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

[Rood]

Well the head of the royal family is apparently only worth about 2bln, while the collective wealth of the family which he is part of is worth $335bln.

So no, he does not have enough wealth to buy a $7bln club as an individual.

I suggest you go and do some research into HBJ - it's been discussed in other threads many times already.

Online estimates of their wealth are massively out because most of the wealth is private but there is enough info out there to show they can afford to do this deal privately.

 

[Rood]

I don't know why people are concerned about Nice and Lausanne...

Well it's blatantly obvious why isn't it?

There is a bloke who wants to buy our football club and he already owns 2 others, neither of which are doing well.

Now I wouldn't expect Nice to win the league or anything but I certainly am going to be worried about their fans protesting and the captain criticising the management.

Bad management and decision making in the boardroom is exactly what has ruined our football club in recent times - I'm absolutely baffled how anyone can look at the facts about Nice in particular and not be worried about the competence of INEOS to run a football club.

 

[bosnian_red]

I suggest you go and do some research into HBJ - it's been discussed in other threads many times already.

Online estimates of their wealth are massively out because most of the wealth is private but there is enough info out there to show they can afford to do this deal privately.

Id say you should also do your research as their invented foundation for this offer literally has the state as funding them

 

[Rood]

Sure. Unarguably for you because you refuse to believe all the investigative journalists, all the previous evidence of state bids by Middle Eastern countries. It’s a strange stance to take, but I guess it’s made it much easier for you to swallow it. You don’t even seem a little skeptic.

We know that the ninety two foundation can be funded by the state, there’s documentation stating it, but you’re happy enough to accept it hasn’t been. Why would his dads use billions of his own personal wealth when he can easily get it from the state, makes no logical sense.

I’ll humour you and go along with the assumption of it being his dad’s money. Are you not questioning how his dad has this wealth and why it’s so hidden? Stories of him embezzling money from the state, doing arms deals. Absolutely feck this club being bought with that money. You’re actually okay with that? Even if you don’t have any morals, don’t you care about what happens if the political landscape changes?

I have absolutely no idea what investigative journalism or documents you are talking about. But it seems you can't read anyway - you literally quoted my post where I said "I'm open to the possibility that the state are involved..." so quite clearly you haven't understood my stance.

However I know very well where Jassim's dad's wealth comes from and put details about that in other threads on here.
HBJ is one of the most renowned politicians and investors in the world today, the family fund that he set up and Jassim managed for many years (Al Mirqab Capital) has investments in everything from real estate to hotels to banks to oil&gas.

Bringing morals into this is pointless - most billionaires are cnuts and likely to have some dodgy history, Sir Jim Ratcliffe is absolutely no different. Or don't you care about how his companies destroy the planet? How about BREXIT? Tax evasion?

I'm only interested in who will be the best owner for my football club so take your moral hand wringing elsewhere.

 

[Frasbul]

I voted Qatar but I now prefer INEOS.

 

[Lyng]

Well it's blatantly obvious why isn't it?

There is a bloke who wants to buy our football club and he already owns 2 others, neither of which are doing well.

Now I wouldn't expect Nice to win the league or anything but I certainly am going to be worried about their fans protesting and the captain criticising the management.

Bad management and decision making in the boardroom is exactly what has ruined our football club in recent times - I'm absolutely baffled how anyone can look at the facts about Nice in particular and not be worried about the competence of INEOS to run a football club.

This really baffles me with the crowd on here who are massively pro Ineos. I get not wanting state ownership, neither do I to be honest. But to actively hope for and be positive about Ineos is weird.
I hope they prove me wrong, but their work with Nice is Woodward levels of terrible.

 

[hp88]

I voted Qatar but I now prefer INEOS.

The pair should just merge at this point and buy United so everyones happy.

 

[mu4c_20le]

This really baffles me with the crowd on here who are massively pro Ineos. I get not wanting state ownership, neither do I to be honest. But to actively hope for and be positive about Ineos is weird.
I hope they prove me wrong, but their work with Nice is Woodward levels of terrible.

