Dubai a contender to buy Man Utd

VanDeBank said:
I'm aware, I'm gay.

It's undeniable Emirates is less crap than Saudi Arabia on a wide range of issues. You're just repeating what I saw with regards to that being a low bar.

We're owned by Republican donors, who would be fine (and have been in the past) with the same funamentalist nonsense as long as they keep their low taxes, subsidies and deregulated business.

The people the Glazers are in bed with have done far more damage to far more people on a global scale (and probably within the US population alone) than Dubai ever could.

The difference is the Glazers own us to turn a short term profit. The arabs are likely to have a less myopic game plan.

Whoever has amassed the wealth needed to buy is in 99,9% of cases, complete and utter human garbage.

Finding a less scummy person/institution than Dubai to get us out from under the glazers is a relatively unimportant consideration to me.
Click to expand...
Get off the high horse. There are gay people in Dubai too. Living their life and it doesn't have to be up to your standards. Funny how gay folks in the west used to be downtrodden now they look down on entire cultures based on them not meeting their high standards.

The world isn't perfect dude. Get out and visit some other places and maybe you'll learn to respect other cultures.
 
Boondog said:
Get off the high horse. There are gay people in Dubai too. Living their life and it doesn't have to be up to your standards. Funny how gay folks in the west used to be downtrodden now they look down on entire cultures based on them not meeting their high standards.

The world isn't perfect dude. Get out and visit some other places and maybe you'll learn to respect other cultures.
Click to expand...

What part of that post do you think is them disrespecting Dubai?
 
crossy1686 said:
I most certainly have mate! Will be interesting to see what happens tomorrow to the stock, I’ll keep an eye on when the market opens.

The money spent this window doesn’t make sense unless you factor in a sale.
Click to expand...

FYI…. US stock market is closed tomorrow for Labor Day.
 
syrian_scholes said:
Oh right, it's okay to use movie refrences in a racist tone, forgot that.
Click to expand...

In a thread where you could actually pick some examples of racism, it's crazy that you picked out the star wars sand quote

Boondog said:
Acting like they are not worthy of owning this team due to parading about on his high horse.
Click to expand...

Reread their post. They're explicitly stating why they wouldn't have a problem with a Dubai sale
 
Cascarino said:
In a thread where you could actually pick some examples of racism, it's crazy that you picked out the star wars sand quote



Reread their post. They're explicitly stating why they wouldn't have a problem with a Dubai sale
Click to expand...
Dammit quoted the wrong post. Excuse me @VanDeBank
 
Mickeza said:
No. I want people to actually engage their brain when they demand the glazers sell and think who outside of an investment group, American/any other nationality billionaire looking to grow the asset for profit or a state for sportwashing will be willing to spend 4 billion on a fecking football club with 600m debt and hundreds of millions required in infrastructure investment. Jim sounds like the dream because at least he’s a fan - but instead of publicly declaring his interest he needs to get a group together and bid. That’s how it works.
Click to expand...

A lot of people are engaging their brains, and there are threads for it. This thread is about a tyranny living of slavery buying the club to work as a public telations firm for them, and people are reacting that here in this thread. This is not the thread to ask for ‘alternatives’, because this is a worse evil than the existing alternatives.
 
Forget all the shite about it being FM with a money cheat code, we might get an insanely engineered South Stand upgrade out of this :drool:
 
Do care what anyone says, they'd be Dubai ous owners.
 
‘Dubai is one of the greatest cities in the world.’

Yes, if you like torturing and jailing people wh defend human rights.
https://www.gc4hr.org/report/view/156

‘They're doing a lot of things right.’

Sure, if it’s right denying half the people basic freedoms and allow violence towards them unpunished.

https://www.civicus.org/index.php/m...in-the-face-of-systematic-human-rights-abuses

‘I know this is hard to understand, but there are other cultures in this world who do not value everything the same way you do.’

There is. Kim Jong Il’s culture of despotism in North Korea. Mussolini’s culture of fascism in Italy in 1940. Kong Leopold’s culture of slavery in the 1880’s. These are just instances. There are many. Mohammed al Maktoum’s human trafficking, prostitution and workers slavery of 85 percent of the people is something I value differently to him. Do you value it?
 
