The Glazer Reign Is Crumbling

Originally Posted by Stickman

Jim needs better PR.

His PR was pitch perfect. The number of people on here who have fallen in love with the local lad narrative. Even to the extent where keeping the Glazers around is acceptable.

Originally Posted by Hyman_Roth

They’ve brought the Middle East heat in more ways than one - that’s fo sho.

Apologies in advance if me claiming the Middle East has high temperatures is deemed racist.

Fountz

Who said you was racist?

Originally Posted by shenwen

His PR was pitch perfect. The number of people on here who have fallen in love with the local lad narrative. Even to the extent where keeping the Glazers around is acceptable.



Who said you was racist?

I think he could do more in terms of sharing high level plans that would get supporters onside.

- Doing X with the debt
- Y with the stadium and training facilities
- Z investment available for players next window to back ETH

I feel the lack of public knowledge on these items has hurt him with your average supporter, myself included if honest.

Shares are up 16.34% after hours!!!

Either multimillionaires are playing poker chips with their dollars, or the hedge funds have some inside information.

Fingers crossed for Qatar.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/quote/M....tsrc=fin-srch

The riches these Glazer @#%&!s are going to enjoy, regardless who buys the club, is sickening. Especially if a deal includes settling the debt. Did they ever put any of their own money into the club?

It's almost as if INEOS are conducting their business properly and professionally, and unlike other parties that have bid, aren't leaking utter nonsense on an almost daily basis and using a bot army on twitter to try and drum up support and muddy the rival bidder.

Almost as if INEOS is a proper, respectable business going through the negotiations properly, and not a despot state that seems to have trouble conducting football business respectfully and legally.

Originally Posted by shenwen

His PR was pitch perfect. The number of people on here who have fallen in love with the local lad narrative. Even to the extent where keeping the Glazers around is acceptable.



Who said you was racist?

Preferable to Qatari ownership hands down.

People claiming they want the Qataris because otherwise the Glazers might some some minority stake with zero control just stinks of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Actually it stinks of bullshit, because most probably don't really give a shit about that the Glazers having a minority stake and zero control, and just get hot under the collar at the thought of broken competition with bottomless pockets. Unfortunately admitting that would effectively be admitting they're the same as the plastic City fans they've been deriding for the past 15 years.

https://twitter.com/utdfaithfuls/status/1668385850814615552?s=46&t=GmThxTwvA3dB-7-ot5Dfuw

real chads look at option chains and not just the share price

Originally Posted by AK14

https://twitter.com/utdfaithfuls/sta...A3dB-7-ot5Dfuw

The tweet he retweeted, from Faisal Islam, doesn’t actually say that.

Originally Posted by Ethers

The tweet he retweeted, from Faisal Islam, doesn’t actually say that.

Just saw it… I hate these lying bastard twitter accounts.

He has said this on some podcast though.

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1668372627193225216?s=46&t=GmThxTwvA3dB-7-ot5Dfuw

https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1668389182513840130?s=46&t=GmThxTwvA3dB-7-ot5Dfuw

I also can’t find his tweet saying this

https://twitter.com/centredevils/status/1668493696365637633?s=46&t=GmThxTwvA3dB-7-ot5Dfuw

I’m guessing that was also on the same podcast.

Bloody podcasts. We want easily linked, 40-word tweets please guys, Jesus.

Apparently because of the spike, United could well be forced to issue either a confirmation or denial to the stock exchange today? And this can’t be bullshit, they have to be truthful with it or they can get into a lot of trouble.

Interesting day ahead I reckon.

Originally Posted by shenwen

His PR was pitch perfect. The number of people on here who have fallen in love with the local lad narrative. Even to the extent where keeping the Glazers around is acceptable.


?

You’re talking shit. again.

My main reason for preferring Jim is because I don’t want football to be dominated by clubs owned by Middle East states, I think state ownership is bad for football, I don’t want United to be owned in the same way PSG and City are, I don’t want owners that feel it’s fine to openly cheat and effectively destroy the competition, I don’t want United to become all the things I think is wrong about city, I don’t respect the countries involved and I don’t think they’re good examples of progressive states with fair rules. I also know the only reason any fan wants ME ownership is because they think that through that route, the club involved has unlimited fund to buy any players it wants - that it can easily dominate a sport that’s built on fair competition. I think the people that want that are clueless vacuous dicks.

Now put Jim up against the red knights or some other united affiliated buyer then I think there would be a debate worth having but as it is, there isn’t.

Originally Posted by Hyman_Roth

You’re talking shit. again.

