Sir Jim Ratcliffe: I want to buy Manchester United | Will make a bid for the club [Telegraph]

dal said:
Amazon? Can’t see that happening, would be worse than the glazers.

Will probably be dubai, £5 billion should do it including £1.5 billion for investment, stadia improvements.
Click to expand...

Doubt if Dubai has the financial bandwidth to do the deal. They still own their cousins, Abu Dhabi a lot from the last financial crisis when they almost went belly-up if not for the intervention of their cuz.
They don't have any of the oil&gas resources like their cousins -- relying on real estate, finance and their charms to survive.
 
sglowrider said:
Doubt if Dubai has the financial bandwidth to do the deal. They still own their cousins, Abu Dhabi a lot from the last financial crisis when they almost went belly-up if not for the intervention of their cuz.
They don't have any of the oil&gas resources like their cousins -- relying on real estate, finance and their charms to survive.
Click to expand...
not to mention would abu dhabi really want them stealing titles away? seems a bit counter productive
 
croadyman said:
Suddenly feels very Ratcliffe or bust again according to some posts in last few hours
Click to expand...

Will be the Americans I suspect. They will appreciate the business sensibility of buying United esp for the long haul where we will see an inevitable change in the business model of the EPL. The threat of the super league saw to that.
As I said earlier, content is King and United is gold. Even during our crap years, we are never away from the headlines. We don't need Netflix to spend a year tailing us around. This has been built up over generations so many content creators/producers will see this as a bargain.

Hardware combined with content is a well-trodden path for tech companies. There is a hierarchy of the types of companies in the tech space. Hardware companies are lower down the totem pole. Content is always at the top.
 
Last edited:
TheReligion said:
Ortega looks one of the most unlikely options really. Apple more realistic at this point. Especially with the denials from Spain.
Click to expand...
I was thinking of options and figured a major company had way less to lose compared to a billionaire spending 25-50 percent of their money and posted about Apple. Then checked the news hours later and saw the link, and I think it’s a fantastic idea. Stadium would be gorgeous as well, with Apple most likely getting the naming rights?
 
sglowrider said:
Will be the Americans I suspect. They will appreciate the business sensibility of buying United esp for the long haul where we will see an inevitable change in the business model of the EPL. The threat of the super league saw to that.
As I said earlier, content is King and United is gold. Even during our crap years, we are never away from the headlines. We don't need Netflix to spend a year tailing us around. This has been built up over generations so many content creators/producers will see this as a bargain.

Hardware combined with content is a well-trodden path for tech companies. There is a hierarchy of the types of companies in the tech space. Hardware companies are lower down the totem pole. Content is always at the top.
Click to expand...

What sort of American company do you see
 
croadyman said:
What sort of American company do you see
Click to expand...

I think the Apple, Google, Netflix even MS links would make sense. They have all got into the content game via tech platforms.
Without knowing the financial details; when you are spending £5-7billion, you are looking at returns in 10-15 years' time. I am sure the EPL model will change before that.

Take the little Wrexham experiment -- the two boys discovered how antiquated the custodians of football, below the EPL were. They were able to bend them then a little to suit their agenda. They have the publicity off the Netflix series -- and wanted to then leverage technology like IPTV to then stream direct. Even they could figure it out.

There is less of an incentive for the NFL and the MLB since they are primarily for the domestic audience. NBA is a much more global sport/content than the above two.

We have moved into a new technology model -- you have the ability to remove the middleman now. It wont happen overnight. But I see United streaming direct to United fans in 10years time with some sort of hybrid model. The technology has been there the past 5-8 years already. Maybe clubs like Burnley or Palace have a bigger share of the TV pot whilst clubs like United get more leeway to stream direct. Afterall MUTV already exist , they just need to pump up the resources like global bandwidth management, bigger production crew etc.

Sports is content. And Content is king.

Most of all, successful content is just very difficult to create or find.
 
