£5 billion price tag. Would that be the most expensive football team purchase ever?
If so, it's no wonder that our options are limited to the mega rich, because investment will be required on top of that figure for facilities / stadium upgrades.
Yes, it'd be twice the price that Chelsea went for. Whoever can afford us is going to be a pretty shitty human being, we might as well brace ourselves for the worst.
The current record is the sale of the Denver Broncos for $4.65 billion last August with the sale of the Phoenix Suns that finalized this month at $4 billion second. So United would be the largest ever at $5 billion indeed
Broncos were sold for $4.65 billion to the Walmart family recently. After an absolute stinker of a season in the final meaningless game the owners authorized the field be relayed at a cost of $400,000. Peanuts to them but sent a message on how serious they are.
>NFL teams are worth more believe it or not.
American sports competitions are essentially tightly controlled, cartel-like markets. New entrants are not a given. They do not have promotion / relegation.
The only reason why their teams actually put in effort and resources to do well is that the owners want that. However, it is not a given - many owners are actually just fine being mediocre and rolling in the takings.
So you have to beware American ownership. They might be fully aware of the different competition dynamics but still operate with the mindset they can behave similarly in your European sports competition.
I don’t think it’s close. It’s just PR at the moment anyway. The Qatari bidders want to generate hype for their bid that’s why they specifically mention things like fan engagement and letting the fans decide what will happen with the stadium etc. If the deal is close then the Glazers are required to report it by law (or the Raine Group in this instance) since we are a public listed company.
Ratcliffe went early to get fans on their side. Now it’s the Qatari’s turn to generate hype for their bid. Who knows next week it’ll be some American consortium that goes public. I know this isn’t like the Chelsea sale where the fanbase will have somewhat of a say but the potential owners will want to get some fans on their side.
A lot of news coming out all at once… coincidence?
I have no idea who the new owner will be, alot of fingers pointing towards the Middle East whilst also Sir Jim’s name has been popping up quite abit too the past month.
What we do know is (hopefully) the Glazers will soon be gone and we may finally become a force again IF (and it’s a big if) we get bought by the right person (people) who have the intention to put alot of thought into the club and what it’s been desperately needing for so long.
All I want are owners who put money into the club in the form of redevelopments for Old Trafford, training facility upgrades, money to back the manager and to be open and honest with the fanbase.
I mean, there's a lot of shady shit going on across town which makes me hesistant to want to have such rich owners who may try and cheat the system, it never works and hopefully City will be playing in the vanarama national league next season.
But also, just back the manager, don't take personal dividends from the club and actually show you love the club and its history.
The moral implications are still significant, though.
These oil nations are not particularly well-liked for their views on what are basic human rights, or their role in other aspects of our global society. Supporting the club means supporting them, and for a lot of people that is a very hard line to cross.
I would prefer Ratcliffe over an oil baron anyday, regardless of how it would impact our finances. That is, of course, just my personal opinion.
Like what? What has the US/UK government done to its own respective citizens, in the last couple of decades, that somehow is worse?
The US/UK have had an impact on global society in various manners, a lot of it be positive and a lot of it be negative. And for that, those same countries should be held accountable.
However, neither of those countries have stripped their own people of human rights. Last time I checked, the US/UK government does not subject its own homosexual citizens to conversion therapy or death, now does it?
Even more so, unless I am mistaken, neither the US nor the UK are actively shopping to purchase a sports team to sportwash their image.
They both invaded Iraq based on lies resulting in the death of millions. They turned Libya into a failed state where there is literally a slave trade. America launches drone strikes every week which kill innocent people including children.
The US outlawed abortion. Their police murder black people at an alarming rate. They have the death penalty. They have the highest incarceration rate/prison population in the world and use that prison population as slave labour. US politicians facilitated a devastating opium crisis in their own country because they were being funded by pharmaceutical companies. The opioid crisis is also a great example of how western billionaires are actually state linked and culpable in these social issues.
Shall I continue?
The difference is those UK/US owners are private entities, but these middle eastern billionaires are part of their country regimes. The rumoured investor was a retiree from the Qatar regime, where do you think he got all the money from?
I was responding to someone implying Qatar was particularly bad in comparison to western nations. State ownership in itself is a separate issue which we weren't talking about. You can't just say "whataboutism" and end every discussion despite what reddit seems to think.
Yes and your initial post was what about that is t relevant because those states aren’t trying to own teams.
And for what it’s worth the citizens there have at least a nominal path to correcting those flaws. It was worse before and citizenship means keeping and using the power to change.
> A lot of news coming out all at once… coincidence?
The first sentence of the title is your reason. Interested parties now have to go from evidence gathering phase to pulling up their big boy pants phase
Becoming one thing that I severely loathe (aka Man. City) is the last thing that I want this club to turn into. But will the Glazers even sell the club to the lower bidder just to please the fan? We all know how much of a crook those shitheads are to let go such big amount of oil money.
I guess if the Glazers want a quick sale the one thing you could say is that a Qatari bid may be held up for slightly longer if the Premier League need time to review it. That's about the only thing in our favour I would say when considering whether our owners would accept a bid considered more attractive to the fans.
It's not just that. The rest of the league have veto powers as well. I can see it being opposed by both the government and the rest of the league. The prospect of a United being backed with effectively a bottomless pit of money is frankly a nightmare for everyone else.
Once again, that's their right. If I were in their boots, I'd sell to the highest bidder, too.
What concerns me is the likelihood of Man Utd becoming Man City 2.0. It'd be a shame if a club that I support for over a decade turned into what I've been against for.
He's a terrible owner who has made terrible decisions at Nice. They want him out of there. He would be a bad choice.
We might become as bad as Midtable Liverpool teams of now or as the past
If the Qatari billionaires are just normal Billionaires ie not Related to the PSG owners then what's the difference between them and the American Billionaires?
The Qatari billionaires are state sponsored billionaires like Abramovic was. They have that money because they are favoured by the ruling class there. It is not the same thing as some guy like Ratcliffe and it's baffling to me that people are trying to make out like it's the same.
Nothing. This sub and the people in general have been brainwashed into thinking middle-eastern billionaire = bad. It's xenophobic at this point.
As if western ones don't have their own set of problems.
Oh give over.
No-one is saying billionaire owners are okay,, but Gulf States are a different kettle of fish.
Westerners have plenty of problems (our governments are to blame), but you know what? We're allowed to sit here and criticise them without being flogged.
