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

LARulz said:
I really don't want this guy, not sure how he will be any different
Click to expand...
croadyman said:
Yeah me neither
Click to expand...
He won’t leverage against the club, so the debt will be gone and so will the debt payments. He is also very unlikely to take dividends from the club. The club can stand on its own feet and we will finally have a level playing field. It can’t be understated how massive that would be for the club.
stw2022 said:
Ratcliffe would almost certainly need to leverage/finance his bid through borrowing
Click to expand...
As would other buyers - including oil money.
 
Andy_Cole said:
I have a contact in the game. He seemed very confident it will be Radcliffe buying United. He’s reliable but you know things can change in football.
Click to expand...

Praying he has learnt from mistakes at NICE like leaving Brailsford there for a start
 
Judas said:
Some simply want to swim non stop in a pool of misery. If there’s a negative angle to find, they’ll find it.
Click to expand...

He has been shown to make a mess of things,there is nothing wrong with having concerns about him doing it here too.
 
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.

I know it sounds simplistic and I know it’s not as simplistic as this but from what I read he’s fecking minted, his company Ineos are minted(woth 60+billion, Ratcliffe 10.5 billion)surely he just needs to put up the 4-5 billion( and that’s a figure plucked out of my arse, just like the 8-10 billion some are quoting because nobody really knows), sort out the ground and training facilities for another couple of billion(again heavy arse plucking here…oo er missus)then we’re pretty self sufficient no?

Are people getting delusions of grandeur with this whole Middle Eastern thing or what? These figures are off the top of my head and some basic Googling.

City we’re bought for £200 million and spent ish £1.5 billion or there abouts (and Silver lake investors have bought 18% of the club)
Newcastle £305 million(20% owned by PCP Capital partners)
PSG bought for €70 million and spent €1.03 billion or there abouts(and I’ve read somewhere that they’re looking for some outside investment)

So why am I hearing that these Middle Eastern countries are the holy grail for our club? Yeah they’ve got a feck ton of cash but have they ever spent billions acquiring a club? Doesn’t seem so, ok they’ve invested heavily during they’re ownership’s (Newcastle is a wait and see)

What I’m trying to say is if Ratcliffe/Ineos/some other partner buy us for 4-5 billion initially would they really need to spend another 1-2 billion on players to get to where City and PSG are now? everyone keeps crapping on about how we’re self sufficient.

We could potentially have an owner who is a United fan, is from Manchester, with an % of external investment and is A LOT richer than the Glazers.

What’s not to love right? Is this not the holy grail? What am I missing here?

I’m excited and worried for the future of our club in equal measure right now I just want the Glazers gone and everyone else feels like our saviours without really knowing what the actual feck is going to happen (if it actually does happen)
 
Coops73 said:
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.

I know it sounds simplistic and I know it’s not as simplistic as this but from what I read he’s fecking minted, his company Ineos are minted(woth 60+billion, Ratcliffe 10.5 billion)surely he just needs to put up the 4-5 billion( and that’s a figure plucked out of my arse, just like the 8-10 billion some are quoting because nobody really knows), sort out the ground and training facilities for another couple of billion(again heavy arse plucking here…oo er missus)then we’re pretty self sufficient no?

Are people getting delusions of grandeur with this whole Middle Eastern thing or what? These figures are off the top of my head and some basic Googling.

City we’re bought for £200 million and spent ish £1.5 billion or there abouts (and Silver lake investors have bought 18% of the club)
Newcastle £305 million(20% owned by PCP Capital partners)
PSG bought for €70 million and spent €1.03 billion or there abouts(and I’ve read somewhere that they’re looking for some outside investment)

So why am I hearing that these Middle Eastern countries are the holy grail for our club? Yeah they’ve got a feck ton of cash but have they ever spent billions acquiring a club? Doesn’t seem so, ok they’ve invested heavily during they’re ownership’s (Newcastle is a wait and see)

What I’m trying to say is if Ratcliffe/Ineos/some other partner buy us for 4-5 billion initially would they really need to spend another 1-2 billion on players to get to where City and PSG are now? everyone keeps crapping on about how we’re self sufficient.

We could potentially have an owner who is a United fan, is from Manchester, with an % of external investment and is A LOT richer than the Glazers.

What’s not to love right? Is this not the holy grail? What am I missing here?

