everyone knows the glazers are scumbags. it was known before they bought the club. the point is really simple. concentrated wealth, when we're speaking about hundreds of millions or billions, almost always implies terrible things. but there are degrees of terrible. ideally, the club would be supporter owned. anything less than that represents something crap. but as i said, there is a scale of crap. the glazers are indirectly tied to terrible things through political spending. the uae and its royal family are directly tied to a genocidal war in yemen, which the americans and some european states do also participate in, something which is a disgrace, but in relative terms you'd be hard pressed to argue that the glazers are worse than anyone whose wealth is tied up so intimately in warfare.
Dubai a contender to buy Man Utd
- Thread starter Chief123
- 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.
So they should accept being called out as endorsers of war criminals
Seconded.
I think the key difference is that United at the moment are, at most, tangential to the global actions of the US. Clubs like City and PSG are being used to actually further the actions of their respective owners, by giving them a shield to hide behind and a means to rehabilitate their reputations. There is a categorical difference of the role of the club in each case.
But they're not. They're buying influence with both political parties to help their business interests, not to promote foreign political policies. Therefore there is no legitimate comparison to be made, nor would the use of the term sportwashing apply to them as it would state actors like Putin, MBS, the Qataris, and Emiratis.
some mad takes in here…
i hate the glazers… my god I do.
and from a success perspective both on and off the pitch, i would expect vast improvements under a Dubai ownership.
but at what cost?? Greenwashing the activities of a pretty appalling regime from a human rights perspective for the chance of winning a few more trophies…
people have some bonkers, selfish priorities sometimes.
it’s no wonder the worlds on its arse with that kinda mentality…
“if it gets me what I want, forget about the collateral damage”
grim.
i hate the glazers… my god I do.
and from a success perspective both on and off the pitch, i would expect vast improvements under a Dubai ownership.
but at what cost?? Greenwashing the activities of a pretty appalling regime from a human rights perspective for the chance of winning a few more trophies…
people have some bonkers, selfish priorities sometimes.
it’s no wonder the worlds on its arse with that kinda mentality…
“if it gets me what I want, forget about the collateral damage”
grim.
Agree to disagree.
Are you suggesting that positive changes have occurred in Abu Dhabi since the purchase of Man City?
Don't want those oil Merchants
Personally I prefer an English based ownership and I'm not even from England
Personally I prefer an English based ownership and I'm not even from England
Absolute NO NO to this purchase option. Would stop following United if it came to supporting the sportswashing for such a regime.
This would definitely be a case of "out of the frying pan and in to the fire".
The Glazers are awful and of course it is rational for all United fans to want them gone, but to see United reduced to nothing more than a public relations tool for a despicable, human rights abusing nation state, would just be sad. I don't want it and United doesn't need it - the club can stand on its own two feet.
Thankfully, there appears to be very little substance to this "story".
The Glazers are awful and of course it is rational for all United fans to want them gone, but to see United reduced to nothing more than a public relations tool for a despicable, human rights abusing nation state, would just be sad. I don't want it and United doesn't need it - the club can stand on its own two feet.
Thankfully, there appears to be very little substance to this "story".
I wouldn’t say it’s just because of Man City but yes there are definitely positive changes, it does take time though. have you visited Abu Dhabi several times in the past 10 years?
There are already more than enough reasons for United fans to despise the Glazers, but if you want to add this to the list, too, fine.
It ultimately doesn't matter who is/would be a worse owner, the Glazer Family or Dubai - they are both bad owners for United and United fans should oppose either one.
Oh, I'm not offended, and nor do I find any of my pre-conceived notions challenged. I just don't think you're making an argument worth engaging. Also, I highly doubt you are actually making an argument over ethical standards at all. Rather, I think you're conducting an indirect defence of gulf state ownership by attempting to level the moral ground. If you hadn't, then you would have acknowledged and expressed outrage over gulf state ownership and sportswashing, and simply argued that there might also be political implications of different kinds of ownership. Which is just boring, transparent and pretty contemptible all around. Bye bye.
Does anyone here have a candidate in mind who has a sainthood to go alongside around 5bn in loose change? Because otherwise this whole virtue signalling is pointless, glazers are scumbags who happily donate to war criminals, middle easterners are scumbags who are human rights abusers and even the sub's current champion by the looks of it is a scumbag who will happily advocate to beggar his countrymen so that he can get out regulations and pollute your waters killing your environment and harming your citizens to make money for himself. There is no clean billionaire who can buy us out there.