Most of the Nice criticism is greatly exaggerated and hard to take seriously. First of all they aren't 'ruined' and are only having a poor season this year because the new manager didn't work out. Everything was going well until Galtier was suddenly dismissed, allegedly for being a racist dickhead behind the scenes. They tend to sign young, hungry players on the rise. But the Qatar cheerleaders here will only focus on the two British signings that he brought in, presumably for their experience to add to the young squad.

 

[T_Model101]

Slightly off topic, but were Qatar to lose the battle, would BeIn Sports have it in for us at every opportunity?

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Slightly off topic, but were Qatar to lose the battle, would BeIn Sports have it in for us at every opportunity?

Don’t they already with Keys there?

 

[Dan_F]

I have absolutely no idea what investigative journalism or documents you are talking about. But it seems you can't read anyway - you literally quoted my post where I said "I'm open to the possibility that the state are involved..." so quite clearly you haven't understood my stance.

However I know very well where Jassim's dad's wealth comes from and put details about that in other threads on here.
HBJ is one of the most renowned politicians and investors in the world today, the family fund that he set up and Jassim managed for many years (Al Mirqab Capital) has investments in everything from real estate to hotels to banks to oil&gas.

Bringing morals into this is pointless - most billionaires are cnuts and likely to have some dodgy history, Sir Jim Ratcliffe is absolutely no different. Or don't you care about how his companies destroy the planet? How about BREXIT? Tax evasion?

I'm only interested in who will be the best owner for my football club so take your moral hand wringing elsewhere.

In every conversation I’ve had with you, you’ve spoken about how you’re not considering it a state bid until someone is able to show you evidence, which for obvious reasons, they cannot. That doesn’t sound like being open to the possibility at all, it’s being in denial so that United can get rid of the debt and have investment in infrastructure, while having a clear conscience.

You know HBJ and you’re completely fine with his money being used to buy and control the club. Talking about his reputation as a politician and investments is definitely one way to put it. There are some really shady fecking accusations out there against him, but again, you’re welcome to bury your head in sand and pretend they don’t exist because someone can’t show you proof.

I don’t consider Jim to have the same history at all. Has he negotiated arms deals and potentially funded terrorists. What a bizarre comparison. I have environmental concerns, but I’m willing to bet a large amount of the products produced by Ineos are quite necessary, like a lot of big polluters. I hope governments enforce stricter laws on environmental concerns.

Talking about Brexit, feck sake. My brother in law voted for Brexit, half the fecking country did. Are we comparing them all morally to HBJ

 

[Dan_F]

This really baffles me with the crowd on here who are massively pro Ineos. I get not wanting state ownership, neither do I to be honest. But to actively hope for and be positive about Ineos is weird.
I hope they prove me wrong, but their work with Nice is Woodward levels of terrible.

Most people who appear very pro Ineos are so because it’s the only alternative to a state run club. And for many that’s end game.

Right now, it feels like my choices are Ineos come in or probably ending a big part of my relationship with the club because I can’t support a state funded club. So forgive people for coming across as very pro Ineos.

 

[Bertie Wooster]

Most of the Nice criticism is greatly exaggerated and hard to take seriously. First of all they aren't 'ruined' and are only having a poor season this year because the new manager didn't work out. Everything was going well until Galtier was suddenly dismissed, allegedly for being a racist dickhead behind the scenes. They tend to sign young, hungry players on the rise. But the Qatar cheerleaders here will only focus on the two British signings that he brought in, presumably for their experience to add to the young squad.

I'm certainly not a Qatar cheerleader, as I've said numerous times I'm not overly confident about either bid. But not sure what you mean by 'it was going well'. If Ratcliffe has the money to buy United, sort out the ground, training facilities, debt, and also improve us on the pitch - then surely he should have been able to take a decent sized French team and get them top 4 in a league that keeps being decried for it's poor standard when it's about PSG's success?

I get an owner with little money doing what you say being described as 'going well'. But surely Ratcliffe, with the level of money he apparently has, should have been delivering some level of success for Nice by now - either CL football or domestic silverware. They were in the CL and EL a few seasons before he bought them - finishing 3rd and 4th - but have finished 5th-9th under him so he's hardly improved them at all.

