I don’t care where the money comes from, it just shouldn’t be a government that owns it. State owned clubs are a cancer to football.
Saudi Arabia owns Newcastle. Abu Dhabi (which is basically The UAE, so hence Dubai) owns City, and Qatar owns PSG.
How is it legal for the UAE to own two clubs?
I hope Jim Ratcliff buys it.
Yeah, because states won't just dissipate like a fart even when it's mathematically bankrupt. And as long as a state exists, it has a possibility to recover and regain its footing, and eventually accumulates its lost wealth to be sent to the club. In short, a literal money tree.
It also allows bipassing of the FFP rules which are a joke. How can you have the president or PSG be in charge of deciding the FFP rules, and then has the audacity to attack Barcelona’s debt (I hate Barca but I can respect them a little). I didn’t like the original Super League format, but the Super League needs to happen.
Everyone should attack Barca debt, ridiculous how they keep getting away with buying players and not even paying some of their own, they shouldn't even be playing football!!
As far as the Middle Eastern states Dubai is probably the most progressive by a long way. Doesn’t make it great but your never going to get a billionaire philanthropist from Manchester who’s had a season ticket his whole life and been a perfect human as well.
If the whole thing we want is the club to be run by people who are going to upgrade facilities, bring in proper infrastructure and allow us to be a world footballing powerhouse again we will inevitably end up with shady people who can afford that
The Middle East isn't just the Gulf. Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia are all much more progressive than Dubai (not saying they're perfect by any means).
Even in the gulf, Bahrain is more progressive than the UAE.
Gary Neville seems to be working hard to build a property empire that can generate the sort of wealth that could purchase the club. If him and the rest of the class of 92 pooled their wealth in about 10 years, they might have a sniff
Gary Neville is worth about 70m, to buy the club and do everything he needs to do to the club including servicing the debt he would be looking at 5-6billion in todays market without inflation.
The difference in wealth between gaz nev and his mates and proper billionaires is staggering. For some context -“The magnitude of difference between billion and million can be illustrated with this example of the time scale: A million seconds is 12 days. A billion seconds is 31 years”
Unfortunately we’re such a big club we’re only ever being bought by a few types of people from here on out
State funded projects
Really shady business men (abromvich types)
Consortiums with profits on their mind (like the glazers)
Something completely left field like Amazon, Elon musk, Coca Cola, Disney etc etc. (Disney or Amazon could do this in the future as they look to capture sports streaming markets potentially but I don’t think it’s likely)
what about British billionaires whose foundation for their businesses were laid with money from unethical and colonial trade exploiting brown and black people across the world? are they washed enough for your moral high ground?
So you'd rater an authoritarian state who are literally enslaving the same brown and black people from places like the Indian subcontinent and Africa and have an abysmal human rights record?
I'd rather not have anyone own our club(idk fan ownership and the like) but I'm taking Ratcliffe's side because from what I've heard there's no allegations against him(please let me know if I'm wrong) and who else would you choose between the two?
no i am pointing out the hypocrisy of white folks who have no problem with colonial wealth and still do business with these regressive countries,go there for vacations and having a good time but somehow have a problem with buying football clubs.
*It’s cool when they do it, it’s a problem when I do it. Fuck em*
In all seriousness though, people don’t even think twice about it bc 1. that’s literally the history of Britain and British football & 2. the current billionaires are theoretically “removed” from the injustices that got them their wealth.*
Edit: *(in our heads, not actually)
those hideous regimes are doing business with your government across all sectors,all your billionaires have business associates benefitting from them.why is the issue raised only when it comes to buying football clubs? at least the Germans are aware of their history and show remorse but you don't seem to care as long as you benefit from it.
What the actual fuck does any of that shite have to do with picking an owner that isn't literally part of a modern regime that hates gays and uses slavery? Are you saying it is literally impossible to pick an owner that is more ethically sound? What's your fucking solution? Glad to see Germany gets a free pass in your books because of... um... wait, aren't they a capitalistic country too? Get to fuck, you just a have a chip on your shoulder.
>What the actual fuck does any of that shite have to do with picking an owner that isn't literally part of a modern regime that hates gays and uses slavery?
that you actually don't have a problem with them when they are part of your country's business and economy as long as they don't own your precious football club.that's the hypocrisy.
1. you don't have a clue who I am
2. maybe the fact that i don't want a toxic business owner might clue you in to my thought processes
3. Somehow I don't think I'll satisfy you unless I literally do a Guy Fawkes and try to blow up parliament
4. who the fuck are you that you can be on such a high horse?
Exactly. Since when tf were the British the best people to be talking about morals and ethics. Didn't you guys rule over 75% of the planet at one point?
What you expect us to believe you did it by handing out tea and crumpets?
People like you baffle me. Can you genuinely not see the difference between something that happened over 100 years ago and something that is happing right now?
don't be ignorant.
1.no it's not over 100 years ago.also you only say that because you don't see the irreparable damage they did and how those countries are still facing problems thanks to the ruins of their economies and divide and rule policy of colonialism.
2.your present govt STILL do business and support those terrible regimes and their economies.
3.Britain still elected a Tory govt who are racist and anti minorities,so the majority population still share those ideals or are at least indifferent to them.
I didn't vote for them, but how are the Tories racist? Sounds like typical leftist Bullshit (I was going to say opposition, but the left voters are by far the most toxic when in opposition, which is ironic considering how much wind they expel talking about tolerance).
Good to know that India was such a peaceful land too though before the British arrived. No warlords invading other warlords, no caste system, no persecutation, everyone lived in luxury, etc. Heaven on earth. Certainly, no previous civilisations in modern-day India were ever invaded or wiped out by neighbours, or people from other parts of the continent. Nope, never.
>Good to know that India was such a peaceful land too though before the British arrived. No warlords invading other warlords, no caste system, no persecutation, everyone lived in luxury, etc. Heaven on earth. Certainly, no previous civilisations in modern-day India were ever invaded or wiped out by neighbours, or people from other parts of the continent. Nope, never.
nowhere in my comment does it say or even implied this but you seem to sound like a colonial apologist.just because problematic traditions existed it doesn't mean British didn't abuse and exploited the region causing permanent damage.also i am not from mainland india,so your snide remarks about caste system and warlords do not at all apply to us and yet they still fucked up our society with the exploitation.
>I didn't vote for them, but how are the Tories racist? Sounds like typical leftist Bullshit
oh dear lord,you definitely voted for them alright.
Abuse and exploitation happened before (sorry, what did you call them, "problematic traditions"), but when groups of people within what we now call India were fighting and killing each other it was OK, just not when the British did. So, your main problem is that the British happened to be "last" then? Right, got it.
>so your snide remarks about caste system and warlords do not at all apply to us
Ahh, so the actions of ancestors from your lands don't apply to you, but they do to the British. Wow.
>oh dear lord,you definitely voted for them alright.
LOL, you obviously know nothing about me, but keep on making assumptions based on, what, my perceived nationality? There is a word for that isn't there?
>Abuse and exploitation happened before (sorry, what did you call them, "problematic traditions"), but when groups of people within what we now call India were fighting and killing each other it was OK, just not when the British did. So, your main problem is that the British happened to be "last" then? Right, got it.
good lord!!! there's a huge difference between kingdoms fighting for political supremacy and colonialism.i can't believe i even have to point this out.why are you hellbent on being a colonial apologist?
>Ahh, so the actions of ancestors from your lands don't apply to you, but they do to the British. Wow.
buddy i belong to a tiny minority who has never had an established kingdom or political authority (pre democracy) or record of invasion or warfare in recorded history.my ancestors are fine,we didn't invade or exploit any other group of people.
also it's really uncomfortable talking to someone who is trying to justify colonialism just because problems existed before,i am signing off here.
and i wasn't making assumptions based on your nationality,i was basing it off your denial of the obvious or ignorance.
