State sportswashing ownership or Profit-seeking ownership?

Glazers weren't so bad. They just had the misfortune of appointing a few wrong apples and post SAF collapse.

Their method is simple. Appoint a coach and back them until they failed.

Once we found a proper manager (hopefully ETH) glazers model will be very beneficial. Minimum interference, patience ( relatively speaking) and cash to spend.

Regarding the stadium, not every non backed owner can rebuilt their stadium. Let's be realistic.
 
On the Street in Davos tonight, at the opening of the WEF , one of the main attractions is a venue attracting people to meet with representatives of United.
Its got nothing to do with the sale, honestly, say United representatives.
 
An American consortium "like the Glazers" is not a realistic prospect. Nobody is taking over United in a £5bn+ leveraged buy out (with the debt being loaded on to the club's balance sheet). Comparing that hypothetical to a "monster sportswashing project" is a transparent attempt by you to swing the outcome of any potential poll in this thread, towards your preferred option of a state buyout.
It's completely realistic that we get owners who aren't state owners but are shit / seeking their personal interest only. People want the ideal but this thread asks you to pick what you think is the lesser of two evils. Your view is clear which is anything but middle east owned so just say it and move on.
 
Glazers weren't so bad. They just had the misfortune of appointing a few wrong apples and post SAF collapse.

Their method is simple. Appoint a coach and back them until they failed.

Once we found a proper manager (hopefully ETH) glazers model will be very beneficial. Minimum interference, patience ( relatively speaking) and cash to spend.

Regarding the stadium, not every non backed owner can rebuilt their stadium. Let's be realistic.
Are you an alien 'cos you're clearly not on the same planet as the rest of us!
 
I'd prefer profit seeking ownership. My ideal is fan ownership but that's not happening so I'd rather owners that are at least partially obliged to listen to fans than ones who could bankroll the club without them.
 
So you are against being state owned, but at the same time are trying to relate United to Marx as some kind of honor? The guy who didn’t work, the guy who let his sons die of hunger, the guy who started a doctrine which has been a failure everywhere and only caused misery and hunger. Really?

You can literally pick Marx in any way for your own arguments sake. Im not a marxist or anything but this is just deducting the man to fit him through some lens where we should be outraged for just mentioning his name - which is BS - we all know communism didnt work out, but Marx’ thinking has led to many other things. You can literally pick him to suit your view if you want, but you could also be nuanced about him and see he had points of where the working class was being enslaved by the few rich.

So many nuances to Marx, but im pretty sure you are not the right fella to have this conversation with just going off how you came at me.

Edit: not even sure you can claim any of his kids died of starvation having read up on it. Three of his 7 children died before the age of 1 which was (sadly) not uncommon nor extraordonary in working class london in the 19th century. In fact he’s been described as a loving father in what I read. So your post seem like grossly misleading/misinformative
 
Last edited:
The Glazers bad because they put United in debt and played a huge part in us not winning trophies for a while and turning us into a circus.

The owners at city, Newcastle etc are bad because they are government regimes that kill gay people.

Both are ultimately sh** but one from a human perspective, is a completely different level.
 
False dilemma here, those are not the only two options.

But if I had to choose between I'd choose a state ownership. I just want to see the club successful again, can't take another decade of decadence with cheap owners milking the club.
 
I'm really surprised fingers are only pointed at the oil nations for killing people (MBS an example). I think there will be so-called respectable nations doing despicable acts to their own population and obviously foreigners including killing.

But hey, carry on if it makes you feel better about your nation being saintly.
Hmm. I've said much, much worse things about the Conservative government than I have ever said about MBS. It's just the Tories aren't being spoken about as potential owners of United.
 
Lets not pretend Newcastle United are a key strategic asset :lol:

His motives involve make Saudi Arabia more attractive to western investment , closer ties to the west through cultural acquisitions form a part of that
Ah, so Newcastle are being used as a tool to further long-term Saudi objectives. Almost sounds like they are a key strategic asset in the west.
 
It will leave a bad taste in the mouth to support a sports washing project. A consortium like the Chelsea is the best we can hope for.
 
Glazers weren't so bad. They just had the misfortune of appointing a few wrong apples and post SAF collapse.

Their method is simple. Appoint a coach and back them until they failed.

Once we found a proper manager (hopefully ETH) glazers model will be very beneficial. Minimum interference, patience ( relatively speaking) and cash to spend.

Regarding the stadium, not every non backed owner can rebuilt their stadium. Let's be realistic.
Such misfortune. Let's see it for what it was
- they bought the club imposing their lack of money on us as debt
- while they had the greatest manager of all time they kept spending low as they knew he'd get by while in truth we started falling behind
- they ran the club incompetently with clowns like Woodward running us like a shit show wasting a billion in just transfers with no major trophies and us still remaining top 4 challengers and still a huge hanging over

They're absolute parasites and we should celebrate the day the feckers are gone. They aren't unfortunate but the reason for the club's demise.
 