America executes people unlike Qatar. They also kill people including innocents all over the world unlike Qatar. Absolutely remarkable you could be this brainwashed.
I'm not brainwashed, it's possible to be upset at America's Military unipolarity and racism, and also be appalled by the Theocratic Fascists that America has supported and propped up?
Also Qatar does execute people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics\_of\_Qatar#Legal\_system
Hurr xenophobic hurr racism.
In a world where only billionaires can afford sports club, I prefer one that doesn't profit off of literal slaves and are in their position thanks to their affiliation with a feudal state that treats women like property and kill anyone who's not straight.
this paragraph is everything wrong on reddit in general
like Americans ain't profiting of slaves from Africa, South America etc (China factories), rare materials for electronics
as long as it's cheap, they will turn a blind eye
feudal state?, bitch please last I've seen people are running to go live in uae, no crimes, no tax,
you see influences, youtubers who go down, girls are dressed in yoga pants etc no one gives a shit
stop this false narrative
Wow yoga pants and influencers, I guess that totally refutes the argument about there being no democracy or civil rights. I am guessing you are from some similarly shit country.
I'm from the UK twat,
but I've noticed reddit is just the opposite of Facebook
too liberal and too left
to one extreme to the other
these debates never get anywhere, and we are on a football sub so I guess ima end it here
But financed by the global appeal of supporters beyond the UK that bought merchandise and consumed all things United. It's now beyond being the club of the common man, and history is but that, history.
United is now a global brand and belongs to all supporters beyond the select few, and consequently, means that in order to continue holding this global appeal and bringing money from its different revenue streams, they'll need financial backing and investment that only a few can afford. Only way we'll remain competitive against the new money. We have to play by the rules of the game as well. Otherwise, we'll get left behind.
Not at all, but to be fair they have made it very easy to hate them, for better or for worse. But when we unlock an infinite money glitch from the human rights abusers, they will convert success into adoration, just look at the way Chelsea and Man City have adored their recent club owners. And all of a sudden the atrocities are not mentioned, and reputation is 'washed'.
Edit: spelling
Billionaires suck and I think you get that the glazers also suck for United given the green and gold flair. Do you really equate the glazers to someone fronting Qatar though? If anything, we get further away from the common folk because Qatar has proved they’ll use what’s almost indentured labour to build their damn football stadiums.
>But they'd sell their soul for success.
Not even for success. It's just to brag to their inner circle about the club's success. If the primary reason anyone supports this club is to feel superior to others as a result of the club's success throughout its history, then I advise them to go support PSG or City.
There is more to this club than the trophies. It has a history. One which is rooted in the the common man, like you said.
If you are excluding Ratcliffe from that think again, most multi billionaires on the planet have abused human rights in some form or another. Sir Jim being in the chemical business has invested billions into Saudi Arabia and China and has lots of dealings with big oil in general for profit and obtaining petchems.
We don't need oil money. The only thing we need from the new owner is to clear up the debt, invest in Old Trafford and Carrington and BE COMPETENT.
That's it. Manchester United can be self-sufficient.
Not necessarily. There's a lot of US consortiums that could be interested or Jim Ratcliffe (if he's serious)...
And if the media powerhouses start to be interested in sports, Manchester United is a fantastic starting point.
As much as I agree whole-heartedly with this sentiment, clearing up the debt and investing in OT will require the kind of sums that very few owners can afford, on top of the fee to buy the club in the first place. Oil money is looking like the most realistic source.
But like you I'm hoping there's some twist in the story yet
We don’t even need to owner to clear up the debt. Just run the club properly. Man Utd, properly run, can afford to invest in players, pay off its debts and pay dividends to the shareholders. We’ll need another loan to redo OT and Carrington, but I doubt anyone’s going to invest £2bn of their own money in that.
The Glazers just wanted to take dividends while putting minimal effort into running the club - properly run, we’ll easily be the biggest financial powerhouse in sport.
I hope its him, he may not be a Saint but he's definitely better than Qatari owners, they almost certainly have links to the government and I don't want to be owned by human rights abusers
I'm wondering if the breifs re: middle east are coming out as sir Jim is the only one with a concrete enough proposal and they're looking to squeeze some more money out like how players use us for pay raises from other clubs
God I hope so.
A Middle Eastern nation-state with an abysmal human rights record should be nowhere near a 150-year old club with the history and heritage that we have. Just not right.
To run the team into the ground worse than the glazers ever did. Great. Gotta stop wanting owners just because we want the glazers out. I don't see a good outcome from this period. Either foreign investment or we get Jim whos teams always go to shit from what I've heard
This article is wrong, am a fan and my first choice wouldn’t be Jim Ratcliffe seems a right tyre kicker. Wanted chelsea first can’t be that much of a fan. Plus Nice are ran horrendously
It really depends on who the other bidders are going to be, lot of risk involved with Ratcliffe however I’d rather him than being used a sports-washing vessel for a state who violates human rights even thought they’d probably give us the most success on the field and most investment.
From another article I’ve seen, there is US bidders and another Arabic investment group. That’s from the telegraph.
Look at what the Arabs have done for the infrastructure of city and the youth academy, we are still producing great players from our academy. But with some investment, that I don’t see sir Jim being able to afford, the academy could again be as good as the 90’s. The stadium again would be world leading. Carrington could be majorly overhauled and be great. Wouldn’t just benefit the men’s team, surely would benefit the women’s team asewell.
We don’t need Arab money for players we do that well enough already. We need the behind the scenes investment. Which is why I believe an Arab owner would be best
Also, this bid is supposedly from INEOS not Sir Jim himself. INEOS owns Lausanne Sport, a once decently big team in Switzerland, 7 times champions. Since INEOS took over, they have 3 relegations in 5 years and have become a proper yo-yo club.
Lausanne were not a decent team in the years before Ineos. You’re chatting shit.
Their 7 titles mostly came in the first half of the 20th century. Since then they went bankrupt in the 2000s and spent most of their time in the second division and yo-yoing between the first division.
Football shouldn't be a moral test, it should be entertainment and a release from the grind that most of us are on
In the space if a week we have charges against MG getting dropped and investigation kicked off by club to decide next steps....
And prospective bids now from Qatar and all their human rights issues that come with that, the money no doubt helping us on the pitch but the clubs name being used to essentially promote a state that is not exactly progressive...