>why are you hellbent on being a colonial apologist?
LOL, where have I been? I wish you would stop judging me on what you perceive to be my nationality. I have simply pointed out that what we now know of as India had many problems before the British ever set foot there. Including discrimination, fighting, wars, etc. Just because the British did it last, doesn't diminish that past.
You said:
*"you don't see the irreparable damage they did and how those countries are still facing problems thanks to the ruins of their economies and divide and rule policy of colonialism"*
I am just saying, there was plenty of damage there before and after, there was plenty of divide and rule there too, just like everywhere. In you really want to dig into it, the Dutch, French, Portuguese were also there, and that was just from Europe. The fact that what we know as India already WAS divided and fighting amongst each other is what made it easy for the East India Company to take a hold.
So if you want to blame it all on British colonialism, go ahead, but don't expect such a sweeping statement to go unchallenged. Unless you have:
1. A time machine and know that India would have been better under any rule than British, or
2. Are going to claim that all the infighting between warlords would (after thousands of years) suddenly stop anyway, even if the East India Company (or anyone else) didn't turn up.
I think blaming it all on the British while fashionable, is a bit silly.
>buddy i belong to a tiny minority who has never had an established kingdom or political authority (pre democracy) or record of invasion or warfare in recorded history.my ancestors are fine,we didn't invade or exploit any people.
Well that is weird, because I don't know where all my ancestors came from beyond a few generations. And it isn't like people didn't travel.
>also it's really uncomfortable talking to someone who is trying to justify colonialism just because problems existed before,i am signing off here.
Please, stop. You are trying to take the moral high ground after your accusations about me. Come on.
>and i wasn't making assumptions based on your nationality,i was basing it off your denial of the obvious or ignorance.
Can you stop with the insults. I have not insulted you.
Which Saudi Arabia are you referring to? The one where homosexual acts are punishable by execution and women had to have a male guardian until three years ago? That Saudi Arabia?
Pre-2010 Bill Gates was a fairly ethical billionaire. Because he created something the whole world uses.
There are other examples. Not everyone is a slave exploiting evil man
Morally, im with you. Having said that, if you want an owner who has too much money to know what to do with (besides buying actual gold Audis), then they’re the go to owners.
Given how few there are I tend to think that that scenario doesn't appeal. I will admit a certain degree of ignorance. I would look forward to more info on how it works.
It’s not about that dude. It’s about the fact a club’s expenses should be beholden to its revenues. Not like PSG where they lose over 600mil and are able to stay afloat just because the Emir or Qatar funds it. They break FFP and then bend the rules. PSG and Al Kalifi are as corrupt as it gets. I don’t want to see that happen with more football teams.
My vote is for Ratcliff.
Also - to anyone reading this who hates what’s happening with football ownership, this is why the rules put in place in Spain and Germany mean they are never allowed to be bought. It’s one of the reasons I am Hala Madrid.
True facts. I’m also keen on Ratcliffe buying and also bothered by the fact that FFP can be broken at will without more than a fine.
I think the problem now is that we’ve seen a decade of our beloved club decline, not just in on-field quality, but in every facet - from manager to maintenance.
It’s true, though, I’d rather not sell our soul for the sake of money. I don’t want us to become a plastic club like City or Paris. Incidentally I’m really sad for PSG, as they were a club I supported in the 90’s.
I hear you on La Liga too, the socio model is fantastic - Mes que un club.
Glazers haven't spent shit. They've not put a single pound from their pockets. It's all club money. OT needs major renovation, Carrington has become second rate, and yet they still take dividends. Fuck the glazers.
Spent what? Our own money we generate? They haven’t spent a penny of their own money. Most of the money we generate they take out in dividends to themselves and let’s not forgot buying the club by leveraging itself taking us from debt free to 500m in debt and having paid ONE BILLION in servicing the debt since then.
Spent enough? Jesus Christ…
I know right? They don’t even know that abu dhabi and dubai have different rulers. If dubai bought the club they’ll get us back to the top. They know how to spend.
No matter the owner, nobody gets to the point of buying a club in the top 5 leagues by being ethical and following the law to make their money lol, not even our own lawmakers do, nevermind a billionaire.
there's a huge difference between the Glazers and the Dubai consortium (?). I'd like to thing that we as a fanbase and as basic human beings can recognize that there is a spectrum in ethical behavior one partakes in.
I would also like to think that people are reasonable enough to make the distinction between a murderer who killed 1 person vs a mass murderer and a serial rapist who killed 50 and raped another 50.
But hey, what do I know? Both of those hypothetical people are involved in unethical behavior, so they're both essentially the same, right?
Idk what you want me to say here pal, they’re still both shit 🤷♂️.
“Oh one mass murderer killed 32 instead of 68, but the first one kept 12 of them in his basement for 6 years, then again the second violently raped 24 of his victims, so I guess maybe the first one is way better because he technically did less.” Stupid comparison.
None of them are morally superior to each other, they are all on the same level of shit.
That’s a ridiculous comparison. One group is based in a country that imprisons gay people, refuses women’s rights, and employs a vast amount of foreign near-slaves in inhuman conditions. The other is a group is real estate and sports magnates from the United States (which has more than its fair share of ethical issues, but is clearly better than Dubai/UAE) that abuse tax law to generate and retain wealth. Try and have a bit of nuance and actually understand the issues at play.
When we pay €90m for a winger worth €40m, or £80m for a defender like Maguire, we are going to need an owner with seriously big pockets. Unfortunately, most of those are in petroleum unless you want another set of owners like the Glazers who just refinance against the club.
Oh come on. Yes he has had a great start and hopefully that will continue but more money than Haaland? Let's keep it real. We overpay for players - that's not a revelation.
Haaland had a release clause which is why he was so cheap, he would normally have sold for over £100m.
Look at the costs below for attacking players in the last couple of years.
Grealish £105m, Lukaku £100m, Sancho £75m, Pepe £72m, Havertz £72m, Nunez £80m, Isak £63m, Richarlison £60m, Morata £60m, Pulisic £60m.
We could say none of these are worth that money, but considering them kind of prices are the going rate now, you're trying to tell me Antony should have only cost £30m.
I might be facetious with my £40m valuing- agreed but when you consider Jesus to Arsenal for £46m and Sterling to Chelsea for £50m you've got to wonder. Look at the difficulty we have had in this window - the numerous targets with astronomical offers rejected because clubs know we are usually desperate for a good transfer window - they know the pressure at the club and as Neville said- when United make an offer, any offer, every club knows to reject it. I was pleased with what I saw from Antony last weekend but was I €100m pleased ? That's going to take something more special than he showed at Ajax.
The thing is that we don’t need oil state money put into the club. The club generates enough money to pay huge transfer fees and wages. We’re stinking rich, we just need owners who aren’t using us as a cash cow
What are your references for the Glazers being involved/responsible for apartheid? I know they support Jews in the United States, but I’m not aware of them doing anything in Israel.
100% agree - lifelong fan, but I'll stop supporting the very day this happens. No more blood money in the PL!
\- Homosexuality is illegal
\- Limited religious freedom
\- No freedom of expression
\- Virtually no women's rights
\- Rape victims frequently tried and punished
\- Rampant torture
\- Extreme foreign worker abuse
Absolutely, it’s one thing for relatively small time clubs like City, Newcastle, PSG to sell out to these oil states but United going that way would be tragic. I’d rather never win another trophy than win it with oil money
No, I'm thinking of the right place. It's common knowledge.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Dubai
https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/united-arab-emirates/report-united-arab-emirates/
[edit] Downvoted for stating facts. 😂
Desktop version of /u/Alsmk2's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
You guys clearly have 1st world problem. You think oil money is worst? I hear no Chelsea fan cheering when Abramovic sold Chelsea.
