How rich is Andrew Tate?
Who you REALLY want for new owner?
- Thread starter Andycoleno9
- Start date
Magic Johnson as the sporting director? Isn't he already involved in football in LA now?
Nah we'd become the little brothers to City in that scenario.
@Telsim re Ratcliffe after your thread got expunged.
He supports the club, he/his company is worth tens of billions, he's British, he's publicly said in the past that he was interested in buying the club (when we were at our lowest ebb), he isn't an oil state, he isn't an American hypercapitalist (who obviously have a bad reputation). There's quite a lot of reasons why people might want him, to be honest.
He supports the club, he/his company is worth tens of billions, he's British, he's publicly said in the past that he was interested in buying the club (when we were at our lowest ebb), he isn't an oil state, he isn't an American hypercapitalist (who obviously have a bad reputation). There's quite a lot of reasons why people might want him, to be honest.
Yeah he was part of the consortium that bought the Rams iirc.
Not sure how great he has been for the Lakers but atleast he has been very vocal about their woes since the bubble. But having perhaps the most entertaining basketball player ever who knows about about running sporting organizations does sound interesting.
He had a stint as a gm but it wasn't great tbh. I'm thinking more for the money and the prestige , I'd say LeBron but he fancies the dippers.
Yeh probably bottom of the list. He’d be worse than Glazers arguably.
A hands off approach to the football and putting smart money into the club. Or. A stupidly rich person who wants a play toy and won't saddle us with debt and let us out spend everyone 
Does anybody know if there is a good buyer from countries like China, Korea or anybody from the Asian continent ?
I’d personally love to see us floated on the stock market again and, see us stay there if I’m getting to pick my dream owner. The club can fund itself and I’d rather we did that and were ran within our means rather than be some billionaires plaything or despots sportwashing project.
They’re not ideal owners by any means. But I’m not sure how the above referenced power imbalance between the two emirates would actually impact the running of the club, at least for as long as the UAE and the Persian Gulf region remain relatively stable politically. That however would be my primary long-term concern. It’s a volatile region with the potential to be impacted in uncertain ways by geopolitical shifts. In that context Dubai’s status relative to Abu Dhabi’s would likely become more relevant, with who knows what implications for United.
Ideally you want Jim Ratcliffe buying 75% and the fans buying 25%.
Anyone who will let every penny the club earn be spent as the club sees fit. A football club that exists to be a football club. Not increase shareholder value.
That's really it. It shouldn't be so difficult.
That's really it. It shouldn't be so difficult.
Wrong - Mancini inherited a basket case club full of mercenaries, improved players like Hart, Kompany and Zabaleta and won a league(well finished level) against the Ferguson dynasty. Pellegrini came in and did well initially - playing better football than anything P£p’s churned out - but then FFP meant he could only sign modest players.
Guardiola decline the circumstances those two had because it would have resembled an actual challenging job for the first time in his career, and only accepted once assured by his amigos in the City board that they’d successful cheated FFP, and he’d therefore have infinite blood money to stockpile expensive players and the inevitable domestic trophies that go with it.
The reason Guardiola won’t leave is because he knows the next guy could very easily come in an bring European success as well as the default domestic wins, shattering the illusion of his genius. He’s literally stuck, the mercenary clown.
Someone who has a spare 5/6/7 billion plus money for infrastructure and doesnt want any return and just does it for the love of Man Utd and football? Sure easy
Prince Chrales. I want him to greet the players with "Oh it's you lot again, oh dear, oh dear."
King*
Pretty sure some of the England players also forgot that when singing the national anthem
The Hut Group, nice n local
Option B
This.
I’ve stopped watching City and Newcastle for this reason. I’ve got no interest in it.
I probably would with United. But hope that doesn’t happen.
King*
Pretty sure some of the England players also forgot that when singing the national anthem
Oh yeah right, have been saying prince for so long.
I would expect big protests if that was going to happen.
More someone who wants returns based purely on increasing asset value - which should correlate with performance. Rather than cash flows out.
I've always maintained football clubs are a terrible investment, relative to alternatives. No one should buy a club (today) to make money. The Glazers did it at the right time.
So if you're buying a club, it's for other reasons.
Or the Hutt group. Hands off as they are far, far away
If you say so. Thanks x
Ole back at the wheel
Oily's at the wheel!
Definitely in his prime!
Married, eh?
They don't have the spending power though, it pales in comparison to Abu Dhabi and Qatar, Saudi etc.
If say a Qatari or Arab prince came to buy your club. How many would protest against the sale and how many would protest for the sale (a La Newcastle fans)? I’m curious
Its confusing because you wrote not increase shareholder value then say get returns on increasing value asset. Which is it? And if they are buying for other reasons and not to make money but make money from increasing asset value. Thats still making money.
Anyway I get you. I think. But that just means someone buying it for nefarious means. Sports washing or whatever evil they need to hide behind Man Utd brand. Is that wat you are trying to say you want?
A wealthy local who genuinely loves the club and funds it with his own money and the fans worldwide. I’m not against us being listed on the stock exchange for fans and investors to own shares in, the problem is the Glazers’ mismanagement of the club, leeching behaviour, and the high-interest debt they saddled us with.
2 in the top 10 richest.
Bernard Arnault we could have a Louis Vuitton kit.
Not serious.
Not serious.
A consortium of wealthy fans
Sure, but I still think we’d be more than able to compete financially. The plus side with them is I think they’d be competent on the football side of things, they’d invest in infrastructure, and they wouldn’t take money out of the club. I also think they’d be highly driven to succeed given Gulf rivalries.
Like I said, far from ideal, but an American consortium or whatever just screams instability and short-termism to me, and there doesn’t appear to be anything else on the horizon.
It's a shame we have had owners for almost 2 decades that haven't done these basic things you have listed. And I totally agree about another American capitalist takeover, it will be much of the same of what we've had.
A massive consortium of our top 50 favourite United players / pashun displayers, fused riches from money men made in a sustainable caring ethical way.