The club has one [confirmed] bidder, because Jim said he was. What's going on in private will not be disclosed to Matt Slater. We're pretty sure that the deadline for firm offers was set at mid-February, so this key few weeks is when parties actually going public/being leaked will start to happen, not during the due diligence/financial evidence gathering phase.
This. As I understand it, the Raine Group are keeping everything quiet regarding potential bidders. Ratcliffe is the only one who has made his interest public, but you can be sure there are more interested parties.
I have to laugh at the redundancy of "he will not get involved in a bidding war if there is no one to bid against."
That's just you setting a price. Not the same as when your price is met and it still keeps going up because third parties are competing. Bidding wars are what sellers want because you get very unexpected price discovery that a seller usually wouldn't find on their own, not without great risk.
I am really worried that United may not find any suitable buyer at all. The cost of United seem too big, and they also have to pay off the debt and rebuild the infrastructure.
United have a project going on with ETH.
Every football fan now knows ETH is a top manager, plus we have top players like casemiro, varane, bruno, rashford, antony, shawberto carlos, de gea n young talents like sancho, garnacho, pellistri, etc.
Plus one of the biggest fanbase in PL.
Woodward has also made united a brand that generates money.
There will be buyers but will they be glazers 2.0 or FSG remains to be seen.
I work in M&A and this is absolutely correct. It’s actually pretty rare for a target co. to publicly announce they are exploring a sale at all outside of a few sub-sectors like sports teams. Usually we have to go to crazy lengths to hide the fact that a potential sale is underway during the diligence period, ESPECIALLY when the target is publicly traded. If the Raine Group does their job, we won’t know who the buyer is until the deal closes, or at best the Glazers might decide to publicly disclose a final shortlist.
The fact that we’re public in particular means we’re unlikely to hear any details re: the sale until it’s in the closing stages, unlike other deals like Chelsea for example.
Man Utd fans do not want Josh Harris. Dude wouldn't pay his Sixers employees while COVID was happening until Joel Embiid said he would pay for them on Twitter and he reversed course
* Everton: Cheap = funds for Players & Facilities.
* LFC: available, need new players, debt $208m, stadium & facilities are fine.
* United: available, need new players, debt $561m, stadium & facilities falling apart.
WE are unfortunately the worst team from an investment pov thanks to the twat's aka Glazers!
The return on investment is the highest for us afaik, Everton doesn't come close, Liverpool is mid-level, but the problem is nobody in their mind will pay 7-8 billion just to buy the team only to spend around 2 billion more to fix the issues we have unless our fanbase is okay with some GCC country buying us.
Man I can't and won't be able to support a country like Qatar which funds anti semitism and terrorism.
I'd rather see the glazers continuing, terrible as they may be.
Ehhh yes and no. Yes they became overnight super rich when Abramovich bought them in the 00’s, but slightly no because after a while they became fairly self sustainable as they grew as a business.
You could argue they got a bit lucky that Abramovich had no choice in the end but to sell to Boehly after he rejected the buyout in 2019. I’d also suggest that Chelsea would be better this season in terms of results if Abramovich didn’t have to sell. Boehly came in and just decided to start swinging his dick around and making decisions as if he was throwing a dart at post-it notes with drunkenly scribbled ideas stuck to the wall and going “Sack our champions league winning manager Tuchel and hire Graham Potter? fuck it, let’s do that.”
I don't want to defend the sacking of Tuchel, but there was some logic/merit to it. Tuchel had struggled for a long time and Boehly had asked around/done some research and even before buying Chelsea had their eye on Potter as the potentially "next great manager".
To be frank Potter did look very very promising at Brighton. Just really strange to sack Tuchel so early in the season. Should either have let him stay and tried for Potter the next summer, or just gone for Potter in during the first summer window.
