By Noor Ahmad
March
Manchester United, the globally renowned English football club with over 140 years of history, the winner of 20 Premier League titles, 12 FA Cups, three Champions’ League titles, and the home to iconic players such as David Beckham and Cristiano Ronaldo, has become the center of takeover speculation in the last several weeks. Bought outright by the Glazer family in 2005 at an estimated price of £790 million and with an estimated debt of £660 million, the takeover elicited wide protests by fans, as much of the club’s earnings had to be diverted away from spending on the club to servicing the debt. Even a campaign known as “Love United, Hate Glazer” was started by its fans. From 2010 onwards, there was speculation of supporters groups such as the “Red Knights” coalescing to buy out the Glazer family, but the price sought by the Glazers was considered well beyond what they were prepared to pay. Instead, the Glazers listed the club’s shares on the New York Stock Exchange, valuing the club at more than two billion dollars. Since then, their popularity with the club’s fans has remained strained. They decided in November 2022 to undertake a strategic review, which may include a partial or full sale of their remaining 70% share in the club. A soft deadline of Feb. 17, 2023, was set by the Glazer family’s merchant bank advisors.
Two bids for the club have materialized. One is from Sir Jim Ratcliffe, owner of INEOS Group, a British chemical company. The other, from Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani, has elicited the most attention, as little is known about this member of the Qatari Royal Family. He is the eldest son of Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani. The Qatari politician who goes by HBJ is the former head of the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), foreign minister, and prime minister of Qatar. HBJ is reputedly worth $1.3 billion, according to Forbes Magazine. Yet, Sheikh Jassim’s bid is likely to be an all-cash offer, valuing the club at $4.5 billion. This disparity between the potential bid and the net worth of his family’s patriarch has raised concerns among many that Sheikh Jassim is not the true bidder; it is suspected that the QIA, the State of Qatar’s Sovereign Wealth Fund, may be the source of the funds and that Sheikh Jassim is merely a figurehead.
In the past, Sheikh Jassim was nominated by the QIA to represent its interests at Credit Suisse, which appointed him to the Board of Directors in 2010. The separation of interests is important as the QIA already owns Paris Saint-Germain (PSG), which it acquired in 2011. UEFA rules stipulate that two clubs owned by the same owner cannot compete with one another in any of their competitions. These rules were introduced to protect competitive integrity. The risks include untoward financial benefits and distorted transfer activity among clubs with the same owners to the detriment of other clubs.
Beyond this, the owners of PSG have been the target of Javier Tebas, the president of La Liga, the Spanish football league. He contends that Qatari ownership has already caused financial distortions which have allowed PSG an unfair financial advantage in bidding for and retaining players that breach UEFA’s new cost controls that place a limit on spending on player and coach wages, transfers, and agent fees to 70 percent of club revenues. These financial regulations that apply to all clubs in UEFA competitions were first introduced in 2010, with the aim of improving solvency and stability for clubs. The State of Qatar also owns Qatar Airways, its national airline, which is one of the main sponsors of PSG, providing a major source of revenue to the club in its spending. La Liga’s complaint stems from PSG’s spending, which made Kylian Mbappe reject a move to Real Madrid. Nasser Al-Khelaifi, the President of PSG, who is also a UEFA executive committee member and chairman of the European Club Association, has countered with his own criticisms of Spanish club Barcelona on raising funds and big money transfers.
Football, once dubbed the “beautiful game,” has become the epicenter of sports washing, a newly coined term that refers to ways in which countries invest in sports to promote their reputation and deflect attention from their less favorable activities. Qatar is not alone in this. Abu Dhabi owns Manchester City and has also been a sponsor of Real Madrid, and countries like Russia, Saudi Arabia and China are also considered active in this field. With football as a great interest of many people, it is an efficient conduit through media that allows positive impressions to form, according to Michael Skey of the London School of Economics.
The truth behind the bid for Manchester United may eventually be unveiled by new legislation, for which a discussion paper, also known as “white paper,” has been floated by the British government in the last few weeks and described as the most radical overhaul of governance since 1863. Although it is not common practice for the government to regulate football, this is a new set of regulations being discussed in light of the potential for sports washing. The white paper envisages a new regulator that will focus on stronger due diligence and the sources of wealth of club owners. However, given the opacity with which linkages between state and individuals exist in the Middle East, it is more likely that we may never know. But one thing is clear, foreign ownership of football clubs and sports sponsorship have become another frontier of political influence through sports washing.