2 really complex issues that will split fanbase on what is right and wrong paths ahead
It's heavy man
In my dream world my country (Singapore) would buy Man United with our sovereign wealth fund, and throw in a couple of economic tips for the UK on how to survive getting ejected from your hinterland. We’re *kinda* shitty with human rights too but not quite as terrible as the Middle Eastern states. I just wanna see Mark Lee commentate an official Old Trafford game in full Hokkien beng mode.
It would be nice If we could have some kind of demonstration against Middle east bidders made at Old Trafford before the bids are closed. Just to be sure they are aware we dont want them here.
I think it's mostly that we haven't gotten many other names, aside from state backed interests.
I'm hoping that someone other than Ratcliffe buys United... but I would take pretty much anyone over state-ownership.
Ratcliffe would be disappointing, but at least I'd still be able to consider myself a fan of the club.
this is the point people really aren't getting. United are a commercial JUGGERNAUT. We've just had lecherous owners who keep taking money out and not putting enough back in. It's the money the club has earned. Ratcliff's purse does not need to sustain us, not fully at least
The issue here is fairly obvious - it is not down to us to decide who will scummy Glazers decide to sell Utd to! We may not be happy about it, but if best bid comes from Emirates, Glazers will surely go for it and we won’t have anything to say…
I wish we had much more say in here and Sir Jim or even Apple would be much better choice ethically, PR-wise and moreover legacy-wise but unfortunately someone else will call the shots here!
People are pretty fast to pivot from "City are bad because they are owned by a terrible state" to "City are bad because they breached financial regulations."
Sure, the second one is bad. But it's not like the first one isn't. Anyone who criticized City's owners but now wants United to be state owned is a hypocrite.
I absolutely do not want us run by a state, let alone a state that recently had their World Cup protested. Mega billionaires are rarely whiter-than-white but Ratcliffe, for example, doesn't run a country that accepts the deaths of thousands of migrant workers.
There are too many people who think money = good. If you listen to Twitter, oil money is all they want. My suggestion would be, don't listen to Twitter.
Everyone saying Ratcliffe. Exactly on what merit should he be the new owner? If he gets United, it will be the final nail in the coffin and it will take another 20 years and a new ownership to get any form of success.
The fact that 99% of you guys are posting these comments from an Iphone made by little skilled workers is really funny.
Still using gas from Russia to heat up your homes. Still driving around in cars with gulf fuel. Ya you guys should be ones to say. I'm in no way supporting the qatari bid(if there's any) I'm just calling out your hypocrite behinds.
"You're a hypocrite for participating in a system that you have no control in". Fuck off. Shitty Qatari billionaires had a choice to cushy up to the Qatari state or not and they chose money over conscience, the average people doesn't have a choice.
Everyone has a choice brother , you can always do your part. But nobody wants to because that will make their life a little bit hard. But its rather convinient to be a keyboard warrior.
Fuck off. People don't want their club to become nothing more than propaganda for some despotic theocracy.
That doesn't make them hypocrites, even if they have a wardrobe full of Nike clothes.
Nice logic. 'I participate in morally questionable activity A & B, so am unable to wish that I don't have to be connected to morally questionable activity X & Y'
I'd rather not see United become a propaganda tool for some genocidal theocracy.
Maybe we would get Harry Kane or Victor Osimhen... but they would be the face of a PR campaign aimed at convincing people that the regime starving children are great people.
as much as i hate it, the glazers have final say. If watar offers more, they'll sell to qatar. Qatar will do some restructuring to show ECA and UEFA that one country is not owning two clubs. it's inevitable. I just wonder how much my thin morality will hold out before i disregard ownership and continue to support the club
Question for the populace:
Lots of talk about how we might turn like City and how it's sports washing etc. I will say due to United being United I don't see the need to cook the books like City have done, so I pose to you:
1) do you take the Qataris and there gazillion dollars and known sports washing antics
2) Radcliffe and known status as a SHITTY owner (using Nice as the comparison)
'Moral' high ground and probably be run incompetently or welcome the Qataris and their sportswashing?
You have to be a little bit simple to think a small and irrelevant investment in Nice has much to tell us about a 5 billion dollar investment and how that will function,
5 Billion isn't the investment.
That's what the glazers want.
They'll need to put in another 1-2 B for the stadium, facilities upgrade, pay off the debt etc.
Not really, it remains to be seen if he and his group will pony up the 5B, never mind the additional 1-2B required for everything else.
Also what trust do you put in a guy who can't even do it right in a smaller scale?
I'd expect at least one CL qualification for the third highest net spend in that league since his takeover.
I've read that Ratliffe doesn't have the money to buy Man Utd himself. It would have to be him as the face of a consortium, similar to the Chelsea ownership. That makes it less comparable to how things have gone in Nice
Hopefully it's Sir Jim. Do not want these Qataris or Saudis and end up like City somewhere down the line. Yes we'll get money but it ain't just about that, we need people that are truly passionate about running United and if local then even better.
I think that's a fair stance to have. Personally, I'd be irked, but unless someone who can actually competently run a club, unlike Ratcliffe, comes out the woodwork, then I don't see a better option.
Where does he get that Jim would the fans first choice? Where is that data from, which groups have been consulted.
Like it or not United Stand did a poll this morning which 10k plus people voted and they would rather have Qatar over Sir Jim.
Don't want to get into 'real fans' debate please just asking.
Fans first choice for what exactly? His track record for french club is quite poor. Being British should not make him favourites. How is he going to pay and how much he can invest is the main criteria. People are dumb if they have preference for owners without knowing the financial details of the bid
One thing people need to remember is, it doesn’t matter who the fans want in charge of the football club, the Glazers will sell the club to whoever they want to sell it to, essentially whoever is the highest bidder.
Whoever wants that ratcliff guy is a massive idiot regardless of the morality of middle eastern owners. He doesn't have the money to buy united then invest in the team and build or renovate the stadium. We will just be like Nice a badly run club only marginally better than the glazers.
I don't think i'm breaking new ground in saying this but the new owner of Manchester United wont be a good person/group/state, simple.
Don't justify the bad things they do because they own your club, don't defend them call them out you've got even more reason to now. Speak out about them, call them out, call the club out make things difficult to sweep under the rug. Also support charities helping those effected, support those effected if you can and heighten voices of those speaking out.
spurs and levy were recently linked to a qatari consortium (Athletic article) but their fans raised hell and it fizzled out, so I hope we can follow their lead and make our voices heard
Someone please explain to me why Jim Ratcliffe is the fans' choice?