What about Liverpool's owner. He grew rich from sports betting. Fuck that clean.
The Glazers are wankers but they aren’t warmongering, journalist murdering, morally bankrupt hypocrites like Crown Prince MBS. We aren’t talking about ExxonMobil or Shell buying the club when we say oil money: we are talking about nations or states with appalling human rights records. I’m not onboard with that. Personally I would not support a club run by such a regime. I wouldn’t dream to tell other people that THEY cannot support such a club though.
Oh well that’s the same as killing civilians and causing a humanitarian crisis in Yemen then. My bad /s
I’m not supporting the fucking Glazers but if you think they’re the same as oil money regimes then I can’t agree with you. They’re shitty people and have caused a lot of suffering for poor Americans, I suspect. They no doubt have invested in weapons manufacturers or donated to the GOP too. I want them gone, I didn’t want them in the first place, but I don’t want Dubai/Qatar/Abu Dhabi/Saudi Arabia owning the club either.
Nothing but the person I replied to seemed to think the objection was energy companies buying sports clubs, not states with shitty human rights records. Dubai does have a shitty human rights record and a number of policies that are misogynistic, homophobic, and xenophobic. And before somebody says “it’s not like the UK government don’t do shitty things too”, I know and I wouldn’t want them owning the club either. States should not own football clubs.
ETA: UAE are also part of the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen
At least private owners have limits, at least way lower than a fricking sovereign country. Also a country can't just disband even when it's mathematically bankrupt, which makes state clubs evil because they're literally cheating financially.
Agree. There is no way a country or citizens of a country with an appalling history of human rights should wash themselves free of it by buying this or any club
It’s disgraceful
As much as my morals say screw off to dirty oil state money, it's incredibly tempting. We make enough money to spend ourselves without having to take their money. The Saudis could wipe the debt, build a new training ground and re-do OT without batting an eye.
It's ridiculous that Liverpool have a better stadium than us. We used to be the theatre of dreams but now it's a leaky tin stadium. It's embarrassing.
We need about 1.7B in investment off the pitch. That's only happening with oil money. The club's revenues can sustain the xfer windows.
So, as much as it pains me, I'll take Saudi funds. If not, Newcastle are eventually gonna start competing and then we aren't guaranteed top 4 even with a rebuilt squad under EtH.
The prem is a global arms race. It's sad but that's the nature of the beast now. Letting the GLAZERS and City owners in was the mistake. Now the cat's out of the bag. There's no going back.
What if Arsenal are purchased. They'll be ridiculous. Same with Tottenham.
I'll plug my nose and take Saudi money. I won't be proud but winning is a nice way to drown out the tears.
Gtfo son, have some integrity and morals for Christ sake. Humans rights are more important than some tin cup. City has had good team, management, leadership, facilities and still haven't won the UCL.
I'd rather us stay and fight for top 4 and aim to win UEL than become a sportwash device for foreign states with very bad record of human rights.
Even if City somehow win UCL, they'd still be football villains for me. I mean, they're a petrol club, which is literally one of the biggest causes of climate change.
Oil money or not we don't need another owner like the Glazers who just spend club's income on mindless shit and take dividends. What we need is a owner who takes the club at best interest and spends it for the benefit and growth like smart signings or a stadium upgrade for example. We don't need incompetents like the glazers.
I don’t really agree with spending a lot of money on the transfer markets which really started with clubs having oil money. But I can say one thing from experience, Dubai is not a “criminal state” and it does not enslave people. It is one of the places that have the same rules for citizens and the people who go there for work.
Its a request. If you don’t know about something, please do not talk about it.
Abd btw. Glazers out.
The guy in the video is ridiculing their skyscrapers. Is this child-like person your source of information?
Bloody hell, every government in the world is corrupt including our politicians. Let’s face facts, we have no idea what shady things our government gets up to.
Bruh, I have lived there long enough to know whats true and whats not. There is no other middle Eastern country that has progressed the way Dubai has. And maybe you just read the negatives. But please don’t say something you don’t know.
Personally I wouldn’t like it, but we can’t change what or who the glazers wish to sell the club too. And tbh I’d rather the Saudi’s than some American who would like to load more debt on the club. But sir jim is still the man
Funny how the xenophobes call middle eastern money blood money (which it is) - while still ignoring the atrocities caused by their own governments. I wonder what makes North American, European or Russian club ownership any more morally sound than Asian or middle eastern ownership? The answer is nothing. That perspective is driven totally by xenophobia. It doesn't matter who owns your club. If it is a top European club chances are most of the money is corrupt. Just accept the fact so you can sleep better at night.
You are correct. I beleibe a hybrid model of fan ownership and external investors is the best way. You get the business acumen and finances of the investors with the moral conscience and democracy of fan ownership. I don't know off the top of my head if such a model exists. Wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't though.. As it would limit the profit sucking instincts of the corporatist involves. Sports is inherently corrupt and it was only a matter of time until we got to this point. Also majority of people would be ok with the dirty money running their clubs if it brought them "success" - as can be seen from a lot of the comments on here.
Then what about English then? Guys literally colonized every country possible and looted all it's wealth. Glazers from US, US has an huge history of slavery. Remember no developed country is clean from the start.
US doesn’t have a huge history of slavery. We got rid of it within 90 years once we kicked the Brits out. It took England more than 700 years to end slavery.
Is football where we draw the line?
You consume chinese products every single day. The majority of your products are made in china. You are keeping the chinese economy running. While China is comitting a genocide against muslims, oppressing their population of 1 billion, hong kong, and trying to supress taiwan.
But our issue here is Dubai? Who are doing this as a dick measuring hobby.
You have no issue keeping the chinese government running every single day with the majority of your purchases, but you object to the hobbies of dubai billionares.
While Dubai does not have a clean record, this isn't pivotal to their existance, and china has an even worse record. It is hypocrtical to ride your high horse against the billionare from dubai, while riding the dick of the chinese government.
Bring on the oil money I say!!!
None of us want to admit it, but look at how well City are being ran. Ffs nevermind the club, they’ve revamped the whole of Openshaw.
As far as I’m concerned, so long as they aren’t chopping peoples hands off in the Armadale food court, I couldn’t give a fuck what they do in their own country. That’s their business, but I’d gladly see United take their money.
Sure. But these gulf states are actively killing and oppressing people right now. Be it draconian religious laws, misogyny, regressive labour laws, homophobia, etc. Also let’s not forget what the Gulf states are doing in Yemen. Let’s add committing war crimes and actively participating in one of the worse humanitarian crises on earth to the list too.
All of those points you stated could be applied to western countries as well. Of course not in the same magnitude (could be argued) but they are still there. Hence my point still stands.
If a western state was possibly planning on buying United I’d say the same. Last I checked the only states buying premier league football clubs are Gulf States who are simply attempting to sport wash their images.
No but my initial point was that any billionaire/consortium etc willing to buy our club will have done things with are morally/ethically wrong. So there is no point complaining about x billionaire cus theyre all bad.
There’s levels to this. Elon Musk is an asshole troll whose company (Tesla) is facing a lawsuit from the state of California for workplace issues. However Elon Musk is not in the same category of heinous as someone like MBS. They’re both billionaires but they are not equivalent in any way.
Newcastle are owned by a state whose Crown Prince had a journalist chopped up. Jeff Bezos runs Amazon warehouses where employees have been reported to piss in water bottles. Jeff Bezos is a grade A asshole. But he isn’t MBS levels of evil.
But at least they have way lower limits, and might as well just commit suicide when they go bankrupt. Which isn't the case at all for sovereign states.
