I wasn't aware of Al Thani accused breaching human rights.
Qatar or Ineos - which owners would you prefer? | Vote now Private
- Thread starter Zlatattack
- 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.
I wasn't aware of Al Thani accused breaching human rights.
As brutal as it seems I’m not sure it could be any other way. Life would be utterly exhausting if you fought the corner of every oppressed right with the vehemence some on here have done.
Bit worrying that Nice are spending so much and achieving little. Seems rather familiar
Bit worrying that Nice are spending so much and achieving little. Seems rather familiar
Just look at their transfers as well, none of them have come off. They bought the likes of Ramsey. But I am told that Nice was an experiment and he will do better for United for some reason.
The same people tell me PSG have done nothing but jumped from 15th to 1st.
Yeah but my post was a response to an INEOS point
From a neutral perspective, I think it would suck if United was bought by Qatar. It's not as if the club would need more money anyway and it would basically make it harder to root for you at the very moment you finally get your act together again.
But as somebody who didn't know Ratcliff before, I'm a bit surprised so many would prefer Qatar. Why is that?
But as somebody who didn't know Ratcliff before, I'm a bit surprised so many would prefer Qatar. Why is that?
The whole “we’ll be a plastic club like City if Qatar own us” thing is ridiculous seeing as we just need to be debt free, we don’t need to cook the books and are arguably the biggest sports brand in the world with a rich history of trophies so we’ll never be plastic no matter what.
For me the most important thing is Qatar are saying they’ll redevelop the stadium, invest in the training facilities, invest in the women’s team, invest in the youth team, develop the area around the stadium and clear ALL debt whereas Ineos are simply saying they’ll take on the debt which regardless of whatever way it’s phrased means our owner having massive debt.
In an ideal world Ineos would be the ones I’d prefer from a completely moral standpoint but this isn’t an ideal world as football is no longer a sport and very much now big business, does anyone honestly believe Jim Ratcliffe will take on £5 billion debt for United then another billion to redevelop the stadium with there being virtually zero chance of a return ?
I don’t believe for a second Qatar won’t have looked at everything going at City financially and because of the feeling between Qatar and Abu Dhabi they’ll want to be better and do better, they’ll know debt free we blow everyone else away but the brand of the club helps them PR wise seeing as we’re the biggest club in the world that can be bought (Real and Barca aren’t allowed and I believe same applies to Bayern) so will do it all by the book.
For me the most important thing is Qatar are saying they’ll redevelop the stadium, invest in the training facilities, invest in the women’s team, invest in the youth team, develop the area around the stadium and clear ALL debt whereas Ineos are simply saying they’ll take on the debt which regardless of whatever way it’s phrased means our owner having massive debt.
In an ideal world Ineos would be the ones I’d prefer from a completely moral standpoint but this isn’t an ideal world as football is no longer a sport and very much now big business, does anyone honestly believe Jim Ratcliffe will take on £5 billion debt for United then another billion to redevelop the stadium with there being virtually zero chance of a return ?
I don’t believe for a second Qatar won’t have looked at everything going at City financially and because of the feeling between Qatar and Abu Dhabi they’ll want to be better and do better, they’ll know debt free we blow everyone else away but the brand of the club helps them PR wise seeing as we’re the biggest club in the world that can be bought (Real and Barca aren’t allowed and I believe same applies to Bayern) so will do it all by the book.
Except you don’t need to do any of that. Infact if you were a protector of everyones human rights you would tolerate beliefs which are different to your own and so thats exhausting defending wouldn’t happen. Fact it we just have the usual thing that has happened throughout history.
“My beliefs are the only truth and the only thing that matters”
People just end up becoming exactly what they set out to discourage/stand against
Again. My question is why is it your business? You seem to want to poke your nose in selective things.
The again Ineos don’t have ETH now do they
Yeah it'd be Real Madrid circa 50s for neutrals. We'd polarise opinions.
Interestingly they could be. The UN general assemby and the Human right councl declared access to a clean and healthy environment a human right.
Mainly because his history with Chelsea makes him out to be a bit of a bluffer. Also he has teamed up with the absolute worst of investment banks to finance it. His statement with the bid didn't exactly inspire confidence with a few diffuse statements which didn't really answer most of our questions/expectations. He would probably be a perfect owner 10-15 years ago, and he might still be the ideal owner from a morally point of view (bar the involvement of said banks), but Glazer's has us lagging so far behind in terms of infrastructure that we need heavy investments to keep up with the other clubs at the top.
Yeah definitely needs to win the PR battle and so how far he's behind on points
Don't think it's dramatic. In the last 10 years we've "competed" onde with mou and once with Ole. We are 1 good striker from competing this year. But of glazers stayed here we wouldn't have a better transfer market than those 3 teams mentioned so we'd probably be further away from winning.