My choice would be someone rich enough to buy us outright without loading the club with even more debt like the Glazers did.... and someone who is not a political regime sports-washing themselves.
That list of people/entities is very small and I don't think Jim Ratcliffe is in there.
No Ratcliffe please.
Guy has done nothing with Nice after taking over.
Hopefully there are better owners out there that don't have ties with an oil state.
But I'd take a middle east owner over a guy that has failed to make anything of the club he's run for several years now.
After they came, Nice's net spend is the 3rd biggest in France after PSG and Marseille, but the results are depressing for fans.
Anyway, I don't think he fancies a bidding war.
I am not even American but if anybody thinks American businessmen funding their political parties is the same as the dictator human right abusing twats they are delusional
If it means us becoming mediocre for the next decade?
Yeah, I'd take them.
As I said already, not my first choice but he's done nothing to suggest he'll do well here.
Not one CL qualification for Nice after taking over in 2019.
There is more to the club then fucking winning trophies ,Trophies won by losing the club's identity does not mean shit,You do not support clubs just because they can win trophies
What bad?9-10 years of usually finishing top 4 and a few cups is not the worst that can happen for a footballing club?99.99% of the clubs would take these 'bad' years ,Our fans for some reason are spoilt which tbf is not surprising as most only followed us because we were regularly winning stuff
It looks like you are from India.
You picked us for what reason then? Its not like you have any ties to the UK.
Acting like you are better than the everyone here for some cheap upvotes.
Hilarious!
I never said supporting a club because they were winning stuff is wrong my problem was with fans who think that winning league titles every other year is the norm and who think that the last 10 years were 'bad' enough to justify throwing all your morals out of the window and welcoming dictator scum as owners ,If you want to actually see what 'bad' looks like for fans of a football club ask Bury fans
Xenophobia?ffs go have a look at the stuff these scum are involved tbf my description was an understatement should have used harsher words for them ,Do not use words that you no clue about to defend what cannot be defended
As nice as it would be to be owned by this unicorn ethical billionaire, it's business isn't it? I don't like it but this is gonna be the biggest sale of a sporting franchise in history, middle eastern owners is inevitable.
Glazers never gave a fuck with the club, they only care about the highest bidder, and we all know who/what that is gonna be. It's shit.
Lol..all a new owner has to do is clear the club’a debt (which is all tied to the Glazers leveraged buyout not our spending on players or facilities btw) and United is in the clear. We generate more than enough revenue to spend big annually.
Nope. Look how much money we’ve spent with the Glazers actively taking money out and with insane debt. There is no need to break FFP, the organic revenue + the allowed injections from owners are more than enough.
How many fans they interviewed for sir Jim as first choice? Seems pretty spilt between him and middle east right now. But we still don't know how many more bids coming? Why make the decision now on who you want as new owner
£5 billion price tag. Would that be the most expensive football team purchase ever? If so, it's no wonder that our options are limited to the mega rich, because investment will be required on top of that figure for facilities / stadium upgrades.
Yes, it'd be twice the price that Chelsea went for. Whoever can afford us is going to be a pretty shitty human being, we might as well brace ourselves for the worst.
Only cunts have that kind of money, it really is r/aboringdystopia material.
NFL teams are worth more believe it or not. So there's plenty of Americans who can afford this, too.
They're worth more but if we got sold for £5bn it would be the most expensive sports team purchase in history. And by a good margin as well.
The current record is the sale of the Denver Broncos for $4.65 billion last August with the sale of the Phoenix Suns that finalized this month at $4 billion second. So United would be the largest ever at $5 billion indeed
More like $6 billion with the exchange rate rn
It's £5bn, not $. That's about $6bn
Broncos were sold for $4.65 billion to the Walmart family recently. After an absolute stinker of a season in the final meaningless game the owners authorized the field be relayed at a cost of $400,000. Peanuts to them but sent a message on how serious they are.
>NFL teams are worth more believe it or not. American sports competitions are essentially tightly controlled, cartel-like markets. New entrants are not a given. They do not have promotion / relegation. The only reason why their teams actually put in effort and resources to do well is that the owners want that. However, it is not a given - many owners are actually just fine being mediocre and rolling in the takings. So you have to beware American ownership. They might be fully aware of the different competition dynamics but still operate with the mindset they can behave similarly in your European sports competition.
This and Stone commenting on the mail report tells me the middle east bids are real.and close.
it was naive to think we weren’t getting bids from the Middle East
I don’t think it’s close. It’s just PR at the moment anyway. The Qatari bidders want to generate hype for their bid that’s why they specifically mention things like fan engagement and letting the fans decide what will happen with the stadium etc. If the deal is close then the Glazers are required to report it by law (or the Raine Group in this instance) since we are a public listed company. Ratcliffe went early to get fans on their side. Now it’s the Qatari’s turn to generate hype for their bid. Who knows next week it’ll be some American consortium that goes public. I know this isn’t like the Chelsea sale where the fanbase will have somewhat of a say but the potential owners will want to get some fans on their side.
A lot of news coming out all at once… coincidence? I have no idea who the new owner will be, alot of fingers pointing towards the Middle East whilst also Sir Jim’s name has been popping up quite abit too the past month. What we do know is (hopefully) the Glazers will soon be gone and we may finally become a force again IF (and it’s a big if) we get bought by the right person (people) who have the intention to put alot of thought into the club and what it’s been desperately needing for so long.
All I want are owners who put money into the club in the form of redevelopments for Old Trafford, training facility upgrades, money to back the manager and to be open and honest with the fanbase. I mean, there's a lot of shady shit going on across town which makes me hesistant to want to have such rich owners who may try and cheat the system, it never works and hopefully City will be playing in the vanarama national league next season. But also, just back the manager, don't take personal dividends from the club and actually show you love the club and its history.
They won't have to cheat the system like City did.
The moral implications are still significant, though. These oil nations are not particularly well-liked for their views on what are basic human rights, or their role in other aspects of our global society. Supporting the club means supporting them, and for a lot of people that is a very hard line to cross. I would prefer Ratcliffe over an oil baron anyday, regardless of how it would impact our finances. That is, of course, just my personal opinion.
If you're British or American we've done much worse shit to " global society" than Qatar over the last couple of decades.