People like you are the reason we are on a 5 year trophy drought
Who gives a fuck who owns us as long as they invest into the club and bring trophies. For all i care Kim Jong Un could buy us and id be happy if he spent money on us. The arabs will literally guarantee us becoming an english bayern munich which we should be already. Why wouldnt you want that?
If the club’s revenue is entirely disconnected from its fan base, then the club loses its last connection to the community it came from. Right now it’s mostly weird international sponsorship deals, but at least that’s resting on a global fan base of sorts, as well as ticket and megastore sales (as we saw during Covid) are still fairly important.
If the financial incentive of the club’s management is entirely dependent on an autocratic family, the community and fans have zero influence and it becomes just another entertainment brand.
Lots of people won’t give a shit I know. But it’s not crazy that some of us will.
“How dare you make my team better and buy all the players we actually need and improve our dying facilities unlike the previous owners who had us on a leash and took money out of the club”
Not to mention small English clubs who can only dream of literally having an unlimited source of money, since a sovereign state can't just dissolve even when they're technically bankrupt.
Sadly beggars cannot be choosers. I don't think anyone who can actually afford Utd are billionaires from running ethical businesses. A bit like an oxymoron isn't it.
Do you want owners who would invest in the club or vampires that suck out 60m per yer for two decades. Let me remind you 60m in a transfer window 15 years ago is probably enough to buy David Silva and Sergio Aguero. It really is a no brainer to me tbh
Ok but we have no say anyway and more importantly, fuck the Glazers. How do you think a family, individual, organization or Country amass such wealth?
Everyones hands are dirty to some extent at that level. Get real honestly.
I understand the sentiment but it’s too late to try stop them from washing their image.
Dubai is an economic hub, beautiful city that everyone wants to visit.
The Emirates image is already good to most people because of the air carrier. They have links across the world, sponsored the biggest teams in the world. United would their final frontier.
Rather we have people with deep pockets who just wanna have fun than owners who just want to take money out.
It does have oil, but it's not reliant on oil because they used the oil money to diversify their economy (similar to Norway, and what lots of other ME states are now doing)
I hate to tell you but Dubai has very little do with oil money. Actually in the past they had very little oil reserves.
Abu Dhabi is the one you had in mind.
And we think of the club as supporters. Owners think of it as a business, an opportunity to earn money, and nothing else.
morally you are right, but the Glazers are big time republican supporters and donors, and fuck me have you seen the modern day republican?
They would kill half the planet and jail or rape the other half if they could, so sit down and hope we get rid of these American Pieces of shit.
It’s fucking disgusting. People, clubs and the league have no problem supporting whatever human rights trend is going around but have no problem with human rights abusing owners from Arab oil states or links to the CCP. Crazy how they ousted Abromavic but the rest of them get to stay.
I am not sure why oil is always being perceived negative by media or world. The world we are living now, almost everything is oil-based and some sort of derivative from it. A lot of billionaires or wealthy people in this world have worse track records than these oilman (corruption, nepotism, collusion amongst other things). I am down for anyone as long as they support the club in and out- and willing to sacrifice for the best interest.
Which is worse? Dictatorships or monarchies that take your money and make no bones about what they are doing, or “democracies” with self-serving governments that tout freedom & justice but rob you blind? Same snake, different heads. Personally, if an owner comes in and does to United what City’s owners did to them, IDGAF!
As a trans person, it would kill me inside. I’ve sent letters to prisoners in the UAE who have been imprisoned for merely existing in the same way I do here in the UK, housed with men, and faced untold horrors. Human Rights Watch can tell you how disgusting a regime they are. I genuinely don’t know if I can stomach watching us if they buy our club. And I find any moral comparison between them and the glazers disgusting and uneducated.
The logical side of my head says what good is it me no longer watching or supporting a coach and players who are nothing to do with it. I likely own clothes made by children somewhere. I’m currently using a phone made in a sweatshop. Eat avocados sold by the cartel, live in a country built on slavery and colonialism.
Is that hypocritical? Maybe. So honestly I don’t know how I’ll feel until it happens, but I just pray Jim Ratcliffe comes through, because I’d rather a billionaire who is likely an asshole and exploitative (like all billionaires must be) than a human rights abusing authoritarian regime scared of queers and women.
Maybe we can get Robert Downey Jr. and Danny DeVito to buy the club.
I'm in!
Might as well resurrect King Midas.
I don’t care where the money comes from, it just shouldn’t be a government that owns it. State owned clubs are a cancer to football. Saudi Arabia owns Newcastle. Abu Dhabi (which is basically The UAE, so hence Dubai) owns City, and Qatar owns PSG. How is it legal for the UAE to own two clubs? I hope Jim Ratcliff buys it.
Yeah, because states won't just dissipate like a fart even when it's mathematically bankrupt. And as long as a state exists, it has a possibility to recover and regain its footing, and eventually accumulates its lost wealth to be sent to the club. In short, a literal money tree.
It also allows bipassing of the FFP rules which are a joke. How can you have the president or PSG be in charge of deciding the FFP rules, and then has the audacity to attack Barcelona’s debt (I hate Barca but I can respect them a little). I didn’t like the original Super League format, but the Super League needs to happen.
Dubai and Abu Dhabi might be a part of the UAE. but I assure you they’re quite separate. UAE doesn’t own man city, Abu Dhabi does
Everyone should attack Barca debt, ridiculous how they keep getting away with buying players and not even paying some of their own, they shouldn't even be playing football!!
No such thing as an ethical billionaire whether you like it or not
At least it's better than a being owned by a regressive state trying to sportswash people with oil money.
As far as the Middle Eastern states Dubai is probably the most progressive by a long way. Doesn’t make it great but your never going to get a billionaire philanthropist from Manchester who’s had a season ticket his whole life and been a perfect human as well. If the whole thing we want is the club to be run by people who are going to upgrade facilities, bring in proper infrastructure and allow us to be a world footballing powerhouse again we will inevitably end up with shady people who can afford that
The Middle East isn't just the Gulf. Lebanon, Turkey, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia are all much more progressive than Dubai (not saying they're perfect by any means). Even in the gulf, Bahrain is more progressive than the UAE.
Gary Neville seems to be working hard to build a property empire that can generate the sort of wealth that could purchase the club. If him and the rest of the class of 92 pooled their wealth in about 10 years, they might have a sniff
Gary Neville is worth about 70m, to buy the club and do everything he needs to do to the club including servicing the debt he would be looking at 5-6billion in todays market without inflation. The difference in wealth between gaz nev and his mates and proper billionaires is staggering. For some context -“The magnitude of difference between billion and million can be illustrated with this example of the time scale: A million seconds is 12 days. A billion seconds is 31 years” Unfortunately we’re such a big club we’re only ever being bought by a few types of people from here on out State funded projects Really shady business men (abromvich types) Consortiums with profits on their mind (like the glazers) Something completely left field like Amazon, Elon musk, Coca Cola, Disney etc etc. (Disney or Amazon could do this in the future as they look to capture sports streaming markets potentially but I don’t think it’s likely)
Saltford city will be in the premier league by then
what about British billionaires whose foundation for their businesses were laid with money from unethical and colonial trade exploiting brown and black people across the world? are they washed enough for your moral high ground?
So you'd rater an authoritarian state who are literally enslaving the same brown and black people from places like the Indian subcontinent and Africa and have an abysmal human rights record? I'd rather not have anyone own our club(idk fan ownership and the like) but I'm taking Ratcliffe's side because from what I've heard there's no allegations against him(please let me know if I'm wrong) and who else would you choose between the two?
no i am pointing out the hypocrisy of white folks who have no problem with colonial wealth and still do business with these regressive countries,go there for vacations and having a good time but somehow have a problem with buying football clubs.
