Would you be okay with state or state-backed ownership?

Status
Not open for further replies.
bosnian_red said:
Does the owner define the club for you? Or are they just temporarily the people who make some decisions until the next owner?

It's fundamentally just weird for me to ever "quit" on your club. Some rich arsehole who decides to throw money at the club isn't who I support, whether they are great or scum. They are simply owners during that period. The club lives on with or without them. People can protest the issues we have with them without bailing on the club.
Click to expand...
I think in this instance, yes, the owner would define the club unfortunately. It defines PSG, it defines City.
 
I don't want to become a plaything club. Someone's toy . I'd feel there's a lack of dignity in that.
 
I just don't believe myself or any other supporter who claim he/she will stop supporting, should such ownership come about.
But I surely fantasize about pulling it off, in case the feckers really manage to become owners.
 
The-Natural said:
I think in this instance, yes, the owner would define the club unfortunately. It defines PSG, it defines City.
Click to expand...
They define them for you because they were not big clubs before they took over, so they were irrelevant for United supporters. Now they are competing with United, so that is defined by their ownership.

The fans of those clubs likely don't define their club as their owners. Man City were shite before, but they existed for over 100 years before the takeover. PSG a bit shorter. But owners still are not the club.

They help/hinder the club like any player, coach, or manager does. Some players happen to be people who should be behind bars and you are ashamed to have them wear the shirt. They don't define the club either.

I don't want them as owners. But if the Qatari's do become our owners, then the fans should voice their concerns and push them to change things in their country. There's literally nothing else we can do. I don't like it when people make excuses for them/keep their hand in the sand, it's a bit pathetic, but you can still love the club and question/criticize the owners, as we do now. It'll just then be a scenario where we criticize them as humans, rather than the way they operate the club.
 
Im not into football so I can give myself moral lessons, as long as its not cheating then I'm all in with any owner that will lead us to the very top. I dont know why the idea that some how the owner of the team must have some moral back ground is a must for some here.
 
We need to use the German model of 50% + 1 fan ownership. Enough with state ownership, sports washing, financial doping, and the like.
 
Shakesey said:
So, you reckon they really are dignified owners? Saddling us with debt and sucking us dry? Neglecting us?
Click to expand...

Up until 5 minutes ago owners that bought clubs to profit from them wasn't unusual. In fact that literally describes every owner we've ever had.

For most of our lifetime the primary purpose of the club was literally to provide shareholders with a return

The Glazers failed but they didn't buy a community owned charity project
 
The Boy said:
I’ve posted this before, but for those that think this doesn’t change the history and tradition of the club or English football, it really does.


English football's history is deeply tied in with various social movements, working class identity and all sorts of politics. Now the premiership is watched globally, I imagine for many it is just entertainment, but even with that globalisation, Manchester United, like most English clubs, remains an important community asset within what remains a working-class city.

To be owned by the Qataris or any other nation state would corrupt all of that and go against the entire history of your club. An absolute monarchy ruling a country with almost no workers' rights is anathema to that.

Too many clubs have already been cut off from their working class roots, it's one of the reasons United and Liverpool are still begrudgingly respected by so many.

If all you want is entertainment, limitless funds and no history or morals, I'd recommend PSG or City.
Click to expand...

Great post. Thanks. Clubs should stand for something. Otherwise they're just entertainment franchises
 
Nah feck that shit.

Be the ultimate 2 fingers from the Glazers.

You wanted us out, well now here you go...
 
RedBanker said:
Perfectly ok as I live in the real world and not in some wokeshit Lalaland. Also I know that world history is a bit older than the last 30 years. So yeah. Having worked with Goldman Sachs for a couple of years I know what they are and what kind of animals their top executives are. Would never want them to bankroll any move for my club.
Click to expand...
You seem like a lovely fella.
 
Tyrion said:
Great post. Thanks. Clubs should stand for something. Otherwise they're just entertainment franchises
Click to expand...

For the majority of our fans that's all we are. They've no idea about the clubs background or roots.

This will be the final nail in us selling out and becoming another empty vessel of a club. For those wanting to play fifa or football manager though they get to wank over the thought of splashing the cash.

City's success is defined by their ME owners and whilst our history won't be, our next chapter of success likely will be.
 
The Boy said:
I’ve posted this before, but for those that think this doesn’t change the history and tradition of the club or English football, it really does.


English football's history is deeply tied in with various social movements, working class identity and all sorts of politics. Now the premiership is watched globally, I imagine for many it is just entertainment, but even with that globalisation, Manchester United, like most English clubs, remains an important community asset within what remains a working-class city.

To be owned by the Qataris or any other nation state would corrupt all of that and go against the entire history of your club. An absolute monarchy ruling a country with almost no workers' rights is anathema to that.

Too many clubs have already been cut off from their working class roots, it's one of the reasons United and Liverpool are still begrudgingly respected by so many.

If all you want is entertainment, limitless funds and no history or morals, I'd recommend PSG or City.
Click to expand...

The Boy said:
No I meant that English football’s history is tied to its working class roots and working class communities, especially in the north of England. Being owned by an absolute monarchy is diametrically opposed to that.

