Asian IPO back on the agenda



Belief that the Glazer regime is readying an Initial Public Offering (IPO) in the autumn has once again gained credence following widespread international media coverage today. The Wall Street Journal broke the news Tuesday that the Glazer family has selected the Singapore Stock Exchange (SGX) as the family’s preferred venue for a $1 billion partial-IPO after exploring options over the past few months.

It is, of course, not the first time that news of the Glazer family’s plan has leaked, with the Times and other outlets reporting in June a potential Hong Kong flotation. Proceeds of any IPO could be used to buy back a proportion of United’s £500 million bond and reduce the Glazers’ personal debt exposure. More to the point institutional investors buying into the offering will also expect a dividend return. As, presumably, does the Glazer family.

Plans, now at an advanced stage according to reports this week, involve the family offering a minority share six years after the Glazer family de-listed United from the London Stock Exchange.

“Manchester United plans a $1 billion initial public offering in Singapore, two people familiar with the matter said, as the record 19-time English soccer champion seeks to cut debt that has fueled fan protest,” reports Bloomberg News.

“Credit Suisse Group AG (CSGN) is working on the transaction, which may take place this year, said the people, who declined to be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. The Premier League team had been considering Hong Kong for the IPO but now favor Singapore, although no final decision has been made, the people added.”

Rules governing loss-making companies may preclude United from flotation in Hong Kong, reports said – denied in some quarters – with the club having lost a record £104.7 million in the past fiscal-year. Much of this related to lower income from player sales and the cost of swapping long-term bank debt for the bond last January.

However, EBITDA – earnings before interest, tax and other deductions - has grown by around 70 per cent over the past six years offering the Glazers hope of a substantial premium on the family’s £800 million ‘investment’ in 2005.

While flotation will enable the Glazer family to cut club debt – depending on the mooted IPO’s success – the family is likely as keen on extracting dividends without drawing supporter ire. Bloomberg reported earlier this year that the Americans’ plans to withdraw extensive dividends of up to £120 million had been shelved on fear of further supporter unrest at the height of the so-called ‘Green and Gold’ campaign.

In the meantime the Glazers have refinanced the £220 million Payment in Kind (PIK) loan in a shroud of secrecy, while moving United’s ultimate parent company to Delaware, USA. The full early redemption cost of £249 million was almost certainly borrowed, with the family keen to pay down that debt through dividend drawing rights granted by the bond last year.

Yet questions remain both about the club’s real value and the Glazers’ long-term ownership plans. The reported a $1 billion partial-IPO of around 25 per cent of the club values United at more than £2.4 billion. That price is – based on any recognised method of enterprise valuation – a huge premium.

Moreover, the choice of SGX appears unusual, on the surface at least, with Hong Kong offering a larger and more liquid market at a time when European retail IPOs in Asia have not been universally successful. That is quite aside from the question of whether Asian institutional investors have any interest in a UK-based sports company.

While the Glazers’ bond offer was hugely over-subscribed, attractive as it was with guaranteed high rates of return and low risk, the family can offer no such assurances with the mooted IPO.

Then there is the question of supporter involvement. Indeed, more than 30,000 small-holding fans eventually bought into United’s London listing, although few into the 1991 IPO. Whether UK-based supporters will be able to access a Singaporean flotation is very much in doubt though; the IPO may in fact only be open to institutional investors. Presumably this a boon to the Glazer family that has no wish to admit large numbers of share-holding fans into an AGM.

The Manchester United Supporters Trust (MUST) offered no immediate response, preferring to wait until the family’s plans are made more concrete.

“You’ve probably seen press reports that the Glazers are to float at least part of their Manchester United shareholding on the Singapore Stock Exchange and that this is a precursor to a full sale,” said a supporter group newsletter on Tuesday.

