Is Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s investment good news for Manchester United? YOUR COMMENTS as the INEOS boss is set to take control of a 25 percent stake of the club… but will leave the Glazers in charge at Old Trafford for now
[ad_1]
Football fans have questioned Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s decision to buy a 25 percent stake of Manchester United, which will see the Glazers remain in control of the club.
The petrochemicals billionaire, a boyhood United fan, initially lodged a bid for a majority stake in the club when the Glazers announced last November that they were open to investment or a full sale.
But after a prolonged impasse, Ratfcliffe submitted an adjusted offer, believed to be worth between £1.4 and £1.5billion, for a 25 percent stake in the club in the first step in what is being viewed as a staged buyout.
News of the breakthrough came shortly after the withdrawal of Qatari Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani from the takeover battle.
Despite offering to clear the debts and pay cash for 100 per cent of the club, the Qatari bid continually failed to meet the Glazers’ £6bn valuation.
Sir Jim Ratcliffe is to complete a deal for 25 per cent of Manchester United this week
The proposal will leave the unpopular Glazer family in charge of the club
Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani with Drew his bid for Man United after a nine-month process
Mail Sport reported Ratfcliffe’s owner also fell short of the asking price, but his bid to take control of a quarter of the club proved sufficient to get a deal done.
Reaction to Ratcliffe’s proposal, which is expected to be ratified over the coming days, appeared to be a largely one-sided debate, going off the comments of Mail Sport readers.
One comment read: ‘Waiting for the s**t to hit the fan when he (Ratcliffe) tries to get out because they (the Glazers) won’t let him have a say and do what they have been doing and continue to rob the club blind.
Another reader said: ‘So, let me get this right. The Glazers spent 250m of their own money (the rest was loans put onto United’s back) and are now proposing selling 25% of the club for perhaps £1.5bn+.
‘And still they’re not in a rush to leave!! United, as a club, have had to pay perhaps £2bn since they arrived in interest, dividends and loans, which is a massive handicap when you’re trying to compete with other clubs who have no such problems. The Glazers greed seems endless!’
Manchester United fans have regularly staged protests against the Glazers since 2005
Several sections of United supporters demanded the Glazers sell the club outright
Several other readers suggested the Glazers were the real winners in the deal, having secured a major investment without relinquishing control of the club.
‘Another business masterclass by the Glazers.. raising money still in complete control and giving No control to anyone else,’ one reader wrote.
Another added: ‘Thought Sir Jim was a smart businessman. All he’s done is topped up Glazers bank accounts.’
A third reader noted: ‘Ratcliffe is skint in the great scheme of things and this won’t make a blind bit of difference. Sad times for united. Glaziers (sic) gonna be here for a long long time.’
Echoing the same feeling, one reader wrote: ‘Cant believe Sir Jim can be that stupid, even by buying 25% he is paying over the top. The Glazers are playing a game here.’
A reader from Glasgow argued Ratcliffe’s proposal was a ‘horrendous deal’ and claimed such a scenario would be unthinkable at other major clubs.
‘The sad thing is that other clubs would never allow this. Imagine this happening at Liverpool, Real Madrid or Barcelona – the fans would riot,’ the reader wrote.
One fan, meanwhile, questioned whether the Ratcliffe’s involvement would be enough to provide the kind of investment United required on and off the pitch.
‘The question is where does the money come from for the kind of investment required to upgrade Old Trafford or build a new stadium.. along with upgrading the Training Center at Carrington etc?, he wrote.
‘INEOS have averaged around 2 billion euros per year gross profit in the last decade.. That’s why they’ll need to borrow to take on 25 percent of the club.. They won’t blow a year’s profit on a business that’s making no money..
‘So again i ask.. where’s all the cash coming from within 3 years as what’s being claimed.. for the other 75 percent or even the minimum 26 percent that get’s INEOS majority control of 51 percent.. plus the 3 billion for righting off debt and the infrastructure spend etc?
Ratcliffe already owns Nice having bought the Ligue 1 side for £91m in 2019, two years after purchasing Swiss team FC Lausanne-Sport.
His INEOS Group, meanwhile, have a series of sporting investments, including sponsoring the Mercedes Formula One team and serving as a performance partner to the All Blacks.
In 2019 INEOS also took over the professional cycling outfit Team Sky, which is won the Tour de France seven times.
But some fans remain unconvinced by Ratcliffe’s decision to settle, at least initially, for a minority stake at Old Trafford.
‘What is the benefit to Jim to buy 25%,’ a reader wrote.
‘It seems like the glazers will rob the money and he won’t have a say. He will be pulling out soon. Just needs to make himself look good.’
Another, meanwhile, described Ratcliffe as a ‘publicity seeker with no money’.
Ratcliffe, who turns 71 on Wednesday, rose to second on The Sunday Times Rich List earlier this year with a fortune close to £30billion.
[ad_2]
Source link