My main reason for preferring Jim is because I don’t want football to be dominated by clubs owned by Middle East states, I think state ownership is bad for football, I don’t want United to be owned in the same way PSG and City are, I don’t want owners that feel it’s fine to openly cheat and effectively destroy the competition, I don’t want United to become all the things I think is wrong about city, I don’t respect the countries involved and I don’t think they’re good examples of progressive states with fair rules. I also know the only reason any fan wants ME ownership is because they think that through that route, the club involved has unlimited fund to buy any players it wants - that it can easily dominate a sport that’s built on fair competition. I think the people that want that are clueless vacuous dicks.

Now put Jim up against the red knights or some other united affiliated buyer then I think there would be a debate worth having but as it is, there isn’t.

Most people that want Qatar (me in this instance) want them because of the options on the table.

Seruous question, why can't Ratcliffe buy United outright if he's so loaded? Just get it done if you want it surely?

Originally Posted by Hyman_Roth

You’re talking shit. again.

My main reason for preferring Jim is because I don’t want football to be dominated by clubs owned by Middle East states, I think state ownership is bad for football, I don’t want United to be owned in the same way PSG and City are, I don’t want owners that feel it’s fine to openly cheat and effectively destroy the competition, I don’t want United to become all the things I think is wrong about city, I don’t respect the countries involved and I don’t think they’re good examples of progressive states with fair rules. I also know the only reason any fan wants ME ownership is because they think that through that route, the club involved has unlimited fund to buy any players it wants - that it can easily dominate a sport that’s built on fair competition. I think the people that want that are clueless vacuous dicks.

Now put Jim up against the red knights or some other united affiliated buyer then I think there would be a debate worth having but as it is, there isn’t.

There also feels an inevitability about it. Before the Glazers were willing to sell, we all seemed to agree that they only way they’d piss off is it they got stupid money from an ME state. And it’s looking that way. There was always a magic number where the Glazers would sell and the only people likely/able to pay were them.

Originally Posted by MUFC One Love

Seruous question, why can't Ratcliffe buy United outright if he's so loaded? Just get it done if you want it surely?

He can't front it.

Originally Posted by MUFC One Love

Seruous question, why can't Ratcliffe buy United outright if he's so loaded? Just get it done if you want it surely?

I've asked this but nobody seems to have an answer. It's truly baffling. "Big United fan, loves the club" but won't shift the worst thing to happen to the club since Munich. Its a bit odd that he's one of the richest men on the planet, his company makes billions a year - but he won't, or can't, afford to remove the parasites.

Originally Posted by magic_cantona

I've asked this but nobody seems to have an answer. It's truly baffling. "Big United fan, loves the club" but won't shift the worst thing to happen to the club since Munich. Its a bit odd that he's one of the richest men on the planet, his company makes billions a year - but he won't, or can't, afford to remove the parasites.

This is my concern with him. We hear about INEOS turnover and how he’s x times richer than Abramovich and Bohely, yet it’s all very ‘half now, half later’. If he was coming in with the same kind of promises as Qatar, none (or very few at least) people would choose Qatar over him.

Originally Posted by MUFC One Love

Seruous question, why can't Ratcliffe buy United outright if he's so loaded? Just get it done if you want it surely?

I suspect it’s because he knows two of the glazer siblings don’t want to sell United and want to keep an investment stake in the club. The glazers control who the club gets sold to so he’s doing what he thinks he needs to do to take control. He also needs to find a way of doing that whilst securing overall control of the club. Which his proposal does.

I think those that have a massive problem with that are wrong. Minority investors don’t have influence or control. They’re just investors. So what if it’s people we don’t like?

Originally Posted by Hyman_Roth

You’re talking shit. again.

My main reason for preferring Jim is because I don’t want football to be dominated by clubs owned by Middle East states, I think state ownership is bad for football, I don’t want United to be owned in the same way PSG and City are, I don’t want owners that feel it’s fine to openly cheat and effectively destroy the competition, I don’t want United to become all the things I think is wrong about city, I don’t respect the countries involved and I don’t think they’re good examples of progressive states with fair rules. I also know the only reason any fan wants ME ownership is because they think that through that route, the club involved has unlimited fund to buy any players it wants - that it can easily dominate a sport that’s built on fair competition. I think the people that want that are clueless vacuous dicks.

Now put Jim up against the red knights or some other united affiliated buyer then I think there would be a debate worth having but as it is, there isn’t.

Great post....

Shiny new transfer crew in bits...

Ask the Geordies which owner they prefer. The current ones or successful businessman Mike Ashley?