Sir Jim Ratcliffe has moved a significant step closer to securing Manchester United with the Glazers and their New York bankers ready to discuss details of a sale with the British petrochemicals billionaire.
The Times understands from sources close to the deal that the Glazers and The Raine Group are now willing to enter final talks with Ratcliffe and his team at Ineos to thrash out the world-record deal.
Insiders believe that valuation, and Ratcliffe’s willingness to agree a deal that enables Joel and Avram Glazer to retain a 20 per cent stake in the club has proved a significant factor. The Qataris’ third and final offer for a 100 per cent buy-out came in below £5 billion, despite claims to the contrary.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jim-ratcliffe-closing-in-on-manchester-united-takeover-f8sx6h73g
Looks like the Glazers are finally facking off lads, albeit not completely as they’re gonna be minority stakeholders. Qatar aren’t in this unless they up their bid in the 11th hour.
Ratcliffe closing in
posted on 13/5/23
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
posted 15 minutes ago
“Utd being used as a political tool for Qatar to cover.uo their awful regime will never be acceptable in my eyes.”
I don’t believe that’s very high on their list of ambitions at all. Football brings them an international diplomatic profile, would of thought that’s first and foremost where the interest comes from. If the idea was to cover up their regime, they would have been better not getting involved with sport at all - never had the spotlight on them so much as the World Cup, where before PSG most people probably wouldn’t have known what continent Qatar was in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your point, it does bring a spotlight but it is part of their ambitions. They’re not stupid with money but they don’t do around these people and long-term they make a return. But, as opposed to an American consortium type, I think making a return is equalled by their desire to change what people think of when their country is mentioned and events like the WC, brands like Manchester United will help do that. It’s brand enhancement where the country is their brand.
I obviously didn’t watch / read the coverage from every country but did every country focus on the human rights aspect to the their WC hosting? As much as we did for example?
posted on 13/5/23
*they don’t fk around
posted on 13/5/23
Money talks and their big money investments have been ‘welcomed’ for years because money is money in business for the most part.
But where they lack is general public support and consumption. This will help tourism and all sorts.
Don’t get me wrong, it might also help them change their ways (if we can be so arrogant to determine what other states should or shouldn’t do) via increased multiculturalism and if that happens then it’s a win-win. But that will take a very long time, if ever imo.
posted on 13/5/23
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 31 minutes ago
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
posted 15 minutes ago
“Utd being used as a political tool for Qatar to cover.uo their awful regime will never be acceptable in my eyes.”
I don’t believe that’s very high on their list of ambitions at all. Football brings them an international diplomatic profile, would of thought that’s first and foremost where the interest comes from. If the idea was to cover up their regime, they would have been better not getting involved with sport at all - never had the spotlight on them so much as the World Cup, where before PSG most people probably wouldn’t have known what continent Qatar was in.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Get your point, it does bring a spotlight but it is part of their ambitions. They’re not stupid with money but they don’t do around these people and long-term they make a return. But, as opposed to an American consortium type, I think making a return is equalled by their desire to change what people think of when their country is mentioned and events like the WC, brands like Manchester United will help do that. It’s brand enhancement where the country is their brand.
I obviously didn’t watch / read the coverage from every country but did every country focus on the human rights aspect to the their WC hosting? As much as we did for example?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The bribed their way to host that world cup in which they allowed many migrants to die needlessly building it for them.
They don't want Utd to make money that's for sure. 5bn to Glazers and a further 2-3bn on stadium and training ground. That's not a wise investment and there are much easier ways to make money if that was their goal. So what do they want? Political favour and a vehicle for tourism to Doha most likely.
Hopefully we don't get them. Only Tinpot clubs without a hope in hell have to stoop that low. 😉
posted on 13/5/23
According to Man United website....Manchester United actually have 1.1 Billion fans worldwide.
(It must be an official figure).
posted on 13/5/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 4 minutes ago
According to Man United website....Manchester United actually have 1.1 Billion fans worldwide.
(It must be an official figure).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just in the UK.
posted on 13/5/23
Re the OP title. Did Vonk misplace a header towards Ratcliffe?
posted on 13/5/23
“The bribed their way to host that world cup in which they allowed many migrants to die needlessly building it for them.”
So why would they do that if they wanted to hide that from the world? It doesn’t make any sense. If you look at the size of Qatar on a map, and the countries that sit around it, it’s not hard to see the diplomatic advantage hosting events like the World Cup bring.
Putting it down to ‘another case of classic sportswashing’ is just lazy, and based on a weird assumption that all Middle Eastern billionaires get involved with football clubs with the same motivation
posted on 13/5/23
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 24 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 4 minutes ago
According to Man United website....Manchester United actually have 1.1 Billion fans worldwide.
(It must be an official figure).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's just in the UK.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That’s just rdd (as clockwork already alluded)
posted on 13/5/23
comment by gratedbean (U4885)
posted 10 minutes ago
“The bribed their way to host that world cup in which they allowed many migrants to die needlessly building it for them.”
So why would they do that if they wanted to hide that from the world? It doesn’t make any sense. If you look at the size of Qatar on a map, and the countries that sit around it, it’s not hard to see the diplomatic advantage hosting events like the World Cup bring.
Putting it down to ‘another case of classic sportswashing’ is just lazy, and based on a weird assumption that all Middle Eastern billionaires get involved with football clubs with the same motivation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Trying to debate with the special needs rag is not the easiest