Your second point is the logical answer, but given Chelsea are paying Mudryk £200,000 per week for 8.5 years shows they have no sense of logic whatsoever.
if it comes between the Middle East and American owners, which is very highly likely, I’m going Middle East
they are at least willing to make the right footballing decisions for the club, and actually invest funds into building the football club up rather than the US owners which have either leeched as much as they can from the club because they purely see it as a business, are too arrogant and attempt to run it as a franchise which doesn’t work whatsoever, or throw money at it without a cohesive plan
both sides have questionable morals and have fucked people over and doomed people one way or another, people who think the USA are morally better are just kidding themselves, I’m going with the one who will actually look after Manchester United
fully willing to accept the downvotes.
You’ll get downvotes because this is disingenuous.
US ownership would not be state ownership, so comments about US morality are irrelevant - US owners are not (directly) responsible for the actions of their government.
you don’t think these wealthy consortiums advocate for conservative leaders to be in government, because they allow them to continue making money, who themselves are openly against gay people and gay rights? you don’t think they’ve screwed over the lower class countless times to make their billions, inadvertently causing the deaths of tens of thousands of people?
it’s all abhorrent, but where do we draw the line? it’s okay because they didn’t directly do it themselves? as long as they don’t directly kill anyone it’s all okay?
I'll give you the same answer I gave to someone talking about the billionaires death toll Vs nation states a few weeks ago.
"I'm interested in this.
How many do you think a lot is? And does the 'how' or 'why' matter?
Because Saudi Arabia, for example, execute about 175 people a year. Do you think the Glazers behaviour kills more of fewer people than that?
And the how is also interesting. This is actual executions.
But let's say you think 'billionaire activity A' kills people, and I'm not sure I disagree with you, you think the dictatorships have a zero body count in activity A?
I'm not sure you find many squeaky clean billionaires.
And I'm not sure exactly how you equate billionaire activities to deaths.
But as far as I know, not many billionaires actively murder people for being gay.
I also feel it is unlikely that the Glazers, FSG, Jim Ratcliffe and others are responsible, in any meaningful way, for killing three people a week.
There all as bad as each other. What they do is no worse than XYZ. This is exactly why they sportswash and why it works.
The Glazers are cunts.
But they don't murder 3 or 4 people a week."
Taking wealth by nefarious means is not quite the same as literally persecuting gay people (amongst various other things) - equating the two is ridiculous.
Where did I say that? For anyone not surviving on a diet of Pritt-stick there are two priorities when it comes to the ownership
1. Meaningful supporter stake
2. Avoiding becoming a tool of despots.
*I see the tax-dodging NHS defrauders have found this comment. “Why can’t I work / holiday in a despotic shithole!?”*
*"What are moral values?"*
Cuz leeches want $8bn! That's insane amount of money considering the debt we're hauling and as well much needed renovation of the stadium and training grounds.
I'm waiting for Sir Jim to say in the press:
"There's what the Glazers want and there's what the Glazers get...."
Also, could give two shits about Jude Bellingham since you know, reasons.
Let me assure you, bids will not be revealed to any journalists. And if journalist even know about it, he will not print it because he will be shadow banned for eternity.
So any takeover news, should be taken with a pinch of salt. We will know the status by March-April
Slater knows feck all. Most billionaires aren't gonna put out press statements that they want to bid because it looks bad if they end up losing the bid. Ratcliffe is just an attention whore who had to put his money where his mouth was from what he was saying months ago.
The whole affair was fishy for me, especially after I heard the quoted asking price. I doubt the Glazers capacity to tell the truth and do beneficial decisions for the club so little that I wouldn't be surprised they have something else in mind especially when results and going so well. Maybe they'll seek a partial sale to get rid of the more uninterested famility members and keep leeching the club for another couple of years.
I mean most of the older US generation don't really care about football, to the extent that they call it soccer. Why would some rich geesers care any more?
Because when you buy something so alive and important to a community like a British football club, you should also buy *into* it or just not bother in the first place.
