Why is this thread still going? Has there actually been any credible link or update
Saudi Takeover - Claim deal done
- Thread starter NWRed
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
- Status
That is stupid past the point of naivety and into straightforward self-serving justification.
I think the problem with United right now we're a club that can't turn the corner.
In one corner, we've got the Glazers, who know nothing about football, clearly own us as a cash cow and don't really care that much about on field performances until the money takes a nose dive.
The club is worth an absolute fortune, no investor at this point would want to buy United as an investment. It'd take a long time to earn that money back, and with how on field performances have been, the club are going in the wrong direction for a potential buyer.
In the other corner, the only potential buyers are people like the Saudi's. More money than sense and can use us as a play thing. Fans don't want this, but they also don't want the Glazers.
In one corner, we've got the Glazers, who know nothing about football, clearly own us as a cash cow and don't really care that much about on field performances until the money takes a nose dive.
The club is worth an absolute fortune, no investor at this point would want to buy United as an investment. It'd take a long time to earn that money back, and with how on field performances have been, the club are going in the wrong direction for a potential buyer.
In the other corner, the only potential buyers are people like the Saudi's. More money than sense and can use us as a play thing. Fans don't want this, but they also don't want the Glazers.
So boring and tiresome reasing, listening and watching fans talk crap about our own players.
£25m wasn't peanuts in 2003 mate. And how did they make it back in a few months?
I hope you don't say shirt sales because thats a myth that i thought had been well and truly busted years ago.
All those in favor of this Saudi takeover, does it not bother you that any silverware the club attains at any point during their leadership will be illegitimate, tainted and ultimately worthless?
Has there been anything credible dismissing it?
We truly don't know how the Saudis would run us but we're (me) are hoping that they will bring in people who know how to run a club successfully. Our current board have never done such a thing. We hope they get the club up and running successfully, playing great football, with a blend of youth and stars. We don't need extra funds or fiddling of the books to do this. We are capable of doing it now. Unfortunately, the current don't have either the appetite or know how of how to.
They would in the meantime invest in OT. Find the conundrum (throw lots of money at it) of extending the south stand and just bringing the whole stadium up to standards and beyond. They would also reinvest in Carrington too.
They would in the meantime invest in OT. Find the conundrum (throw lots of money at it) of extending the south stand and just bringing the whole stadium up to standards and beyond. They would also reinvest in Carrington too.
How so?
I don't see that as the case, I see the Saudi ownership as freeing the club from the shackles that are the Glazers. they are not buying a tin pot club, they are buying a club already showered in success.
Are we suddenly going to bribe match officials with death threats?
Think about it and get back to me, mate.
Very good point. Only thing I have read that RA wasn't in Riyadh specifically for the sale of the club, which we all knew that anyway.
Thought about it and I'm back, still don't get it?
I don't think they care one bit. We could be owned by Kim Jong Un and they would be perfectly ok with it as long as it buys them a shiny new toy.
It really wouldn’t be no matter what your point of view is. Let’s say the Saudis take over and let United «run their financial horses» - they don’t pump in money but allow United to spend what they generate, which is a lot.
COMPLETELY different. City NEEDED their money. They NEEDED the books to be fiddled, we don't.
All we need is the correct people put in the correct positions of the club and we will then attain success, with the clubs own generated money.
We'd miraculously become a club with no history?
Or we'd be allowed to spend more of our own money we generate?
Bingo.
Are City or Chelseas titles worthless?
I meant peanuts for the Beckham brand and what it would bring to Madrid money wise.
i read reports back then that Madrid had recovered the costs etc.
But putting that issue aside my original point of trying to shift Beckham today with how the club is run still stands.
In my honest opinion, yes.
You admitted it yourself. You do all of your thinking in less than a minute. It's not about the money. It's about becoming the sports franchise of a nation. One that isn't exactly Denmark in its social progressiveness.
You’re obviously entitled to that opinion, but most of the world would disagree. Both Chelsea and City’s brand growth are evidence of that.
Unprecedented mental gymnastics.
We don't need their money...we instead just need their money to become successful. Either that, or you believe that the crown prince has an insane amount of football knowledge and his sheer presence as our owner would be our salvation.
True that it is different to City though. The got bought from a relatively (in comparison) harmless regime compared to Saudi Arabia.
United have spent close to a billion in transfers since 2013. You think you need more?
Worse, we'd be a club whose entire illustrious history gets tainted as it is used to bolster the image of people commiting terrible human rights abuses. That history is exactly why we'd be worse sell-outs than City, as well as a far more effective PR front. It's a big part of what they'd be buying.
If anything the fact that we don't need the money makes it worse.
Well that approach failed 
So it's back to the default "they are worst human beings on planet earth whose only motivation for purchasing our club is to wash their filthy image".
So it's back to the default "they are worst human beings on planet earth whose only motivation for purchasing our club is to wash their filthy image".
Just imagine, us v City in the Champions League final in Riyadh
Mbappe scores the goal to put us 2-1 up, he wipes his forehead with relief that he's going to see his family tonight
Mbappe scores the goal to put us 2-1 up, he wipes his forehead with relief that he's going to see his family tonight
Exactly, you only take dirty oil money when it’s the only option left.
We will be worse sell-outs than City? None of us have any saying in the club ownership. The Glazers can sell to who they please.
I get that people don’t want to sell to Saudi (don’t want it myself), but the whole clubs history being tainted or gone is rubbish. The club will be here after the Saudis also. If you want to be angry, it should be at the people governing football in England that has accepted owners of all kind flowing into their clubs. In a perfect world all clubs should be owned by their supporters, as membership organisations. That ship has sailed long ago.
Fair enough, I would say most non United fans would disagree
I disagree. The circumstances are very different.
The Glazers are already spending money by the bucket load - £800 million since Fergie retired, only City are above us in that regard - so there is no need to sell our soul like City.
It’s not like we can have a vote on the matter is it?? Our soul was sold long ago. If the Glazers want to sell, they can sell to who they want.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50070823
Them Saudis do seem to have gone into 'let's do stuff' mode. Just sayin.
Them Saudis do seem to have gone into 'let's do stuff' mode. Just sayin.
I don’t think a net spend of about 50m Euros in 2018 and 90m Euros this summer is by the bucket load
Of course the club's history will be tainted. It will be directly used to gloss the reputation of people commiting horrendous human rights violations. That association doesn't dissapear once these new owners do, it's there forever as part of the club's own history.
True, as fans we can do feck all about this.
At the same time, I agree that it is far worse than what City did. First of all, the nature of the investment (if we include the buyout, paying out the debt, improving the stadium, a cash infusion at the beginning) is likely to be 4-5 times larger than what City owners spent on City. Then Saudi Arabia has a far worse human right record than UAE, and has influenced worldwide terrorism via their Wahhabism ideology far more than UAE. And well, for City this was the only option to become successful, while for us, all we need is a competent CEO instead of Ed, a few football men and we can do it. I mean, Liverpool is being successful despite spending significantly less than us since SAF left, while starting at a worse position.
Club didn't sell its soul when the Glazers took over. It got stiffed.
- Status