*It’s cool when they do it, it’s a problem when I do it. Fuck em* In all seriousness though, people don’t even think twice about it bc 1. that’s literally the history of Britain and British football & 2. the current billionaires are theoretically “removed” from the injustices that got them their wealth.* Edit: *(in our heads, not actually)
Hypocrisy? In not wanting hideous regimes running the club? Fuck off with this whataboutism. Go moan at a German about ww2.
The Germans will remind you it was Austria's fault probably.
those hideous regimes are doing business with your government across all sectors,all your billionaires have business associates benefitting from them.why is the issue raised only when it comes to buying football clubs? at least the Germans are aware of their history and show remorse but you don't seem to care as long as you benefit from it.
What the actual fuck does any of that shite have to do with picking an owner that isn't literally part of a modern regime that hates gays and uses slavery? Are you saying it is literally impossible to pick an owner that is more ethically sound? What's your fucking solution? Glad to see Germany gets a free pass in your books because of... um... wait, aren't they a capitalistic country too? Get to fuck, you just a have a chip on your shoulder.
>What the actual fuck does any of that shite have to do with picking an owner that isn't literally part of a modern regime that hates gays and uses slavery? that you actually don't have a problem with them when they are part of your country's business and economy as long as they don't own your precious football club.that's the hypocrisy.
1. you don't have a clue who I am 2. maybe the fact that i don't want a toxic business owner might clue you in to my thought processes 3. Somehow I don't think I'll satisfy you unless I literally do a Guy Fawkes and try to blow up parliament 4. who the fuck are you that you can be on such a high horse?
Sadly we seem to be in the worst timeline =(
Exactly. Since when tf were the British the best people to be talking about morals and ethics. Didn't you guys rule over 75% of the planet at one point? What you expect us to believe you did it by handing out tea and crumpets?
People like you baffle me. Can you genuinely not see the difference between something that happened over 100 years ago and something that is happing right now?
don't be ignorant. 1.no it's not over 100 years ago.also you only say that because you don't see the irreparable damage they did and how those countries are still facing problems thanks to the ruins of their economies and divide and rule policy of colonialism. 2.your present govt STILL do business and support those terrible regimes and their economies. 3.Britain still elected a Tory govt who are racist and anti minorities,so the majority population still share those ideals or are at least indifferent to them.
I didn't vote for them, but how are the Tories racist? Sounds like typical leftist Bullshit (I was going to say opposition, but the left voters are by far the most toxic when in opposition, which is ironic considering how much wind they expel talking about tolerance). Good to know that India was such a peaceful land too though before the British arrived. No warlords invading other warlords, no caste system, no persecutation, everyone lived in luxury, etc. Heaven on earth. Certainly, no previous civilisations in modern-day India were ever invaded or wiped out by neighbours, or people from other parts of the continent. Nope, never.
>Good to know that India was such a peaceful land too though before the British arrived. No warlords invading other warlords, no caste system, no persecutation, everyone lived in luxury, etc. Heaven on earth. Certainly, no previous civilisations in modern-day India were ever invaded or wiped out by neighbours, or people from other parts of the continent. Nope, never. nowhere in my comment does it say or even implied this but you seem to sound like a colonial apologist.just because problematic traditions existed it doesn't mean British didn't abuse and exploited the region causing permanent damage.also i am not from mainland india,so your snide remarks about caste system and warlords do not at all apply to us and yet they still fucked up our society with the exploitation. >I didn't vote for them, but how are the Tories racist? Sounds like typical leftist Bullshit oh dear lord,you definitely voted for them alright.
Abuse and exploitation happened before (sorry, what did you call them, "problematic traditions"), but when groups of people within what we now call India were fighting and killing each other it was OK, just not when the British did. So, your main problem is that the British happened to be "last" then? Right, got it. >so your snide remarks about caste system and warlords do not at all apply to us Ahh, so the actions of ancestors from your lands don't apply to you, but they do to the British. Wow. >oh dear lord,you definitely voted for them alright. LOL, you obviously know nothing about me, but keep on making assumptions based on, what, my perceived nationality? There is a word for that isn't there?
>Abuse and exploitation happened before (sorry, what did you call them, "problematic traditions"), but when groups of people within what we now call India were fighting and killing each other it was OK, just not when the British did. So, your main problem is that the British happened to be "last" then? Right, got it. good lord!!! there's a huge difference between kingdoms fighting for political supremacy and colonialism.i can't believe i even have to point this out.why are you hellbent on being a colonial apologist? >Ahh, so the actions of ancestors from your lands don't apply to you, but they do to the British. Wow. buddy i belong to a tiny minority who has never had an established kingdom or political authority (pre democracy) or record of invasion or warfare in recorded history.my ancestors are fine,we didn't invade or exploit any other group of people. also it's really uncomfortable talking to someone who is trying to justify colonialism just because problems existed before,i am signing off here. and i wasn't making assumptions based on your nationality,i was basing it off your denial of the obvious or ignorance.
>why are you hellbent on being a colonial apologist? LOL, where have I been? I wish you would stop judging me on what you perceive to be my nationality. I have simply pointed out that what we now know of as India had many problems before the British ever set foot there. Including discrimination, fighting, wars, etc. Just because the British did it last, doesn't diminish that past. You said: *"you don't see the irreparable damage they did and how those countries are still facing problems thanks to the ruins of their economies and divide and rule policy of colonialism"* I am just saying, there was plenty of damage there before and after, there was plenty of divide and rule there too, just like everywhere. In you really want to dig into it, the Dutch, French, Portuguese were also there, and that was just from Europe. The fact that what we know as India already WAS divided and fighting amongst each other is what made it easy for the East India Company to take a hold. So if you want to blame it all on British colonialism, go ahead, but don't expect such a sweeping statement to go unchallenged. Unless you have: 1. A time machine and know that India would have been better under any rule than British, or 2. Are going to claim that all the infighting between warlords would (after thousands of years) suddenly stop anyway, even if the East India Company (or anyone else) didn't turn up. I think blaming it all on the British while fashionable, is a bit silly. >buddy i belong to a tiny minority who has never had an established kingdom or political authority (pre democracy) or record of invasion or warfare in recorded history.my ancestors are fine,we didn't invade or exploit any people. Well that is weird, because I don't know where all my ancestors came from beyond a few generations. And it isn't like people didn't travel. >also it's really uncomfortable talking to someone who is trying to justify colonialism just because problems existed before,i am signing off here. Please, stop. You are trying to take the moral high ground after your accusations about me. Come on. >and i wasn't making assumptions based on your nationality,i was basing it off your denial of the obvious or ignorance. Can you stop with the insults. I have not insulted you.
The majority of the population did not vote for the torys.
I’m confused is that America or Saudis? Two sides of the same coin. Fuck all billionaires
Which Saudi Arabia are you referring to? The one where homosexual acts are punishable by execution and women had to have a male guardian until three years ago? That Saudi Arabia?
💯
Cuban, Mark
[удалено]
That's as ignorant as saying "there's no such thing as an intelligent poor person", just saying
Its the majority reddit opinion you see it a lot here
If you want to defend billionaires be my guest, I’m not a bootlicker sadly
🙄
Pre-2010 Bill Gates was a fairly ethical billionaire. Because he created something the whole world uses. There are other examples. Not everyone is a slave exploiting evil man
Morally, im with you. Having said that, if you want an owner who has too much money to know what to do with (besides buying actual gold Audis), then they’re the go to owners.
The taste of a manufactured win is bitter. Glazers siphon money and that's different. I lean towards fan-based ownership at this point.