Mr Pigeon said:
Forget all the shite about it being FM with a money cheat code, we might get an insanely engineered South Stand upgrade out of this :drool:
Click to expand...

We might even get a New Trafford instead, with a capacity of 100k+. And Mbappe, Haaland as strikers. Question is if we want to walk that path.
 
Vapor trail said:
No it's not, compared to most domestic clubs united have spent obscene amounts of money and the planning has been diabolical. The glazers is the only differentiation between United and City and the results are night and day. Money is not an answer to diligence it takes vision, strategy and implementation to pioneer development. Sure City have the resources to make these things tangible but they come from astute minds.

City are a very well run club. The scouting, to the infrastructure to the first team players and the DOF. Everything is cohesive that's why Pep leaving eventually will not make or break the club they will continue to remain competitive unless something unexpected happens. Who the Glazers sell the club to fans have no real influence over its whoever pays the amount. What's telling is that the recent developments and signs point towards a sale being closer compared to any other period they have had ownership.
Click to expand...
We're nowhere near as rich as City are. When you talk about "we've spent obscene amount of money on transfers", you're also forgetting the fact that that money comes from somewhere else - infrastructure, for example. City don't have that problem. They can easily spend the same amount as we do on transfers and renovate and improve their whole club. They have the best club academy at the moment despite them spending obscene amount of money. We don't. See the difference? Where do you think City would be if they suddenly lost their capital and had to rely on the club's resources? i give them 5 years at best before they slip up fighting for midtable places.

If the Glazers had unlimited money, we'd be a well run club, too, I would imagine. But they don't. This is a profit venture for them and as such they neither have the desire nor the capacity to fund United to the top.

A well club for me would be Real Madrid - still have a lot of money but it's the club's money and it is always spent wisely by Perez. Very shrewd management there. City are just like PSG - remove their hijab and they'll be as plain as any other club.
 
A lot of this morality crap argument (and it is a crap argument, of course the UAE state and the Dubai royal family are abhorrent human rights abusers with terrible human rights records) misses the point.

There's no good reason for a state to own a football club. States buy football clubs for bad reasons, it's called sportswashing. We have no reason to accept our club being used in that way, winning football matches is not worth it.
 
Sviken said:
A well club for me would be Real Madrid - still have a lot of money but it's the club's money and it is always spent wisely by Perez. Very shrewd management there. City are just like PSG - remove their hijab and they'll be as plain as any other club.
Click to expand...

Is this a assumption or facts? They have sold almost everything, or at least a share of everything that can be sold - stadium, stadium name, training facilities, training facilities name, part of their brand. So it depends what you mean with "well".
 
Sviken said:
A well club for me would be Real Madrid - still have a lot of money but it's the club's money and it is always spent wisely by Perez. Very shrewd management there. City are just like PSG - remove their hijab and they'll be as plain as any other club.
Click to expand...

I’m sure somebody will know the full story, but haven’t they been deus ex machina’d out of crippling debt by the Spanish government a couple of times? More loopholes than an amateur knitting class?
 
Can’t wait for United fans to justify this after years of railing at City and PSG. I hope this website will still allow users to post about human rights issues in the ME after the takeover.
 
If it were to be Rashid bin Mohammed Al Maktoum to buy United, I'd feel he'd put the correct infrastructure in place at the club.

Look at what he has done with Dubai.
 
ilrm said:
Can’t wait for United fans to justify this after years of railing at City and PSG. I hope this website will still allow users to post about human rights issues in the ME after the takeover.
Click to expand...

You won't be hearing from us anymore mate - if that ever comes to fruition. @Niall would either be well compensated or silenced and the site will be run by bots.
 
Who cares who owns us as long as they are good owners and put the club first. This holier than thou attitude is very weird, I bet the people the people complaining look up to aren't that great in private either.
 
ilrm said:
Can’t wait for United fans to justify this after years of railing at City and PSG. I hope this website will still allow users to post about human rights issues in the ME after the takeover.
Click to expand...

