Qatar or Ineos - which owners would you prefer? | Vote now Private

Which owners would you prefer?

  • Qatar

    Votes: 961 62.8%

  • Ineos

    Votes: 570 37.2%
  • Total voters
    1,531
  • Poll closed .
dove said:
You should stop reading the Daily Mail or the Sun and present it as some kind of reliable information which we all know is not.
Click to expand...
Fair, but you do know some rumors are put out there on purpose? Like the Keegan Qatari takeover tweets?
 
NLunited said:
There are tweets with Mbappé mentioned as a target for the Qataris.

There is more propoganda coming from the Qataris getting our fans all riled up promising multiple star signings in one window. The last I read is Mbappé, Bellingham, Declan Rice, Pickford and fecking Kane. I‘m not making this stuff up.
Click to expand...

I said credible links, are there any serious sources saying this or is it just click bait bollocks from gutter rags like the Sun?
 
ShinjiNinja26 said:
I said credible links, are there any serious sources saying this or is it just click bait bollocks from gutter rags like the Sun?
Click to expand...
Hey my point is not that they are true or not, but that the Qataris are making false promises.
 
NLunited said:
I think the majority of the fans believe we will see Chelsea spending levels. Therefpre it is the exact opposite.

Getting Mbappé in summer would be possible MAYBE, because the transfersum would be huge and the wages huge.

Getting Bellingham and Mbappé in one window? Not gonna happen unless the Qataris cook the books.

60% of MU fans are living in the Twilight Zone.
Click to expand...
Yes I have said a few times now that it is to do with revenue generated.

The original point was that, compared to City, United provide a much more powerful financial base from which to generate the level of revenue that will allow very high levels of spending and still be within FFP. That’s just a fact.

I’m not party to whatever nonsense is being spouted about us rushing out to buy several megastars in the summer. I wouldn’t have even thought about that and don’t really care. Over the long term we should be able to outspend all our rivals (as we used to, years ago) if everyone stays within FFP, because United is simply a far bigger money making proposition, provided there’s no debt and no money being taken out of the club.

What most people object to about the Glazers (without trying to speak on anyone’s behalf) is that the club is being run into the ground on the back of debt repayments, dividends (although not actually that much) and poor management (inadequate investment in the wrong things at the wrong times).

The ideal owner would not use club revenue to pay off debt and would take no money out of the club. Under owners like that, this club would be the most powerful club, financially, in the league and possibly the world. That doesn’t mean we spend another £200m out of the gate, but soon that kind of spending would be easy. If there’s no debt. And with systematic investment, better management etc.

Who can provide that kind of ownership? And what would be the moral cost? These are key questions but the point is that this club could generate insane money and therefore could (afterwards) spend insane money.
 
Honestly I don't like either. They're both planet polluting. I have a slight preference for the British born planet polluting green washing cynical self publicist, but let's face it they're both awful and a choice between the two cannot be treated as an endorsement. As were the Glazers. I guess ignoring the owners is the only viable option. It's not like we are being given a say anyway.
 
Raoul said:
Everyone wants the Glazers gone (obviously) and among the two statements submitted last Friday, the Qatari one appears more attractive because of the outright sale with out debt, a paying off of existing debt, and promises of infrastructure development. That's not to say the Qatari bid will win in the end, or even that the Glazers are guaranteed to sell. There's a lot of wishful thinking based on minimal verified, factual information.
Click to expand...
And the moral dilemma?
 
Rossa said:
And the moral dilemma?
Click to expand...
As the saying goes "one man's meat is another man's poison" - moral dilemma's are personal to you and you alone, and there's nothing wrong with that
 
OrcaFat said:
Yes I have said a few times now that it is to do with revenue generated.

The original point was that, compared to City, United provide a much more powerful financial base from which to generate the level of revenue that will allow very high levels of spending and still be within FFP. That’s just a fact.

