United Thread - 2023/24

[Protein Junkie]

I don’t think I have ever known any sporting organisation that champions relative mediocrity like Scum 2023.
They actually beat a team above them in the table.
Their expensive Fosbury flop of a striker actually scored a goal.
They climb to the dizzy heights of sixth.
The second coming of Catweazle is the dawn of a new era.
All variables of the last ten years.
“Plus ca meme chose” you giddy cnuts.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Possibly, I’ve not bothered to read the full details but I just don’t think Ratcliffe would enter an agreement that restricts him getting his return in the future.

Agreed it's a strange one to understand. Seems he has assumed all the sporting risk with no real control.

 

[ShorehamCitizen]

They never dropped below 8th during that scoreless run!.

Only at Ragville.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Scum!

 

[TinFoilHat]

Has anyone read the full takeover document?

5live this morning claiming there's a clause where they can't criticise the Glazers and in a moment of journalistic clarity it protects the Glazers investment.

 

[j.cbluelongsight]

They still sell quite a lot of content abroad - because they have to.
They have more than a few top-earners (not just in front of the camera) all of whom will be under pressure to "prove their worth". The only way to do that, as far as the thick twat politicians are concerned is the tun a profit. (Rather than say, produce artistic or investigative excellence). Whether we like it or not, blowing smoke up the rags arse is a proven profit-maker.
Everybody wans to keep their job. If BBC execs don't turn a profit, the Tories, for example, will happily replace the top mam with a proven Tory who will gladly do their bidding. In fact, they already have.
When people on the Media Discussion thread keep calling for the BBC to be dismantled and sold off, they're playing right into the greedy hands of the same breed of politicians who have made water supply, train services and energy supply worse but somehow more expensive and will soon argir the only way to "save the NHS" is by selling bits of it off..
As the old saying goes, people who know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
The BBC are a shower of shit when it comes to denigrating City and glorifying the red clubs. Jealousy plays a part on a personal level but there's more at play than spite and bias.

The quicker the woke savile apologists scum loving BBC is fooked of the better. It will be gone in ten years and turned into a subscription service they waste millions at the tax payers expense(just like the govt).
Hate the bully tactics the TV licence agency uses the best thing I did is bin it of years ago, comedy gold they think they can ask me questions at my door if I have a TV or what I watch, none of their business just close the door on them. The thing Is most people think paying the licence is compulsory and it isn't and get fooled by their bully tactics and red letters. Anyone age 25 or under probally dosent even have a aerial plugged into their tvs let alone know what iplayer is.

Just remeber the BBC is supposed to be impartial but it isn't and has slung shite at our club for years, and has had its tongue so far up whiskeys noses arse.

 

[At-Swim-Two-Birds]

Possibly, I’ve not bothered to read the full details but I just don’t think Ratcliffe would enter an agreement that restricts him getting his return in the future.

My understanding is that Ratcliffe bought 25% of the previously exclusively Glazer held B shares and 25% of the New York listed A shares. The deal also delegates to Ratcliffe management control of the football operations. Glazers retain overall control as B shares hold 10 votes to A shares 1. Love to see the business case as I think this is about business. The boyhood fan stuff is overplayed given he tried to buy Chelsea, he tried to invest in Barcelona and he bought Nice.

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

Still struggling to see Ratcliffe's 25% stake as anything more than a vanity project. He's paid the Glazers a billion for the privilege of taking on the responsibility of on field success. If his long term aim is ownership then he's walked into a prisoners dilemma. ie If he is successful then at best the price of buying the Glazers out goes up. At worst the Glazers decide they like it and want to hang around.

Maybe its like his venture into sailing which has been described as like standing in a cold shower whilst watching a bonfire of £50 notes. Anyway, crack on Jim theres a roof to fix.

I was thinking about this the other day (I'm sure someone with a bit more nous would know whether this is doable or not).

The only way I could see this as a worthwhile venture would be that they have some written agreement that if Medicine Jim can inflate the shares to 'X' amount that it allows him to purchase further Glazier shares at either market value or a pre-agreed price.

Surely he would be on to a hiding to nothing without this or am I missing the entire business point of the purchase in the first place...........

 

[ancoats]

At what point does the investment come under the FFP ruling and ownership putting their own money in to spend?
The £1.5billion debt is also being forgotten and the ruling that it should be the club should be made to reduce it every season and not grow above its revenue,

it's so funny that people are blowing smoke up Jim Ratcliffe's arse because he holds nothing and controls nothing
the Glazer are still in full control and when the shit hits the fans again Jim will be blamed

 

[TinFoilHat]

Just waiting for St Marcus to tweet dressed as Bob the Builder to offer to fix roofs of some rags who lost them in the storm.