“Until we have more details we can’t give a full response but what we do know is we want to communicate with as many Manchester United supporters as possible and make sure every Manchester United supporter has the chance to share in ownership when the opportunity arises. It is quite possible that shares will not be available to ordinary supporters and that MUST will have to provide a mechanism for supporters to buy shares.”

Whatever that mechanism may be it seems unlikely that ordinary United supporters will build any significant share holding in the club post flotation – if an IPO happens at all. After all even if all 175,000 MUST members invest £1,000 each the block will represent just over five per cent of the club.

Then the wider question of what effect floating United overseas will have, – institutional investors are unlikely to be more in tune with supporters than the Glazer family –  is as yet unanswered.

Share Button

Comments

  1. AsherMUFC says:

    hi ed, I have heard that it being floated in asia would mean uk fans will find it difficult to buy shares, is this true and if so why?

    • Asher – quite possibly. Does, for example, your broker deal in Singapore? If not will you need a local broker. If so, will they expect SG$ bank account. And so on…

      • Good point. Although in the world of finance such prerequisites and rules are often relaxed if a cost-benefit analysis proves it judicious.

  2. AsherMUFC says:

    Ed said:
    Asher – quite possibly. Does, for example, your broker deal in Singapore? If not will you need a local broker. If so, will they expect SG$ bank account. And so on…

    ffs! however, MUST might be able to help uk fans out to stick it to the Glazers

    • Mongoletsi says:

      // ffs! however, MUST might be able to help uk fans out to stick it to the Glazers//

      No, buying share only helps the Glazers. They’d literally be double-bumming us if we bought shares.

  3. What an absolute load of sh1t, and a waste of mine and everybodys time who reads this.
    The amount is $400 million, which values the club at 1.6 billion dollas, which is around £1 billion total.
    NO SPORTING CLUB IN THE WORLD IS WORTH £2.4 Billion.

    $400 million for 25%

    • Chris – charming first time commenter. The price is what it is eventually underwritten at, if an IPO happens at all. I don’t know that price yet and you most certainly don’t know that either so when talking about “shit” it would be advisable to look very closely in the mirror.

      But if you want a reason I’ve quoted the figure how about we go for…

      Bloomberg
      Reuters
      Wall Street Journal

      … I’m thinking they know their “shit” a bit more than you. Mind you I do believe, as outlined in my article, that its a gross over-valuation and may well not succeed in generating that level of interest.

  4. If the shares are sold on the basis of a guaranteed ROI at 5%. The value of the company won’t really matter. £400m or £800m for 25% of Manchester United, the investors will buy them as it gives them a guaranteed return. Just because 25% could be sold at a certain value it doesn’t really give the true value of the club. If the shares we’re sold just with dividends from profits in mind then you’d get a true valuation over that 25% and the whole club. A guaranteed ROI is basically the same as the bonds.

    The reason they’d only get 5% if all members put £1000 is also the reason the Supporters Trust stated they are after one million members.

    ‘We’d like to see at least a million Manchester United supporters sharing in ownership of their club’ They better get campaigning big time.

  5. Numbers, percentages and pound signs just spell a total headache for me! That said, as helpless as it makes me feel and the sadness it brings to see something that not only I love but people have given their lives for banded around in such a cock out, capitalist driven insensitive manner, I’m confident at some point in time an opportunity to bring the club back to some semblance of community control will present itself.

    When it does I hope we as fans with the help of the right people will take that opportunity to stop this from ever happening again. It seems like pie in the sky but Manchester and its people have a history of defying the odds and breaking new ground. I’m hoping that we can change the face of club ownership in the top flight.

    I’d urge everyone to take up a positive position rather than take an apathetic one or a negative stance against the likes of MUST. To continue being successful, playing great football whilst having a club governance structure that has the best interests of the club and supporters in hand is not a dream but an essential step in taking football back and giving it some soul. Keep up the good work Rant, MUST, G&G and all involved. Let’s hope these new developments are the start of the end for the Glazers.