And his money should certainly be enough to, at the very least, keep Lausanne up in the Swiss top flight and establish them in it, rather than being a yo-yo club between the top two divisions.

I really don't think it's 'greatly exaggerating' to highlight that neither are great auditions for buying United. The same when it's pointed out about the issues at PSG and Malaga for Qatari owners. Both sides of the argument are recognising the valid concerns of the worrying record of the 'other' bidder, but are then trying to undermine the valid concerns about their preferred choice.

The truth is, neither bidder has a great record to point to in terms of the clubs they've owned (or state owned) thus far. Which is a worry about both.

 

[klsv]

I'm sure those who have followed Ligue 1 more closely will correct me, but as far as I understand, Nice were in financial trouble during the early 00's but managed to save the club. Back in Ligue 1, they were a lower mid-table club with some random bursts of brilliance. Somehow managed to finish 4th between two 17th place finishes etc. Then from 15/16 onwards they've been a decent side. EL twice before and Conference League this season. Ineos, of course said they want to compete with PSG, but as I understood, there wasn't any promises to go full sugar daddy. Rather investing in the youth while slowly increasing the sums put into first team transfers. Nice under Ineos only got to 100 million mark in transfer spendings this year.

They will need time to compete with the likes of Lyon and Marseille. I'm not sure, but I imagine that players will rather join those clubs ahead of Nice and any team in PL ahead of any L1 side except for PSG. Basically, they're all selling clubs and those who manage to get the youth development and scouting spot on, will be the best side behind PSG. Ligue 1 seems like a very difficult place to succeed at. Look at Lens, Lille and Bordeaux. If you look at their league positions past 10 years, it's an absolute roller coaster. The only constant is PSG with their money and then you have Lyon and Marseille, two very well established clubs with less money but decent pulling power, floating in and around top 3 every season. The rest of the clubs just seem to be all over the place. Get into Europe one season, get relegated few years later.

United seems to be in a very different situation when it comes to finances, stability, pulling power etc.

 

[Lyng]

Most of the Nice criticism is greatly exaggerated and hard to take seriously. First of all they aren't 'ruined' and are only having a poor season this year because the new manager didn't work out. Everything was going well until Galtier was suddenly dismissed, allegedly for being a racist dickhead behind the scenes. They tend to sign young, hungry players on the rise. But the Qatar cheerleaders here will only focus on the two British signings that he brought in, presumably for their experience to add to the young squad.

We arent ruined either but still very badly run after the Glazers took over. Hiring very incompetent people to run the club is very much what has happened at Nice. It hasnt gone well at all, they haven progressed at all. All the lofty promises have not been achieved. And no I dont expect them to compete with PSG.

 

[Lyng]

The truth is, neither bidder has a great record to point to in terms of the clubs they've owned (or state owned) thus far. Which is a worry about both.

Exactly my feeling as well.

 

[mu4c_20le]

I'm certainly not a Qatar cheerleader, as I've said numerous times I'm not overly confident about either bid. But not sure what you mean by 'it was going well'. If Ratcliffe has the money to buy United, sort out the ground, training facilities, debt, and also improve us on the pitch - then surely he should have been able to take a decent sized French team and get them top 4 in a league that keeps being decried for it's poor standard when it's about PSG's success?

I get an owner with little money doing what you say being described as 'going well'. But surely Ratcliffe, with the level of money he apparently has, should have been delivering some level of success for Nice by now - either CL football or domestic silverware. They were in the CL and EL a few seasons before he bought them - finishing 3rd and 4th - but have finished 5th-9th under him so he's hardly improved them at all.

And his money should certainly be enough to, at the very least, keep Lausanne up in the Swiss top flight and establish them in it, rather than being a yo-yo club between the top two divisions.

I really don't think it's 'greatly exaggerating' to highlight that neither are great auditions for buying United. The same when it's pointed out about the issues at PSG and Malaga for Qatari owners. Both sides of the argument are recognising the valid concerns of the worrying record of the 'other' bidder, but are then trying to undermine the valid concerns about their preferred choice.

The truth is, neither bidder has a great record to point to in terms of the clubs they've owned (or state owned) thus far. Which is a worry about both.