Last edited:
sglowrider said:
Doubt if Dubai has the financial bandwidth to do the deal. They still own their cousins, Abu Dhabi a lot from the last financial crisis when they almost went belly-up if not for the intervention of their cuz.
They don't have any of the oil&gas resources like their cousins -- relying on real estate, finance and their charms to survive.
Click to expand...
God have a think man. You know we had covid where the world shut down. It's been reported that Dubai have somewhat recovered. Plus they are still loaded. Worth 302 billion. Why would Manchester Citys owners give a shit if they bought us when they are richer. Dubai is still a separate emirate state at the end of the day. Some people here need to think and not be braindead.
 
sglowrider said:
Deserted debts stir disquiet in the mysterious world of Dubai Inc
Click to expand...
Ok I have a business degree and that was their subsidiaries. Those ain't even their sovereign fund. Parent and subsidiary companies are 2 separate companies. Plus they are not the ones who want to buy Manchester United. Its the corporation of dubai who is confirmed to be interested which isn't either of those companies in the article. parent companies have no obligation to to lend their subsidiaries money. I doubt they care given they are worth 10 times more
 
Slysi17 said:
God have a think man. You know we had covid where the world shut down. It's been reported that Dubai have somewhat recovered. Plus they are still loaded. Worth 302 billion. Why would Manchester Citys owners give a shit if they bought us when they are richer. Dubai is still a separate emirate state at the end of the day. Some people here need to think and not be braindead.
Click to expand...
Abu Dhabi vs Dubai. Football is the new camel racing.
 
Slysi17 said:
Ok I have a business degree and that was their subsidiaries. Those ain't even their sovereign fund. Parent and subsidiary companies are 2 separate companies. Plus they are not the ones who want to buy Manchester United. Its the corporation of dubai who is confirmed to be interested which isn't either of those companies in the article. parent companies have no obligation to to lend their subsidiaries money. I doubt they care given they are worth 10 times more
Click to expand...
I don't have a business degree but after reading the article above, I have also come to the same conclusion as yourself. Dubai Holding was formerly known as DIC, who tried buying Liverpool and they're a subsidiarie of Dubai.

The ones reported to be interested in buying the club are the investment corporation of Dubai (ICD) which has assets of over $300bn.
 
Adnan said:
I don't have a business degree but after reading the article above, I have also come to the same conclusion as yourself. Dubai Holding was formerly known as DIC, who tried buying Liverpool and they're a subsidiarie of Dubai.

The ones reported to be interested in buying the club are the investment corporation of Dubai (ICD) which has assets of over $300bn.
Click to expand...
Yep that's what I am basically saying. Its not the subsidiaries who want to buy the club. Its the actual parent company the incorporation of dubai who as you said are worth 302 billion. They control those 2 companies but still really loaded. People need to research before spouting the nonsense of dubai is in debt so they can't buy Manchester United
 
Slysi17 said:
Yep that's what I am basically saying. Its not the subsidiaries who want to buy the club. Its the actual parent company the incorporation of dubai who as you said are worth 302 billion. They control those 2 companies but still really loaded. People need to research before spouting the nonsense of dubai is in debt so they can't buy Manchester United
Click to expand...
Tbf to Sglowrider, it is a bit confusing, so I can sympathise.

But you're correct, it's the subsidiaries who have had issues whilst the parent company (ICD) is financially extremely healthy.
 
Adnan said:
Tbf to Sglowrider, it is a bit confusing, so I can sympathise.

But you're correct, it's the subsidiaries who have had issues whilst the parent company (ICD) is financially extremely healthy.
Click to expand...
You have a point i guess. I did an accounting degree so I guess I easily spotted it. So yeah don't rule out Dubai buying the club. Not saying its definitely going to happen but they are very loaded and could afford Manchester United easily. Plus they don't give a crap about Manchester city owners. They are not going to decide not to buy it due to that
 
sglowrider said:
I think the Apple, Google, Netflix even MS links would make sense. They have all got into the content game via tech platforms.
Without knowing the financial details; when you are spending £5-7billion, you are looking at returns in 10-15 years' time. I am sure the EPL model will change before that.

Take the little Wrexham experiment -- the two boys discovered how antiquated the custodians of football, below the EPL were. They were able to bend them then a little to suit their agenda. They have the publicity off the Netflix series -- and wanted to then leverage technology like IPTV to then stream direct. Even they could figure it out.

There is less of an incentive for the NFL and the MLB since they are primarily for the domestic audience. NBA is a much more global sport/content than the above two.

We have moved into a new technology model -- you have the ability to remove the middleman now. It wont happen overnight. But I see United streaming direct to United fans in 10years time with some sort of hybrid model. The technology has been there the past 5-8 years already. Maybe clubs like Burnley or Palace have a bigger share of the TV pot whilst clubs like United get more leeway to stream direct. Afterall MUTV already exist , they just need to pump up the resources like global bandwidth management, bigger production crew etc.

Sports is content. And Content is king.

Most of all, successful content is just very difficult to create or find.
Click to expand...