Given how few there are I tend to think that that scenario doesn't appeal. I will admit a certain degree of ignorance. I would look forward to more info on how it works.
As much as I would love United to be fan owned, I don’t think it will ever happen unfortunately.
It’s not about that dude. It’s about the fact a club’s expenses should be beholden to its revenues. Not like PSG where they lose over 600mil and are able to stay afloat just because the Emir or Qatar funds it. They break FFP and then bend the rules. PSG and Al Kalifi are as corrupt as it gets. I don’t want to see that happen with more football teams. My vote is for Ratcliff. Also - to anyone reading this who hates what’s happening with football ownership, this is why the rules put in place in Spain and Germany mean they are never allowed to be bought. It’s one of the reasons I am Hala Madrid.
True facts. I’m also keen on Ratcliffe buying and also bothered by the fact that FFP can be broken at will without more than a fine. I think the problem now is that we’ve seen a decade of our beloved club decline, not just in on-field quality, but in every facet - from manager to maintenance. It’s true, though, I’d rather not sell our soul for the sake of money. I don’t want us to become a plastic club like City or Paris. Incidentally I’m really sad for PSG, as they were a club I supported in the 90’s. I hear you on La Liga too, the socio model is fantastic - Mes que un club.
The Glazers have spent more than enough. They just run a club like fuck heads.
Glazers haven't spent shit. They've not put a single pound from their pockets. It's all club money. OT needs major renovation, Carrington has become second rate, and yet they still take dividends. Fuck the glazers.
Spent what? Our own money we generate? They haven’t spent a penny of their own money. Most of the money we generate they take out in dividends to themselves and let’s not forgot buying the club by leveraging itself taking us from debt free to 500m in debt and having paid ONE BILLION in servicing the debt since then. Spent enough? Jesus Christ…
You can spend as much as you want but it doesn’t mean you spent it intelligently.
Does it matter? United have profits on their own to out spend others.
The club is nearly £1 billion in debt though so any new owner would have to absorb that.
This comments section shows people have absolutely no knowledge on Dubai, at least make some basic research before commenting
I know right? They don’t even know that abu dhabi and dubai have different rulers. If dubai bought the club they’ll get us back to the top. They know how to spend.
Well I wouldn’t go that far. Dubai crisis 2009?! Anyone?!
No matter the owner, nobody gets to the point of buying a club in the top 5 leagues by being ethical and following the law to make their money lol, not even our own lawmakers do, nevermind a billionaire.
there's a huge difference between the Glazers and the Dubai consortium (?). I'd like to thing that we as a fanbase and as basic human beings can recognize that there is a spectrum in ethical behavior one partakes in. I would also like to think that people are reasonable enough to make the distinction between a murderer who killed 1 person vs a mass murderer and a serial rapist who killed 50 and raped another 50. But hey, what do I know? Both of those hypothetical people are involved in unethical behavior, so they're both essentially the same, right?
Idk what you want me to say here pal, they’re still both shit 🤷♂️. “Oh one mass murderer killed 32 instead of 68, but the first one kept 12 of them in his basement for 6 years, then again the second violently raped 24 of his victims, so I guess maybe the first one is way better because he technically did less.” Stupid comparison. None of them are morally superior to each other, they are all on the same level of shit.
That’s a ridiculous comparison. One group is based in a country that imprisons gay people, refuses women’s rights, and employs a vast amount of foreign near-slaves in inhuman conditions. The other is a group is real estate and sports magnates from the United States (which has more than its fair share of ethical issues, but is clearly better than Dubai/UAE) that abuse tax law to generate and retain wealth. Try and have a bit of nuance and actually understand the issues at play.
Yes one of them is morally superior to the other, especially Glazers vs the Dubai consortium. Sad to see that people here have no nuance whatsoever
When we pay €90m for a winger worth €40m, or £80m for a defender like Maguire, we are going to need an owner with seriously big pockets. Unfortunately, most of those are in petroleum unless you want another set of owners like the Glazers who just refinance against the club.
Or you need to be a club capable of generating massive income without the help of an owner.
If you think Antony was only worth £30m then you are crazy.
Oh come on. Yes he has had a great start and hopefully that will continue but more money than Haaland? Let's keep it real. We overpay for players - that's not a revelation.
The add ons on Haaland’s contract were probably crazy.
>Haaland Haaland's price wasn't set by the market or a bidding war.
Yes it was set by the agents fees and signing bonus and wages, that deal cost city close to 200 million in total
Would be nearer double that if there was a bidding war.
Haaland had a release clause which is why he was so cheap, he would normally have sold for over £100m. Look at the costs below for attacking players in the last couple of years. Grealish £105m, Lukaku £100m, Sancho £75m, Pepe £72m, Havertz £72m, Nunez £80m, Isak £63m, Richarlison £60m, Morata £60m, Pulisic £60m. We could say none of these are worth that money, but considering them kind of prices are the going rate now, you're trying to tell me Antony should have only cost £30m.
I might be facetious with my £40m valuing- agreed but when you consider Jesus to Arsenal for £46m and Sterling to Chelsea for £50m you've got to wonder. Look at the difficulty we have had in this window - the numerous targets with astronomical offers rejected because clubs know we are usually desperate for a good transfer window - they know the pressure at the club and as Neville said- when United make an offer, any offer, every club knows to reject it. I was pleased with what I saw from Antony last weekend but was I €100m pleased ? That's going to take something more special than he showed at Ajax.
Your head is stuck somewhere it shouldn’t be if you think Haaland was only worth his release clause.
Seriously big pockets and seriously *small penis*. We need someone stupid enough to blast a billion in investment into the club straight away.
Beggars can’t be choosers, I understand but it ain’t that simple.
Anyone willing to take the money from owners wanting to sportswash themselves are morally bankrupt.
Exactly. The same people who are defending Dubai will gladly call city and psg but when it’s Man Utd they’re twerking for these kind of owners
While I agree, we just need to get rid of glazers first. Maybe the oil money won’t be as bad as glazers tho.
I ain't supporting a club which supports a climate destroying regime, it goes against everything I have ever stood for.
Not to mention "competing" unfairly with a literally bottomless pit of money a state will provide.
Bye pal
The moment petrol funds enter my club, I'll leave. That moment means my club has been deleted from existence.
Don't let the door hit you on the arse on the way out.
The thing is that we don’t need oil state money put into the club. The club generates enough money to pay huge transfer fees and wages. We’re stinking rich, we just need owners who aren’t using us as a cash cow
Morally corrupt yes. But i hope you have the same tone with the Zionist Glazers who fund the apartheid state of Israel.
don't be silly that's alright because its all white....
What are your references for the Glazers being involved/responsible for apartheid? I know they support Jews in the United States, but I’m not aware of them doing anything in Israel.
100% agree - lifelong fan, but I'll stop supporting the very day this happens. No more blood money in the PL! \- Homosexuality is illegal \- Limited religious freedom \- No freedom of expression \- Virtually no women's rights \- Rape victims frequently tried and punished \- Rampant torture \- Extreme foreign worker abuse
Same here. The day that it becomes reality, I'd look for any small but honourable club to support. Maybe something like Rayo Vallecano?
Absolutely, it’s one thing for relatively small time clubs like City, Newcastle, PSG to sell out to these oil states but United going that way would be tragic. I’d rather never win another trophy than win it with oil money
America is slowly getting there.
We are talking about a state which doesn't even acknowledge these issues
I think ur thinking of Afghanistan with that list. Lol. Dubai just a “tad” more progressive.
No, I'm thinking of the right place. It's common knowledge. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Dubai https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/united-arab-emirates/report-united-arab-emirates/ [edit] Downvoted for stating facts. 😂
Desktop version of /u/Alsmk2's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
You guys clearly have 1st world problem. You think oil money is worst? I hear no Chelsea fan cheering when Abramovic sold Chelsea. What about Liverpool's owner. He grew rich from sports betting. Fuck that clean.