There would be a lot of mental gymnastics going on with some. Others, like myself, would be appalled.
 
ilrm said:
Can’t wait for United fans to justify this after years of railing at City and PSG. I hope this website will still allow users to post about human rights issues in the ME after the takeover.
Click to expand...
Hm, this coming from the club being bailed out with taxpayers money who removed the cross from their emblem for some cash?
 
For the posts above referencing the City owners.

When Abu Dhabi bought City, they had Gary Cook in charge of the club, and he made many mistakes before calling upon Brian Marwood to oversee the football side of the club. And Marwood was a ex pro footballer who played in the 70s and 80s. He had no experience in a head of football role and was working for Nike when Gary Cook brought him to City. And it was under Brian Marwood in a head of football role that City won the league, 3 years after he took the reigns as the head of football.

The two chaps from Barcelona joined after City had won the league and they were brought to the club by Brian Marwood who took on a less stressful role as the head of football for City's satellite clubs. Abu Dhabi threw money at it and Brian Marwood via Gary Cook worked towards a strategy that paid off in 2012.

City's infrastructure and longterm strategy was put in place by Brian Marwood who had no experience in a structural role at a football club before his arrival in 2009.
 
Last edited:
ilrm said:
Can’t wait for United fans to justify this after years of railing at City and PSG. I hope this website will still allow users to post about human rights issues in the ME after the takeover.
Click to expand...

couldn’t agree with you more, it’s hypocritical at best.
 
ilrm said:
Can’t wait for United fans to justify this after years of railing at City and PSG. I hope this website will still allow users to post about human rights issues in the ME after the takeover.
Click to expand...

I would prefer Ratcliffe but if Dubai guys are actually serious we have to consider it. The trouble is you can't often get the perfect owner which isn't ideal at all
 
I’d honestly rather stick with the Glazers, and this is coming from someone who’s parents are Arab.

As soon as you’re bought by these states you are locked in with them until they’re ready to throw you away, which will be never. If things don’t go as planned then you can’t get rid of them as owners considering no bid would ever tempt them.
 
AussieDevil said:
I’d honestly rather stick with the Glazers, and this is coming from someone who’s parents are Arab.

As soon as you’re bought by these states you are locked in with them until they’re ready to throw you away, which will be never. If things don’t go as planned then you can’t get rid of them as owners considering no bid would ever tempt them.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't want to stick with them leeches
 
croadyman said:
I would prefer Ratcliffe but if Dubai guys are actually serious we have to consider it. The trouble is you can't often get the perfect owner which isn't ideal at all
Click to expand...
There is a world of difference between a billionaire and a state actor.
 
Dion said:
A lot of this morality crap argument (and it is a crap argument, of course the UAE state and the Dubai royal family are abhorrent human rights abusers with terrible human rights records) misses the point.

There's no good reason for a state to own a football club. States buy football clubs for bad reasons, it's called sportswashing. We have no reason to accept our club being used in that way, winning football matches is not worth it.
Click to expand...

This 100%. There should be no allowance for states or their minions to own sports teams.
 
horsechoker said:
Can't we get bought by one of those good countries, you know, like... Iceland?

*waits for someone to tell me how evil Iceland is*
Click to expand...
'good countries'
What a moronic naive pov. You do realise all countries are equally shit?
 
Pronewbie said:
You mean like city and us? What's so bad about state owners who are more accountable than private ones?
Click to expand...
What makes a state owner more accountable? The private owner has far more to lose as it's their own money on the line, and unless they are stupid, will make steps to make sure their investment makes them money. The state uses it's monopoly of force to tax people and subsidise it's mistakes. States are far less accountable than private citizens.
 
The Mitcher said:
What makes a state owner more accountable? The private owner has far more to lose as it's their own money on the line, and unless they are stupid, will make steps to make sure their investment makes them money. The state uses it's monopoly of force to tax people and subsidise it's mistakes. States are far less accountable than private citizens.
Click to expand...
The glazers are accountable to their profit margin, the state is comfortable being accountable to more than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.