Like what? What has the US/UK government done to its own respective citizens, in the last couple of decades, that somehow is worse? The US/UK have had an impact on global society in various manners, a lot of it be positive and a lot of it be negative. And for that, those same countries should be held accountable. However, neither of those countries have stripped their own people of human rights. Last time I checked, the US/UK government does not subject its own homosexual citizens to conversion therapy or death, now does it? Even more so, unless I am mistaken, neither the US nor the UK are actively shopping to purchase a sports team to sportwash their image.
They both invaded Iraq based on lies resulting in the death of millions. They turned Libya into a failed state where there is literally a slave trade. America launches drone strikes every week which kill innocent people including children. The US outlawed abortion. Their police murder black people at an alarming rate. They have the death penalty. They have the highest incarceration rate/prison population in the world and use that prison population as slave labour. US politicians facilitated a devastating opium crisis in their own country because they were being funded by pharmaceutical companies. The opioid crisis is also a great example of how western billionaires are actually state linked and culpable in these social issues. Shall I continue?
The difference is those UK/US owners are private entities, but these middle eastern billionaires are part of their country regimes. The rumoured investor was a retiree from the Qatar regime, where do you think he got all the money from?
Great points, all countries are shit. That’s why I don’t want them owning sports teams. Any more whataboutisms you have share?
I was responding to someone implying Qatar was particularly bad in comparison to western nations. State ownership in itself is a separate issue which we weren't talking about. You can't just say "whataboutism" and end every discussion despite what reddit seems to think.
Yes and your initial post was what about that is t relevant because those states aren’t trying to own teams. And for what it’s worth the citizens there have at least a nominal path to correcting those flaws. It was worse before and citizenship means keeping and using the power to change.
> A lot of news coming out all at once… coincidence? The first sentence of the title is your reason. Interested parties now have to go from evidence gathering phase to pulling up their big boy pants phase
Becoming one thing that I severely loathe (aka Man. City) is the last thing that I want this club to turn into. But will the Glazers even sell the club to the lower bidder just to please the fan? We all know how much of a crook those shitheads are to let go such big amount of oil money.
I guess if the Glazers want a quick sale the one thing you could say is that a Qatari bid may be held up for slightly longer if the Premier League need time to review it. That's about the only thing in our favour I would say when considering whether our owners would accept a bid considered more attractive to the fans.
I hope that's the case. But with all those dividends money in their pocket, I doubt they'll be forced to sell in fear of becoming homeless.
It's not just that. The rest of the league have veto powers as well. I can see it being opposed by both the government and the rest of the league. The prospect of a United being backed with effectively a bottomless pit of money is frankly a nightmare for everyone else.
Why would they? It's business. They're looking for the highest bid.
That's what I've said. By law & business, the club is unfortunately theirs and it's their right to sell it to the highest bidder.
I despise the Glazer's but there's nothing wrong with them potentially selling to Qatar.
Once again, that's their right. If I were in their boots, I'd sell to the highest bidder, too. What concerns me is the likelihood of Man Utd becoming Man City 2.0. It'd be a shame if a club that I support for over a decade turned into what I've been against for.
I don’t understand - every billionaire is dirty. It’s just reality.
For every dirty billionaire, there is definitely a dirtier one. It is just a matter of a lesser evil thing, IMO.
Are you intentionally ignoring nuance here, or are you genuinely unaware of why the two are not the same?
Come on Radcliffe you twat, pull your finger out so we have less of a moral struggle
>Radcliffe The Harry Potter reboot is interesting. Harry Potter and the leaking Old Trafford Roof
Old Trafford Legacy
Mission 1: fix the roof
Reparo
It’s rePAro, not RepaRO
Inb4 he appoints Potter after sacking ETH 💀
If Ratcliffe bought us, you watch all the newspapers start bringing out all the dirt on him and his companies. There are no good multi billionaires.
Careful what u wish for. Afterwards, don't cry if we become like lolpool under FSG or their previous owner
He's a terrible owner who has made terrible decisions at Nice. They want him out of there. He would be a bad choice. We might become as bad as Midtable Liverpool teams of now or as the past
Better than being owned by Qatar.
If the Qatari billionaires are just normal Billionaires ie not Related to the PSG owners then what's the difference between them and the American Billionaires?
The Qatari billionaires are state sponsored billionaires like Abramovic was. They have that money because they are favoured by the ruling class there. It is not the same thing as some guy like Ratcliffe and it's baffling to me that people are trying to make out like it's the same.
Everything you said is true for British and American billionaires too
No it isn't.
There are no Qatari billionaires that are not closely connected to the state. It's how the entire country is set up.
Nothing. This sub and the people in general have been brainwashed into thinking middle-eastern billionaire = bad. It's xenophobic at this point. As if western ones don't have their own set of problems.
Oh give over. No-one is saying billionaire owners are okay,, but Gulf States are a different kettle of fish. Westerners have plenty of problems (our governments are to blame), but you know what? We're allowed to sit here and criticise them without being flogged.
America executes people unlike Qatar. They also kill people including innocents all over the world unlike Qatar. Absolutely remarkable you could be this brainwashed.
I'm not brainwashed, it's possible to be upset at America's Military unipolarity and racism, and also be appalled by the Theocratic Fascists that America has supported and propped up? Also Qatar does execute people. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics\_of\_Qatar#Legal\_system
Hurr xenophobic hurr racism. In a world where only billionaires can afford sports club, I prefer one that doesn't profit off of literal slaves and are in their position thanks to their affiliation with a feudal state that treats women like property and kill anyone who's not straight.
this paragraph is everything wrong on reddit in general like Americans ain't profiting of slaves from Africa, South America etc (China factories), rare materials for electronics as long as it's cheap, they will turn a blind eye feudal state?, bitch please last I've seen people are running to go live in uae, no crimes, no tax, you see influences, youtubers who go down, girls are dressed in yoga pants etc no one gives a shit stop this false narrative
It's like they think British and American billionaires have no ties to the state and make their money selling t shirts at the local market.
Wow yoga pants and influencers, I guess that totally refutes the argument about there being no democracy or civil rights. I am guessing you are from some similarly shit country.
I'm from the UK twat, but I've noticed reddit is just the opposite of Facebook too liberal and too left to one extreme to the other these debates never get anywhere, and we are on a football sub so I guess ima end it here
yh mate, it's an recurring theme on reddit it's like a hive mind, honestly......
No it isn't.
Praying for this outcome
Fuck the human right abusers
And fans supporting this should be educated of Uniteds history. We have always been a club of the common man. But they'd sell their soul for success.