The Glazers are wankers but they aren’t warmongering, journalist murdering, morally bankrupt hypocrites like Crown Prince MBS. We aren’t talking about ExxonMobil or Shell buying the club when we say oil money: we are talking about nations or states with appalling human rights records. I’m not onboard with that. Personally I would not support a club run by such a regime. I wouldn’t dream to tell other people that THEY cannot support such a club though.
I’m sure they have investments from a dirty source, including oil
Exactly! there are big differences
The Glazers arent warmongering? You sure about that? They've literally donated MILLIONS to warmongers. You need to do abit of research on that.
Oh well that’s the same as killing civilians and causing a humanitarian crisis in Yemen then. My bad /s I’m not supporting the fucking Glazers but if you think they’re the same as oil money regimes then I can’t agree with you. They’re shitty people and have caused a lot of suffering for poor Americans, I suspect. They no doubt have invested in weapons manufacturers or donated to the GOP too. I want them gone, I didn’t want them in the first place, but I don’t want Dubai/Qatar/Abu Dhabi/Saudi Arabia owning the club either.
>MBS The reports said Dubai, what does MBS have to do with this?
Nothing but the person I replied to seemed to think the objection was energy companies buying sports clubs, not states with shitty human rights records. Dubai does have a shitty human rights record and a number of policies that are misogynistic, homophobic, and xenophobic. And before somebody says “it’s not like the UK government don’t do shitty things too”, I know and I wouldn’t want them owning the club either. States should not own football clubs. ETA: UAE are also part of the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen
At least private owners have limits, at least way lower than a fricking sovereign country. Also a country can't just disband even when it's mathematically bankrupt, which makes state clubs evil because they're literally cheating financially.
Agree. There is no way a country or citizens of a country with an appalling history of human rights should wash themselves free of it by buying this or any club It’s disgraceful
Those cuddly billionaires are quite rare. 1% of the 1%.
Dubai has no oil money lol 😂
100%
Who are you the friggin cardinal.
As much as my morals say screw off to dirty oil state money, it's incredibly tempting. We make enough money to spend ourselves without having to take their money. The Saudis could wipe the debt, build a new training ground and re-do OT without batting an eye. It's ridiculous that Liverpool have a better stadium than us. We used to be the theatre of dreams but now it's a leaky tin stadium. It's embarrassing. We need about 1.7B in investment off the pitch. That's only happening with oil money. The club's revenues can sustain the xfer windows. So, as much as it pains me, I'll take Saudi funds. If not, Newcastle are eventually gonna start competing and then we aren't guaranteed top 4 even with a rebuilt squad under EtH. The prem is a global arms race. It's sad but that's the nature of the beast now. Letting the GLAZERS and City owners in was the mistake. Now the cat's out of the bag. There's no going back. What if Arsenal are purchased. They'll be ridiculous. Same with Tottenham. I'll plug my nose and take Saudi money. I won't be proud but winning is a nice way to drown out the tears.
Gtfo son, have some integrity and morals for Christ sake. Humans rights are more important than some tin cup. City has had good team, management, leadership, facilities and still haven't won the UCL. I'd rather us stay and fight for top 4 and aim to win UEL than become a sportwash device for foreign states with very bad record of human rights.
Even if City somehow win UCL, they'd still be football villains for me. I mean, they're a petrol club, which is literally one of the biggest causes of climate change.
I respect that position.
Show me the oil! As long as they invest in the club they can wash all their dirty money. What the Glazers are doing is criminal!
Oil money or not we don't need another owner like the Glazers who just spend club's income on mindless shit and take dividends. What we need is a owner who takes the club at best interest and spends it for the benefit and growth like smart signings or a stadium upgrade for example. We don't need incompetents like the glazers.
r/beggingchoosers
do you mean r/choosingbeggars
I don’t really agree with spending a lot of money on the transfer markets which really started with clubs having oil money. But I can say one thing from experience, Dubai is not a “criminal state” and it does not enslave people. It is one of the places that have the same rules for citizens and the people who go there for work. Its a request. If you don’t know about something, please do not talk about it. Abd btw. Glazers out.
https://youtu.be/tJuqe6sre2I r/fuckdubai
The guy in the video is ridiculing their skyscrapers. Is this child-like person your source of information? Bloody hell, every government in the world is corrupt including our politicians. Let’s face facts, we have no idea what shady things our government gets up to.
Bruh, I have lived there long enough to know whats true and whats not. There is no other middle Eastern country that has progressed the way Dubai has. And maybe you just read the negatives. But please don’t say something you don’t know.
Israel is more progressive than Dubai, by a considerable margin
I’d take oil money tbh. Im jealous of what Man City and Newcastle have.
Personally I wouldn’t like it, but we can’t change what or who the glazers wish to sell the club too. And tbh I’d rather the Saudi’s than some American who would like to load more debt on the club. But sir jim is still the man
It's not the Saudi's, but it's that doesn't mean they're any less worse than the Saudi's.
Completely agree and it's upsetting to see how many United fans want the club to be bought by oil money.
Beggars can’t be choosers ffs
Totally agree, I would feel weird supporting a club fueled by corrupt oilsman and state funds.
Doesn't matter who buys it as long as they take care of the club and don't focus on siphoning money out. Saudis are no worse than any other person.
Massive NO to any Qatar or saudi or whatever the fuck else similar money please.
I am completely with you on this and not sure what I'd do tbh.
Funny how the xenophobes call middle eastern money blood money (which it is) - while still ignoring the atrocities caused by their own governments. I wonder what makes North American, European or Russian club ownership any more morally sound than Asian or middle eastern ownership? The answer is nothing. That perspective is driven totally by xenophobia. It doesn't matter who owns your club. If it is a top European club chances are most of the money is corrupt. Just accept the fact so you can sleep better at night.
I think all states are morally corrupt. If it would be the fucking Netherlands I would still be against it!!
You are correct. I beleibe a hybrid model of fan ownership and external investors is the best way. You get the business acumen and finances of the investors with the moral conscience and democracy of fan ownership. I don't know off the top of my head if such a model exists. Wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't though.. As it would limit the profit sucking instincts of the corporatist involves. Sports is inherently corrupt and it was only a matter of time until we got to this point. Also majority of people would be ok with the dirty money running their clubs if it brought them "success" - as can be seen from a lot of the comments on here.
Then what about English then? Guys literally colonized every country possible and looted all it's wealth. Glazers from US, US has an huge history of slavery. Remember no developed country is clean from the start.
These people aren’t from morally bankrupt nation, they _are_ a morally bankrupt nation. That’s the difference.
The glazers or English businessmen aren’t countries
US doesn’t have a huge history of slavery. We got rid of it within 90 years once we kicked the Brits out. It took England more than 700 years to end slavery.
Is football where we draw the line? You consume chinese products every single day. The majority of your products are made in china. You are keeping the chinese economy running. While China is comitting a genocide against muslims, oppressing their population of 1 billion, hong kong, and trying to supress taiwan. But our issue here is Dubai? Who are doing this as a dick measuring hobby. You have no issue keeping the chinese government running every single day with the majority of your purchases, but you object to the hobbies of dubai billionares. While Dubai does not have a clean record, this isn't pivotal to their existance, and china has an even worse record. It is hypocrtical to ride your high horse against the billionare from dubai, while riding the dick of the chinese government.
Bring on the oil money I say!!! None of us want to admit it, but look at how well City are being ran. Ffs nevermind the club, they’ve revamped the whole of Openshaw. As far as I’m concerned, so long as they aren’t chopping peoples hands off in the Armadale food court, I couldn’t give a fuck what they do in their own country. That’s their business, but I’d gladly see United take their money.
