Prince Abdullah’s United World have had their latest say on the Sheffield United ownership dispute, hitting back at chief executive Stephen Bettis’ comments last week

Prince Abdullah’s United World have issued their latest statement on the ongoing dispute with Sheffield United’s current owners, insisting they are not in negotiations over the unpaid instalment for the club and that “changes in the club’s fortunes are not a basis for revisiting an agreed price.”

The dispute between the previous and current owners has dominated the summer agenda at Bramall Lane, with a £35m instalment understood to remain due to the prince following the 2024 sale to Steven Rosen and Helmy Eltoukhy.

After the payment went unpaid, United World launched a winding-up petition against the Americans’ company, COH Sports Bidco, which they used to buy the Blades. The club had already been moved to a new holding company, however, and COH Sports Bidco was wound up by the High Court without opposition.

United World say they are committed to recovering the outstanding sum “through the proper legal process”. Stephen Bettis, the Sheffield United chief executive, told The Star last week that Rosen and Eltoukhy were hoping to reach an agreement with the prince and his representatives and were in discussions to that effect.

But a United World statement issued this week read: “We believe Sheffield United supporters and the wider community deserve a clear and accurate picture of the situation.

“We welcome Mr Bettis’s public confirmation that the sum owed to United World is not in dispute. The price for the club was agreed in a binding contract between fully advised parties, and that sum remains due.

“The company through which the owners bought the club has been wound up by the High Court for failing to pay this debt. Independent liquidators have been appointed and are now responsible for its affairs.

“Contrary to Mr Bettis’s suggestion that discussions are ongoing, United World is not and has not been in negotiations with the owners, despite several attempts by us to reach out to them.

“Changes in the club’s fortunes since completion, including decisions the owners have themselves acknowledged as mistakes, are not a basis for revisiting an agreed price.”

Bettis also confirmed that the dispute stemmed from “the new owners [being] unhappy around certain things in relation to the deal” agreed by all parties in 2024, which allowed the fee to be paid in instalments.

“When the sale completed, the club was, as Mr Bettis himself acknowledged, at the top of the Championship, with a young squad capable of competing for promotion,” the statement added. “We are saddened to see where the club stands today.

“The players sold this summer were recruited during United World’s ownership and, on Mr Bettis’s own account, the proceeds of those sales will not all be reinvested in the team. United World remains committed to recovering the sum owed through the proper legal process.”