Much as I would like to think it was possible for them to buy us,doesn't seem realistic at all. I might feel differently if it wasn't coming from such an unreliable Utd source in Cross. Certainly interesting that the Saudi stuff was coming from BBC but won't happen as they own Newcastle.
 
Slysi17 said:
You have a point i guess. I did an accounting degree so I guess I easily spotted it. So yeah don't rule out Dubai buying the club. Not saying its definitely going to happen but they are very loaded and could afford Manchester United easily. Plus they don't give a crap about Manchester city owners. They are not going to decide not to buy it due to that
Click to expand...
I wasn't paying much attention to it until it was reported by Matt Lawton in The Times, and he's a decent journalist.

 
Adnan said:
I wasn't paying much attention to it until it was reported by Matt Lawton in The Times, and he's a decent journalist.

Click to expand...

Oh yeah true. I remember seeing that tweet. I actually understand why people were confused. They might of thought it was one of the subsidiaries but it's been confirmed it's the parent company. Sorry guys for getting a bit uptight. When are they are coming forward I wonder because as you said reliable journalist
 
croadyman said:
Much as I would like to think it was possible for them to buy us,doesn't seem realistic at all. I might feel differently if it wasn't coming from such an unreliable Utd source in Cross. Certainly interesting that the Saudi stuff was coming from BBC but won't happen as they own Newcastle.
Click to expand...
@Shakesey

Example -- If Bruce Springsteen's music catalogue can be sold at $500 million, surely the United platform would make sense then at $5-6billion. Bowie's was sold for $250million and he's been dead for a long time with little to no chance of making a comeback or any new material.
''Lot of money chasing after a limited supply of legacy catalogs' was the reason given by folks in the business.

And United is a legacy project.
 
Last edited:
Slysi17 said:
Oh yeah true. I remember seeing that tweet. I actually understand why people were confused. They might of thought it was one of the subsidiaries but it's been confirmed it's the parent company. Sorry guys for getting a bit uptight. When are they are coming forward I wonder because as you said reliable journalist
Click to expand...
It was first reported by Mike Keegan months earlier about Dubai seriously positioning themselves to purchase the club.

I would expect things to take a bit of time but I'm expecting to hear more concrete news in the coming weeks regarding the people behind potential offers. And by the end of the season, we will hopefully have a clearer a picture of who will takeover from the Glazers.
 
Adnan said:
It was first reported by Mike Keegan months earlier about Dubai seriously positioning themselves to purchase the club.

I would expect things to take a bit of time but I'm expecting to hear more concrete news in the coming weeks regarding the people behind potential offers. And by the end of the season, we will hopefully have a clearer a picture of who will takeover from the Glazers.
Click to expand...

I am sure it will be cleared up by the end of the season. Or never. This will allow the new owners to have an impact on this upcoming summer window.
 
sglowrider said:
I am sure it will be cleared up by the end of the season. Or never. This will allow the new owners to have an impact on this upcoming summer window.
Click to expand...
I hope so mate, it would be nice to go into a summer transfer window with new ownership. And who that will be, is going to keep us all enthralled in the meantime.
 
Taking debts when interest rates have been going up and theres no sign of slowing down doesnt look wise to me.

Can the Posh French Waiter pull it off? maybe he should buy the club cash :devil:
 
croadyman said:
That is dream one but realistically my first choice would be Ortega,could buy us as a legacy for his family as he's 86. Apparently this Ambani guy worth around $90bn is shady to say the least.
Click to expand...
Ambani's worth isn't shady by any means but he isn't spending 6-8 billion without returns or major expansion plan of Reliance in Europe. Safe to say, he won't be buying.
 
tenpoless said:
Taking debts when interest rates have been going up and theres no sign of slowing down doesnt look wise to me.

Can the Posh French Waiter pull it off? maybe he should buy the club cash :devil:
Click to expand...

This is when you hope the Glazers do their due diligence on who they want to sell the club to. And not try and extract the most ---- Someone who promises them $ 10 billion but whose package is heavily reliant on debt or someone who is cash rich and is offering $8Billion for example.
 
Not sure what y'all are on about. I'd bet good money that none of the tech companies will buy us.

If they want streaming rights, that has to be negotiated with the PL, UEFA etc. The other content like behind the scenes footage, documentaries, youth games (all of the stuff MUTV does) is no where near valuable enough for a 5bn takeover of United.