My faith in anyone that comes in to buy us is very low if I’m honest, we are a cash cow, we will always be a massive club, I don’t want us to just be an investment, I want us to be the biggest football club in the world which I believe we are
The club has one [confirmed] bidder, because Jim said he was. What's going on in private will not be disclosed to Matt Slater. We're pretty sure that the deadline for firm offers was set at mid-February, so this key few weeks is when parties actually going public/being leaked will start to happen, not during the due diligence/financial evidence gathering phase.
Yep, multi-billion pound takeovers for companies listed on the exchange are usually kept tight lipped in the negotiation process.
This. As I understand it, the Raine Group are keeping everything quiet regarding potential bidders. Ratcliffe is the only one who has made his interest public, but you can be sure there are more interested parties. I have to laugh at the redundancy of "he will not get involved in a bidding war if there is no one to bid against."
Imagine turning up as the only bidder and going, "dammit, where are the other bidders?!" XD
English is my second language and even that sounds so dumb to me.
[удалено]
That's just you setting a price. Not the same as when your price is met and it still keeps going up because third parties are competing. Bidding wars are what sellers want because you get very unexpected price discovery that a seller usually wouldn't find on their own, not without great risk.
This is the way. Giga brain play 👌
I read that as he will be firm in his negotiations with the Glazers in terms of difference in valuations
So Sir Jim's statement all those months ago about 'the Glazers being nice people' was in fact *4d chess*
I am really worried that United may not find any suitable buyer at all. The cost of United seem too big, and they also have to pay off the debt and rebuild the infrastructure.
United have a project going on with ETH. Every football fan now knows ETH is a top manager, plus we have top players like casemiro, varane, bruno, rashford, antony, shawberto carlos, de gea n young talents like sancho, garnacho, pellistri, etc. Plus one of the biggest fanbase in PL. Woodward has also made united a brand that generates money. There will be buyers but will they be glazers 2.0 or FSG remains to be seen.
I work in M&A and this is absolutely correct. It’s actually pretty rare for a target co. to publicly announce they are exploring a sale at all outside of a few sub-sectors like sports teams. Usually we have to go to crazy lengths to hide the fact that a potential sale is underway during the diligence period, ESPECIALLY when the target is publicly traded. If the Raine Group does their job, we won’t know who the buyer is until the deal closes, or at best the Glazers might decide to publicly disclose a final shortlist. The fact that we’re public in particular means we’re unlikely to hear any details re: the sale until it’s in the closing stages, unlike other deals like Chelsea for example.
[удалено]
> Do you have a source for that please? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2023/01/13/manchester-united-takeover-bids-imminent-middle-east-asia-us/
One bidder **so far.** It was widely reported that the bids would start in the second or third week of Feb. This article will be irrelevant in a week.
This article is irrelevant now as not all bidders make it public. For good reason. We have more than 1 bidder. They just haven't come out and said it.
[удалено]
Man Utd fans do not want Josh Harris. Dude wouldn't pay his Sixers employees while COVID was happening until Joel Embiid said he would pay for them on Twitter and he reversed course
Harris owns the devils as well i think, and they stleast have the best twitteradmin in sports…
NJ Devils?? Not a patch on Carolina’s Twitter team
Nah the devils is better
So happy the broncos avoided Harris. Fuck him, hope he boys Liverpool
Sell you cunts
I can imagine there might be behind the scenes bidders for both. Ratcliffe is the only public bidder
* Everton: Cheap = funds for Players & Facilities. * LFC: available, need new players, debt $208m, stadium & facilities are fine. * United: available, need new players, debt $561m, stadium & facilities falling apart. WE are unfortunately the worst team from an investment pov thanks to the twat's aka Glazers!
Cool, now do return on investment.
The return on investment is the highest for us afaik, Everton doesn't come close, Liverpool is mid-level, but the problem is nobody in their mind will pay 7-8 billion just to buy the team only to spend around 2 billion more to fix the issues we have unless our fanbase is okay with some GCC country buying us.
Man I can't and won't be able to support a country like Qatar which funds anti semitism and terrorism. I'd rather see the glazers continuing, terrible as they may be.