I’m excited and worried for the future of our club in equal measure right now I just want the Glazers gone and everyone else feels like our saviours without really knowing what the actual feck is going to happen (if it actually does happen)
Click to expand...

speaking too much sense for some I think. I’ve seen people suggesting the stadium needs £1B, the training ground needs £1B and then the expectation that we need billions for transfers. The best stadiums in the world haven’t cost that much and training grounds certainly don’t. Just removing the debt alone will be a massive influx of money.
I believe some form of FFP still exists so we couldn’t and I’m sure, wouldn’t go out all of a sudden and spend £500M every window.
INEOS with their connections could bring in plenty of money to improve everything required. I’d much rather us go down this route than become another oil money play thing used for bragging rights.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
People keep talking about his wealth as though he’ll be buying the club himself.
Let’s make this clear, if they make a bid, it’ll be INEOS that make it, a company with a valuation of over 60 billion.
They can absolutely afford to buy the club and invest in infrastructure.
Click to expand...
He said that himself when he looked into buying before a few months ago. Ineos will be the owners officially if he does buy.
 
Coops73 said:
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.

I know it sounds simplistic and I know it’s not as simplistic as this but from what I read he’s fecking minted, his company Ineos are minted(woth 60+billion, Ratcliffe 10.5 billion)surely he just needs to put up the 4-5 billion( and that’s a figure plucked out of my arse, just like the 8-10 billion some are quoting because nobody really knows), sort out the ground and training facilities for another couple of billion(again heavy arse plucking here…oo er missus)then we’re pretty self sufficient no?

Are people getting delusions of grandeur with this whole Middle Eastern thing or what? These figures are off the top of my head and some basic Googling.

City we’re bought for £200 million and spent ish £1.5 billion or there abouts (and Silver lake investors have bought 18% of the club)
Newcastle £305 million(20% owned by PCP Capital partners)
PSG bought for €70 million and spent €1.03 billion or there abouts(and I’ve read somewhere that they’re looking for some outside investment)

So why am I hearing that these Middle Eastern countries are the holy grail for our club? Yeah they’ve got a feck ton of cash but have they ever spent billions acquiring a club? Doesn’t seem so, ok they’ve invested heavily during they’re ownership’s (Newcastle is a wait and see)

What I’m trying to say is if Ratcliffe/Ineos/some other partner buy us for 4-5 billion initially would they really need to spend another 1-2 billion on players to get to where City and PSG are now? everyone keeps crapping on about how we’re self sufficient.

We could potentially have an owner who is a United fan, is from Manchester, with an % of external investment and is A LOT richer than the Glazers.

What’s not to love right? Is this not the holy grail? What am I missing here?

I’m excited and worried for the future of our club in equal measure right now I just want the Glazers gone and everyone else feels like our saviours without really knowing what the actual feck is going to happen (if it actually does happen)
Click to expand...

Good post.

Quite rare in here at the moment.
 
Ciddy said:
speaking too much sense for some I think. I’ve seen people suggesting the stadium needs £1B, the training ground needs £1B and then the expectation that we need billions for transfers. The best stadiums in the world haven’t cost that much and training grounds certainly don’t. Just removing the debt alone will be a massive influx of money.
I believe some form of FFP still exists so we couldn’t and I’m sure, wouldn’t go out all of a sudden and spend £500M every window.
INEOS with their connections could bring in plenty of money to improve everything required. I’d much rather us go down this route than become another oil money play thing used for bragging rights.
Click to expand...

Was a very good post! Leicester’s training complex is meant to be up there as one of the best in the world and cost £100m. Some people do massively overstate costs to try prove points
 
Lets face it, all we can hope for is the least shit buyer. That might be INEOS but we have no say sadly.

Glazers will sell to the highest b8dder.
 
Hope any bid that doesn't guarantee significant investment in infrastructure is not considered.
 
Coops73 said:
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.

I know it sounds simplistic and I know it’s not as simplistic as this but from what I read he’s fecking minted, his company Ineos are minted(woth 60+billion, Ratcliffe 10.5 billion)surely he just needs to put up the 4-5 billion( and that’s a figure plucked out of my arse, just like the 8-10 billion some are quoting because nobody really knows), sort out the ground and training facilities for another couple of billion(again heavy arse plucking here…oo er missus)then we’re pretty self sufficient no?

Are people getting delusions of grandeur with this whole Middle Eastern thing or what? These figures are off the top of my head and some basic Googling.

