comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 5 minutes ago
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. 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What an imbecile. Saying someone can’t read when I already mentioned he raised circa 20 billion. What a fool you are. No need even debating with you. You’re out of depth it is unbelievable.
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 5 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Admin really needs to ban this psycho. Is he constantly drunk?🤦♂️
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 14 minutes ago
What did Elon pay?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A third of it was via bank loans.
This is the richest man on the planet too or certainly in the top 2/3 and he uses the system too to benefit him.
If Jim takes loans out to buy Utd and puts them on INEOS that's not an issue at all for United and INEOS can swallow those loans up quite easily.
Rapey boy know this too. It just doesn't fit his agenda.
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 24 minutes ago
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?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There has been talk of £10bn
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 11 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No sorry I don't. Can you explain the difference to me please? 😂
Of course I do you bleeding imbecile. It was only two days ago you were arguing that the Qatar offer was the highest. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Jim taking a loan against Utd would be bad. Taking it against INEOS wouldn't be an issue at all and would be a drop in the ocean to such a vast company.
Go and read up from other sources that aren't just Pro Qatar. Seems like you've been believing half the BS they are spouting. Probably get your facts from Goldbridge. 😂
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am filtered by one or two here, I would never ever care to comment on what they have to say, I suppose it is the man in me. No way cleverson is a man.
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 11 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No sorry I don't. Can you explain the difference to me please? 😂
Of course I do you bleeding imbecile. It was only two days ago you were arguing that the Qatar offer was the highest. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Jim taking a loan against Utd would be bad. Taking it against INEOS wouldn't be an issue at all and would be a drop in the ocean to such a vast company.
Go and read up from other sources that aren't just Pro Qatar. Seems like you've been believing half the BS they are spouting. Probably get your facts from Goldbridge. 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Laughable seeing you embarrass yourself daily
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 11 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No sorry I don't. Can you explain the difference to me please? 😂
Of course I do you bleeding imbecile. It was only two days ago you were arguing that the Qatar offer was the highest. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Jim taking a loan against Utd would be bad. Taking it against INEOS wouldn't be an issue at all and would be a drop in the ocean to such a vast company.
Go and read up from other sources that aren't just Pro Qatar. Seems like you've been believing half the BS they are spouting. Probably get your facts from Goldbridge. 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Laughable seeing you embarrass yourself daily
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embarrass myself how exactly? By telling the truth? Just because you don't like what it is I'm saying doesn't mean it's not true.
Nothing I have said on this thread is false. You're just a moron who defends rapists and can't understand basic business concepts.
Loans against the club = bad.
Loans against parent company = no issue at all and especially against such a vast one.
Utd's revenue is 1% of INEOS. One percent !!!! That's absolutely nothing.
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. 👍
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A snitch and two rapeys high fiving.
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am filtered by one or two here, I would never ever care to comment on what they have to say, I suppose it is the man in me. No way cleverson is a man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's a REAL man
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
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
Rest assured I have zero interest in following a fool like yourself, so you have done me a favour
Didn't Jim Radcliffe fail in buying Chelsea for 2.5bn?
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
Sign in if you want to comment
Glazers have played a blinder
Page 2 of 2
posted on 16/10/23
What did Elon pay?
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 5 minutes ago
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. 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What an imbecile. Saying someone can’t read when I already mentioned he raised circa 20 billion. What a fool you are. No need even debating with you. You’re out of depth it is unbelievable.
posted on 16/10/23
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 5 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Admin really needs to ban this psycho. Is he constantly drunk?🤦♂️
posted on 16/10/23
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 14 minutes ago
What did Elon pay?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A third of it was via bank loans.
This is the richest man on the planet too or certainly in the top 2/3 and he uses the system too to benefit him.
If Jim takes loans out to buy Utd and puts them on INEOS that's not an issue at all for United and INEOS can swallow those loans up quite easily.
Rapey boy know this too. It just doesn't fit his agenda.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by RipleysCat (U1862)
posted 24 minutes ago
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?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There has been talk of £10bn
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 11 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No sorry I don't. Can you explain the difference to me please? 😂
Of course I do you bleeding imbecile. It was only two days ago you were arguing that the Qatar offer was the highest. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Jim taking a loan against Utd would be bad. Taking it against INEOS wouldn't be an issue at all and would be a drop in the ocean to such a vast company.
Go and read up from other sources that aren't just Pro Qatar. Seems like you've been believing half the BS they are spouting. Probably get your facts from Goldbridge. 😂
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am filtered by one or two here, I would never ever care to comment on what they have to say, I suppose it is the man in me. No way cleverson is a man.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 11 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No sorry I don't. Can you explain the difference to me please? 😂
Of course I do you bleeding imbecile. It was only two days ago you were arguing that the Qatar offer was the highest. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Jim taking a loan against Utd would be bad. Taking it against INEOS wouldn't be an issue at all and would be a drop in the ocean to such a vast company.
Go and read up from other sources that aren't just Pro Qatar. Seems like you've been believing half the BS they are spouting. Probably get your facts from Goldbridge. 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Laughable seeing you embarrass yourself daily
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 57 seconds ago
comment by Glazers Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 11 minutes ago
I hope this fool knows the difference between revenue and net profit. A company can make revenue of billions and still be in trouble. Elementary business here for this doofus
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No sorry I don't. Can you explain the difference to me please? 😂
Of course I do you bleeding imbecile. It was only two days ago you were arguing that the Qatar offer was the highest. You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Jim taking a loan against Utd would be bad. Taking it against INEOS wouldn't be an issue at all and would be a drop in the ocean to such a vast company.
Go and read up from other sources that aren't just Pro Qatar. Seems like you've been believing half the BS they are spouting. Probably get your facts from Goldbridge. 😂
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Laughable seeing you embarrass yourself daily
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Embarrass myself how exactly? By telling the truth? Just because you don't like what it is I'm saying doesn't mean it's not true.
Nothing I have said on this thread is false. You're just a moron who defends rapists and can't understand basic business concepts.
Loans against the club = bad.
Loans against parent company = no issue at all and especially against such a vast one.
Utd's revenue is 1% of INEOS. One percent !!!! That's absolutely nothing.
posted on 16/10/23
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. 👍
posted on 16/10/23
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A snitch and two rapeys high fiving.
posted on 16/10/23
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Bibby Smalls (U22987)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by scholayScholes (U13961)
posted 22 minutes ago
I see Cleverson this sad caaaant is still following me around even when filtered. Hilarious stuff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He really is a massive Div isn't he.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am filtered by one or two here, I would never ever care to comment on what they have to say, I suppose it is the man in me. No way cleverson is a man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's a REAL man
posted on 16/10/23
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
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
Page 2 of 2