If it was possible I'd like a few united supporting consortium's maybe got together had say an equal percentage. With hope red knights, ratcliffes consortium, beckhams etc ideas are pulling the same direction. So it's basically fan owned and one mogul isn't making decisions to fill his own pockets rather than the goodness of the club.
Who you REALLY want for new owner?
- Thread starter Andycoleno9
- Start date
There's nothing wrong with owners who are running us for profit, within reason. In fact it's what I would prefer, as long as it's only them taking a small dividend each year while mostly looking to increase the actual value of the club. None of this saddling the club with debt and then forcing the club to pay that as well. The club being run more as a business means the club as a whole should be in a stronger position than one that is reliant on a sugar-daddy who could potentially pull out at any moment.
Even under the Glazer's we have spent enough money to be competitive with the sugar-daddy clubs. The issue is that we have been run utterly incompetently so that all that money has been completely squandered.
Crown prince sheik moneybags. Torture our inefficiencies and imprison all incompetences.
I wouldn't mind Dubai to be honest. Won't be after any profit and have the best image of the Gulf States. We might be needing pockets that deep to compete going forward. At least for the near future.
The trouble is the moralists in this fanbase put them under same umbrella as Abu Dhabi/Qatar
For all the moral posturing and virtue signaling about Newcastle/City owners for years by United fans...yet now when its actually time to put our money where our mouth is, apparently Oil Money > Ratcliffe(United fan and unproblematic British guy), because he aint rich enough and cant compete with City/Chelsea/Newcastle.
You love to see it.
You love to see it.
I am so surprised with the amount of people hoping for oil money. I simply can't understand how any who have supported United for more than a decade can be OK with that outcome. Assuming most who are hoping for oil money are newer football / Manchester United followers. Only explanation I can think of.
Not necessarily, I support Utd since the mid 90' and I wouldn't be against oil money(not that I have any power to oppose that). All I want us is to be competitive again. If that means oil money then so be it. Doesn't really matter the faces, the names or the money origin as long as we make smart decisions in terms of managers, players and stop playing for Europa League spots.
All I want is...
- Someone that isn't looking to take money out of the club.
- Will invest in the infrastructure/team (even if it's the clubs own money).
- Can competently run a football club or will put someone in place that can competently run a football club
I genuinely don't care who this person is, anyone with the sort of money that is going to be needed to buy us is not going to be squeaky clean so if your going down the morals route then your effectively picking the best of a bad bunch in that sense.
- Someone that isn't looking to take money out of the club.
- Will invest in the infrastructure/team (even if it's the clubs own money).
- Can competently run a football club or will put someone in place that can competently run a football club
I genuinely don't care who this person is, anyone with the sort of money that is going to be needed to buy us is not going to be squeaky clean so if your going down the morals route then your effectively picking the best of a bad bunch in that sense.
Dubai would be ok. They have money and they are probably the least bad option from gulf states. I would be ok with that combination.
Worst scenario would be that they buy Liverpool and we get Glazers vol 2 owners. There would be three superpowers in EPL. And it is pretty sure transfer fees will keep rising in the future. Maybe even skyrocket because of oil money and tough competition for top players.
Worst scenario would be that they buy Liverpool and we get Glazers vol 2 owners. There would be three superpowers in EPL. And it is pretty sure transfer fees will keep rising in the future. Maybe even skyrocket because of oil money and tough competition for top players.
This is pretty much where I am at as well.
Not Musk under any condition. He'd sack everyone including the first XI and try to play in every position himself... possibly bringing in his mate Donald Chump as manager
Rather Dubai than some halfwit from the States who will burn the club into the ground.
I've lived in the UAE for 5 years, most people who hate on the MENA region have never visited.
They form an opinion based on what the Daily Mail or The Sun writes. Saudi is a bit backwards but they're trying to evolve right now into a tourism sector which is why they want to host the 2030 WC and why they bought Newcastle.
Qatar really wants to make a name for itself but they are probably the worst out of the three, they have a crap tonne of money and need to build infrastructure overnight, within 30 years we won't rely on fossil fuels at all. You have to remember that these countries have like a 20-30 year window to get the best infrastructure and transition to have tech and tourism industries or theyll struggle.
Dubai owners would bring the best infrastructure, an amazing hiearchy and facilities.
Look at Dubai since the 70s when they struck oil, one Sheikh went to Cambridge and they always had close British ties. They took on consultants, built a great health care system, they're working on education, it's one of the best countries for tourism. The UAE was actually protected by Britain pre-oil so was Qatar I believe, but Britain built the first embassy, and schools there I believe maybe the first airport but I'm unsure.
They've also hosted Expo 2020 last year which was great, they have the tallest tower and the country was just sand 50 years ago, I'd take them over anyone else honestly.