City we’re bought for £200 million and spent ish £1.5 billion or there abouts (and Silver lake investors have bought 18% of the club)
Newcastle £305 million(20% owned by PCP Capital partners)
PSG bought for €70 million and spent €1.03 billion or there abouts(and I’ve read somewhere that they’re looking for some outside investment)

So why am I hearing that these Middle Eastern countries are the holy grail for our club? Yeah they’ve got a feck ton of cash but have they ever spent billions acquiring a club? Doesn’t seem so, ok they’ve invested heavily during they’re ownership’s (Newcastle is a wait and see)

What I’m trying to say is if Ratcliffe/Ineos/some other partner buy us for 4-5 billion initially would they really need to spend another 1-2 billion on players to get to where City and PSG are now? everyone keeps crapping on about how we’re self sufficient.

We could potentially have an owner who is a United fan, is from Manchester, with an % of external investment and is A LOT richer than the Glazers.

What’s not to love right? Is this not the holy grail? What am I missing here?

I’m excited and worried for the future of our club in equal measure right now I just want the Glazers gone and everyone else feels like our saviours without really knowing what the actual feck is going to happen (if it actually does happen)
Click to expand...
Yup. It’s almost certain that INEOS would be the least bad of the confirmed interested parties, although obviously we don’t know anything of others who may be circling.

It’s not perfect, but on the face of it, it’s the best option.
 
Coops73 said:
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.

I know it sounds simplistic and I know it’s not as simplistic as this but from what I read he’s fecking minted, his company Ineos are minted(woth 60+billion, Ratcliffe 10.5 billion)surely he just needs to put up the 4-5 billion( and that’s a figure plucked out of my arse, just like the 8-10 billion some are quoting because nobody really knows), sort out the ground and training facilities for another couple of billion(again heavy arse plucking here…oo er missus)then we’re pretty self sufficient no?

Are people getting delusions of grandeur with this whole Middle Eastern thing or what? These figures are off the top of my head and some basic Googling.

City we’re bought for £200 million and spent ish £1.5 billion or there abouts (and Silver lake investors have bought 18% of the club)
Newcastle £305 million(20% owned by PCP Capital partners)
PSG bought for €70 million and spent €1.03 billion or there abouts(and I’ve read somewhere that they’re looking for some outside investment)

So why am I hearing that these Middle Eastern countries are the holy grail for our club? Yeah they’ve got a feck ton of cash but have they ever spent billions acquiring a club? Doesn’t seem so, ok they’ve invested heavily during they’re ownership’s (Newcastle is a wait and see)

What I’m trying to say is if Ratcliffe/Ineos/some other partner buy us for 4-5 billion initially would they really need to spend another 1-2 billion on players to get to where City and PSG are now? everyone keeps crapping on about how we’re self sufficient.

We could potentially have an owner who is a United fan, is from Manchester, with an % of external investment and is A LOT richer than the Glazers.

What’s not to love right? Is this not the holy grail? What am I missing here?

I’m excited and worried for the future of our club in equal measure right now I just want the Glazers gone and everyone else feels like our saviours without really knowing what the actual feck is going to happen (if it actually does happen)
Click to expand...

Good points.

I think people are just getting excited at the idea of oil money

Ratcliffe would likely attend games, be aware of what the supporters want, invest in the facilities and team, and allow United to spend their own money on players (which alone would mean we could sign pretty much anyone) and very likely wouldn’t take any dividends
 
Adisa said:
Hope any bid that doesn't guarantee significant investment in infrastructure is not considered.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the glazers care one iota about what any bid will guarantee - it will go to the highest bidder and they want to make the most money from the sale, simple as that really - don’t you think?

I applaud you for the positives vibes and thoughts though
 
Oil money = success.

Anything else is risky imo. Could go either way.
 
Coops73 said:
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.

I know it sounds simplistic and I know it’s not as simplistic as this but from what I read he’s fecking minted, his company Ineos are minted(woth 60+billion, Ratcliffe 10.5 billion)surely he just needs to put up the 4-5 billion( and that’s a figure plucked out of my arse, just like the 8-10 billion some are quoting because nobody really knows), sort out the ground and training facilities for another couple of billion(again heavy arse plucking here…oo er missus)then we’re pretty self sufficient no?

Are people getting delusions of grandeur with this whole Middle Eastern thing or what? These figures are off the top of my head and some basic Googling.