Nicely summer tbh. We know there are levels to some of this but in the end, we just want the club to be run by competent people
I too would prefer a less controversial owner but no one can say City haven`t benefitted from their owners and similar success will eventually happen at Newcastle and i don`t see many complaints from either fanbase. Our government unfortunately are the biggest suppliers of arms to Saudi and continue to have strong relationship with them, most global companies are based in both these countries too. We have also recently seen big sporting events and pop artists in Saudi showcasing and yes there does appear huge changes in those those countries, changes do take time as we know from our own history. Let's not forget how many expats are living in Dubai and Saudi, working and benefiting from their opportunity out there, i know guys who left the UK in the 90`s and are still living there. There is cultural differences and many countries have different view on Gay relationships, that is in their culture. In Saudi and Dubai there are gays but they understand that LGBT is not to be promoted and their personal lifestyle has to be kept private. I believe sports can over time help remove barriers and bring communities together so i won`t stop supporting Utd if the ownership changes to a middle eastern owner. Our government and the FA didn`t stop the Newcastle takeover/ownership and the world cup is been played in Qatar and no one is boycotting it. My preference is Ratcliffe but if it`s Dubai then eventually i will accept it as long they run it properly, i am separating sports and politics. I respect they will be people with different view to myself.
Last edited:
Points for having a strawman argument literally within your first sentence, followed by hypocritical use of "virtue signalling" in your second, but you lose points for not fitting in snowflakes somewhere.
Imagine taking your gay kid to watch his favorite team and the new owners are killing or sentencing gay people to life imprisonment in their home country.
" Nah nah kiddo, its ok, they use money on players "
" Nah nah kiddo, its ok, they use money on players "
The United Arab Emirates is an elective monarchy formed from a federation of seven emirates, consisting of Abu Dhabi (the capital), Ajman, Dubai, Fujairah, Ras Al Khaimah, Sharjah and Umm Al Quwain. Each emirate is governed by an Emir.
The Emirate of Dubai is ruled by Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum. Dubai is the capital of Emirate of Dubai and is bordered to the south by the emirate of Abu Dhabi, to the northeast by the emirate of Sharjah, to the southeast by the country of Oman, to the east by the emirate of Ajman, and to the north by the emirate of Ras Al Khaimah.
The UAE capital – and by far the wealthiest emirate – Abu Dhabi has also seen a population boom in the last 50 years. But there is a marked difference between the UAE’s two most successful emirates – Abu Dhabi still relies on oil for much of its wealth. Today less than 1% of Dubai’s GDP is from oil – at one time it was over half.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/11/dubai-uae-transformation/
Yeah seems most ownership has some issues, not easy to find the perfect ones sadly
Agreed. 5/10 on the BadBillionaire scale.
Imagine taking your muslim kid to watch his favorite team and the current owners are donating monies to israel leading to muslims being killing or sentenced to life imprisonment in palestine for demanding basic human rights.
" Nah nah kiddo, its ok, they're the lesser evil "
Its nearly double what the club is worth.
Have they given money to Israel?
These are not the same things.
Sportswashing ? You're just regurgitating mainstream talking points.
We have propagandizing into thinking the West doesn't do anything wrong. How about the illegal invasion of Iraq & killing of millions of civilians. Or the illegal detention of Julian Assange.
To be honest I would much prefer a Dubai takeover because they don't have a profit motive. Someone like Sir Jim will be counting every dollar.
Why ?
Because Dubai is an autocratic state in which things like being gay is illegal. It is abhorrent.
You have been falling for western media propaganda. You think the West doesn't illegally invade countries like Iraq and Afghanistan and kill millions of civilians.
I would much prefer Dubai ownership over Jim Ratcliffe as he would be looking to making a return on investment.
That's precisely why it's not just about there being "billionaires" around.
I fully understand why the Glazers -barely being billionaires- only got involved because it was good business. Those billionaires you 100% want to avoid. Shite owners, in it for the money, uncertain future and timing/outcome of exit strategy. Been there, done it, got the rags passing for t-shirt.
The 50-100m range can all easily do it, but why bother? They are all (or almost all) American and can probably find much more interesting and rewarding sport projects closer to their hearts. Do they even know United or care? If you see fan mutinees and grumpy randomers hanging "Glazers out" blankets, is it worth the aggro? I wouldn't.
That 20-30bn is probably the sweet spot where you could find someone who knows and cares about the club enough to do something good that sticks and could be somewhat set up as FC/foundation going forward (i.e. not subject to exit strategies).
I'm not arguing for the sake of it. I just can't see there being that many alternatives that tick as many boxes as Ratcliffe.
Are Western states attempting to buy Man Utd?
Because the Glazers for their faults are not intentionally complicit and/or directly responsible in the death and oppression of thousands of people.
And when did the ruler of dubai order the invasion of another country or killed thousands of people ?
I'm genuinely curious to see how many people would follow through with these sorts of statements. My guess? None.
Hahaha so are we lumping ever middle eastern country into one bucket. Dubai is actually one of the most advanced countries in the world.
You don't think the Glazer's and Jim Ratcliffe profited of the illegal wars in the Iraq and Afghanistan? Those wars killed 1000x more people than anything the Dubai group could even capable of.
That's only because supporting a club is not really something you can choose to do, any more than you can stop caring about a family member. That doesn't mean that people wouldn't be disgusted if it happened.
Hahaha another gullible pawn for the western media. When did the Dubai leader invade a country illegally and kill millions of innocent civilians ?
Those skyscrapers weren't built by Emiratis.
Dubai was literally built only decades ago by slavery/bonded labour. No one is asking for George Bush and Tony Blair to buy United ffs.