Have the Glazers played a blinder?

The Glazers aren’t hanging around if anything they have given more control to INEOS than anybody thought they would to start with, who knew INEOS would be hiring CEOs?

Also it was stated they wouldn’t be taking any more money out of the club iirc? Anyhow I think 18/24 months it will be full INEOS control which is what we have now in all but legality.
 
Plant0x84 said:
Goodness me, Time to turn the tv off and walk away from your computer if supporting the club is making you this miserable. Disengage for a bit. When you come back to it you will be refreshed and hopefully so will the team.

I am sure INEOS will buy the rest of the club just as soon as they can, and the Glazers can’t take any dividends out contractually for 3 years.

Turning the club/team around was never going to be a quick thing, or an easy thing for that matter. Fans must be patient, have some resolve and defiance and stand by the club in its hour of need.

Work will start this summer on upgrades at Carrington, and the task force is working on plans for OT. These are big projects but will come good in time.
Click to expand...

Task force? They just need to repair the roof. They could literally start work on it this week if they wanted to?

The problem with all the positive INEOS spin is its all based on something thats between speculation and delusion. "They will buy the rest of the club as soon as they can" - why? If the Glazers wanted to sell the club they would have. INEOS gave them a way to continue making money from it instead. If they sell it will be because INEOS and them between them ruin it enough that there isn't any money to make anymore.

I know it's difficult to accept but if you look at it logically there really is very little (if any) positive in the INEOS/Glazer situation. It makes very little sense from a business/success standpoint for anyone who's main goal isn't leeching money from the club.
 
noodlehair said:
Task force? They just need to repair the roof. They could literally start work on it this week if they wanted to?

The problem with all the positive INEOS spin is its all based on something thats between speculation and delusion. "They will buy the rest of the club as soon as they can" - why? If the Glazers wanted to sell the club they would have. INEOS gave them a way to continue making money from it instead. If they sell it will be because INEOS and them between them ruin it enough that there isn't any money to make anymore.

I know it's difficult to accept but if you look at it logically there really is very little (if any) positive in the INEOS/Glazer situation. It makes very little sense from a business/success standpoint for anyone who's main goal isn't leeching money from the club.
Click to expand...

As far as I'm aware, the only they make any money over the next 3 years is by selling shares and giving up more control as dividends won't be paid during that time.
 
izak said:
It was never the best option, there were bidders willing to facilitate things quicker, they were bidders that could have bought the whole right of the club if the Glazer weren't out right cnuts.

We had option that would have made a solid decision on the stadium by now, we had an option that would have sacked the current manager if the result were as bad as they've been, we had other options that were far better than what we are seeing.
Click to expand...
No we didn’t. The Qatar bid was never real. It was never serious. We know that now, it was all a fantasy.
 
noodlehair said:
Task force? They just need to repair the roof. They could literally start work on it this week if they wanted to?

The problem with all the positive INEOS spin is its all based on something thats between speculation and delusion. "They will buy the rest of the club as soon as they can" - why? If the Glazers wanted to sell the club they would have. INEOS gave them a way to continue making money from it instead. If they sell it will be because INEOS and them between them ruin it enough that there isn't any money to make anymore.

I know it's difficult to accept but if you look at it logically there really is very little (if any) positive in the INEOS/Glazer situation. It makes very little sense from a business/success standpoint for anyone who's main goal isn't leeching money from the club.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of clauses and opportunities that have been reported on which allow INEOS to buy out the remaining shares or match any offer made for the club to believe that is the direction of travel.
INEOS and sir Jim specifically have also stated they have no interest in taking money from the club. Their aim is success on the pitch. That sounds very positive to me.
 
They’ve run the club as a successful business for a while, when they’ve needed a cash injection due to a bit of a decline, they’ve got it from SJR and had to cede some control. It’s good for us as fans because despite the idiotic idea of the commercial side being detached from the footballing side, SJR clearly wants us to do well.

The main question as United fans we should have is whether SJR just wants to make a lot of money (in which case I’m not sure we’ll win lots in the near future) or if he’s willing to swallow some big initial losses to chase a major trophy.
 
Insanity said:
You know, I was thinking about this the other day and the only reason they have sold this 25% stake is because of our under performance in the past eleven years. The way their chosen men pissed away more than Gbp 1b since Fergie left and turned their coffers dry, they had very few options left then to take outside investment into the club to keep it going. They finally realized that they are good at sucking blood but are terrible at running a football club. For them to keep sucking blood they need someone to sort out the football side of things. Enter Jim, a "local lad" looking to buy a major English club for a while. The terms weren't what he liked but this 25% allows him to get his foot in.