We need the new owners to invest in the team and Qatar is the safest bet.
I only talk about the football part of the deal. SInce I don't know any of the owners, I don't really know hoy shite persons they are in real life.
I don't discriminate because of their nationalities.
Maybe he thinks human rights are more important than how the stadium would be funded...
No something far worse sadly.
You said we were going to be a mid table team without the Qataris. That’s ridiculously dramatic.
So let me get this straight….
For Manchester United Football Club.
Human rights which have been associated to a country… is more important than how our owner wants to invest in our football club.
Well bloody hell… you’d think all this Glazer out movement was all a dream.
Maybe one day we will all have this same enthusiasm the next time their is racism in football.
Can't wait till Al Thani takes over
Good job deleting your post about the majority wanting it because you realised how dumb it sounded in a Brexit context.
Though the needless crowing comes across just as badly in fairness.
Not sure what you're emotional about or what Brexit has to do with anything. Your post is pretty dumb. Pipe down.
Can't wait till Al Thani takes over
Good for you. You've probably been twitching to start supporting City for a good 7/8 years now I reckon. I feel for you.
Fans giddy because other fans have genuine concerns about their club and their support and want to rub it in are literally the bottom of the barrel for me.
That probably made more sense in your head. I feel for you.
Western industry clearly does not give a feck. To be fair global industry doesn’t for that matter
I can't fathom the logic of trading owners and ending up a lot more indebted in the process. I don't think we need gazillions so we blow everyone up in the transfer market, what we need is doing away with being financially hamstrung by debt service and I can't see how Ineos delivers on that.
Moan all you want about City's owners, but they are a well run club. We don't need the deep pockets and we wouldn't need to cheat FFP like them. We just need to stop being run by muppets and the debt cleared.
Mind, I'm not particularly enamoured with how PSG is run.
Moan all you want about City's owners, but they are a well run club. We don't need the deep pockets and we wouldn't need to cheat FFP like them. We just need to stop being run by muppets and the debt cleared.
Mind, I'm not particularly enamoured with how PSG is run.
That's not the reason I am "giddy". You're free to have concerns, just as I have concerns about Ratcliff.
Exactly my thoughts.
Couldn’t give a feck about Jim Ratcliffe who should be the owner of Chelsea anyway. People just jumping on wanting “Bri’ain to be about Bri’ish” bandwagon without looking into the benefits (or lack thereof) he would bring to the club.
It makes perfect sense. You just don't like what it implies.
Isn't Jim richer than Al Thani too? Although of course we know Al Thani is just a puppet in the Qatar takeover. They can't even be honest about that. Hahaha
the daily Mirror had similar results.
Really doesn't, though. "Hahaha"
For me, yes. I feel, as a football club, we have a responsibility to other football clubs to operate under the same conditions as them and that's my sole objection to Qatar.
Exactly I don't care if the owners are British, Chinese, American or from the middle east. As long as they are the best option for success I'm all in.
I've repeat this several times and I'll say it again, Im not into football because we are the epitome of morality. I want my successful club back, I'll go to church for the rest.
This is an assumption which is faulty for the most part. Ineos will borrow money to buy the club because Ineos makes more money with £5bn being invested in it's company than it would lose paying interest on that loan. A loan secured against Ineos would be extremely low interest and spread out over a long period of time. It's now the extremely wealthy work. It's ethnically extremely shitty because it causes an aggregation of wealth but it's not the same leveraged buyout as the Glazers. We'd be carrying no more debt than we are now (and less if the debt on the club is cleared as part of the process, which isn't confirmed one way or the other). The debt would be on Ineos who are about 100 times our size.
Not surprised that United We Stand has Ratcliffe as firm favourite because majority of those will be old school matchgoers
To be fair, we always do. Evra incident anyone? We've always been known as a grassroots, liberally progressive club. Be a shame if that ever changes.
Al Thani's net worth is 1.2bn dollars. Jim's is closer to 15bn.
So Qatar are telling lies before they have even bought the club. The man they say is behind the purchase doesn't even have enough money on his own. If that's not a huge red flag then I don't know what else I can say.
I'm very idealistic and dream of an Utopia. The older i got the more i realized all i can do is making the life better of my immediate surrounding. Carrying the world on your shoulder only makes you end up feeling depressed and helpless. Sure, if you feel strong about a specific topic you might be able to improve things a little, but you will never be able to solve all the worlds problems. We should do the little things like do something nice once a day even if its for a total stranger. Also, in my experience, the louder people complain about it,often online,the less likely they follow their words with actions.