Find me a buyer with 6+bn to throw at Utd who doesn't have skeletons in their closet.... it may be obvious like the human rights issues we see in some middle eastern states, or less obvious like the environmental cost of sourcing raw materials that can be laid at the feet of most corporations, it is way too simplistic to think that there is a buyer out there who is just an altruistic trillionaire who just wants to rescue sick animals and feed the homeless, unless we are getting bought by Santa you are going to have to accept that our new owners at best are ruining the environment at worst are responsible for atrocities against other humans, probably a mix of both.

I am not defending or upholding anybody but there are three things I would say about sports washing:

Try dispassionately viewing the actions of your own "Western" country under the same scrutiny as you view those taken by countries half the world away, that you have probably never been to and who your only knowledge of comes through the lens of western media. Look at the bubbling homophobia, anti-semitism, racism and extreme conservatism in the US over the last few years, I know the potential for where that might lead that scares me more than what I see reported in the middle east. I also know that that is not all Americans and what I see is again through the lens of the media.

I think everybody to a certain extent is guilty of blind moral superiority, our way is right, our way is best, our way is just.... therefore every other country should follow our example and if they don't they are morally corrupt etc.... in doing this we forget about the right to chose and the will of a country to exercise that right, it may seem wrongminded or abhorrent to me or you, but flip the coin and what goes on here in the UK, or in your country wherever that might be, may be just as abhorrent to other countries. Nobody goes around thinking, I know this is evil but I just cannot help myself.

Sport swashing may seem like a bad thing, and surely there is an argument to justify that point of view, I would not disagree, but then it is at the very least an acknowledgement that there is a need for sports washing, anything that can highlight and has the potential to improve social injustice has to have some merit.... the standpoint of the west is that we effectively think everybody should do what we do, be happy then sports washing is part of that assimilation process.
 
Hmm. I've said much, much worse things about the Conservative government than I have ever said about MBS. It's just the Tories aren't being spoken about as potential owners of United.
There is little doubt MBS and most rulers in the Middle East are in positions of power due to a mandate given by their masters in the West. Stop believing they can do much without USA or Europe's agreement or bidding with foreign policy or trade.

Much like others (Hussain, Gaddafi, Assad, Roman, Taliban), their (nations) assets will be confiscated and stolen if and when the governments in the West decide their time is up.
 
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out...led-2022-far-targeting-trans-people-rcna20418

"State lawmakers have proposed a record 238 bills that would limit the rights of LGBTQ Americans this year — or more than three per day — with about half of them targeting transgender people specifically.

Nearly 670 anti-LGBTQ bills have been filed since 2018, according to an NBC News analysis of data from the American Civil Liberties Union and LGBTQ advocacy group Freedom for All Americans, with nearly all of the country’s 50 state legislatures all having weighed at least one bill."


This is not whataboutism. It's the hypocrisy in the media demonising others whilst not paying attention on their own shores. Not much was made in the media during the WC in Russia despite gangs going around bashing gays with the tacit approval of the authorities. Qatar never arrested a single gay person or stopped them from sleeping with each other in privacy and yet is still being demonised.
 
Is this topic ever going to get a poll? I’m really curious how many fans are happy to be sportswashed in order to compete.
 
Unfortunately any owner with the facilities to take over a PL club are going to be owners that the majority of people wouldn't want.
 
It's sports washing when countries we don't particularly agree with buy a club or promote sports. It's genius marketing, an astute investment if and when other countries do similar and invest. The bias is unreal.
 
The biggest brands in the world have their pulse and wares in the Middle East. Why would United be any different as long as the club is run by people who would have the best interests of the club?
 
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out...led-2022-far-targeting-trans-people-rcna20418

"State lawmakers have proposed a record 238 bills that would limit the rights of LGBTQ Americans this year — or more than three per day — with about half of them targeting transgender people specifically.

Nearly 670 anti-LGBTQ bills have been filed since 2018, according to an NBC News analysis of data from the American Civil Liberties Union and LGBTQ advocacy group Freedom for All Americans, with nearly all of the country’s 50 state legislatures all having weighed at least one bill."


This is not whataboutism. It's the hypocrisy in the media demonising others whilst not paying attention on their own shores. Not much was made in the media during the WC in Russia despite gangs going around bashing gays with the tacit approval of the authorities. Qatar never arrested a single gay person or stopped them from sleeping with each other in privacy and yet is still being demonised.

Sorry but the bolded just isn't true. The media reported a lot about the risk of LGBT people in Russia and about the issues.
 
No one is going to spend £5bn on something out of benevolence. Maybe if they had £50bn net worth, were a big Man Utd fan and really wanted to run a football club.
Exactly.

United are not a charity case. There has to be a financial or marketing benefit. Other than that like you mention you need to be a passionate United fan with billions to spare which would be quite a rarity.
 