City we’re bought for £200 million and spent ish £1.5 billion or there abouts (and Silver lake investors have bought 18% of the club)
Newcastle £305 million(20% owned by PCP Capital partners)
PSG bought for €70 million and spent €1.03 billion or there abouts(and I’ve read somewhere that they’re looking for some outside investment)

So why am I hearing that these Middle Eastern countries are the holy grail for our club? Yeah they’ve got a feck ton of cash but have they ever spent billions acquiring a club? Doesn’t seem so, ok they’ve invested heavily during they’re ownership’s (Newcastle is a wait and see)

What I’m trying to say is if Ratcliffe/Ineos/some other partner buy us for 4-5 billion initially would they really need to spend another 1-2 billion on players to get to where City and PSG are now? everyone keeps crapping on about how we’re self sufficient.

We could potentially have an owner who is a United fan, is from Manchester, with an % of external investment and is A LOT richer than the Glazers.

What’s not to love right? Is this not the holy grail? What am I missing here?

I’m excited and worried for the future of our club in equal measure right now I just want the Glazers gone and everyone else feels like our saviours without really knowing what the actual feck is going to happen (if it actually does happen)
Click to expand...
Hear hear!
 
BluesJr said:
Oil money = success.

Anything else is risky imo. Could go either way.
Click to expand...
Oil money doesn’t guarantee success. Neither City or PSG have won the CL despite billions spent, and that is the ultimate stated aim of both ‘projects’.

Also we’ve beaten Financially doped City to the league under Sir Alex, we’ve knocked PSG out of the CL in recent years. Oil money isn’t a path we need to follow.
 
Plant0x84 said:
Oil money doesn’t guarantee success. Neither City or PSG have won the CL despite billions spent, and that is the ultimate stated aim of both ‘projects’.
Click to expand...
Objectively speaking City have been pretty much perfect or near enough since they’ve been taken over. A cup competition is always going to go against you more often than not. Look at the infrastructure at that club. It’s unbelievable.
 
Coops73 said:
I don’t really understand how this Ratcliffe fella has gone down in everyone’s estimation.

feck me he was on the front of banners at a protest a few weeks ago being urged to buy us, now he’s UK Glazer.
Click to expand...
His Nice have gone nowhere. And back then we were desperate because it looked like the glazers would never feck off.
 
BluesJr said:
Objectively speaking City have been pretty much perfect or near enough since they’ve been taken over. A cup competition is always going to go against you more often than not. Look at the infrastructure at that club. It’s unbelievable.
Click to expand...
It’s an infrastructure they bought from prime Barca. Hardly an achievement.
 
Plant0x84 said:
It’s an infrastructure they bought from prime Barca. Hardly an achievement.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter how they got it. They have it. They’ve transformed that area of Manchester. We need the same. This club needs to be transformed into the modern age.
 
Andy_Cole said:
I have a contact in the game. He seemed very confident it will be Radcliffe buying United. He’s reliable but you know things can change in football.
Click to expand...

I find it hard to see how anyone can be confident of this given the number of possible suitors.
 
Sir Jim would probably be the best owner we can get because he is a Man Utd fan.
 
Ciddy said:
speaking too much sense for some I think. I’ve seen people suggesting the stadium needs £1B, the training ground needs £1B and then the expectation that we need billions for transfers. The best stadiums in the world haven’t cost that much and training grounds certainly don’t. Just removing the debt alone will be a massive influx of money.
I believe some form of FFP still exists so we couldn’t and I’m sure, wouldn’t go out all of a sudden and spend £500M every window.
INEOS with their connections could bring in plenty of money to improve everything required. I’d much rather us go down this route than become another oil money play thing used for bragging rights.
Click to expand...
Wembley cost 1bn and the price off materials has since skyrocketed
 
golden_blunder said:
Wembley cost 1bn and the price off materials has since skyrocketed
Click to expand...
Tbf most of Wembleys price probably went into somebodys back pocket :lol:

But yes it won't be cheap.

How much was the Spurs stadium?
 
Adam-Utd said:
Tbf most of Wembleys price probably went into somebodys back pocket :lol:

But yes it won't be cheap.

How much was the Spurs stadium?
Click to expand...
Around the same I think.

Having a Middle East owner would mean things are done with haste. No messing about. I wouldn’t be so sure that would be the case with Western owners.
 
The structure on the football side of the club at Man City was put in place by Brian Marwood. He joined City in 2009, from Nike, and as the football administrator/director, he developed the strategy where the scouting and data analytics side grew to what it is today. Three years after his arrival, City had won the league. The Barcelona chaps only arrived later and due to Marwood stepping away after being in the role for several years. Soriano who is the CEO currently at City was fired from Barcelona and joined City after overseeing the demise of Catalan Airlines who went bankrupt. He didn't join from Barcelona.

Whoever the new owners are, they must engage with the fans and not look at the fans like customers to bleed dry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.