When they appointed Galtier it was after sacking Vieira and were going through another upheaval. He took them back to 5th and seemed like a project manager. That's what I meant by things were looking well. I never said hrs an amazing owner, just that some of the stuff said was way over the top.

 

[croadyman]

I voted Qatar but I now prefer INEOS.

On what grounds then?

 

[croadyman]

As I've said a lot, I'm still pretty undecided between what I see as three far from ideal options.

Without having a strong opinion I've pretty much stayed out of the threads / debates as the situation has dragged on. But, must admit, as I've been discussing it for the past few days I think I've swayed from slightly preferring to the Qatari bid to slightly preferring the Ratcliffe one.

But really not a lot in it. And I'm still concerned about Ratcliffe's record in charge of Nice and Lausanne. And also concerned about another person in their 70's buying the club. Don't really want to end up with Ratcliffe's children, or whoever, as owners by proxy the same as the Glazers. It's a shame the chance to buy the club has only come now - although I guess you could argue he's had the chance to 'learn from his (many) mistakes' at other clubs in the meantime. We can only hope so, anyway.

Yeah his record of running clubs is awful

 

[TheGodsInRed]

Most people who appear very pro Ineos are so because it’s the only alternative to a state run club. And for many that’s end game.

Right now, it feels like my choices are Ineos come in or probably ending a big part of my relationship with the club because I can’t support a state funded club. So forgive people for coming across as very pro Ineos.

Same. If it wasn't for their corrupt world cup bid I wouldn't have even known about their human rights issues, but it cannot be ignored imo.

 

[lsd]

Sure. Unarguably for you because you refuse to believe all the investigative journalists, all the previous evidence of state bids by Middle Eastern countries. It’s a strange stance to take, but I guess it’s made it much easier for you to swallow it. You don’t even seem a little skeptic.

We know that the ninety two foundation can be funded by the state, there’s documentation stating it, but you’re happy enough to accept it hasn’t been. Why would his dads use billions of his own personal wealth when he can easily get it from the state, makes no logical sense.

I’ll humour you and go along with the assumption of it being his dad’s money. Are you not questioning how his dad has this wealth and why it’s so hidden? Stories of him embezzling money from the state, doing arms deals. Absolutely feck this club being bought with that money. You’re actually okay with that? Even if you don’t have any morals, don’t you care about what happens if the political landscape changes?



If his dad is one of the richest men in the world then surely we wouldn't be reaching a convoluted 5th round of bidding, they would slapped £6bn on the table several months ago and got the deal done

His father isn't one of the richest men in the world and neither is he. I have no in idea where that comes from but the truth is Sir Jim is richer than both easily.

For some reason a lot of United fans are blindly believing that this bid is from all of the Qatar royal family and it's their money which is certainly not a given by any means.

Sheikh Jassim and his dad alone do not have the money to be doing what people want to believe

 

[Rood]

In every conversation I’ve had with you, you’ve spoken about how you’re not considering it a state bid until someone is able to show you evidence, which for obvious reasons, they cannot. That doesn’t sound like being open to the possibility at all, it’s being in denial so that United can get rid of the debt and have investment in infrastructure, while having a clear conscience.

You know HBJ and you’re completely fine with his money being used to buy and control the club. Talking about his reputation as a politician and investments is definitely one way to put it. There are some really shady fecking accusations out there against him, but again, you’re welcome to bury your head in sand and pretend they don’t exist because someone can’t show you proof.

I don’t consider Jim to have the same history at all. Has he negotiated arms deals and potentially funded terrorists. What a bizarre comparison. I have environmental concerns, but I’m willing to bet a large amount of the products produced by Ineos are quite necessary, like a lot of big polluters. I hope governments enforce stricter laws on environmental concerns.

Talking about Brexit, feck sake. My brother in law voted for Brexit, half the fecking country did. Are we comparing them all morally to HBJ

That is not what Ive said - however, I have a major issue with people who say 'I dont want this bid because its a state bid' when actually there is no proof of that whatsoever. Still I am open to the possibility of state involvement but think its daft to focus on that when its just speculation.
You see I prefer to deal in facts rather than rumour, speculation and unproven allegations that you prefer.