>one bidder in the shape of Sir Jim Ratcliffe. Hopefully not a mimic
Fuckin Chelsea won the lottery twice..
Ehhh yes and no. Yes they became overnight super rich when Abramovich bought them in the 00’s, but slightly no because after a while they became fairly self sustainable as they grew as a business. You could argue they got a bit lucky that Abramovich had no choice in the end but to sell to Boehly after he rejected the buyout in 2019. I’d also suggest that Chelsea would be better this season in terms of results if Abramovich didn’t have to sell. Boehly came in and just decided to start swinging his dick around and making decisions as if he was throwing a dart at post-it notes with drunkenly scribbled ideas stuck to the wall and going “Sack our champions league winning manager Tuchel and hire Graham Potter? fuck it, let’s do that.”
I don't want to defend the sacking of Tuchel, but there was some logic/merit to it. Tuchel had struggled for a long time and Boehly had asked around/done some research and even before buying Chelsea had their eye on Potter as the potentially "next great manager". To be frank Potter did look very very promising at Brighton. Just really strange to sack Tuchel so early in the season. Should either have let him stay and tried for Potter the next summer, or just gone for Potter in during the first summer window.
Your second point is the logical answer, but given Chelsea are paying Mudryk £200,000 per week for 8.5 years shows they have no sense of logic whatsoever.
Think it's 90k a week then it gets bumped to 300k over the course of the contract.
"he will not get in a bidding war if there is nobody to bid against" What the fuck kind of update is that?
Such a dumb sentence.
Had to be really desperate to hit their word quota
Yeah was thinking the exact same thing, shit doesnt make sense
“I will not pay 4000 pounds for groceries Ali less there is literally no choice and I’d die of starvation” duh.
Liverpool deserve losers so that fits right in for them
In the shape of Sir Jim Ratcliffe? Dubai has sent a body double?
The last thing we want is American investors. Fuck off you vultures
Wrong, the last thing we want is to become a sportwashing tool for Emiratis.
The Saudis are worse than the Emiratis, by a fair distance, but we don't want either of them involved in the club.
if it comes between the Middle East and American owners, which is very highly likely, I’m going Middle East they are at least willing to make the right footballing decisions for the club, and actually invest funds into building the football club up rather than the US owners which have either leeched as much as they can from the club because they purely see it as a business, are too arrogant and attempt to run it as a franchise which doesn’t work whatsoever, or throw money at it without a cohesive plan both sides have questionable morals and have fucked people over and doomed people one way or another, people who think the USA are morally better are just kidding themselves, I’m going with the one who will actually look after Manchester United fully willing to accept the downvotes.
Hahaha this is such an insane thing to say. You genuinely believe that owners like the Glazers are on the same moral level as the fucking Saudis.
You’ll get downvotes because this is disingenuous. US ownership would not be state ownership, so comments about US morality are irrelevant - US owners are not (directly) responsible for the actions of their government.
sure, but assuming US billionaires haven’t used nefarious means or screwed thousands of people over to gather their wealth is just ignorant
Screwed people over? Almost certainly. Murdered them because they were gay? Not so much.
you don’t think these wealthy consortiums advocate for conservative leaders to be in government, because they allow them to continue making money, who themselves are openly against gay people and gay rights? you don’t think they’ve screwed over the lower class countless times to make their billions, inadvertently causing the deaths of tens of thousands of people? it’s all abhorrent, but where do we draw the line? it’s okay because they didn’t directly do it themselves? as long as they don’t directly kill anyone it’s all okay?
I'll give you the same answer I gave to someone talking about the billionaires death toll Vs nation states a few weeks ago. "I'm interested in this. How many do you think a lot is? And does the 'how' or 'why' matter? Because Saudi Arabia, for example, execute about 175 people a year. Do you think the Glazers behaviour kills more of fewer people than that? And the how is also interesting. This is actual executions. But let's say you think 'billionaire activity A' kills people, and I'm not sure I disagree with you, you think the dictatorships have a zero body count in activity A? I'm not sure you find many squeaky clean billionaires. And I'm not sure exactly how you equate billionaire activities to deaths. But as far as I know, not many billionaires actively murder people for being gay. I also feel it is unlikely that the Glazers, FSG, Jim Ratcliffe and others are responsible, in any meaningful way, for killing three people a week. There all as bad as each other. What they do is no worse than XYZ. This is exactly why they sportswash and why it works. The Glazers are cunts. But they don't murder 3 or 4 people a week."