If they want stadium naming rights, they will buy some stadium naming rights. They don't have to buy the whole club. Also Apple didn't care to bid for Camp Nou so it's hardly likely they'll be interested in OT.

If the content people really need the content, we will spin up something like Barca Studios and give % rights to Netflix for a couple hundred million or something like that.
 
alexthelion said:
Would that be true if the known face had/has major questions over how they would run United?
Click to expand...

Probably not. All im saying is that he’s the best option out there so far. I’ve actually not said he’s a great option. But I’d like someone opposing Jim to spell out why he is a bad option. I’m not sure Nice is any evidence of him being bad, but someone out there: please point out in what areas he’s bad, when naming him a bad option.
 
I know almost nothing about Ratcliffe apart from him being interested in United before. He doesn't seem to have done very much with the other clubs he owns. Anyone know more about this guy?
 
Teja said:
Not sure what y'all are on about. I'd bet good money that none of the tech companies will buy us.

If they want streaming rights, that has to be negotiated with the PL, UEFA etc. The other content like behind the scenes footage, documentaries, youth games (all of the stuff MUTV does) is no where near valuable enough for a 5bn takeover of United.

If they want stadium naming rights, they will buy some stadium naming rights. They don't have to buy the whole club. Also Apple didn't care to bid for Camp Nou so it's hardly likely they'll be interested in OT.

If the content people really need the content, we will spin up something like Barca Studios and give % rights to Netflix for a couple hundred million or something like that.
Click to expand...

Just like when the EPL was introduced, it was a disruptive model that changed the way football was being presented to the world. That was 30years ago. Do you think that the current model will remain the same in 10 years time?

Why do you think the Project Big Picture and the Super League came about? There is movement to want to change the current model. This is whats driving the major players in the content market. The US, China and India markets are embryonic.

Its expensive to buy content from the movie houses -- whole take a big chuck of the revenues. So why not buy a unique property like Unted that has millions of eyeballs guaranteed every weekend and then sum. No need for costly customer acquisition at more. Its cheaper.

A bank spends an average of $200 to acquire a customer. Given that United has several hundred million very loyal fans/customers already... imagine how much that fan base is worth?
 
I keep hearing that Ratcliffe hasn't done anything Nice and is by and large a poor owner, which to me couldn't be further from the truth.
He has stated (actually his brother has) several times that the investment into Nice is hampered by FFP restrictions, which is why they have made steady but unspectacular signings.
Most of their signings have been young players for future planning, Ratcliffe has improved the youth structure, training facilities and scouting networks at the club.

Also Ratcliffe has made it clear that Nice are just a stepping stone, a part of something bigger, he wants a third football team, a bigger team, so he can almost use Nice as a feeder style club rather like the red bull teams.

So whilst Nice haven't become a major force in France since the takeout, they have become a consistent upper mid table team with a steady foundation. They are severely hampered by their income which has stopped any major leaps but INEOS have made it clear that they are willing to keep putting in the money.

Seems like a step above the Glazers to me.
 
sglowrider said:
They don't have any of the oil&gas resources like their cousins -- relying on real estate, finance and their charms to survive.
Click to expand...

This last bit made me chuckle. Everyone’s heard the “They’d be nothing without oil” comments. Anyways by the above logic New York, London, Paris , Milan Shanghai , Madrid, are barely surviving

Can we at least have some consistency.
 
Champ said:
So whilst Nice haven't become a major force in France since the takeout, they have become a consistent upper mid table team with a steady foundation. They are severely hampered by their income which has stopped any major leaps but INEOS have made it clear that they are willing to keep putting in the money.

Seems like a step above the Glazers to me.
Click to expand...
if all his done is taken Nice to upper mid table, in one of the lowest spending leagues in Europe. It’s not really a good sign.
 
I thought Nice finished second last year? Looking from a far that seems an alright achievement. Are there any other specific reasons why is he considered a bad owner for them?

Edit: They we're fifth. Still doesn't necessarily seem all that horrible.
 
AlPistacho said:
if all his done is taken Nice to upper mid table, in one of the lowest spending leagues in Europe. It’s not really a good sign.
Click to expand...
He's been owner of Nice for three years, they are now at a consistent level, a lot of the work at Nice has been done with longevity in mind, with heavy restrictions as to what they can spend on players.

I'd say it's a good sign personally,

Nice were never likely to challenge PSG and had Galtier stayed I think they would have been in the top three.
 
These news about banker wankers from far away land wanting to get involved really rustled my jimmies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.