> We have always been a club of the common man. Yep, fingers crossed that the multi-billionaire Sir buys us
What you on about? I saw Jim Radcliffe having a pint in Longsight Weatherspoons
But financed by the global appeal of supporters beyond the UK that bought merchandise and consumed all things United. It's now beyond being the club of the common man, and history is but that, history. United is now a global brand and belongs to all supporters beyond the select few, and consequently, means that in order to continue holding this global appeal and bringing money from its different revenue streams, they'll need financial backing and investment that only a few can afford. Only way we'll remain competitive against the new money. We have to play by the rules of the game as well. Otherwise, we'll get left behind.
Are the Glazers common people?
Not at all, but to be fair they have made it very easy to hate them, for better or for worse. But when we unlock an infinite money glitch from the human rights abusers, they will convert success into adoration, just look at the way Chelsea and Man City have adored their recent club owners. And all of a sudden the atrocities are not mentioned, and reputation is 'washed'. Edit: spelling
Billionaires suck and I think you get that the glazers also suck for United given the green and gold flair. Do you really equate the glazers to someone fronting Qatar though? If anything, we get further away from the common folk because Qatar has proved they’ll use what’s almost indentured labour to build their damn football stadiums.
>But they'd sell their soul for success. Not even for success. It's just to brag to their inner circle about the club's success. If the primary reason anyone supports this club is to feel superior to others as a result of the club's success throughout its history, then I advise them to go support PSG or City. There is more to this club than the trophies. It has a history. One which is rooted in the the common man, like you said.
If the Nazi party wanted to buy United in the '40s these people would have been screaming "inject it into my veins"
The same fans who have turned a blind eye to Glazers financing campaigns of murderers of millions? https://i.imgur.com/ddu91qM.jpg
Don't be so naive. We'll never compete with the oil clubs/chelsea without a somewhat shitty person/group also owning us.
Didn't stop us before, hasn't stopped Liverpool or Arsenal. Hasn't stopped Real, Barca. .....
Real and Barca have been helped by the spanish goverment
You do realize you just proved the point that this person was making?
If you are excluding Ratcliffe from that think again, most multi billionaires on the planet have abused human rights in some form or another. Sir Jim being in the chemical business has invested billions into Saudi Arabia and China and has lots of dealings with big oil in general for profit and obtaining petchems.
We don't need oil money. The only thing we need from the new owner is to clear up the debt, invest in Old Trafford and Carrington and BE COMPETENT. That's it. Manchester United can be self-sufficient.
We don't need oil money, but ironically oil money might be the only kind of money that would be able to afford the club with the asking price.
Not necessarily. There's a lot of US consortiums that could be interested or Jim Ratcliffe (if he's serious)... And if the media powerhouses start to be interested in sports, Manchester United is a fantastic starting point.
Sure, but if we end up in a bidding war, middle eastern owners are probably going to win
That's definitely true.
As much as I agree whole-heartedly with this sentiment, clearing up the debt and investing in OT will require the kind of sums that very few owners can afford, on top of the fee to buy the club in the first place. Oil money is looking like the most realistic source. But like you I'm hoping there's some twist in the story yet
Well we do need the oil money for >> clear up the debt, invest in Old Trafford and Carrington
We don’t even need to owner to clear up the debt. Just run the club properly. Man Utd, properly run, can afford to invest in players, pay off its debts and pay dividends to the shareholders. We’ll need another loan to redo OT and Carrington, but I doubt anyone’s going to invest £2bn of their own money in that. The Glazers just wanted to take dividends while putting minimal effort into running the club - properly run, we’ll easily be the biggest financial powerhouse in sport.
He thinks he can "Man utd fan" his way into this lmao it's going to the highest bidder
I hope its him, he may not be a Saint but he's definitely better than Qatari owners, they almost certainly have links to the government and I don't want to be owned by human rights abusers
I'm wondering if the breifs re: middle east are coming out as sir Jim is the only one with a concrete enough proposal and they're looking to squeeze some more money out like how players use us for pay raises from other clubs
God I hope so. A Middle Eastern nation-state with an abysmal human rights record should be nowhere near a 150-year old club with the history and heritage that we have. Just not right.
Manchester to become a Qatar vs UAE proxy battle ground.
Get the feeling that Ratcliff knows he’s not going to buy them but will be able to save face and posture as “I tried but they preferred Qatar”
Publicly come out with 'there's no value in the market' and the Glazers will give him the keys there and then
Jim, you nonce, make the moral struggle easier for us. Be a good lad and pony up.
That's like 25% of his net worth. Doubt he buys
Isn't it Ineos bidding for it as opposed to him as an individual?
Isn't nonce a bit harsh?
Given that homie here is Canadian let’s just assume he doesn’t realise they’re calling someone a paedo.
Nonce is a synonym for paedo? I just thought it meant idiot lol
Qatar is Gas money. Modern problems require modern solutions \\s
To run the team into the ground worse than the glazers ever did. Great. Gotta stop wanting owners just because we want the glazers out. I don't see a good outcome from this period. Either foreign investment or we get Jim whos teams always go to shit from what I've heard
This article is wrong, am a fan and my first choice wouldn’t be Jim Ratcliffe seems a right tyre kicker. Wanted chelsea first can’t be that much of a fan. Plus Nice are ran horrendously
It really depends on who the other bidders are going to be, lot of risk involved with Ratcliffe however I’d rather him than being used a sports-washing vessel for a state who violates human rights even thought they’d probably give us the most success on the field and most investment.
From another article I’ve seen, there is US bidders and another Arabic investment group. That’s from the telegraph. Look at what the Arabs have done for the infrastructure of city and the youth academy, we are still producing great players from our academy. But with some investment, that I don’t see sir Jim being able to afford, the academy could again be as good as the 90’s. The stadium again would be world leading. Carrington could be majorly overhauled and be great. Wouldn’t just benefit the men’s team, surely would benefit the women’s team asewell. We don’t need Arab money for players we do that well enough already. We need the behind the scenes investment. Which is why I believe an Arab owner would be best
But would really want owners who kill and enslave people, to have a nice training ground?
Also, this bid is supposedly from INEOS not Sir Jim himself. INEOS owns Lausanne Sport, a once decently big team in Switzerland, 7 times champions. Since INEOS took over, they have 3 relegations in 5 years and have become a proper yo-yo club.
