If you put it that way, I want us to win the PL this season and also your second choice is flawed from your perspective because I don't want the Qataris to own Man Utd just for the squad's sake. You know full well that we've been lacking in terms of infrastructure, stadium and training facilities, morale and so much more since over a decade. All this is definitely the reason I want the Glazers out. Actually, I don't mind even if Sir Jim took over because it doesn't matter who but I want the rascals out. They might've backed our previous managers but it was only when they were freshly appointed and needed to know that they were backed. Also it was never the right players and never the right system. We should've brought Pep right after SAF retired and imagine the picture then. He would've fixed a lot and was a young hungry coach as well but they didn't because our hierarchy was all wrong. Not until recently have we set things right and we need a reset at the top as well. You cannot say I don't enjoy the journey because I've watched every season since 2003-04 and I've been through a lot of heartbreak. This club and it's fans deserve a lot more than we are getting right now but I'm also happy to convey that EtH has been a delight and everything we asked for.
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.
He didnt say anything about the Muslims as a whole.
It's not equivalent, but it's also no doubt that they are buying allegiances. I'm also quite certain that Qatar wishes that fans support the bid purely on what they promise to do, and not based on other factors, such as equality or human rights. I could go on, but I guess it's no need for me to be the umpteenth person to describe how sportswashing works.
If Ineos gets the club, a lot of fans will be upset but do nothing.
I just wanted to know if Qatar gets the club will the minority against it also do nothing?
I just wanted to know if Qatar gets the club will the minority against it also do nothing?
Qatar doesnt ask for player price
Who could possibly answer you that?
It's a decent number to get an idea of fan opinion, I think RedCafe represents our global fanbase quite well too - Im not that sure about who exactly is voting in The Atheltic poll but interesting to get a completely opposite result
I think thats quite rare in these types of poll to get such a wild difference
Not sure which Twitter polls you refer to and if they are getting enough votes to make them meaningful - feel free to link them, always good to compare different polls on same question
UWS is definitely more representative of matchgoers though, but even among matchgoers I see a fair bit of distrust of the INEOS bid due to Ratcliffe trying to buy Chelsea and Nice struggling
Really I have massive reservations about both bids but will await more details before making an opinion
I doubt many of our fans even thought about 'sportwashing'. They did think their growth was unfair and their fans plastic, whatever that means, but they thought that about Chelsea in exactly the same way.
If had you said wanting a load of free cash too was hypocritical you would have a point, but not with the political stuff.
Thanks. You are right. I mixed up the names, and you probably have a point that they might have a better case then.
So you want them to change their religion? How tolerant of you.
We will undoubtedly see some protest. We'll also unfortunately see some scenes outside Old Trafford like those we saw at City and Newcastle:
I think it's probably a reasonably accurate reflection. There wasn't a notable reaction from the crowd on sunday either. Abramovich and City have changed football forever.
Pep would have failed miserably here, the setup was all wrong and our scouting/recruitment team wasn't good enough. His best team, still to this day, was the initial team he built who got 100 points and the next season won the domestic sweep and it was built on a KDB, Silva, Fernandinho, Aguero, Sterling who he inherited and Sane, Mahrez, Jesus plus the back line he bought after the first season went poorly. Everything City have built is built on a lie/cheating but the recruitment side was vastly superior to ours.
If you have watched us since 03/04 you've literally seen some of our golden years, what are you talking about?
03/04: FA cup winners
05/06: League Cup winners
06/07: PL winners
07/08: One of our greatest ever seasons
08/09: PL and League cup winners
09/10: League Cup winners
10/11: PL winners
12/13: PL winners
15/16: FA cup winners
16/17: Europa and League cup winners
Last edited:
Just to add to that - KSA's sovereign wealth fund is the official majority owner (with 80%) of Newcastle, yet they managed to "convince" the Premier League that there won't be any state involvement in the running of the club, so would be surprised if a significantly way more diffuse connection to the State of Qatar would pass as state-owned in this case.
We will undoubtedly see some protest. We'll also unfortunately see some scenes outside Old Trafford like those we saw at City and Newcastle:
Most United fans I know from Manchester are leaning towards Qatar. I think it's probably generational thing.
This is what gets me. I wish some would own their hypocrisy or whatever you want to call it about Qatari ownership. This notion that the Qatari ownership group will clear debts and invest in the infrastructure, all while not financially doping, sports washing, or caring about ROI, is deliberate naivety at best.
My fundamental issue is the Glazers rate, which is strangling the club, refers to a 500M loan from the originally bargain buy.
If the rate is the same but the amount now 7x-10x that surely we are completely fecked? Feels like cutting the nose to spite the face.
I don't see any guarantee Ratcliffe is going to be any better. In fact, I'm at the point I'd rather skint owners than some Boehly type excited with his new toy and randomly signing players for fun. We've just literally had 10 years of that and it got us nowhere.
What generation is represented by the majority?
You seem to be confused, seriously. Kindly check your facts well before arguing. The Sheikh 's father was the former prime minister of Qatar. His father has a lot of properties in the UK.
A lot of strong opinions on here. I just want to know what people are willing to do. I can tell you right now if Ineos takeover I’ll be angry but I will do absolutely nothing but vent on here everytime they mess up.
I've mainly spoken to younger fans.
I’m like you. I really don’t want a Todd Boehly. Going back to the Woodward era would finish me.
That's interesting because I would assume that it's also the generation that is on social media all the time and was made aware of Qatar's transgressions the most.
Everything you have said here is false. - Luke Skywalker
It would be nice if people don't make wrong claims out of thin air and then present them as facts.
