Doesn’t mean they sacked a manager doing good. Except imo Tuchel who was sacked because he didn't want to renew.
Qatar or Ineos - which owners would you prefer? | Vote now Private
- Thread starter Zlatattack
- Start date
Why would anyone want to know who voted for who? The goal of the poll is to see the ratio of Qatar vs Ratcliffe rather than analyzing posters individually.
I’m sure its easy to know why. There is a lack of tolerance in here from some people
The obvious difference here being that PSG were already a club that had won titles and cups through the 90s and 2000s, Nice not so much.
It’s definitely a concern but Ineos are clearly not running it like Qatar are PSG and spending insane amounts of money on players. Would be interesting to see how Man City and PSG would have found life after the takeovers if current financial fair play rules were in place 15 years ago.
The point about FFP is a good one.
Ineos is spending alot of money on the wrong types of players. I think thats a huge concern.
Although Im not 100% sure about the setup there, whoever is making the footballing decisions there is doing a bad job.
Similar to PSG when Leonardo was DOF
Money helps yes.
But does United need to be state owned to be sucessful?
PSG is dominating a weak league by 5 points, you'd expect them to be 15, 20 points ahead with all the money. City have certain charges hanging above their heads at the moment.
You're right. However it does reveal an element of a little patience and quite frankly little maturity in managing clubs. TBF both groups seem to be learning from it. INEOS had hired Jean Claude Blanc as INEOS Sport CEO. He certainly has far more experience than Ineos head of football Bob Ratcliffe whose only football experience is that of being Jim Ratcliffe brother. The Qatari had replaced the horrible Leonardo with the much more respected sporting director Campos.
If you take in account that club size then yes they are spending at par to PSG.
Doesn’t seem huge. €25 million net spend per year since 19/20. Maybe that huge for the top half of the French league though?
Does seem like they can’t find the right manager, but I don’t know enough to comment on what’s gone wrong.
Ties will be the same. On the outside not but if you think it doesnt have any connection with Qatar state and regime you should think twice.
As for people who'll decide on football things or not we dont know that.
Leonardo was very bad for PSG.
So you mean Ineos originally hired Jim Ratcliffs brother to be DOF?
What??? You can’t see how a company with 60bn in revenue and 2bn profits wouldn’t be able to buy the club without loaning against a smaller 100 times smaller than the parent company?
Seeing what you want to see.
To be fair, that's just lack of research on my part. I'd gone off Jim Ratcliffs wealth and wasn't looking at is as Ineos as a whole.
You could be right though.
4th highest spenders in the league for the past 4 years. Its alot of money and even worse its been on crap
Bob Ratcliffe is INEOS head of sport not as DOF
So you’re agreeing they are not expected to get close to PSG given the size of the club?
PSG are paying Messi double a year what Nice are spending on transfers.
Yeah still no great
I vote Qatari's... 'cos Bruno will look cool as feck lifting the European Super Duper League in a Bisht 
Doesn’t make the league shit. Just means they have alot of over spending like we do in the PLChrist how shit is that league. €25 million a season is 4th highest?
After this vote, no one on this forum is in a position to dump on City over their ownership, ever again. Obviously, our fan base is every bit as prepared as they are to just gleefully take the money, and pretty everything detrimental said about them applies equally to us.
Isnt 25 million a net spend?Christ how shit is that league. €25 million a season is 4th highest?
Were they? Qatar bought a majority stake in June 2011 and PSG finished 4th in the league in 2010-11 season.
No his brother was the CEO, Brailsford was the DOF.
Yeah. That seems the fairest way to judge owners. Player selling is something I think we all agree the Glazers have done terribly at.
Makes it pretty obvious why it was easy for Qatar to turn PSG into such a dominate force with no FFP concerns.
Yes, United need money, and I doubt that Ratcliffe would make us competitive against the likes of City, Bayern, Real etc. We are also lagging behind in terms of facilities and infrastructure. As for City's charges, they cheated. Simples. I doubt Qataris would want to do that. They will invest money, but not cheat. No need to.
French clubs and that includes PSG abide to different rules to the rest of Europe. In France the DNCG monitors all clubs on a yearly basis and validate their budgets, you can't overspend without proving the existence of funding.
The same rules were in place when Qatar took over?
Yes which is why the new owners were asked to put large reserves in the name of the club. That way they couldn't leave one morning with PSG having a massive bill to pay.
And to be clear it is not an FFP rule or anything like that, the point is to protect clubs finances. Sugar daddies are allowed, they just can't make promises that they can't pay.
Edit: It applies to all sports.
In the past 4 years Nice were the 4th biggest spenders in the league. Yet they were 5th, 9th, 5th and they are currently 9th as opposed to big spenders PSG who achieved the goal 3 times out of 4.
Messi was a free transfer. He scored 24 goals and made 17 assists in 37 matches. Ramsay is Nice best paid player (Pepe is paid more but he's on loan), he scored 1 goas and made 2 assists in 26 games.I think PSG are just achieving the expectations set. Nice are vastly underachieving though.
Ineos own a Swiss club as well. There are barely any news about them. I think they have since been relegated
It’s strange how this whole ‘I just want united to be successful’ ‘logic’ being used to justify a Qatari ownership doesn’t apply to Mason Greenwood. We’re short a striker, he is contracted to us, he could win us the league… you just want us to be successful right?
I vote Qatari's... 'cos Bruno will look cool as feck lifting the European Super Duper League in a Bisht
Qatari LGBTQ getting thrown in jail and being treated like shit is cool af too I guess
So irrelevant to my point? Qatar can pile as much money into the reserves as they want.
Irrespective of QATAR/Elliott/SJR/Satan/God/Morals bid, it would be very unwise to introduce Greenwood now. The guy hasn't play football for months, he's likely to disrupt the dressing room and will add more heat to a squad that seem doing all the right things.
Small fish. With many other better options
Ownership is big fish mate. Where both options are bad.
I simply gave you the context of the league spendings, following a series of posts where you were seemingly surprised by the figures.
Okay, apologies. You were replying to the post about Qatar having an easier ride at the beginning due to less FFP, I thought it was about that.
I see this isn't the place for non-serious posts then!
As I've said before, we don't need unlimited wealth to create success we just need to spend the money that we generate better.
You've answered your own question! Just because City and Chelsea have had hollow success, that doesn't mean we need to go down that route.
I mean, spending 4th highest and finishing 5th is not really a problem. The other seasons are troubling though as you’d expect them to be pushing for European places by now.
I’ll ignore the bit about Messi being a free transfer. Come on.