Sorry but the bolded just isn't true. The media reported a lot about the risk of LGBT people in Russia and about the issues.
To be fair, there might have been a few murmurs but not to the same extent as Qatar where broadcasters were actually boycotting various parts of the presentations and constant moans.
 
The possibility of any state becoming owners is depressing. I wouldn't go as far as not supporting but it just wouldn't feel like the same club anymore.
 
It's sports washing when countries we don't particularly agree with buy a club or promote sports. It's genius marketing, an astute investment if and when other countries do similar and invest. The bias is unreal.
Other than ME countries, is any other country looking to buy a football club?

I am against any state ownership.
 
The possibility of any state becoming owners is depressing. I wouldn't go as far as not supporting but it just wouldn't feel like the same club anymore.
I don't see PSG and City fans not enjoying the teams' successes.
 
I don't see PSG and City fans not enjoying the teams' successes.
And that's ultimately what it really boils down to, "if my team does OK then I don't really give a feck" and I've no doubt that if then Saudi's or whoever take over United the same will happen
 
It's sports washing when countries we don't particularly agree with buy a club or promote sports. It's genius marketing, an astute investment if and when other countries do similar and invest. The bias is unreal.

What countries are pumping massive money literally from its national funds(disguised as companies) into a football club while cheating the FFP?

Aside from Qatar and UAE, who else is doing that?

You said "The bias is unreal", assuming other countries are doing exactly the same, but aren't mentioned.
 
I don't see PSG and City fans not enjoying the teams' successes.
City enjoy it because they never could have other wise. In our case if we are run well without any cash injection we will still do well and I enjoy that more.
 
If anything, suppose the club was purchased by people/states you feel are undesirable I would think the media would have a field day, and the supporters would have a direct say from the terraces and forums to point out their grievances.
 
What countries are pumping massive money literally from its national funds(disguised as companies) into a football club while cheating the FFP?

Aside from Qatar and UAE, who else is doing that?

You said "The bias is unreal", assuming other countries are doing exactly the same, but aren't mentioned.
Just a wild guess but I think Barcelona and Real Madrid have cleverly managed accounts to manipulate the FFP system. I would say City and PSG accounts have been manipulated to escape the wrath of the governing bodies.

Let me ask you a question. Would you as a United fan be worried if any prospective United owner spent more on the club infrastructure and playing staff than giving priority to FFP rules?

I for one hope the new owners create the best in class in every aspect.
 
Ah, so Newcastle are being used as a tool to further long-term Saudi objectives. Almost sounds like they are a key strategic asset in the west.

Well, no. A key strategic asset would be something that affects uk infrastructure or national security, i believe there was issues last year with China or Chinese companies owning some of this and they were being made to sell it. A football club is not a key strategic asset for the UK
 
Depends who the sports washing is for. The arab oil states are amongst the most odious regimes in the world, with saudi arabia a particularly bad case. It sits very badly with me to cheer on such people.
 
What countries are pumping massive money literally from its national funds(disguised as companies) into a football club while cheating the FFP?

Aside from Qatar and UAE, who else is doing that?

You said "The bias is unreal", assuming other countries are doing exactly the same, but aren't mentioned.
It's happened in other countries in the past though not exactly the same way, Real Madrid were basically funded by the Spanish state for decades, Barcelona by the Catalan region, many of the top eastern European teams of bygone years were essentially state funded
 
Well, no. A key strategic asset would be something that affects uk infrastructure or national security, i believe there was issues last year with China or Chinese companies owning some of this and they were being made to sell it. A football club is not a key strategic asset for the UK
No a football club isn't but it's used as a vehicle to do so, look at what Abu Dhabi has done around Manchester, the area round the Etihad was an industrial wasteland, look at it now
 
Just a wild guess but I think Barcelona and Real Madrid have cleverly managed accounts to manipulate the FFP system. I would say City and PSG accounts have been manipulated to escape the wrath of the governing bodies.

Let me ask you a question. Would you as a United fan be worried if any prospective United owner spent more on the club infrastructure and playing staff than giving priority to FFP rules?

I for one hope the new owners create the best in class in every aspect.
Unless they changed it infrastructure isn't counted towards FFP, anyway FFP was introduced to counter the oil type money, until Abu Dhabi came along it didn't exist
 
Depends who the sports washing is for. The arab oil states are amongst the most odious regimes in the world, with saudi arabia a particularly bad case. It sits very badly with me to cheer on such people.
Our governments do billions in trade creating countless job opportunities with such nations. A complete boycott on the scale of Russia would show those Arabs. Who cares about us losing jobs and not being able to heat our homes and cripple our businesses.
 
Last edited:
Best case (not going to happen any time soon): Member ownership

Between the two option: Profitseeking ownership.

I'll jump the ship if we become a sportswashing project for a dictatorship.