Fan owned would be second but it wouldn't prove to be anywhere close, then Jim or Musk. American owners is a no go for me, they will just want profits as FSG did with Liverpool.
Britain also committed some of the worlds biggest atrocities with imperialism and the colonies people are very quick to forget, but all the gulf states are not the same, Dubai would be very good for United.
A gulf state also means they want the team to be highly succesful, because its good PR for their country.
Newcastle under Saudi will be outshining United in a decade if United don't really think about what direction they're going in.
Last edited:
I echo this sentiment wholeheartedly.
That would be hilarious. Dubai is literally becoming the party capital of the world. Almost being ruined by a flagrant trade in the oldest profession. Definitely not in the same umbrella.
Anyone of sir Ratcliff, Dubai or even mukesh ambani.
What I wish for is no debt, a good football structure and sound football people running the club. If these things are in place, we won't need oil money to compete
What I wish for is no debt, a good football structure and sound football people running the club. If these things are in place, we won't need oil money to compete
The Emirate of Dubai hasn't entered the Premier League fray yet - expect the Maktoums to show keen interest. A downside is that it'll turn the city into a UAE dick flopping contest.
Don’t want oil or oil state ownership.
United is one of the few clubs in the world where if they are run correctly, the profits are massive anyway.
The amount of money siphoned off by the Glazers is shocking and should never have been allowed.
If Ratcliffe wants a decent profit he can get that AND invest well in the team and club, simply by having a better infrastructure.
United is one of the few clubs in the world where if they are run correctly, the profits are massive anyway.
The amount of money siphoned off by the Glazers is shocking and should never have been allowed.
If Ratcliffe wants a decent profit he can get that AND invest well in the team and club, simply by having a better infrastructure.
Local - Perfect, Foreign - Bad, Foreign who are now doing what the British empire once did - the worst. Ah and he must locate Old Trafford on a map...
Seriously guys all I would want is someone who afford the huge investment that is needed, who can go toe to toe financially wise against the big guns and who brings back the 'we strive to be the best' mentality across all the board (first team, management, executive, youth academy, links with supporter clubs etc) we once had. I can't care less from where he is
Seriously guys all I would want is someone who afford the huge investment that is needed, who can go toe to toe financially wise against the big guns and who brings back the 'we strive to be the best' mentality across all the board (first team, management, executive, youth academy, links with supporter clubs etc) we once had. I can't care less from where he is
Dubai.
Ayye more than likely. But a guy can dream ey.
I think that's why rhe Ratcliffe 'Elderly fan doing it for the love of the club' appeals to so many.
Dubai by an absolute mile.
Not big fan of oil money in the game, and as a christian Arab in a democratic country, I absolutely loath the sports washing and would like nothing more than US supported Arab Royals in the area to have their heads up spikes, and realizing the only reason they are still in power is because of US interests in the areas resources.
However, In as far as blood money goes, the Dubai Royals are probably the best of a bad bunch, and they actually have built a ( relatively to Arab standards) a modern, inclusive princedom. We could do much, much worse in terms of middle eastern oil money once we stop looking at Arabs as one population.
Still prefer Radcliffe ( whilst knowing nothing about his business background ) but between American corporate greed ( Bezos' lack of stance at the murder of Kashoggi, Musk manipulating international blockchain market for a quick buck... ) and American ( and British for inclusivity) Human rights abuses ( how many millions of Afghani/Iraqi/ Syrian/ Bahreini, Libyan innocent people have to be killed, and how many bloody dictators in that area to maintain a monopoly over the resources need to be protected before we start looking at the US as a bloody regime that helped destabilize the world for a century. ).
God forbid an Arab putting money at United, we want them "clean" US dollars.
However, In as far as blood money goes, the Dubai Royals are probably the best of a bad bunch, and they actually have built a ( relatively to Arab standards) a modern, inclusive princedom. We could do much, much worse in terms of middle eastern oil money once we stop looking at Arabs as one population.
Still prefer Radcliffe ( whilst knowing nothing about his business background ) but between American corporate greed ( Bezos' lack of stance at the murder of Kashoggi, Musk manipulating international blockchain market for a quick buck... ) and American ( and British for inclusivity) Human rights abuses ( how many millions of Afghani/Iraqi/ Syrian/ Bahreini, Libyan innocent people have to be killed, and how many bloody dictators in that area to maintain a monopoly over the resources need to be protected before we start looking at the US as a bloody regime that helped destabilize the world for a century. ).
God forbid an Arab putting money at United, we want them "clean" US dollars.
Not when the Glazers want 6 billion. Add 2 Billion on infrastructure and 2 on players over 10 years.
10 billion all in. That is a lot of money to earn for a football club.
