It is really disappointing that all the 'get Glazers out' years has led to those two as the only alternatives.
Neither tick any boxes either morally or competency (Football ownership wise). I really wasn't expecting much difference on the morality level to be honest - anyone having the money to buy United, and try to compete with state owned City and Newcastle, was unlikely to be much better than those. But I was hoping we'd get bidders that filled me with hope in terms of competency. But neither do, really.
I now just want the whole business sorted one way or another as quickly as possible so that we can allow ETH to know the budget and get on with his transfer business.
Which of the scenarios is most likely to lead to success, I've no idea. My guess would be the Qatar bid is the biggest gamble as it's the most likely to lead to biggest success, given their wealth, but also most capable of going the most wrong if they run it like PSG or Malaga. And that going with Radcliffe, or sticking with Glazers, would be most likely to just carry on in a similar vein to recent times - which, at least under ETH, still offers the possibilities of some trophies and a good squad togetherness, even if it still maintains the club debt and makes it unlikely we'll catch up with City until they themselves drop down a few levels.
So no real idea which scenario would be best. Just feels all options are far less ideal than was hoped, and it's dragged on for way too long and is now going to unnecessarily impact our summer transfer business which is really frustrating.