100% They are ready to sell, no way they would make this statement, otherwise.
So you want owners to shoot to kill underperforming players. Got it.
Who you REALLY want for new owner?
- Thread starter Andycoleno9
- Start date
Get the Chinese in. Its only a matter of time before they take over the world. We'd win the league 55 times in a row. We'd have the Champions League record by 2050. Can't see any negatives to be honest.
A) Americans (some random american billionaire like Kroenke, Boehly, Glazers...)
Basically playing roulette. Might work out great. Might be a disaster.
B) Oil money
Probably the safest bet in terms of pure investment as they're unlikely to give a feck about losses. Also means we become another sports washing sham outfit that makes you want to vomit
C) Jim Ratcliffe and co
See A but slightly better odds as they are more familiar with the game
D) Elon Musk
Absolute shit show
Ideally we'd end up with a German style 50+1 deal but it ain't gonna happen so just toss a coin!
Basically playing roulette. Might work out great. Might be a disaster.
B) Oil money
Probably the safest bet in terms of pure investment as they're unlikely to give a feck about losses. Also means we become another sports washing sham outfit that makes you want to vomit
C) Jim Ratcliffe and co
See A but slightly better odds as they are more familiar with the game
D) Elon Musk
Absolute shit show
Ideally we'd end up with a German style 50+1 deal but it ain't gonna happen so just toss a coin!
Chinese takeaway please
In today's economic climate and interest rate, need to qualify that NONE should involve shark loan / medium term borrowing, which is most probably the case for American / Musk options, unless you think they can fork out multi-billions in cash.
In light of the Chelsea case, no oil money will be stupid enough to come in, that include South American, Chinese, Eastern European, possibly African as well.
Don’t the Indians have some crazy rich billionaires?
What's the deal with Josh Harris and David Blitzer? Saw them mentioned in the Telegraph article in the context of them being failed bidders for Chelsea.
Can't help thinking he's not rich enough for everything we need,feel it would need to be either
Chinese Royal Family
Dubai/Indian/American multi billionaire
Jeff Bezos
Elon Musk
Last edited:
Margot Robbie.....just to see her attend home games
Depends which regime it came from. If it were Saudi oil money, I would go by way of FCUM. I just can't support it.
Nope we definitely aren't
I understand people feeling that way
I fear we are going to become all we hate in club like City and Chelsea.
Saudi/ oil money is the last thing we need right now, but who else could afford the $10B plus being quoted
Saudi/ oil money is the last thing we need right now, but who else could afford the $10B plus being quoted
This is an absolutely inspired idea and has my full support.
MBS obviously
Saudi or Dubai 100%
They'll give us amazing infrastructure and make us into a superpower.
American owners no thanks, not in a million years.
Musk is a no go.
They'll give us amazing infrastructure and make us into a superpower.
American owners no thanks, not in a million years.
Musk is a no go.
Why so many like Ratcliffe, his current record of owning club is really poor.
I'd like a consortium of people including Becks, Fergie, magic Johnson but it'll be hard to compete with the oil state teams. Maybe Ambani from India.
I dont expect nor i want owners that gonna pump trucks of money into new toys, there are other types of investments into the club, as long new owners arent leeches, with zero football agenda and knowledge, we should be fine.
From that list, wouldnt pick either option, for C) have no clue about him so cant judge.
From that list, wouldnt pick either option, for C) have no clue about him so cant judge.
Knew it was a royal family
Yeah many of the fanbase won't like it but do feel that it's the most realistic outcome when the club valuation is around $10b
Please please please no Saudis.
Apple
To be fair, we have ALREADY become all we mocked: Pumping money into the market senselessly (City's early days) to bring in players with inflated ego that made players's power overshadowed managers (Chelsea) just to happily get top 4 (Arsenal) and spend our time drunk on the past (Liverpool).
Another option is for Zuck to buy us out. This way, even if our on-field performance is crap, we can win the quadruple in his metaverse.
From a sporting perspective, a Saudi or a Dubai investment would be quite good for the club. The owners love the game of football and want to see the sports and brand grown in their respective country. Especially any owners from Saudi, who are trying to re-brand themselves as a tourist and sports destination. I can understand that all investments are made for financial reasons but having an investment from Middle East also means football developments at the club level in terms of infrastructure. I am all up for a Saudi or fellow Dubai investment
Something like the Bayern model would be ace — except, extrapolated over 100% because fans owning a substantial amount of United stocks is not realistic any more considering the club's outrageous valuation. 25% of that club is split between Adidas, Allianz and Audi with Deutsche Telekom being another strategic partner...
https://fcbayern.com/en/club/company/teaser-stockholder
United could have a 100% split between a handful of co-owners and strategic partners who are investing for the long term (as well as advertisement opportunities) and will mostly leave the day-to-day running of the club to footballing experts. The club doesn't even need vast injections of their money; just let it operate on its own and don't drag it through the mud like the current owners.
The ideal would probably be something like 33% for Foxconn (revenues of $170 billion per year and also own a majority stake in SHARP), 33% for Government Pension Fund Global (total assets of more than $1 trillion), 33% for Tata Group (revenues of $190 billion per year), and Ørsted with a token holding of 1% as a strategic partner — enterprises that are spread out, with incalculable and sustainable collective wealth so they have no need for United's puny revenues; and crucially, are at a safe working distance from Manchester (which minimizes the scope for micro-management in the sporting sector).
https://fcbayern.com/en/club/company/teaser-stockholder
United could have a 100% split between a handful of co-owners and strategic partners who are investing for the long term (as well as advertisement opportunities) and will mostly leave the day-to-day running of the club to footballing experts. The club doesn't even need vast injections of their money; just let it operate on its own and don't drag it through the mud like the current owners.