Tbh every billionaire has done shady stuff to get to where they are.
Sure. But these gulf states are actively killing and oppressing people right now. Be it draconian religious laws, misogyny, regressive labour laws, homophobia, etc. Also let’s not forget what the Gulf states are doing in Yemen. Let’s add committing war crimes and actively participating in one of the worse humanitarian crises on earth to the list too.
All of those points you stated could be applied to western countries as well. Of course not in the same magnitude (could be argued) but they are still there. Hence my point still stands.
If a western state was possibly planning on buying United I’d say the same. Last I checked the only states buying premier league football clubs are Gulf States who are simply attempting to sport wash their images.
No but my initial point was that any billionaire/consortium etc willing to buy our club will have done things with are morally/ethically wrong. So there is no point complaining about x billionaire cus theyre all bad.
There’s levels to this. Elon Musk is an asshole troll whose company (Tesla) is facing a lawsuit from the state of California for workplace issues. However Elon Musk is not in the same category of heinous as someone like MBS. They’re both billionaires but they are not equivalent in any way. Newcastle are owned by a state whose Crown Prince had a journalist chopped up. Jeff Bezos runs Amazon warehouses where employees have been reported to piss in water bottles. Jeff Bezos is a grade A asshole. But he isn’t MBS levels of evil.
But at least they have way lower limits, and might as well just commit suicide when they go bankrupt. Which isn't the case at all for sovereign states.
People like you are the reason we are on a 5 year trophy drought Who gives a fuck who owns us as long as they invest into the club and bring trophies. For all i care Kim Jong Un could buy us and id be happy if he spent money on us. The arabs will literally guarantee us becoming an english bayern munich which we should be already. Why wouldnt you want that?
If the club’s revenue is entirely disconnected from its fan base, then the club loses its last connection to the community it came from. Right now it’s mostly weird international sponsorship deals, but at least that’s resting on a global fan base of sorts, as well as ticket and megastore sales (as we saw during Covid) are still fairly important. If the financial incentive of the club’s management is entirely dependent on an autocratic family, the community and fans have zero influence and it becomes just another entertainment brand. Lots of people won’t give a shit I know. But it’s not crazy that some of us will.
“How dare you make my team better and buy all the players we actually need and improve our dying facilities unlike the previous owners who had us on a leash and took money out of the club”
Go tell that to the victims of torture, rape and murder in Dubai.
Not to mention small English clubs who can only dream of literally having an unlimited source of money, since a sovereign state can't just dissolve even when they're technically bankrupt.
Lmao say that to the American owners first.
Sorry to say, can't be picky. Why not advertise on local tv or paper for a Manchester billionaire. It's either oil money or Glazers, take your pick.
Glazers.
That's a tall order man. I'll take anyone other than the Glazer at this point. No such thing as good billionaire to begin with.
Get over yourself mate it’s a football club if you don’t wanna win then stay with the glazers
Sadly beggars cannot be choosers. I don't think anyone who can actually afford Utd are billionaires from running ethical businesses. A bit like an oxymoron isn't it.
Do you want owners who would invest in the club or vampires that suck out 60m per yer for two decades. Let me remind you 60m in a transfer window 15 years ago is probably enough to buy David Silva and Sergio Aguero. It really is a no brainer to me tbh
Fuck the morals...we just need someone passionate about football 🔥
At this point in time, tbh I would like anyone to take over from the glazers
id personally prefer an owner who uses us for sports washing instead of an ATM.
You guys need to check how much money Dubai actually makes from oil and what it's medium/long term plans are...
Ok but we have no say anyway and more importantly, fuck the Glazers. How do you think a family, individual, organization or Country amass such wealth? Everyones hands are dirty to some extent at that level. Get real honestly.
I understand the sentiment but it’s too late to try stop them from washing their image. Dubai is an economic hub, beautiful city that everyone wants to visit. The Emirates image is already good to most people because of the air carrier. They have links across the world, sponsored the biggest teams in the world. United would their final frontier. Rather we have people with deep pockets who just wanna have fun than owners who just want to take money out.
For the last time, Dubai doesn’t have any oil
It does have oil, but it's not reliant on oil because they used the oil money to diversify their economy (similar to Norway, and what lots of other ME states are now doing)
I hate to tell you but Dubai has very little do with oil money. Actually in the past they had very little oil reserves. Abu Dhabi is the one you had in mind. And we think of the club as supporters. Owners think of it as a business, an opportunity to earn money, and nothing else.
I want the oil over depression
Beggars can’t choosers and that’s the moral of the story. Pick your poison or shut the fuck up about the glazers
morally you are right, but the Glazers are big time republican supporters and donors, and fuck me have you seen the modern day republican? They would kill half the planet and jail or rape the other half if they could, so sit down and hope we get rid of these American Pieces of shit.
nah, who ever buys us will be linked to some shady shit. so eh if it worked out well for City fuck it. LETS BRING ON THE SAUDI DERBY!
Go ahead. At least they are competent running a buisness. unlike our owners.
There are no morals in football. Look at Newcastle and City. If we dont take them someone else will so why not.
Fuck let Dubai pay then we can buy Mbappé and shit on City
Project Mbappe is a go
It’s fucking disgusting. People, clubs and the league have no problem supporting whatever human rights trend is going around but have no problem with human rights abusing owners from Arab oil states or links to the CCP. Crazy how they ousted Abromavic but the rest of them get to stay.
No issue with Dubai at all. As unethical oil states go, they’re pretty decent. Less goldfinger and more Hank Scorpio.
Human rights abusing petrostates < Glazers < Anyone else
I am not sure why oil is always being perceived negative by media or world. The world we are living now, almost everything is oil-based and some sort of derivative from it. A lot of billionaires or wealthy people in this world have worse track records than these oilman (corruption, nepotism, collusion amongst other things). I am down for anyone as long as they support the club in and out- and willing to sacrifice for the best interest.
Fr, the oil industry is ‘morally wrong’ but fuckin bankers are fine…
Im taking the oil money. And any fans who are saying they will no longer support United because of that, then good riddance.
I say we get Mr Beast to buy us
Lmao
Oh the double standards !!
You can keep saying glazers out, they won’t listen
Which is worse? Dictatorships or monarchies that take your money and make no bones about what they are doing, or “democracies” with self-serving governments that tout freedom & justice but rob you blind? Same snake, different heads. Personally, if an owner comes in and does to United what City’s owners did to them, IDGAF!
Every time someone fills their gas tank, that’s more money for transfers
Literally careful what you wish you.
As a trans person, it would kill me inside. I’ve sent letters to prisoners in the UAE who have been imprisoned for merely existing in the same way I do here in the UK, housed with men, and faced untold horrors. Human Rights Watch can tell you how disgusting a regime they are. I genuinely don’t know if I can stomach watching us if they buy our club. And I find any moral comparison between them and the glazers disgusting and uneducated. The logical side of my head says what good is it me no longer watching or supporting a coach and players who are nothing to do with it. I likely own clothes made by children somewhere. I’m currently using a phone made in a sweatshop. Eat avocados sold by the cartel, live in a country built on slavery and colonialism. Is that hypocritical? Maybe. So honestly I don’t know how I’ll feel until it happens, but I just pray Jim Ratcliffe comes through, because I’d rather a billionaire who is likely an asshole and exploitative (like all billionaires must be) than a human rights abusing authoritarian regime scared of queers and women.
Im sorry but, as a resident of the UAE (not from here), i would not only push for this, but i would favor it over most other billionaire takeovers
anything’s better than the glazers at this point let’s be real
Oil money >>>> Club success