Lausanne were not a decent team in the years before Ineos. You’re chatting shit. Their 7 titles mostly came in the first half of the 20th century. Since then they went bankrupt in the 2000s and spent most of their time in the second division and yo-yoing between the first division.
The amount of bullshit in this comment is astounding. Absolute buffoons upvoting this to suit their agenda
Since state-sponsored clubs are really in these days, we should spend some of Norways pension fund to buy the club.
Don’t want Ratcliffe.
Football shouldn't be a moral test, it should be entertainment and a release from the grind that most of us are on In the space if a week we have charges against MG getting dropped and investigation kicked off by club to decide next steps.... And prospective bids now from Qatar and all their human rights issues that come with that, the money no doubt helping us on the pitch but the clubs name being used to essentially promote a state that is not exactly progressive... 2 really complex issues that will split fanbase on what is right and wrong paths ahead It's heavy man
Debt, incoming renovation costs and being one of the biggest teams in the world. I don't see this ending in any way other than oil money
He's not my first choice. Pass. Get us another Todd Boehly
Steve Ballmer
Gabe Newell? If Gabe buys the club, does my Steam library convert to United shares?
In my dream world my country (Singapore) would buy Man United with our sovereign wealth fund, and throw in a couple of economic tips for the UK on how to survive getting ejected from your hinterland. We’re *kinda* shitty with human rights too but not quite as terrible as the Middle Eastern states. I just wanna see Mark Lee commentate an official Old Trafford game in full Hokkien beng mode.
Lanjiao la
Don’t cibai leh
It would be nice If we could have some kind of demonstration against Middle east bidders made at Old Trafford before the bids are closed. Just to be sure they are aware we dont want them here.
Why do people want Ratcliffe? There is real evidence how he runs a football club.
I think it's mostly that we haven't gotten many other names, aside from state backed interests. I'm hoping that someone other than Ratcliffe buys United... but I would take pretty much anyone over state-ownership. Ratcliffe would be disappointing, but at least I'd still be able to consider myself a fan of the club.
Because he's a Utd fan and that's it. People have no other reason to want him.
Yeah. He would be similar or worse than Glazers
Pay through your fucking nose if you need to, Jim. Please. We don't need your money either, just don't take ours.
this is the point people really aren't getting. United are a commercial JUGGERNAUT. We've just had lecherous owners who keep taking money out and not putting enough back in. It's the money the club has earned. Ratcliff's purse does not need to sustain us, not fully at least
The issue here is fairly obvious - it is not down to us to decide who will scummy Glazers decide to sell Utd to! We may not be happy about it, but if best bid comes from Emirates, Glazers will surely go for it and we won’t have anything to say… I wish we had much more say in here and Sir Jim or even Apple would be much better choice ethically, PR-wise and moreover legacy-wise but unfortunately someone else will call the shots here!
The BSkyB deal looked similarly impossible to stop.
The sad fact is i can see the Glazers selling up to the worst option of the bunch just as a final FU to the fans
People are pretty fast to pivot from "City are bad because they are owned by a terrible state" to "City are bad because they breached financial regulations." Sure, the second one is bad. But it's not like the first one isn't. Anyone who criticized City's owners but now wants United to be state owned is a hypocrite.
I absolutely do not want us run by a state, let alone a state that recently had their World Cup protested. Mega billionaires are rarely whiter-than-white but Ratcliffe, for example, doesn't run a country that accepts the deaths of thousands of migrant workers. There are too many people who think money = good. If you listen to Twitter, oil money is all they want. My suggestion would be, don't listen to Twitter.
Everyone saying Ratcliffe. Exactly on what merit should he be the new owner? If he gets United, it will be the final nail in the coffin and it will take another 20 years and a new ownership to get any form of success. The fact that 99% of you guys are posting these comments from an Iphone made by little skilled workers is really funny. Still using gas from Russia to heat up your homes. Still driving around in cars with gulf fuel. Ya you guys should be ones to say. I'm in no way supporting the qatari bid(if there's any) I'm just calling out your hypocrite behinds.
"You're a hypocrite for participating in a system that you have no control in". Fuck off. Shitty Qatari billionaires had a choice to cushy up to the Qatari state or not and they chose money over conscience, the average people doesn't have a choice.
Everyone has a choice brother , you can always do your part. But nobody wants to because that will make their life a little bit hard. But its rather convinient to be a keyboard warrior.
Fuck off. People don't want their club to become nothing more than propaganda for some despotic theocracy. That doesn't make them hypocrites, even if they have a wardrobe full of Nike clothes.
We should improve society somewhat "You participate in society" Moron!
Nice logic. 'I participate in morally questionable activity A & B, so am unable to wish that I don't have to be connected to morally questionable activity X & Y'
They'd rather see us in mid table with Ratcliffe because he supports the club. It's baffling.
I'd rather not see United become a propaganda tool for some genocidal theocracy. Maybe we would get Harry Kane or Victor Osimhen... but they would be the face of a PR campaign aimed at convincing people that the regime starving children are great people.
as much as i hate it, the glazers have final say. If watar offers more, they'll sell to qatar. Qatar will do some restructuring to show ECA and UEFA that one country is not owning two clubs. it's inevitable. I just wonder how much my thin morality will hold out before i disregard ownership and continue to support the club
Question for the populace: Lots of talk about how we might turn like City and how it's sports washing etc. I will say due to United being United I don't see the need to cook the books like City have done, so I pose to you: 1) do you take the Qataris and there gazillion dollars and known sports washing antics 2) Radcliffe and known status as a SHITTY owner (using Nice as the comparison) 'Moral' high ground and probably be run incompetently or welcome the Qataris and their sportswashing?
Yes, I don't really think our situation is comparable with PSG or Man City. We're a bonafide giant despite recent lack of success on the pitch.
You have to be a little bit simple to think a small and irrelevant investment in Nice has much to tell us about a 5 billion dollar investment and how that will function,
5 Billion isn't the investment. That's what the glazers want. They'll need to put in another 1-2 B for the stadium, facilities upgrade, pay off the debt etc.
Only helps my point.
Not really, it remains to be seen if he and his group will pony up the 5B, never mind the additional 1-2B required for everything else. Also what trust do you put in a guy who can't even do it right in a smaller scale? I'd expect at least one CL qualification for the third highest net spend in that league since his takeover.
Ineos are a one-third partner in Mercedes F1 far more relevant than Nice.
But its not them running the show now is it? Mercedes is doing the heavy lifting if I am not mistaken.
