so much money they could buy any club they want without a care, there money will be getting spent in the world of football regardless of our stance. Of course this doesn't make it right, but doing the right thing will probably make little to no difference in the end result.
 
Andycoleno9 said:
Oh, we will use levels of morality now? Hitler is 10, Saudi Arabia is 9, Kim Jong Un is 8, ... little kids who make united shirts which you wear are 4....etc...
So 4 is ok then? You are right, feck those kids, they are getting payed for their job. Whole 1 dollar per day. Ungrateful bastards.

So yes, if you want to moralize about money in United today and Saudi money, then my previous post stands.
Click to expand...

It's amazing how people seem to use their scale of morals. People don't seem to bothered that Saudis already pump money into United and how United are already helping the Saudis. Where are all their morals then?!
 
decorativeed said:
Some of us give a shit, to be simplistic about it. About stuff in general too, not just United.

I've watched United slip into unethical behaviour more and more over the last few decades. Back when I bought my first replica shirt they were made predominantly by ladies in a factory in Cheshire. Then we signed up to Nike and they were made in countries where there were next to no labour laws, by people earning pennies, while they charged £50+ for them.

United "employ" hundreds of people on zero hour contracts while enjoying the status of being the world's most profitable club, paying feck all-in corporation taxes and basing themselves in the Cayman Islands so that even more money goes to the owners and none goes to HMRC.

Recently, it included these zero hour, zero-rights workers in its gender pay gap report, so that it skewed the figures to make them look progressive.

We recently signed a sponsorship deal with Uber, another company who share our tax-dodging, employee-shafting ways.

In terms of morals, it seems we're in a race to the bottom, and it doesn't sit well with me at all. A buy-out by an intollerant and brutal regime would be the final straw for many, I think.

As a club, we could actually try to take the lead and show the there's a better way to operate, in an ethical manner, fitting with the heritage of the city and making the most of our status as a brand leader. That kind of thing is much more important to me than how much we can spend on transfers . There's little chance of that happening with the leadership we have currently though, and zero if such a buy-out is to happen.
Click to expand...
Thanks, for putting words to much of what I’ve been thinking. I would genuinely be ecstatic if we adopted a fully transparent model of operating, with a view to abide by and promote ethical standards from bottom to top. I think that would be a fantastic way for one of the top clubs to lead the way, and hopefully put us at the forefront of a new wave within football, where human rights actually matter.

Conversely, if we do end up becoming an outlet for generating public and political goodwill for an oppressive regime, that would be it for me.
 
Getting back to Football matters,there's no doubt under the Saudis Utd would become an altogether brand new gigantic superpower with a genuinely real prospect of seeing the likes of Neymar,Mbappe etc at the club, You can bet your very last dollar that every single opposition football fan will be praying this doesn't happen and we remain under the current owners taking their annual £25m dividends out of the club instead!
 
Jed I. Knight said:
Thanks, for putting words to much of what I’ve been thinking. I would genuinely be ecstatic if we adopted a fully transparent model of operating, with a view to abide by and promote ethical standards from bottom to top. I think that would be a fantastic way for one of the top clubs to lead the way, and hopefully put us at the forefront of a new wave within football, where human rights actually matter.

Conversely, if we do end up becoming an outlet for generating public and political goodwill for an oppressive regime, that would be it for me.
Click to expand...
We wouldn't be a top club for long if we abandoned the basic principles of modern business.
 
robinrooney said:
The Saudis PR could not really ne lower than it is now for obvious reasons. It will blow over and United could be the way they recover from this.
Click to expand...

Sportswashing. Happens all the time unfortunately. Too many people turn a blind eye when money’s involved.

Ramzan Kadyrov - Khabib, Salah etc

Russia & Qatar - World Cup
 
reddaz71 said:
Getting back to Football matters,there's no doubt under the Saudis Utd would become an altogether brand new gigantic superpower with a genuinely real prospect of seeing the likes of Neymar,Mbappe etc at the club, You can bet your very last dollar that every single opposition football fan will be praying this doesn't happen and we remain under the current owners taking their annual £25m dividends out of the club instead!
Click to expand...

I can just imagine the scousers ranting should it happen.

In all seriousness it’s probably the rocket the club needs to relaunch it back to the very top.
 
reddaz71 said:
Getting back to Football matters,there's no doubt under the Saudis Utd would become an altogether brand new gigantic superpower with a genuinely real prospect of seeing the likes of Neymar,Mbappe etc at the club, You can bet your very last dollar that every single opposition football fan will be praying this doesn't happen and we remain under the current owners taking their annual £25m dividends out of the club instead!
Click to expand...
Exactly this. We are talking so much here about morale and we forgot on bloody football.
We have one of the best reputations in the world and have income to avoid FFP. With Saudi money it would be; Toby or Godin? No, lets buy Varane. Perisic or Willian? Meh, lets call Neymar. And while we are in Paris, lets talk about Mbappe.( ok, i know that i am exaggerating things now).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.