Who is your preferred next owner of Manchester United?

PoTMS

Full Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
17,337
@Damien is it possible to get some of the options listed as a poll? Sir Jim Radcliffe/INEOS, Qatar, Saudi, China, Elon Musk, US private equity firms, etc.

There's obviously pros and cons to every bidder but a recent Athletic article found an overwhelmingly majority wanted Sir Jim and only 17% wanted Qataris in. However, there was no elaboration on who they polled and how many.

I wonder if the same result will show when polling the largest Manchester United forum.
 
FpKB6iFXoAA1j6i


The Athletic's poll, if you just want to ape that as a comparison point.
 
Probably best to wait till tomorrow for options since we should hopefully have a bit of a clearer idea of who's in the race by then
 
Rightnr said:
Probably best to wait till tomorrow for options since we should hopefully have a bit of a clearer idea of who's in the race by then
Click to expand...

As per Sky News it could be next week before we start getting details on who the bidders are. It's not like there's going to be an announcement tomorrow on who submitted bids.
 
Another opinion poll heavily leaning towards the Qataris.

 
Jim would be ideal considering his invested in successful teams in other sports, but there is little doubt the Qatari bid will triumph
 
Probably best to wait until all the bidders have been announced.
 
PoTMS said:
Another opinion poll heavily leaning towards the Qataris.

Click to expand...


Twitter is not a good place to judge the average person's opinion.

And I say that as someone who lives on Twitter (in a different echo chamber).
 
1. Pagliuca and Co: The Celtics seem to have been well-run these last few years

2. Blitzer and Co: The 76ers also seem to be relatively well-run

3. Ratcliffe: Doesn't have the record of the other two but at least I can stand him











Last and certainly least, the Qataris and the Saudis
 
Since its all hypothetical, why dont they add a fans bid? Not that it happen anyway.
 
led_scholes said:
Since its all hypothetical, why dont they add a fans bid? Not that it happen anyway.
Click to expand...
I think every United fan would choose that option over Qatar/INEOS if that was a realistic possibility but like you said, never gonna happen.
 
Rawls said:
1. Pagliuca and Co: The Celtics seem to have been well-run these last few years

2. Blitzer and Co: The 76ers also seem to be relatively well-run

3. Ratcliffe: Doesn't have the record of the other two but at least I can stand him











Last and certainly least, the Qataris and the Saudis
Click to expand...

Well we will see in next couple of days whether either of those top two met that deadline
 
Qatar based on the finance. Morals, less clear-cut.

If we get a more palatable offer from the US consortiums, probably would be best for most on here.

The thing is though, the Glazers decide and the Qataris usually get what they want if it comes down to money.
 
Me, I'd suddenly have a 4bn asset, then I'd be willing to sell it for 2bn to get the person with the best interest of the club in
 
Not Qatar or anyone else that will use us as their plaything
Valencia Shin Crosses said:
Qatar. It's the only ownership that I'm confident in the club truly getting everything it needs to rise back to the top.
Click to expand...

We're on track to to that anyway despite having the fecking glazers in charge. We don't need a sugar daddy. Just someone who puts the right people in place and leaves ten hag do what he is doing.

Last thing we need is someone coming in and buying loads of big name players we don't need (and ten hag doesnt want) because they want to have shiny new toys to show off. It will happen. It's the only reason Qatar want to buy us. Big name players to act as ambassadors for Qatar.
 
Ratcliffe. The Qatari royals are collectively wealthy but none of the names that have come forward are individually anywhere near Ratcliffe's wealth. At the end of the day we dont even need big money putting in, we just need to be able to keep the money the club makes like we did before the bloodsucking Glazers arrived.
 
Qatar - they are definitely most likely to spend huge amount of money investment to the club.
 
Bert_ said:
Not Qatar or anyone else that will use us as their plaything

We're on track to to that anyway despite having the fecking glazers in charge. We don't need a sugar daddy. Just someone who puts the right people in place and leaves ten hag do what he is doing.

Last thing we need is someone coming in and buying loads of big name players we don't need (and ten hag doesnt want) because they want to have shiny new toys to show off. It will happen. It's the only reason Qatar want to buy us. Big name players to act as ambassadors for Qatar.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Without Qatar money backing, we won't be able to outbid the likes of City, Real, PSG, Chelsea to sign the likes of Mbappe, Haaland, Tchouameni, Camavinga, Enzo, Felix during recent years. We are now in the era to compete with those mega rich clubs with crazy spending on the best young players in the game, having to rely heavily on loanees like Weghorst or Sabitzer instead just won't be enough.
 
Ali Dia said:
Qatar

It’s either winning the lottery or being dumped with another mortgage
Click to expand...

It's not winning the lottery. We are not some small time outfit that have no hope of success without a massive cash injection.
 
If the only two options are INEOS and Qatar, I rather have Qatar. Both petrochemical companies and Qatar rank as equally morally bankrupt to me anyway.

Although I hope we have more options.
 
led_scholes said:
Since its all hypothetical, why dont they add a fans bid? Not that it happen anyway.
Click to expand...
This would be the best option, but no, it won't happen. There are one or two that I don't know in the list of options, but most of them are total shits. Naturally, I realise it's the total shits who have the big money. Oh dear, I'm going to bed.
 
RedRonaldo said:
I disagree. Without Qatar money backing, we won't be able to outbid the likes of City, Real, PSG, Chelsea to sign the likes of Mbappe, Haaland, Tchouameni, Camavinga, Enzo, Felix during recent years. We are now in the era to compete with those mega rich clubs with crazy spending on the best young players in the game, having to rely heavily on loanees like Weghorst or Sabitzer instead just won't be enough.
Click to expand...

We can can compete with any of them sans Glazers. And thats as far as we can. FFP means you can't inject money into clubs like City/PSG/Chelsea have in the past. All we need to (and can do) is take the Glazer shackles off.

Even with those shackles, we have regularly outbid other teams for players (Pogba, Lukaku, Maguire, Sanchez, Di Maria). Look how that turned out. This isn't FIFA.
 
I was adamantly against the Qatar bid if it was a state funded bid. However - it seems to be from an individual and their own private wealth and the individual just happens to be from Qatar, i’m not saying he won’t have links to the state and we have to be careful and above all I want the club to be a welcoming place for all supporters. But If their statement is to be believed and they are genuinely a long time supporter of the club (and judging from pics of him in our kit on social media, he is.) then I like the sound of this bid. But other than that I would like Ratcliffe, though we don’t know who the potential others are yet either
 
Between Ratcliffe and Qatar, it's Ratcliffe by such a margin that I'll stop supporting the club if it becomes another sportswashing project.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.