I personally think it’s a shame, but it’s only my opinion.
Click to expand...

Well said. An autocratic royal regime owning United is just wrong.
 
Shakesey said:
Jeez guys. Sometimes I really do think you're on some kind of crazy crusade to change a broken world.

Romanticism at its finest.
Click to expand...
Why is it a 'crazy crusade' to not want our football club to be owned by a despot? People are completely free to post their opinions and their preferences on our future ownership model.
 
Shakesey said:
Ok. Thanks for telling me how to define other clubs.
Click to expand...
^ you're free to define them however you want. But if you ask 100 random football fans, the vast majority will tell you that their background as an oil club is very much an integral part of how people view them.

but alas, you call it a "crazy crusade" and "romanticism" to be against state-backed ownership, so I guess it's just going to be agree to disagree.
 
Infestissumam said:
^ you're free to define them however you want. But if you ask 100 random football fans, the vast majority will tell you that their background as an oil club is very much an integral part of how people view them.

but alas, you call it a "crazy crusade" and "romanticism" to be against state-backed ownership, so I guess it's just going to be agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
I guess so :(
 
I just want the football to be handled by the right people.

It is what it is, not many can meet the price Glazers want. Erik is a good judge of what he wants, I don’t want a Chelsea scenario where they buy shitloads of players to circumvent rules and not allow steady integration. Football is all about a strong spine and build from there and I think Erik has the right formula and pace set.

Whoever it is, needs to listen and take input, not do what they want. My fear with state lead ownerships is the ‘Now’ factor, statement signings, return of big contracts and money out. We need to be smart here and built at the right pace.
 
We can't call Manchester City all these years for their oil money funding and then welcome oil money funding with open arms.
It would be most fickle of us.
 
Can’t support a club without shame or moral owned by a totalitarian dictatorship, without free elections or respect for basic human rights. It has been 44 great years of ups and downs since I fell in love with the club, but that would be the end of it for me. A total dissaster for one of the proudest football clubs in the world to sell it’s soul for cash if it happens.
 
The best is still supporter-owned and -operated. But, it’s almost for sure impossible now.
 
troylocker said:
Can’t support a club without shame or moral owned by a totalitarian dictatorship, without free elections or respect for basic human rights. It has been 44 great years of ups and downs since I fell in love with the club, but that would be the end of it for me. A total dissaster for one of the proudest football clubs in the world to sell it’s soul for cash if it happens.
Click to expand...

I respect you for sticking to guns on walking away from supporting the club,there will be a few saying it now but can't go through it when comes right down to the crunch
 
Shakesey said:
Come the inevitable Qatari takeover, there will be a lot more oppo fans on this forum.
Click to expand...

True but the main reason they have appeared in the last few years is because we weren't going anywhere so got bantered
 
I’m actually shocked by this. Overwhelming majority of this forum did not even want Qatar World Cup(1 month ) citing human rights etc and a good number even blamed Beckam for being their ambassador.
3 months later, majority are happy with the same people taking charge of this club and writing a new chapter which can be anything between 5 to 50yrs.
 
troylocker said:
Can’t support a club without shame or moral owned by a totalitarian dictatorship, without free elections or respect for basic human rights. It has been 44 great years of ups and downs since I fell in love with the club, but that would be the end of it for me. A total dissaster for one of the proudest football clubs in the world to sell it’s soul for cash if it happens.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, would you quit your job if your place of work were to be taken over, or in part funded by, those with links to the Qatari regime?

Would you disown your children (if relevant to you) in the event they decided to seek pastures new out in the Middle East?

You must have a line in the sand somewhere?
 
By all means disagree with the prospect of Qatar, or the UAE, or wherever they come from. Voice your concerns and even protest this to those at the top - I can understand that. I can’t help but think some of the talk about completing withdrawing support for the club is a little dramatic and over the top, however. Completely parking a part of your life to one side as if it doesn’t exist just doesn’t seem to help anyone. Just enjoy the football and take it less seriously, perhaps. Or take up golf during match days instead…
 
Kag said:
Out of interest, would you quit your job if your place of work were to be taken over, or in part funded by, those with links to the Qatari regime?

Would you disown your children (if relevant to you) in the event they decided to seek pastures new out in the Middle East?

You must have a line in the sand somewhere?
Click to expand...

Not sure where my line is but it’s certainly around the club I love.

Would be disgusting to see a state own United.
 
Kag said:
By all means disagree with the prospect of Qatar, or the UAE, or wherever they come from. Voice your concerns and even protest this to those at the top - I can understand that. I can’t help but think some of the talk about completing withdrawing support for the club is a little dramatic and over the top, however. Completely parking a part of your life to one side as if it doesn’t exist just doesn’t seem to help anyone. Just enjoy the football and take it less seriously, perhaps. Or take up golf during match days instead…
Click to expand...

United is an integral part of my life and has been for years. I really have a deep emotional connection with the club and I don’t want to see them become a status symbol for a regime that has literal blood on their hands.
 
I'd probably still watch us but tbh I don't think I can be as proud of us/being an United fan as before.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.