I’m not party to whatever nonsense is being spouted about us rushing out to buy several megastars in the summer. I wouldn’t have even thought about that and don’t really care. Over the long term we should be able to outspend all our rivals (as we used to, years ago) if everyone stays within FFP, because United is simply a far bigger money making proposition, provided there’s no debt and no money being taken out of the club.

What most people object to about the Glazers (without trying to speak on anyone’s behalf) is that the club is being run into the ground on the back of debt repayments, dividends (although not actually that much) and poor management (inadequate investment in the wrong things at the wrong times).

The ideal owner would not use club revenue to pay off debt and would take no money out of the club. Under owners like that, this club would be the most powerful club, financially, in the league and possibly the world. That doesn’t mean we spend another £200m out of the gate, but soon that kind of spending would be easy. If there’s no debt. And with systematic investment, better management etc.

Who can provide that kind of ownership? And what would be the moral cost? These are key questions but the point is that this club could generate insane money and therefore could (afterwards) spend insane money.
Click to expand...

The argument in favor of the Qataris has been increased spending on infrastructure and transfers. Increased spending on transfers is not a given as I have pointed out, which makes the Qatar bid less palatable ( it‘s not palatable to me until they sign a human rights declaration and change their laws).
 
NLunited said:
The argument in favor of the Qataris has been increased spending on infrastructure and transfers. Increased spending on transfers is not a given as I have pointed out, which makes the Qatar bid less palatable ( it‘s not palatable to me until they sign a human rights declaration and change their laws).
Click to expand...
But it is a given. You don’t think they buy the club and not invest in the team? That would be madness, even for them. I’m not in favour of them at all but it’s pointless to argue that they won’t buy players - they absolutely will. And they absolutely will be able to, and stay within FFP, the only question will be the timing of that.
 
I'd rather keep the Glazer's than get the Qataris. At least they'd go nowhere near the football side of things now they've lucked on a great manager. PSG managers have minimal say on transfers. And I've not even mentioned the sports washing.

Can't believe this poll. Shameful.
 
Relem said:
I'd rather keep the Glazer's than get the Qataris. At least they'd go nowhere near the football side of things now they've lucked on a great manager. PSG managers have minimal say on transfers. And I've not even mentioned the sports washing.

Can't believe this poll. Shameful.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I don’t think there’s a particularly good outcome for us regardless.

If we start winning things again, we’ll grow financially and will be able to start investing again.
 
glazed said:
Honestly I don't like either. They're both planet polluting. I have a slight preference for the British born planet polluting green washing cynical self publicist, but let's face it they're both awful and a choice between the two cannot be treated as an endorsement. As were the Glazers. I guess ignoring the owners is the only viable option. It's not like we are being given a say anyway.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you said, except the part about ignoring the owners being the only viable option. That's not the only option. We can still protest them (whether it's human rights if it's Qatar, the environment if it's Ineos, etc.). Use the power of the fanbase to bring attention to their negatives, while trying to get them to be better.

Sportswashing, greenwashing, etc., works when they get you to associate them with sport and forget about or de-emphasize their abuses against people/the environment. Fan groups should work to keep their abuses at the forefront of everyone's minds.
 
NLunited said:
There are tweets with Mbappé mentioned as a target for the Qataris.

There is more propoganda coming from the Qataris getting our fans all riled up promising multiple star signings in one window. The last I read is Mbappé, Bellingham, Declan Rice, Pickford and fecking Kane. I‘m not making this stuff up.
Click to expand...
Where and who from?
 
NLunited said:
The argument in favor of the Qataris has been increased spending on infrastructure and transfers. Increased spending on transfers is not a given as I have pointed out, which makes the Qatar bid less palatable ( it‘s not palatable to me until they sign a human rights declaration and change their laws).
Click to expand...
Have the Qataris not said they won't splash the cash on transfers?
 
NLunited said:
Don‘t think they did, they promised Mbappé via Mike Keegan on Twitter in the beginning of February.
Click to expand...
Why are you posting this? All reports have said that they won't splash unnecessarily. Show the source of your information that you've been sharing so far in this thread.
 