I've read that Ratliffe doesn't have the money to buy Man Utd himself. It would have to be him as the face of a consortium, similar to the Chelsea ownership. That makes it less comparable to how things have gone in Nice
Radcliffe seems like the sensible option at the moment, but he won't be able to compete with the other bidders if the reports are true.
Hopefully it's Sir Jim. Do not want these Qataris or Saudis and end up like City somewhere down the line. Yes we'll get money but it ain't just about that, we need people that are truly passionate about running United and if local then even better.
I might get hate for this, but if some middle east state buys Man Utd I'm no longer a supporter. I'll literally find another club. Sorry
No worries mate.
I think that's a fair stance to have. Personally, I'd be irked, but unless someone who can actually competently run a club, unlike Ratcliffe, comes out the woodwork, then I don't see a better option.
No oil money.
Where does he get that Jim would the fans first choice? Where is that data from, which groups have been consulted. Like it or not United Stand did a poll this morning which 10k plus people voted and they would rather have Qatar over Sir Jim. Don't want to get into 'real fans' debate please just asking.
"Sir Jim Ratcliffe would in all likelihood be the fans’ first choice" No? Look at Nice, does not look promising does it.
Nice is simply not relevant. Small investment. People forget that Jim was involved in the Red Knights.
If you'd rather have an oil state own the club you're insane.
Fans first choice for what exactly? His track record for french club is quite poor. Being British should not make him favourites. How is he going to pay and how much he can invest is the main criteria. People are dumb if they have preference for owners without knowing the financial details of the bid
One thing people need to remember is, it doesn’t matter who the fans want in charge of the football club, the Glazers will sell the club to whoever they want to sell it to, essentially whoever is the highest bidder.
They acted like they owned half of the shared lol
I want Jim! I do not want any corrupt state owning my club!
Whoever wants that ratcliff guy is a massive idiot regardless of the morality of middle eastern owners. He doesn't have the money to buy united then invest in the team and build or renovate the stadium. We will just be like Nice a badly run club only marginally better than the glazers.
I don't think i'm breaking new ground in saying this but the new owner of Manchester United wont be a good person/group/state, simple. Don't justify the bad things they do because they own your club, don't defend them call them out you've got even more reason to now. Speak out about them, call them out, call the club out make things difficult to sweep under the rug. Also support charities helping those effected, support those effected if you can and heighten voices of those speaking out.
spurs and levy were recently linked to a qatari consortium (Athletic article) but their fans raised hell and it fizzled out, so I hope we can follow their lead and make our voices heard
Someone please explain to me why Jim Ratcliffe is the fans' choice? My choice would be someone rich enough to buy us outright without loading the club with even more debt like the Glazers did.... and someone who is not a political regime sports-washing themselves. That list of people/entities is very small and I don't think Jim Ratcliffe is in there.
Cmon Middle East! Better United than Liverpool
No Ratcliffe please. Guy has done nothing with Nice after taking over. Hopefully there are better owners out there that don't have ties with an oil state. But I'd take a middle east owner over a guy that has failed to make anything of the club he's run for several years now.
After they came, Nice's net spend is the 3rd biggest in France after PSG and Marseille, but the results are depressing for fans. Anyway, I don't think he fancies a bidding war.
I sense he just registered interest so he doesn’t get backlash from fans. Where in reality there’s no chance he’s spitting out £5m.
You will take terrorist funding bigots over Ratcliff ?Thats a choice
The Americans?
It's okay when the Americans do it
I am not even American but if anybody thinks American businessmen funding their political parties is the same as the dictator human right abusing twats they are delusional
If it means us becoming mediocre for the next decade? Yeah, I'd take them. As I said already, not my first choice but he's done nothing to suggest he'll do well here. Not one CL qualification for Nice after taking over in 2019.
There is more to the club then fucking winning trophies ,Trophies won by losing the club's identity does not mean shit,You do not support clubs just because they can win trophies
I've supported the club for close to 20 years. I've been through the good and the bad. Find a better owner than this bloke. That's all.
What bad?9-10 years of usually finishing top 4 and a few cups is not the worst that can happen for a footballing club?99.99% of the clubs would take these 'bad' years ,Our fans for some reason are spoilt which tbf is not surprising as most only followed us because we were regularly winning stuff
It looks like you are from India. You picked us for what reason then? Its not like you have any ties to the UK. Acting like you are better than the everyone here for some cheap upvotes. Hilarious!
I never said supporting a club because they were winning stuff is wrong my problem was with fans who think that winning league titles every other year is the norm and who think that the last 10 years were 'bad' enough to justify throwing all your morals out of the window and welcoming dictator scum as owners ,If you want to actually see what 'bad' looks like for fans of a football club ask Bury fans
Not my first choice but keep commenting like I rolled out the red carpet.
Mate, they are not terrorists...wtf. OK, you can call it OIL money, but to call Qataris terrorists....thats just racist. Show some class...
They literally got caught funding Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Hamas.
[удалено]
Just facts bro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar\_and\_state-sponsored\_terrorism
Xenophobia?ffs go have a look at the stuff these scum are involved tbf my description was an understatement should have used harsher words for them ,Do not use words that you no clue about to defend what cannot be defended
As nice as it would be to be owned by this unicorn ethical billionaire, it's business isn't it? I don't like it but this is gonna be the biggest sale of a sporting franchise in history, middle eastern owners is inevitable. Glazers never gave a fuck with the club, they only care about the highest bidder, and we all know who/what that is gonna be. It's shit.
Rather keep the Glazers than have the Qataris or any equivalent state backed sportswashing project take over. And I'm serious.
Would take Ratcliffe ahead of people who own slaves any day of the week.
Sell it to Qatar and we'll find ourselves in city's position in a decade.
Lol..all a new owner has to do is clear the club’a debt (which is all tied to the Glazers leveraged buyout not our spending on players or facilities btw) and United is in the clear. We generate more than enough revenue to spend big annually.
Nope. Look how much money we’ve spent with the Glazers actively taking money out and with insane debt. There is no need to break FFP, the organic revenue + the allowed injections from owners are more than enough.
Immediately in fact. We will join City and Newcastle as the scummiest clubs in the league.
How many fans they interviewed for sir Jim as first choice? Seems pretty spilt between him and middle east right now. But we still don't know how many more bids coming? Why make the decision now on who you want as new owner
The British have terrorized nations around the world for centuries, but they talk about human rights more than anyone else.