Realistically the only option is an oil state. Businesses will have a hard time turning a profit.
Any time threads like this pop up, I’m always surprised how people still can’t understand the difference between being state-owned vs privately-owned, and the same whataboutisms based on that lack of understanding.
Glazers have taken 1.5 billion out of the club over 17 years. We can all agree that they have sucked the club dry.
Well, that is nothing compared to if a business wants to get profit on their 6-10 billion investment.
Even if they are long-term investors and look ahead 30 years, they still have to bleed United dry on a scale
the Glazers would be horrified of, just to make a profit.
This is why I want an owner that is not looking for a profit and the only realistic option is an oil state.
Well, that is nothing compared to if a business wants to get profit on their 6-10 billion investment.
Even if they are long-term investors and look ahead 30 years, they still have to bleed United dry on a scale
the Glazers would be horrified of, just to make a profit.
This is why I want an owner that is not looking for a profit and the only realistic option is an oil state.
It's nvm whom will own Manutd. I am just hoping that the owner who will be invested Manutd facility / stadium / player etc. by Manutd Money.
Looking at Twitter 9 out of 10 "fans" wouldn't mind and actually prefer Dubai. Even on here I can see it. Sad. They probably don't understand that this club can take care of its own and be successful, it's just that the Glazers are incompetent from a sporting point of view.
I probably would too.
I feel some here share this romantic and somewhat naive view that a 'United supporting' Ratcliffe would come in, clear the debt, and allow the club to 'spend its own money', which apparently is enough for a new stadium, training ground and squad improvements and all will be well again with us competing at the zenith of Europe.
The reality I fear is Ratcliffe will end up disappointing many since he'll still be another businessman looking to make a buck out of the club, developments within the club both at an infrastructural and personnel level would still be slow and we'll continue to watch our rivals widen the gap between us and them.
The harsh reality is whether we like it or not, is we need obnoxiously rich owners who are happy to invest billions off the bat, and aren't looking to take money out of the club in the short term, and who's primary concern is we strive to have the best in class in and around the club. Unfortunately the only avenue to that are owners from the likes of Dubai.
The reality I fear is Ratcliffe will end up disappointing many since he'll still be another businessman looking to make a buck out of the club, developments within the club both at an infrastructural and personnel level would still be slow and we'll continue to watch our rivals widen the gap between us and them.
The harsh reality is whether we like it or not, is we need obnoxiously rich owners who are happy to invest billions off the bat, and aren't looking to take money out of the club in the short term, and who's primary concern is we strive to have the best in class in and around the club. Unfortunately the only avenue to that are owners from the likes of Dubai.
Hard to equate Twitter to match going fans though. I’m sure there is plenty of them that won’t care, but there will also be a huge core of fans that would protest it.
I’ve thought a lot about my own personal feelings on what I would do if that was the case. I only make it to Old Trafford every couple of months at the moment due to other commitments, so I wouldn’t be missed, but would I even be able to justify supporting if the club ends up in the hands of a state.
The thought of not watching or caring is bizarre and I can’t really get my head around it, but I think there’s a lot of people who will be in a moral dilemma.
It's not the fans that decide either, they aren't paying 5 billion+ for ownership
There is plus and minus with every owner and to all the nay sayers to a country buying us, do you put petrol in your car? Do you buy clothes to wear? These are all mainly from extremist regimes who pay their people a pittance and a lifestyle we would be up in arms against if done here. We put western values on everything and expect the world to adhere to our ethics, which a lot dont.
Back to the subject, the only way Utd can compete with the Citys and Newcastles will be to have an owner where money is no object.
I can see that a business owner will want some ceiling on what we can spend and/or want some return. We would still lag behind the Citys etc.
Back to the subject, the only way Utd can compete with the Citys and Newcastles will be to have an owner where money is no object.
I can see that a business owner will want some ceiling on what we can spend and/or want some return. We would still lag behind the Citys etc.
Red Bull would be a good choice. They've managed well and secured success in all their sport ventures so far.
Just read Apple interested in buying. Express Mirror Star all reporting it.
Okay? Not sure what that has to do with protests or fans making their own decisions on whether to continue supporting.
Indeed, over the course of the 19th century Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the emirates that comprise the UAE (then collectively referred to as the Trucial States), and Oman all became British protectorates. The British Residency in the region was based in Bushire.
Just seen they’re worth $2.3trillion
Last edited:
Not entirely sure you've understood what he meant by the club paying for itself given the 2bn you've added for infastructure and 2bn for players.
A club can be run for profit and run well.
The Glazers weren't really all that interested in making the club a success which would have actually led to greater profits. They've done the bare minimum, made most, if not all, of their investment back and will be fecking off with billions of profit.
We don't need to be a state run sportswashing project to be a well-run club.