NK86 said:
Why are you posting this? All reports have said that they won't splash unnecessarily. Show the source of your information that you've been sharing so far in this thread.
Click to expand...
Go in the other Qatar thread: the tweet was posted there. Around February 7th.
 
People are not paying attention to PSG. PSG have some of the finest breeding ground for young talent in the world and and yet they keep trying to scoop up big names rather then pave the way for that talent to flourish. Their have no real identity for how they play because the owners just keep purchasing big names and changing managers for not winning a knockout competition.

From the beginning of the season I did not see how they win the CL, you can carry 1 player not pressing, but carrying 3, no chance.

That's what a Qatar ownership brings, soulless club forgoing our traditions.
 
krazyrobus said:
People are not paying attention to PSG. PSG have some of the finest breeding ground for young talent in the world and and yet they keep trying to scoop up big names rather then pave the way for that talent to flourish. Their have no real identity for how they play because the owners just keep purchasing big names and changing managers for not winning a knockout competition.

From the beginning of the season I did not see how they win the CL, you can carry 1 player not pressing, but carrying 3, no chance.

That's what a Qatar ownership brings, soulless club forgoing our traditions.
Click to expand...
This is probably the way to look at it.

Some have been going blue in the face to argue that the Qatar ownership would not spend big on transfers which is absolute nonsense - it’s what they would do above all else but it is not necessarily a good thing. If they came in here and sacked Erik, holy feck, the ride the Glazers got will look silky smooth. In fact, Erik would tell them to get fecked at the first sign of interference.
 
krazyrobus said:
People are not paying attention to PSG. PSG have some of the finest breeding ground for young talent in the world and and yet they keep trying to scoop up big names rather then pave the way for that talent to flourish. Their have no real identity for how they play because the owners just keep purchasing big names and changing managers for not winning a knockout competition.

From the beginning of the season I did not see how they win the CL, you can carry 1 player not pressing, but carrying 3, no chance.

That's what a Qatar ownership brings, soulless club forgoing our traditions.
Click to expand...

They just started a 16 year old in the CL didn't they?
 
Godfather said:
They just started a 16 year old in the CL didn't they?
Click to expand...
Yup they have made that adjustment now, but that has not been their general operating model.

Look at these players born around the Paris area that were in the catchment area for their academy.

Mendy, Konate, Saliba, Kounde, Kanta, Nkuku, Rabio, Pogba, Coman, Mbappe, Mahrez

Only Coman can you consider came through their academy and because of the sheer amount of people who were ahead of him went to Juve on loan.

That is a stunning amount of talent to let slip through the cracks when you are the only major club in the Paris area.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
I agree with everything you said, except the part about ignoring the owners being the only viable option
Click to expand...

I agree. But not sure I have the energy to do more than complain on the caf and do a snarky bit of journalism when I get the chance.
 
krazyrobus said:
People are not paying attention to PSG. PSG have some of the finest breeding ground for young talent in the world and and yet they keep trying to scoop up big names rather then pave the way for that talent to flourish. Their have no real identity for how they play because the owners just keep purchasing big names and changing managers for not winning a knockout competition.

From the beginning of the season I did not see how they win the CL, you can carry 1 player not pressing, but carrying 3, no chance.

That's what a Qatar ownership brings, soulless club forgoing our traditions.
Click to expand...

PSG for all their Domestic trophies have not been well run at all by Qatar.
 
NLunited said:
With that amount of talent coming through they should be a powerhouse. Instead they are a sad joke.
Click to expand...

Yeah ignoring all that local talent and instead choosing to buy in has been a massive blunder. Hopefully they don't make the same mistake if they end up owning United.
 
The whole reason that they even have such a world class academy now is because of the massive investment made under that ownership group put towards developing their youth set up and tapping into all that local talent finally. No matter how their managers have chosen to use it.

They didn't have that before at all. Their academy wasn't even top 5 in France prior.
 
stevoc said:
Yeah ignoring all that local talent and instead choosing to buy in has been a massive blunder. Hopefully they don't make the same mistake if they end up owning United.
Click to expand...
No thanks. They can feck off.
 
