I actually thought they played it this way because now the asset is valued at twice the amount it was before which means they can take out bigger loans against the value of the asset, buy higher value assets with that money, continue to collect dividends for a few years and then sell their stake later to JR or other at the higher valuation. It's very clever tbh just not very nice for the fans.
I think the Glazers hate the fans as much as the fans hate them, no way were they going to allow a debt free Phoenix to rise from the ashes, they can get a big billion + payout now and sit back at laugh at the green & gold protests from Tampa still totally in control.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Cash itself isn't that valuable to a billionaire as cash depreciates in value. They would need to put any cash directly into another asset (or assets) that will produce more money otherwise there's no real point in selling their stakes when they can just take out loans against the value of the club when they need cash.
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.
If they sell for 10b in future then JR's 1.5b becomes 2.5b.
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be so sure of that. You've been far richer than Liverpool the last 10 or so years and it's United that's struggled to stay competitive.
Don't forget that this would take out a lot of the other teams, United can't buy all the best players, Liverpool would have their pick too, leaving Liverpool in a great position to match and even usurp United.
where are these rumours coming from. Do you really believe that Uncle Jim got this far in the process which was conducted by a respected 3rd party who laid down a complete regiem change offer on the table using his own personal wealth potential and/or that of INEOS as collateral, way past the 11th hour, without having the money. He would have probably had to prove his financial credibility before the biding proces even started. Its complete bullchit. I think the days of charlatan wasters of the likes of Michael Knighton are well gone.
comment by K7-0ptimus Primal (U1282)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be so sure of that. You've been far richer than Liverpool the last 10 or so years and it's United that's struggled to stay competitive.
Don't forget that this would take out a lot of the other teams, United can't buy all the best players, Liverpool would have their pick too, leaving Liverpool in a great position to match and even usurp United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We've been badly run. I thought that was obvious.
I'm talking about a United with their own TV rights that weren't being ran by morons. We'd be unstoppable which is precisely my point.....the other clubs wouldn't allow it.
Looks like they aren't going anywhere.
OP it would be valuable to cite your sources if you're sharing news that contradicts recent reporting
comment by The God Fowler (U2538)
posted 26 minutes ago
Looks like they aren't going anywhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don't see Jim handing over 1.8bn without a pathway to a majority.
I also don't see the Glazers handing over sporting decisions to a minority investor who isn't going to be buying more shares.
They are leaving.....just not yet. The end of the road has finally come. It might just take a while until they disappear over the horizon.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by K7-0ptimus Primal (U1282)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be so sure of that. You've been far richer than Liverpool the last 10 or so years and it's United that's struggled to stay competitive.
Don't forget that this would take out a lot of the other teams, United can't buy all the best players, Liverpool would have their pick too, leaving Liverpool in a great position to match and even usurp United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We've been badly run. I thought that was obvious.
I'm talking about a United with their own TV rights that weren't being ran by morons. We'd be unstoppable which is precisely my point.....the other clubs wouldn't allow it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't be a problem for Liverpool but yeah, the other clubs.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 39 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here you are again opening your big mouth.
He never had the money in liquid cash you fool. Never ever did he have that. He had to sell numerous Tesla shares in stages to obtain circa 20 billion which he put in.
Sir Jim has not got 5 billion in cash you fool. He either has to sell his assets/ shares/ lend money against his assets which he won’t!!! The first thing he did was hire two big banks, one which I know very well to help him raise the cash. If you think he is going to place these loans against himself and not the club, you’re stupider than I first thought.
There are a select group of individuals in this world that walk around with that money in liquid cash!!
Because you’re a numpty, you think Elon Musk is the richest man in the world reported by Forbes. The richest men in this world, a fool like you will never know them. But carry on.
Elon himself knows this.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 46 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This guy has a wonderful way of consistently talking BS but won’t stop even when told he is waffling. It really is a sight.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe he only wants 51%, but the Glazers dont want to sell their controlling share for anything less than for the maximum return, which nobody is willing to pay.
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe he only wants 51%, but the Glazers dont want to sell their controlling share for anything less than for the maximum return, which nobody is willing to pay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What amount is the maximum return?
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 46 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This guy has a wonderful way of consistently talking BS but won’t stop even when told he is waffling. It really is a sight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not talking crap. He is said to be worth 20bn and his company does have revenues of 60bn.
It's not my fault you can't read my friend and have literally no understanding of how business actually works.
You probably think Elon Musk bought twitter for 33bn upfront in cash. 😂
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 1 minute ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come back to me when you don't hide behind a filter Rapelay. Your hero Tate would disown you. Love and hugs baby x
Sign in if you want to comment
Glazers have played a blinder
Page 1 of 2
posted on 16/10/23
I actually thought they played it this way because now the asset is valued at twice the amount it was before which means they can take out bigger loans against the value of the asset, buy higher value assets with that money, continue to collect dividends for a few years and then sell their stake later to JR or other at the higher valuation. It's very clever tbh just not very nice for the fans.
posted on 16/10/23
What news OP?
posted on 16/10/23
I think the Glazers hate the fans as much as the fans hate them, no way were they going to allow a debt free Phoenix to rise from the ashes, they can get a big billion + payout now and sit back at laugh at the green & gold protests from Tampa still totally in control.
posted on 16/10/23
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 16/10/23
Cash itself isn't that valuable to a billionaire as cash depreciates in value. They would need to put any cash directly into another asset (or assets) that will produce more money otherwise there's no real point in selling their stakes when they can just take out loans against the value of the club when they need cash.
posted on 16/10/23
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.
posted on 16/10/23
If they sell for 10b in future then JR's 1.5b becomes 2.5b.
posted on 16/10/23
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be so sure of that. You've been far richer than Liverpool the last 10 or so years and it's United that's struggled to stay competitive.