The other point here is that HBJ is not the one buying us anyway, in fact he's on the record as saying he has no interest in sports investment but that his sons are pushing for that. But yes there is a high possibility the money comes from the Family Office fund, Al Mirqab Capital who are involved in various investment sectors and no Im not particularly fussed if the money even comes from arms deals (although again there is no proof of this) but still Im glad you have taken the time to at least do some research as its better than many who think anyone with the same surname must be brothers.

You can pick and choose whichever virtue signaling issue bothers you more , you have plenty to choose from when you look at the list of billionaire bidders for Man Utd - green washing, sports washing, human rights, BREXIT etc (and BTW only a third of the country voted for this, not half - all twats).
Fact is anyone who can afford to buy us comes with major moral baggage, there are no winners in this comparison - there is no ethical billionaire looking to buy my club so I just look at which option is likely to be the best for my football club.

The one offering to remove the Glazers, clear the debts and refurb the stadium sounds bloody good to me.

Not sure what the INEOS bid has going for us fans apart from 'well its not Qatar'.

 

[lex talionis]

Nothing is certain in life. Who had any idea Leicester City would go on that amazing run and turn over massive clubs?

That said, if Ratcliffe takes partial control of the club, all of us here should prepare for another decade of top four scraping. But we will be entertained with the occasional fantastic result, as was the case this season when we -- under the steady hand of the Glazers -- won the league cup, beat Barcelona, and took home three points against City, Arsenal and Liverpool although there was never a time when we were seriously challenging for the title. Oh well.

 

[lsd]

Nothing is certain in life. Who had any idea Leicester City would go on that amazing run and turn over massive clubs?

That said, if Ratcliffe takes partial control of the club, all of us here should prepare for another decade of top four scraping. But we will be entertained with the occasional fantastic result, as was the case this season when we -- under the steady hand of the Glazers -- won the league cup, beat Barcelona, and took home three points against City, Arsenal and Liverpool although there was never a time when we were seriously challenging for the title. Oh well.

It's like arguing with covidiots at times.

Sir Jim is not looking to take partial control but chances of this weird Qatar brigade ever admitting that is well same as getting an anti vaxxer to admit real medical professionals know more than them.

I think it's time for me to ignore this thread for my own sanity now

 

[Dan_F]

That is not what Ive said - however, I have a major issue with people who say 'I dont want this bid because its a state bid' when actually there is no proof of that whatsoever. Still I am open to the possibility of state involvement but think its daft to focus on that when its just speculation.
You see I prefer to deal in facts rather than rumour, speculation and unproven allegations that you prefer.

The other point here is that HBJ is not the one buying us anyway, in fact he's on the record as saying he has no interest in sports investment but that his sons are pushing for that. But yes there is a high possibility the money comes from the Family Office fund, Al Mirqab Capital who are involved in various investment sectors and no Im not particularly fussed if the money even comes from arms deals (although again there is no proof of this) but still Im glad you have taken the time to at least do some research as its better than many who think anyone with the same surname must be brothers.

You can pick and choose whichever virtue signaling issue bothers you more , you have plenty to choose from when you look at the list of billionaire bidders for Man Utd - green washing, sports washing, human rights, BREXIT etc (and BTW only a third of the country voted for this, not half - all twats).
Fact is anyone who can afford to buy us comes with major moral baggage, there are no winners in this comparison - there is no ethical billionaire looking to buy my club so I just look at which option is likely to be the best for my football club.

The one offering to remove the Glazers, clear the debts and refurb the stadium sounds bloody good to me.

Not sure what the INEOS bid has going for us fans apart from 'well its not Qatar'.

I don’t think it’s daft at all to worry about where the money comes from. If it’s not a state bid, the money has to come from HBJ right? You accept that is your best case scenario. The money HBJ has gathered is not clean in the slightest, at least Ineos are manufacturing products that we all use. For me, there is no comparison in manufacturing plastic products and selling arms, being caught up in scandals around fraud, also tax evasion by the way, which you seem to be concerned about with Jim.