He'd be hailed a hero If he is able to get things right on the football side and in conjunction can improve the facilities. In due time, he can put pressure on the Glazers to sell more (or convince a couple of the six to sell them his stake after he has increased the club's value with his improvements) and try to get a controlling stake. If he is not able to improve the football side of things, he can always blame the Glazers for interfering or not providing enough funds needed for getting back us to the top. He can claim that the Glazers have destroyed things beyond repair and it is unfix-able with them retaining any kind of control of the club. He can then force them to sell the controlling stake that way. I think in either scenario he can control the narrative with the help of the British press. The fans already (and rightly) hate the Glazers and will lap anything up.

In a way, it's Jim who might have played a blinder. In either scenario, I can see him taking control of the club in due time. In one, us fan will get the joy of seeing our club back competing again while Jim gets full control and in the other, we might have to suffer more pain but ultimately we get rid of the Glazers. Financially, the second one will be more beneficial to INEOS. With Jim being 70 and having a billionaire's ego, he might be wishing for the first.
Click to expand...

you cant be serious?
 
At least we won trophies under the Glazers, we haven’t won anything since SJR took over. We don’t realise how lucky we had it before.
 
izak said:
It was never the best option, there were bidders willing to facilitate things quicker, they were bidders that could have bought the whole right of the club if the Glazer weren't out right cnuts.

We had option that would have made a solid decision on the stadium by now, we had an option that would have sacked the current manager if the result were as bad as they've been, we had other options that were far better than what we are seeing.
Click to expand...

Qatar, with all the money in the world, couldn't even get a bid accepted.
 
Malons said:
Undeniably bad owners, but we've always had owners throughout our history whose primary goal was to make money out of the club. To use the profits to line their pockets or pay dividends.

We need to stop pretending that in 2005 that changed. Sometimes it's as if people genuinely think they bought the club from a socialist cooperative.

I agree with criticism of how they have run he club. But this whole "they're just looking to make money out of us".

Yeah? And everyone else before them too.
Click to expand...

Aside from a brief period after the 68 European Cup win, when Louis Edwards and Busby colluded to to ignore the football, let the team rot, while feathering their own nests, resulting in relegation, the club owners have consistently invested in the stadium, outstripping any other stadium in the country, as well as competing on a par with other clubs, recruiting with the best of them. It was team management that let us down until Fergie arrived.The club prospered more than any other until the Glazers came along. From consistent post-war investment, resulting in the best stadium in the country to this embarrassment we saw the other day… the final insult, literally pissing on us from a great height, and that’s on top of the laughing stock we’ve become on the pitch.

Think on pal.

Maybe Martin Edwards was stung by his father being exposed for his dodgy dealings which resulted in himself keeping his nose clean. He utimately made a tidy profit out of the club but you can hardly criticise his commitment.
 
I disagree. I think they’ll be gone within 2/3 years.

I think their old man played a blinder, and they are fecking clueless as evidenced by the horrible decision making in the past however many years
 
Ratcliffe and his team haven’t even had a transfer window are trying to put a footballing structure in place still, they’ve been in less than 6 months and have clearly been assessing what needed to be put in place across the whole club and this was never going to be a quick fix.

I often believe that a lot of people on here truly understand the near fatal damage the Glazer’s have actually done at the club, we’re so far behind everyone one else and are now playing catch up so I’d fully expect it to take 3 years to see genuine and obvious improvement.

We have to first get the footballing structure in place and they then need to put in place our footballing identity and playing style then we need to recruit a head coach and coaching staff to implement that style then get our scouting department and recruitment team on the same page in bringing the right players in.

After that we need to build a squad all playing in that style and for them to click by which time you’d like to think Guardiola will be gone but this will take time, anyone thinking we’ll be selling 15 players and bringing in 15 players then challenging next season may be in for an unpleasant surprise and needs to accept being patient.
 
noodlehair said:
Task force? They just need to repair the roof. They could literally start work on it this week if they wanted to?

The problem with all the positive INEOS spin is its all based on something thats between speculation and delusion. "They will buy the rest of the club as soon as they can" - why? If the Glazers wanted to sell the club they would have. INEOS gave them a way to continue making money from it instead. If they sell it will be because INEOS and them between them ruin it enough that there isn't any money to make anymore.

I know it's difficult to accept but if you look at it logically there really is very little (if any) positive in the INEOS/Glazer situation. It makes very little sense from a business/success standpoint for anyone who's main goal isn't leeching money from the club.
Click to expand...
If you look at it logically you would understand that all business want to make more money. To make more money you have to be successful. To be successful you need to run your business properly. Glazers understand they don't know what there are doing so they gave up that control. Lots of positives to see. But it you feel negative and down. That's fine. That how you perceive it. Don't agree. But negative will always see negativity. Positive will always see positive and see those opportunities to be better.
 