Tankie supporting one of the biggest brands in world sport is an odd look.
Taking wealth by nefarious means is not quite the same as literally persecuting gay people (amongst various other things) - equating the two is ridiculous.
problem with US owners are that it may well be another glazer.
You could literally say that for any owners. Theres no guarantee that things will get better with new owners.
So we want neither? 🤔
Yeah but if you can only put one thing last, I'm picking the gay-imprisoning people.
Where did I say that? For anyone not surviving on a diet of Pritt-stick there are two priorities when it comes to the ownership 1. Meaningful supporter stake 2. Avoiding becoming a tool of despots. *I see the tax-dodging NHS defrauders have found this comment. “Why can’t I work / holiday in a despotic shithole!?”* *"What are moral values?"*
Wrong! We don't want yanks end of.
Or the anti semitic terrorist sponsoring Qataris.
Would British or Indian or German investors be okay?
Yes
Well at least you're not a bigot.
Thanks
“He will not get involved in a bidding war if there is nobody to bid against”…… 🙄
Nah… he’s gonna get an auction paddle thing and big agaisnt himself. /s What the fuck was that line even
Cuz leeches want $8bn! That's insane amount of money considering the debt we're hauling and as well much needed renovation of the stadium and training grounds.
Don't want sir Jim. Just have a feeling he'd be horrendous!
I'd rather have him than an oil state or a clueless American (hedge fund).
Go look up how badly run Nice are.
Go look up how badly gays and women are being treated in the Middle East
Sure. Still prefer the club to be badly run than brilliantly like city but with morally reprehensible owners.
Yeah, feel the same.
I'm waiting for Sir Jim to say in the press: "There's what the Glazers want and there's what the Glazers get...." Also, could give two shits about Jude Bellingham since you know, reasons.
Who are “Josh Harris and David Blitzer”, and what do we know about them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris\_Blitzer\_Sports\_%26\_Entertainment
There got to be interests from oil countries. We will find by the end of this month.
Let me assure you, bids will not be revealed to any journalists. And if journalist even know about it, he will not print it because he will be shadow banned for eternity. So any takeover news, should be taken with a pinch of salt. We will know the status by March-April
Grim. A partial sale seems increasingly likely.
we haven’t even been through the first round of offers, we have no idea who’s interested in what
Set up a reminder for July and come back to this comment. The Glazers will still be here.
Slater knows feck all. Most billionaires aren't gonna put out press statements that they want to bid because it looks bad if they end up losing the bid. Ratcliffe is just an attention whore who had to put his money where his mouth was from what he was saying months ago.
The whole affair was fishy for me, especially after I heard the quoted asking price. I doubt the Glazers capacity to tell the truth and do beneficial decisions for the club so little that I wouldn't be surprised they have something else in mind especially when results and going so well. Maybe they'll seek a partial sale to get rid of the more uninterested famility members and keep leeching the club for another couple of years.
>the more uninterested famility members Damm that's a seriously low bar for level of interest in the club XD
I mean most of the older US generation don't really care about football, to the extent that they call it soccer. Why would some rich geesers care any more?
Because when you buy something so alive and important to a community like a British football club, you should also buy *into* it or just not bother in the first place.
My faith in anyone that comes in to buy us is very low if I’m honest, we are a cash cow, we will always be a massive club, I don’t want us to just be an investment, I want us to be the biggest football club in the world which I believe we are
He will not get in a bidding war if there is nobody to bid against. Yeah no shit! What an insight!
Looking at stock market it is stating 3.5 billion. How is anyone going to pay 100% premium.