My love of football has already been diminished a fair bit over the last 15 years or so in no small part due to the massive investment from billionaires of questionable morals. That's just as much a function of getting older - I'm older than most footballers now for a start. I still really enjoy watching it and always will, I simply care a lot less about the results now than I used to.

Will the club I have always supported, and lived and breathed for in the first 20-odd years of my life being owned by Qatar diminish my passion for the sport even further? A bit, sure, but this is nothing new.
 
krazyrobus said:
Yup they have made that adjustment now, but that has not been their general operating model.

Look at these players born around the Paris area that were in the catchment area for their academy.

Mendy, Konate, Saliba, Kounde, Kanta, Nkuku, Rabio, Pogba, Coman, Mbappe, Mahrez

Only Coman can you consider came through their academy and because of the sheer amount of people who were ahead of him went to Juve on loan.

That is a stunning amount of talent to let slip through the cracks when you are the only major club in the Paris area.
Click to expand...

Qatar brought PSG in 2011. Some of these players would have have to been with PSG since 13 at the early stages of their ownership for your point to even make sense.

It’s not like they could acquire us this summer and take credit for Kobie Mainoo
 
To improve the squad next year we need:
Striker in the mould of Kane: 100M
CM in the mould of FDJ: 80M
RB with the ability like Shaw: 60M
GK - ball playing: 50M

Estimated funds required for new players 300M

We have transfer debt of 300M
Long term debts 500M
Infrastructure -stadium and training - 1000M

We are in urgent need of about more than 2000M but the money have already being used to pay Glazers debts, dividends, and whatnot (1500M).

In other words, we are fecked by the Glazers and sucked dry. We are left with no other option except the Qatari. They are the only ones that can fork out 8000M to buy and invest in the club with ZERO debts to us.

I only want the best for the only club I support all my life week in week out and the best choice is obvious to all.
 
Last edited:
Yakuza_devils said:
To improve the squad next year we need:
Striker in the mould of Kane: 100M
CM in the mould of FDJ: 80M
RB with the ability like Shaw: 60M
GK - ball playing: 50M

Estimated funds required for new players 300M

We have transfer debt of 300M
Long term debts 500M
Infrastructure -stadium and training - 1000M

We are in urgent need of about more than 2000M but the money have already being used to pay Glazers debts, dividends, and whatnot (1500M).

In other words, we are fecked by the Glazers and sucked dry. We are left with no other option except the Qatari. They are the only ones that can fork out 8000M to buy and invest in the club with ZERO debts to us.

I only want the best for the only club I support all my life week in week out and the best choice is obvious to all.
Click to expand...

And how would this work within FFP?

Anyone especially well-versed on the finer details? Because looking at the FFP rules, a club is only allowed £60m in losses over a 3 year span (this was recentlynincreased from 30m due to Covid). We lost 115m last year, and 92m the year before that.

So is there something I'm missing with how this is figured?
 
krazyrobus said:
Yup they have made that adjustment now, but that has not been their general operating model.

Look at these players born around the Paris area that were in the catchment area for their academy.

Mendy, Konate, Saliba, Kounde, Kanta, Nkuku, Rabio, Pogba, Coman, Mbappe, Mahrez

Only Coman can you consider came through their academy and because of the sheer amount of people who were ahead of him went to Juve on loan.

That is a stunning amount of talent to let slip through the cracks when you are the only major club in the Paris area.
Click to expand...

Why only Coman would come through their academy? Rabiot, Nkunku, Kimpembe, Ferland Mendy, Ikone, Coman, Dembélé, Edouard, Diaby, Nianzou and many others are all from their academy.

Also there is no catchment area in France, it's not like the UK, so all clubs have access to all players. The amount of clubs in an area is irrelevant unless the kids for some reason want to stay around Paris which is actually sometimes not the case, they prefer to go away and focus on Football.

Paris have done a significantly better job in the last decade when it comes to scouting and developing players. They also have used most of them in the first team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.