Baseless racism accusation
Sounds about right. Older fans unfortunately will not want the club to be owned by a brown man. Unfortunate but it’s just the society we are in. In an ironic way it’s similar to the fight we have with the Middle East and human rights.
Hopefully as the years pass things change.
Fair.
I just meant nobody can answer you that. Of course people tend to have strong opinions online but rarely go beyond that in their actions. But we'll see.
Totally wrong! Jassim 's father wasn't the Emir. Stop throwing dust into people's eyes.
Very naive view. Of course an owners politics or way of thinking will impact the club.
You polled, @Spoony's acquaintances?
Totally agree. Both the bids we know about have a mix of positives and negatives. Plus we don't know majority of the detail, only their PR.
If they can't even make a commitment that LGBTQ fans will never be discriminated against in any capacity at United then they shouldn't take over.
Yeah. I had to explain Human rights and then gave them the option to re-vote.
Qataris cheated at PSG and Malaga. Do you your homework. They would cheat here too.
Honestly this is a decision I'm glad I don't have to make, because I simply don't have the full insight required to do it. But let's throw out my line of thinking anyway.
Firstly, morals/ethics. I have an instant distrust of any billionaire so I don't believe the Ineos bid is suddenly/magically going to mean that we're in a clean situation when compared with Qatar. It wouldn't shock me if Ineos have a lot of business with Qatar or other states with questionable morals. Does this make them okay because it's a third party situation? I just assume anyone who takes us over is going to have done, endorsed or enabled a lot of terrible practices. The key difference is that with Qatar it's more in the spotlight because of the World Cup. It's sort of like how people complain that footballers earn way too much when in reality they earn a pittance compared to what you can get in the business world. The spotlight is on the footballer, so they get targeted by the public far more than those who grow up in a corporate environment. I reckon it's probably similar for Ineos. For me, based on endless precedent, I assume billionaires are guilty until proven innocent. Probably not fair, but if you want to argue that we should assume innocent until proven guilty, we should question why we slam on this particular, specific Qatar investment fund when they have yet to be convicted of any crime that I'm aware of. So as I say, you can assume guilty or assume innocent, but for me that still paints both options with the same brush.
With morals out of the way, the second thing I'd want is for fans to own the majority of the club. I don't expect this to happen regardless of who wins the bidding process. Short of government or FIFA/UEFA/FA enforced regulations, I don't think this will ever happen again, sadly.
With morals and fan ownership out of the way, we're left with who we feel will run the club better on football and financial fronts. For the football front, I think it's genuinely not possible for us folk to have any clue who will be smarter about how they work the football side of the club. I'm not sure anyone at all has any firm clue regarding this, to be honest. For the financial side, I think the Qatari group is better placed, it's safe to say. The financial side will impact the football side, too, so that does have a slight edge there but again it's just not enough to say they'll be better with any real certainty.
The financial edge is literally the only way I can separate the options so with that in mind, for now I vote for the Qatari group.
Regardless of who wins, I hope that it adds notable pressure on both of them to perform ethically and morally in all they do, because of course I do. I just don't have faith that either would be an ethical company because in my opinion you don't earn billions by being an ethical, moral company.
Firstly, morals/ethics. I have an instant distrust of any billionaire so I don't believe the Ineos bid is suddenly/magically going to mean that we're in a clean situation when compared with Qatar. It wouldn't shock me if Ineos have a lot of business with Qatar or other states with questionable morals. Does this make them okay because it's a third party situation? I just assume anyone who takes us over is going to have done, endorsed or enabled a lot of terrible practices. The key difference is that with Qatar it's more in the spotlight because of the World Cup. It's sort of like how people complain that footballers earn way too much when in reality they earn a pittance compared to what you can get in the business world. The spotlight is on the footballer, so they get targeted by the public far more than those who grow up in a corporate environment. I reckon it's probably similar for Ineos. For me, based on endless precedent, I assume billionaires are guilty until proven innocent. Probably not fair, but if you want to argue that we should assume innocent until proven guilty, we should question why we slam on this particular, specific Qatar investment fund when they have yet to be convicted of any crime that I'm aware of. So as I say, you can assume guilty or assume innocent, but for me that still paints both options with the same brush.
With morals out of the way, the second thing I'd want is for fans to own the majority of the club. I don't expect this to happen regardless of who wins the bidding process. Short of government or FIFA/UEFA/FA enforced regulations, I don't think this will ever happen again, sadly.
With morals and fan ownership out of the way, we're left with who we feel will run the club better on football and financial fronts. For the football front, I think it's genuinely not possible for us folk to have any clue who will be smarter about how they work the football side of the club. I'm not sure anyone at all has any firm clue regarding this, to be honest. For the financial side, I think the Qatari group is better placed, it's safe to say. The financial side will impact the football side, too, so that does have a slight edge there but again it's just not enough to say they'll be better with any real certainty.
The financial edge is literally the only way I can separate the options so with that in mind, for now I vote for the Qatari group.
Regardless of who wins, I hope that it adds notable pressure on both of them to perform ethically and morally in all they do, because of course I do. I just don't have faith that either would be an ethical company because in my opinion you don't earn billions by being an ethical, moral company.
Seamlessly! Do you know how many migrant workers died to make that World Cup "seamless" ?
Ha ha, the same.
I will feel exactly how i felt when Ole got contract. Absolutely devasted with knowing that our future is fighting for top 4 trophy.
For me this is now crossroads where we can go in glory path to become no1 club in the world (and England) or we can go on ...Spurs path.
I don't think any Western Arab-owned football clubs have actively sought to undermine their LGBTQ+ fanbase. Generally - and this is based entirely from my surface perception - they've aligned with local attitudes towards the issues.