Jim is no angel but yes, I think morally I can stack them up and be at peace with having Ineos as owner. If you want to call that virtue signalling you can, but I’m telling you there’s a good chance I stop supporting the club if Qatar come in, so it’s not. HBJ may not be the face, but if it’s his money that’s unforgivable. Almost worse than a straight up state bid - which is something that maybe some fans who support Qatar might want to do some research on.

I don’t think it’s right that an owner just comes in and spends a billion on a new stadium. It’s a massive competitive advantage that no other team has had. I would rather the Glazers were forced to clear their own debt but unfortunately that’s not the way it works. I would rather we had to manage the debt than sold out to a state/HBJ.

 

[Dan_F]

Nothing is certain in life. Who had any idea Leicester City would go on that amazing run and turn over massive clubs?

That said, if Ratcliffe takes partial control of the club, all of us here should prepare for another decade of top four scraping. But we will be entertained with the occasional fantastic result, as was the case this season when we -- under the steady hand of the Glazers -- won the league cup, beat Barcelona, and took home three points against City, Arsenal and Liverpool although there was never a time when we were seriously challenging for the title. Oh well.

Nothing is certain but I’m going to spend the next paragraph acting like it is.

Poor United, finishing in the top three, beating La Liga champions, wining a trophy, spending £250 million on players after coming off a horrendous season. Completely spoilt and embarrassing to read some of this stuff.

 

[Lyng]

Nothing is certain but I’m going to spend the next paragraph acting like it is.

Poor United, finishing in the top three, beating La Liga champions, wining a trophy, spending £250 million on players after coming off a horrendous season. Completely spoilt and embarrassing to read some of this stuff.

United should always strive for the biggest trophies.

 

[Dan_F]

United should always strive for the biggest trophies.

Yes and? Striving is different to feeling entitled and then throwing your toys out the pram because rich daddy isn’t coming in to save you. Even though Jim is a richer daddy than Jassim.

 

[stw2022]

Ineos out of the two but it really isn't going to be that much of a change from the Glazer era. The idea they'll borrow to buy us loading all of the debt on the parent company and not expect us to pay a considerable chunk of our earnings towards it (which given the size of the borrowing needed may well be more than we pay to cover Glazer's loans) is just derisible fantasy

 

[romufc]

Keep your head in the sand if you think that this random guy (totally unconnected and in no way family with the rulers... oh wait) suddenly has multi billions of wealth where he wants to spend it all on United and that it isn't actually funded by the state..

Do you think City are all above board? Newcastle? PSG? It's ok if you are willing to ignore all the ethical issues. I genuinely don't give a feck if people don't. It's just hilarious that people will bury their heads in the sand and deny what is blindingly obvious as their way of coping. If you want to support it, at least own it like croadyman is doing where he openly doesn't care about off the pitch things.

I don't think City and PSG are above board but also, there has been nothing done by Newcastle yet, that is having questionable, you are stereotyping they are not above board because of ME owners. In the future they might not be but, currently, you cannot point to anything that says its not.

Ethical issues are a concern from not just Qatar, every rich owner, you simply chose to ignore all of the INEOS ones, plus where are INEOS getting this money? JP Morgan and others, do you think they are all above board?

Why don't you take your own advice and own that neither owner is 100% above board.

 

[romufc]

Ineos out of the two but it really isn't going to be that much of a change from the Glazer era. The idea they'll borrow to buy us loading all of the debt on the parent company and not expect us to pay a considerable chunk of our earnings towards it (which given the size of the borrowing needed may well be more than we pay to cover Glazer's loans) is just derisible fantasy

Exactly, people are deluded in thinking that INEOS will borrow £5bn and spend their own money on transfers and infrastructure without loading anything on the club in some way or another.

 

[Lyng]

Yes and? Striving is different to feeling entitled and then throwing your toys out the pram because rich daddy isn’t coming in to save you. Even though Jim is a richer daddy than Jassim.

I dont see anyone throwing their toys out the pram? In fact I have only seen people talk about not supporting United if Jassim took over (despite it now seeming pretty clear it was never a state bid)
Nevertheless we should never be happy with top 3 in the long run.