The ideal would probably be something like 33% for Foxconn (revenues of $170 billion per year and also own a majority stake in SHARP
), 33% for Government Pension Fund Global (total assets of more than $1 trillion), 33% for Tata Group (revenues of $190 billion per year), and Ørsted with a token holding of 1% as a strategic partner — enterprises that are spread out, with incalculable and sustainable collective wealth so they have no need for United's puny revenues; and crucially, are at a safe working distance from Manchester (which minimizes the scope for micro-management in the sporting sector).Ambani does not work like middle east oil sheiks. He wants a clear return on every penny he invests & runs an incredibly tight but efficient ship with focus on mass market value generation through localization of production. Unless one of his kids decide to blow $5b on this ego purchase (his daughter looks like someone who'd do it), I'd be really surprised how it'd fit into their overall plan. He is not someone who is going to block a decent proportion of their non-share assets on a cash guzzling football club. If he does purchase it, think Blackburn.
I don't care about where they get their money, as long as they: a) have enough of it, b) got a succession plan, c) put sport above brand, and d) are prepared to invest.
Since United is a behemoth, they'd better be able to afford it with their own money.
Some oil state or
1. Elon Musk (Tesla, SpaceX)
2. Bernard Arnault & family (LVMH)
3. Gautam Adani (infrastructure, commodities)
4. Jeff Bezos (Amazon)
5. Warren Buffett (Berkshire Hathaway)
6. Bill Gates (Microsoft)
7. Larry Ellison (Oracle)
8. Mukesh Ambani (diversified)
9. Carlos Slim Helu & family (telecom)
10. Larry Page (Google)
Since United is a behemoth, they'd better be able to afford it with their own money.
Some oil state or
1. Elon Musk (Tesla, SpaceX)
2. Bernard Arnault & family (LVMH)
3. Gautam Adani (infrastructure, commodities)
4. Jeff Bezos (Amazon)
5. Warren Buffett (Berkshire Hathaway)
6. Bill Gates (Microsoft)
7. Larry Ellison (Oracle)
8. Mukesh Ambani (diversified)
9. Carlos Slim Helu & family (telecom)
10. Larry Page (Google)
Last edited:
Oil Money from Middle East
Guaranteed flow of money. Very unlikely purse pinching.
Most middle eastern countries love football. So they would invest to try to be the best in the game. They can outprice and get the best footballing directors to run the club. They don't need to bring in investment bankers and people to somehow be desperate to raise money.
Won't need to pull out money from the club
Almost all countries in the world have trade relations with them. The govts absolutely love them, do billions of dollars of trade with them and even sell them arms. So there is no problem like sudden Russian isolation, because most govt are happy to get their money.
Guaranteed flow of money. Very unlikely purse pinching.
Most middle eastern countries love football. So they would invest to try to be the best in the game. They can outprice and get the best footballing directors to run the club. They don't need to bring in investment bankers and people to somehow be desperate to raise money.
Won't need to pull out money from the club
Almost all countries in the world have trade relations with them. The govts absolutely love them, do billions of dollars of trade with them and even sell them arms. So there is no problem like sudden Russian isolation, because most govt are happy to get their money.
Ratcliffe would be ok. Musk to as it would put us in a great position to win the inevitable Space League.
Both would be several times better than options A or B, B in particular would be horrible.
Both would be several times better than options A or B, B in particular would be horrible.
This might have legs, as long as they have an eye for talent and foot the bill.
Somebody who doesn't give a shite about couple of billion losses. Yes, oil money is the safest bet. I really don't get it why people would be happy to US investment group. Right after Glazers.
Steve Ballmer - although very unlikely as he recently said he had no interest in Liverpool but maybe United will change his mind.
Genuinely baffling how people can claim someone like Musk would be an awful owner because of the type of person he is, which is basically a bit of a weirdo, yet also claim some oil state ran by what effectively amounts to human scum is the ideal owner.
One says some dodgy things on Twitter and while the others torture people for entertainment.
I don't get it. Give me the dodgy billionaire villain from a knock-off batman film everytime.
One says some dodgy things on Twitter and while the others torture people for entertainment.
I don't get it. Give me the dodgy billionaire villain from a knock-off batman film everytime.
Ambani might be interested too, he did bid for Pool afaik.
The issue with Musk is he will try to be incredibly hands on & want to implement "his" ideas. This will most likely involve hiring/firing people at will & destabilizing the structure. We'll also be in front page news every day & the noise will be 50x more than Ronaldo's. We need to move out of all this circus and focus on football. The club is better left to be run by footballing people, with owners involving in only key decisions.
Bayern would struggle to get top 6 in the epl with that model.Something like the Bayern model would be ace — except, extrapolated over 100% because fans owning a substantial amount of United stocks is not realistic any more considering the club's outrageous valuation. 25% of that club is split between Adidas, Allianz and Audi with Deutsche Telekom being another strategic partner...
https://fcbayern.com/en/club/company/teaser-stockholder
United could have a 100% split between a handful of co-owners and strategic partners who are investing for the long term (as well as advertisement opportunities) and will mostly leave the day-to-day running of the club to footballing experts. The club doesn't even need vast injections of their money; just let it operate on its own and don't drag it through the mud like the current owners.
The ideal would probably be something like 33% for Foxconn (revenues of $170 billion per year and also own a majority stake in SHARP
This model only works if everyone else in the league is also following it.