Don't forget that this would take out a lot of the other teams, United can't buy all the best players, Liverpool would have their pick too, leaving Liverpool in a great position to match and even usurp United.
posted on 16/10/23
where are these rumours coming from. Do you really believe that Uncle Jim got this far in the process which was conducted by a respected 3rd party who laid down a complete regiem change offer on the table using his own personal wealth potential and/or that of INEOS as collateral, way past the 11th hour, without having the money. He would have probably had to prove his financial credibility before the biding proces even started. Its complete bullchit. I think the days of charlatan wasters of the likes of Michael Knighton are well gone.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by K7-0ptimus Primal (U1282)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be so sure of that. You've been far richer than Liverpool the last 10 or so years and it's United that's struggled to stay competitive.
Don't forget that this would take out a lot of the other teams, United can't buy all the best players, Liverpool would have their pick too, leaving Liverpool in a great position to match and even usurp United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We've been badly run. I thought that was obvious.
I'm talking about a United with their own TV rights that weren't being ran by morons. We'd be unstoppable which is precisely my point.....the other clubs wouldn't allow it.
posted on 16/10/23
Looks like they aren't going anywhere.
posted on 16/10/23
OP it would be valuable to cite your sources if you're sharing news that contradicts recent reporting
posted on 16/10/23
comment by The God Fowler (U2538)
posted 26 minutes ago
Looks like they aren't going anywhere.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I really don't see Jim handing over 1.8bn without a pathway to a majority.
I also don't see the Glazers handing over sporting decisions to a minority investor who isn't going to be buying more shares.
They are leaving.....just not yet. The end of the road has finally come. It might just take a while until they disappear over the horizon.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 30 minutes ago
comment by K7-0ptimus Primal (U1282)
posted 37 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
The only way that United will ever be worth 10bn is if we get to do our own TV rights on MUTV.
However that will never ever be allowed to happen as that will effectively be it for the rest of the PL teams. We'd absolutely crush everyone. Only Liverpool would be able to stay fairly competitive and even they wouldn't be that close to us such is our global reach.
10bn is fanciful. It's pipedream stuff and won't happen.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't be so sure of that. You've been far richer than Liverpool the last 10 or so years and it's United that's struggled to stay competitive.
Don't forget that this would take out a lot of the other teams, United can't buy all the best players, Liverpool would have their pick too, leaving Liverpool in a great position to match and even usurp United.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We've been badly run. I thought that was obvious.
I'm talking about a United with their own TV rights that weren't being ran by morons. We'd be unstoppable which is precisely my point.....the other clubs wouldn't allow it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wouldn't be a problem for Liverpool but yeah, the other clubs.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 39 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here you are again opening your big mouth.
He never had the money in liquid cash you fool. Never ever did he have that. He had to sell numerous Tesla shares in stages to obtain circa 20 billion which he put in.
Sir Jim has not got 5 billion in cash you fool. He either has to sell his assets/ shares/ lend money against his assets which he won’t!!! The first thing he did was hire two big banks, one which I know very well to help him raise the cash. If you think he is going to place these loans against himself and not the club, you’re stupider than I first thought.
posted on 16/10/23
There are a select group of individuals in this world that walk around with that money in liquid cash!!
Because you’re a numpty, you think Elon Musk is the richest man in the world reported by Forbes. The richest men in this world, a fool like you will never know them. But carry on.
Elon himself knows this.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
posted on 16/10/23
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 46 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This guy has a wonderful way of consistently talking BS but won’t stop even when told he is waffling. It really is a sight.
posted on 16/10/23
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 16/10/23
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe he only wants 51%, but the Glazers dont want to sell their controlling share for anything less than for the maximum return, which nobody is willing to pay.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe he only wants 51%, but the Glazers dont want to sell their controlling share for anything less than for the maximum return, which nobody is willing to pay.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What amount is the maximum return?
posted on 16/10/23
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 18 minutes ago
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 46 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 hour, 38 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Jim is worth £20b, and his company has revenues of 60b each year, then why is he bidding £1.5b for a 25% stake, with (according to you) plans to buy the remaining shares by 2025?
Why not just make a bid for all of Glazers shares right now, if he’s worth as much as you say he is?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This guy has a wonderful way of consistently talking BS but won’t stop even when told he is waffling. It really is a sight.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not talking crap. He is said to be worth 20bn and his company does have revenues of 60bn.
It's not my fault you can't read my friend and have literally no understanding of how business actually works.
You probably think Elon Musk bought twitter for 33bn upfront in cash. 😂
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 1 minute ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Come back to me when you don't hide behind a filter Rapelay. Your hero Tate would disown you. Love and hugs baby x
Page 1 of 2