 

[Dan_F]

I dont see anyone throwing their toys out the pram? In fact I have only seen people talk about not supporting United if Jassim took over (despite it now seeming pretty clear it was never a state bid)
Nevertheless we should never be happy with top 3 in the long run.

The guy I replied to is making out we’re doomed under Ineos, and unless you’ve been living under a rock, people are certainly throwing their toys out the pram about making sure we get a sugar daddy.

I can’t be bothered to repeat myself, but if you think it’s not a state bid, are you concerned where Jassim’s daddy got the money? Maybe Google him and see if you want that type of money funding the club and also whether it’s good for United to be so strongly linked to politics in the region.

 

[Lyng]

The guy I replied to is making out we’re doomed under Ineos, and unless you’ve been living under a rock, people are certainly throwing their toys out the pram about making sure we get a sugar daddy.

I can’t be bothered to repeat myself, but if you think it’s not a state bid, are you concerned where Jassim’s daddy got the money? Maybe Google him and see if you want that type of money funding the club and also whether it’s good for United to be so strongly linked to politics in the region.

There are no clean billionaires. Ineos are far from clean either.
Quite frankly I hoped someone like Bezos or Apple bought us. They arent clean either but better than Ineos and Jassims father at least. Thats not the case though and thus we are left with two prospects than are both far from ideal. Guns or destroying the earth is pretty much the same to me.

 

[Dan_F]

There are no clean billionaires. Ineos are far from clean either.
Quite frankly I hoped someone like Bezos or Apple bought us. They arent clean either but better than Ineos and Jassims father at least. Thats not the case though and thus we are left with two prospects than are both far from ideal. Guns or destroying the earth is pretty much the same to me.

Slating Ineos but accepting Amazon and Apple is a bit strange. Any company of that size is going to be a massive polluter, but Ineos aren’t just burning and polluting stuff for fun, it’s producing stuff we all use constantly. Until governments get involved and force change, nothing can be done to avoid those products for most.

Equating the production of plastics to selling arms and hanging with dictator's doesn’t seem balanced to me.

 

[Lyng]

Slating Ineos but accepting Amazon and Apple is a bit strange. Any company of that size is going to be a massive polluter, but Ineos aren’t just burning and polluting stuff for fun, it’s producing stuff we all use constantly. Until governments get involved and force change, nothing can be done to avoid those products for most.

Equating the production of plastics to selling arms and hanging with dictator's doesn’t seem balanced to me.

Its not just the production of plastic. You might want to look deeper into the history of Ineos. And then there is the whole Brexit part.

I am not saying I dont accept Ineos as a owner. I simply said I would prefer someone else. Qatar or Ineos is much the same to me. Would prefer others.

 

[Red_toad]

Its not just the production of plastic. You might want to look deeper into the history of Ineos. And then there is the whole Brexit part.

I am not saying I dont accept Ineos as a owner. I simply said I would prefer someone else. Qatar or Ineos is much the same to me. Would prefer others.

Are you blaming Sir Jim for Brexit? Harsh if so, I’d say he was entitled to his opinion, even if it were wrong.

 

[Lyng]

Are you blaming Sir Jim for Brexit? Harsh if so, I’d say he was entitled to his opinion, even if it were wrong.

He was a staunch advocate of it, no?

 

[Dan_F]

Its not just the production of plastic. You might want to look deeper into the history of Ineos. And then there is the whole Brexit part.

I am not saying I dont accept Ineos as a owner. I simply said I would prefer someone else. Qatar or Ineos is much the same to me. Would prefer others.

Unless they’re selling arms, embezzling money, handing suitcases of cash, running countries accused of human rights abuses, I doubt it compares.

The Brexit thing is such a red herring. I hate Brexit, people were lied to etc. but they made personal choices (however stupid) in a democratic vote…

 

[Tarrou]

Exactly, people are deluded in thinking that INEOS will borrow £5bn and spend their own money on transfers and infrastructure without loading anything on the club in some way or another.

its also deluded to think the club can service a 5bn debt

truth is nobody knows what they’ll do but id love someone to show me how the numbers work with Ineos putting the debt repayments on the club..because the math just doesn’t add up