Denis' cuff said:
Aside from a brief period after the 68 European Cup win, when Louis Edwards and Busby colluded to to ignore the football, let the team rot, while feathering their own nests, resulting in relegation, the club owners have consistently invested in the stadium, outstripping any other stadium in the country, as well as competing on a par with other clubs, recruiting with the best of them. It was team management that let us down until Fergie arrived.The club prospered more than any other until the Glazers came along. From consistent post-war investment, resulting in the best stadium in the country to this embarrassment we saw the other day… the final insult, literally pissing on us from a great height, and that’s on top of the laughing stock we’ve become on the pitch.

Think on pal.

Maybe Martin Edwards was stung by his father being exposed for his dodgy dealings which resulted in himself keeping his nose clean. He utimately made a tidy profit out of the club but you can hardly criticise his commitment.
Click to expand...
You've got it totally wrong there, United were always active in the transfer market after Busby, with some quite high profile transfers amongst them.
Willie Morgan
Martin Buchan
Ian Storey Moore
Joe Jordan
Gordon McQueen
Ray Wilkins
Gary Birtles
Bryan Robson
Mark Hughes
All top signings
Add to that the likes of Ted Macdougall, Mickey Thomas, Lou Macari, Gordon Strachan.
The only mistake Busby made was hanging on to the likes of Charlton, Law and Stepney when they were well past their sell by date.
It took the arrival of Tommy Docherty to get rid of them.

As for Martin Edwards he was more interested in watching his son play rugby on a Saturday afternoon than he was watching United, and couldn't wait to sell to cash in. Ferguson was his goose that laid the golden egg for him.
 
matherto said:
Let's face it, they're never going anywhere.

They'll continue to take just as much money as they always have done outside of the club.

Meanwhile fans are already turning on INEOS over different decisions/non-decisions.

Ratcliffe and co will get all the stick from here until the end of time as they're in charge of the football side of things and the Glazers will sit there in the background removed from the stress of occasionally having to go to a game or read a negative thing happening and they'll be laughing from here to eternity about what they've managed to pull off.

They'll continue to dangle the carrot to our new 'co-owners', maybe give them a bite or two here and there and watch as we burn to the ground (or drown, given the state of Old Trafford) and they'll never, ever feel the bile of the fans.

It's early days and it's catastrophising but turning this club around to even staying where we are right now let alone sinking lower is gonna be slower than Maguire on his worst day. I can't see an upside to any of it.
Click to expand...
More or less been thinking this.

INEOS taking the flak with the Ten Hag saga and poor results, while Glazers comparatively take a backseat away from the limelight.
 
Wilt said:
More or less been thinking same.

INEOS taking the flak with the poor results and Ten Hag saga, while Glazers comparatively take a backseat away from the limelight.
Click to expand...
Not sacking ETH has been a massive mistake and it probably won’t happen before Chelsea either. Ineos have to take responsibility for that.
 
Wilt said:
More or less been thinking this.

INEOS taking the flak with the Ten Hag saga and poor results, while Glazers comparatively take a backseat away from the limelight.
Click to expand...
INEOS themselves aren't getting the flak either. "Still early days", "give them time" etc. it's perfect for both of them.
 
The Glazers have managed to fail upwards spectacularly with United. Admittedly if they weren't a bunch of soul sucking parasites with the football acumen of a toad they would have made an absolute fortune from the club but considering just how shit they have been, they have done very well out of us.
 
If you don’t have a full sale, allowing Ineos or whoever buys to bring in a cash rich investment arm or partner, then Ineis has essentially signed up just to make a few personnel and player decisions within the Glazers budget, while also operating as the Glazers personal flak jacket.

You can’t blame Ineos. For one thing we have no idea what there cash reserves available for investment are worth. Clearlake was chosen by Boehly’s people because they have 33B in liquid funds available for sporting investment.

Second, why would Ineos tackle major issues like debt maintenance or the infrastructure of the club without getting more of the club in return even if they could?

I take it back: I would blame Ineos. Because their semi bail out of the Glazers is allowing them to stay a vampiric force on the club, but without the scrutiny and protest they endured before.
 
Bluelion7 said:
I take it back: I would blame Ineos. Because their semi bail out of the Glazers is allowing them to stay a vampiric force on the club, but without the scrutiny and protest they endured before.
Click to expand...

Yep, the protests worked really well ?

You would prefer being under the Glazers being run the way they had been for number of years and just the odd few times fans put the scrutiny?

Or INEOS getting involved with the football structure? Cleaned the club up from incompetent staff and look like we are moving towards a better phase?
 
My personal speculative theory is that they and INEOS have some set date in the future where it’ll be agreed they sell the rest of their share to INEOS, but that financial figure is not set in stone and is based on how well the club does during that period (both on-pitch and off-pitch metrics possibly). If INEOS run it well and we’re back to winning the really major honours (PL & CL) and even more profitable off the pitch, the Glazers get more money.

The risk on the Glazer side is they’re effectively letting someone with a lower stake in the club run things for them, and possibly stepping to one side and trusting them to do that despite being the majority shareholder, when you account for all the family members.
 
