With more news coming out now as to them letting JR buy 25% and the deals around it shows you what a masterclass they’ve actually pulled off!
Rumours are that JR doesn’t have the $1.5bn needed for a 25% of the club and will go out to lenders to help out. This debt will likely be leveraged against United at a future date SHOULD the Glazers ever sell up.
Looks like they’ll just use that 25% to sure up a few pieces on the balance sheet and overall end up have any potential owners pay close to 10bn when the time is right.
Brilliant business from them, they got someone to inject money in way over the market value and kept full control free to do as they wish if and when such a time should arise.
As a United fan it seems that JR doesn’t have the money needed to clear the debt, fix the roof or the training ground and is just hoping this is his way in to something which may never materialise. It’s truly sad to see a once great club crashing and burning. What’s most disappointing and frustrating is that as fans we can do nothing at all but watch the car crash unfolding.
Glazers have played a blinder
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
You're also now filtered rapey as nothing more can be achieved with this back and forward BS.
Enjoy arguing with whoever you choose to next. 👍
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What a weasel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Facking hell. the gift that just keeps giving
posted on 16/10/23
Rest assured I have zero interest in following a fool like yourself, so you have done me a favour
posted on 16/10/23
You lot are bonkers 😂
posted on 16/10/23
Didn't Jim Radcliffe fail in buying Chelsea for 2.5bn?
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 37 minutes ago
Didn't Jim Radcliffe fail in buying Chelsea for 2.5bn?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. Received a swift email not interested in your bid.
posted on 17/10/23
Interesting reading Jims attempt to buy Chelsea. Says the exact thing about his bid to buy United. Except he claims to be a United fan now.......
"Sir Jim Ratcliffe, Chairman of INEOS, has made a formal bid for Chelsea FC, for £4.25bn," the statement read. "£2.5bn is committed to the Charitable Trust to support victims of the war, with £1.75bn committed to investment directly into the club over the next 10 years. Ratcliffe, a Chelsea fan whose company INEOS also owns French club Nice and Swiss side Lausanne, has sensed an opportunity to secure a deal and has outlined his vision for the club. "We will invest in Stamford Bridge to make it a world-class stadium, befitting of Chelsea FC," the statement continued.
posted on 17/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 12 hours, 2 minutes ago
This article is utter tripe.
1. He doesn't have the funds? The man is worth 20bn isn't he and his company has revenues of 60bn a year. He does have the money. Taking Loans out is perfectly normal in this kind of deal. Elon Musk didn't pay for Twitter in cash upfront either even though he has the money to.
2. Leveraged against the club? Where have you plucked this from? Your backside? Every single report I have read says it will be leveraged against INEOS so United won't be impacted whatsoever.
The amount of BS propaganda I have read on this deal is absolutely hilarious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Being worth 20 bn does not mean you have 20bn in the bank, it means your assets are worth 20bn. Ineos assets are also potentially worth 60bn. That is also dependent on proven oil reserves. Ineos are not a major player in the Global Oil and Gas industry by the way.
2. If you can share your sources highlighting the financial leverage agreements, that would be greatly appreciated. Keep in mind that Ineos has shareholders and JV partners who will have a say and what is leveraged on Ineos except he is using his own shares in the organisation.
Your post is incredibly naive and you should not be mocking others for posting BS when you don't understand the difference between being worth 20bn and having 20bn in the bank.
posted on 17/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 9 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 37 minutes ago
Didn't Jim Radcliffe fail in buying Chelsea for 2.5bn?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. Received a swift email not interested in your bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
incorrect. He bid 4.25m for it
posted on 17/10/23
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 47 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 9 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 37 minutes ago
Didn't Jim Radcliffe fail in buying Chelsea for 2.5bn?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. Received a swift email not interested in your bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
incorrect. He bid 4.25m for it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect He bid £4.25bn.
posted on 17/10/23
comment by I stand with Belgium (U22987)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by RB&W - Whiteside has done it again (U21434)
posted 47 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 9 hours, 22 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 37 minutes ago
Didn't Jim Radcliffe fail in buying Chelsea for 2.5bn?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct. Received a swift email not interested in your bid.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
incorrect. He bid 4.25m for it
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect He bid £4.25bn.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Incorrect, he bid £2.5bn with a commitment to invest £1.75bn over 10 years