Bluelion7 said:
If you don’t have a full sale, allowing Ineos or whoever buys to bring in a cash rich investment arm or partner, then Ineis has essentially signed up just to make a few personnel and player decisions within the Glazers budget, while also operating as the Glazers personal flak jacket.

You can’t blame Ineos. For one thing we have no idea what there cash reserves available for investment are worth. Clearlake was chosen by Boehly’s people because they have 33B in liquid funds available for sporting investment.

Second, why would Ineos tackle major issues like debt maintenance or the infrastructure of the club without getting more of the club in return even if they could?

I take it back: I would blame Ineos. Because their semi bail out of the Glazers is allowing them to stay a vampiric force on the club, but without the scrutiny and protest they endured before.
Click to expand...
From 2010 onwards, when the debt was restructured, the Glazers were only a problem insofar as their running of the club was a total shambles. The interest payments, debt and dividends didn't really have a material impact on our ability to spend.

Unlike City and Chelsea, United don't need to have cash artificially pumped in to enable us to compete - but what we do need is an executive team who can ensure that the funds that are available are spent efficiently, and that was what was sorely lacking.

INEOS coming in is therefore a huge step in the right direction, because their focus is on achieving sporting success first and foremost. The Glazers didn't care about that at all and certainly had no clue how to achieve it.

What I will also say is that there's this notion that the Glazers were raking it in at the clubs' expense...but this wasn't really true. The cost of their ownership was high initially (pre debt restructuring) but they didn't make anything of any note. From about 2013 onwards they started taking a bit out in dividends...but again...when you've an asset worth billions on paper, £15m/£20m here and there split between seven siblings is not much to write home about.

The return for them annually was actually relatively insignificant because what the club did make was spent on either a) interest or b) overpriced, overpaid footballers...so their ability to make serious returns always depended on a sale. I think it dawned on them, when they went out to market, that their negligence had actually cost them billions of dollars in value (i.e. poor state of stadium). Nobody wanted to pay the £10BN+ the club should have been worth...so they chose the next best option...sell a portion, let INEOS fix it up, sell the rest later once the value has increased.
 
mctrials23 said:
The Glazers have managed to fail upwards spectacularly with United. Admittedly if they weren't a bunch of soul sucking parasites with the football acumen of a toad they would have made an absolute fortune from the club but considering just how shit they have been, they have done very well out of us.
Click to expand...
They got hold of the golden goose, which lays for them no matter how they sabotage it. Im not sure any other club could have survived them this long
 
Thanks to Man United, the answer to the question is yes. The Glazers have played a blinder.

Hurts to say, but either Ineos or Qatar owning us would benefit the Glazers in some way.
 
I'd be very surprised if there isn't some sort of arrangement INEOS have with the Glazers to eventually buy them out entirely.
 
Chairman Steve said:
My personal speculative theory is that they and INEOS have some set date in the future where it’ll be agreed they sell the rest of their share to INEOS, but that financial figure is not set in stone and is based on how well the club does during that period (both on-pitch and off-pitch metrics possibly). If INEOS run it well and we’re back to winning the really major honours (PL & CL) and even more profitable off the pitch, the Glazers get more money.

The risk on the Glazer side is they’re effectively letting someone with a lower stake in the club run things for them, and possibly stepping to one side and trusting them to do that despite being the majority shareholder, when you account for all the family members.
Click to expand...
IIRC the have a date by which INEOS have to buy them out at a set price and I think it's within two or three years and from then on the Glazers can tout for another buyer and force INEOS to sell along with them. I think SJR will do a phased buyout until he remains with Joel and Avram as co-owners, because they look like the most attached of the siblings.

I suspect that it will take another £2bn or thereabouts for INEOS to cross the 50% plus one vote mark and they will renegotiate with Joel and Avram new terms of governance where the two get to stay as minority shareholders but with a significant voice on major decisions. That way SJR doesn't have to completely buy them out, I doubt he ever wanted to and the leaches enjoy the growth from his efforts and the prestige of owning a blue chip sports brand.
 
I think SJR will buy them out, why do all this effort to try recover the club just to increase value for glazers? Plus he will want full access to the fracking right on the land that United owns around OT.
 
RedinIndia said:
SJR doesn't have the funds/investors with him to buy out Glazers totally.
Click to expand...
He never wanted to totally buy them out, he wanted a majority stake and that's what he bid for. If we are to believe that the other siblings want out those are the ones he needs to buy out and it won't cost him more than £1.5bn - 2bn and having total control of a company that rakes in £60bn in turnover means he can. He will just find the most advantageous moment to do it but that doesn't mean he can't.
 
Don't like that they're still here but let's see how ineos gets on with football decisions and hopefully in the next few years they will buy out the rest of the glazers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.