  6. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    “Beginning of the end”, might sound good to some anti-Glazer folks… but I fear for United even more now… the Glazers do not give a fuck about United, beyond how much money they can make… and one thing I’m absolutely certain of, is that United will be sold to whoever offers them the best return, even if it puts United in the hands of even more selfish and ruthless owners.

    There is no way, fans or a fan based consortium, such as “the Red Knights”, could offer the Glazers the money they’re after… and they don’t seem to be even considering offers from rich Arab sorts, who at least could own United without debt, and a concern for “profit”… it seems to me, that the Glazers are selling off United in expensive chunks, to investors looking to make money…

    My fear is, United could be owned by many, who paid big money, expecting big money in return…

    1 hour… that’s all I want… 1 hour, in a locked room, with a ball peen hammer and the whole Glazer clan.

  7. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    // ffs! however, MUST might be able to help uk fans out to stick it to the Glazers//

    No, buying share only helps the Glazers. They’d literally be double-bumming us if we bought shares.

    ur a little silly to say that tbh, it gives the fans some power and would be able to have a bigger say to who the Glazers would sell the club to eventually.

    Also this move means Glazers can pay some of the debt off, apart from the debt the Glazers aren’t bad owners, they dont make us pay £1000 for a season ticket like arsenal and tbh most things to do with the club are not overpriced.

    • “Aren’t bad owners”!? They have created debt were their previously was none. Created a loss were previously we had profit. Shackled the spending resulting in inadequate investment in the team relative to our previous spending and that of our peers…I could go on. Given United’s financial and footballing superiority prior to the takeover a good owner would have kept the situation the same or improved it. Instead the financial situation has worsened and the squad has depleted. We have been successful despite them. From our perspective the above equals poor ownership. The only reason they haven’t raised ST prices is for fear of alienating fans when they are walking a financial tight rope. They would be fucked if attendances dropped.

    • Mongoletsi says:

      // Glazers aren’t bad owners //

      Fuck off. They’ve ripped the heart out of the club. Without them, we’b be debt free, able to spen more on players, no piss-ripping with the season tickets, etc, etc.

  8. How much longer can Man Utd fans put up with the scum who are ruining this wonderful club of ours.Our football team is a pawn in big business and the Glazers will screw everybody along the way, to say it makes me sick to the stomach is an understatement. All this is because of the debt that the glazers loaded onto to the club. Hundreds of millions wasted in fees to lawyers etc and all to make them even more rich.America stinks of corruption/greed and DEBT, just like the glazers Bastards every one of the family

  9. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    AsherMUFC said:
    ur a little silly to say that tbh, it gives the fans some power and would be able to have a bigger say to who the Glazers would sell the club to eventually.

    Also this move means Glazers can pay some of the debt off, apart from the debt the Glazers aren’t bad owners, they dont make us pay £1000 for a season ticket like arsenal and tbh most things to do with the club are not overpriced.

    You call someone else, “a little silly”… and then write, “apart from the debt the Glazers aren’t bad owners”.

    Fuckin hell Mate…

    Apart from being a racist cock, Nick Griffin’s not a bad bloke.

  10. captainhormone captainhormone says:

    AsherMUFC said:
    ur a little silly to say that tbh, it gives the fans some power and would be able to have a bigger say to who the Glazers would sell the club to eventually.

    Also this move means Glazers can pay some of the debt off, apart from the debt the Glazers aren’t bad owners, they dont make us pay £1000 for a season ticket like arsenal and tbh most things to do with the club are not overpriced.

    hmm…true tbf

    whats your name on twatter again??

  11. captainhormone said:
    hmm…true tbf

    whats your name on twatter again??

    Probably @cunt

  12. AsherMUFC says:

    Alfonso Bedoya said:
    You call someone else, “a little silly”… and then write, “apart from the debt the Glazers aren’t bad owners”.

    Fuckin hell Mate…

    Apart from being a racist cock, Nick Griffin’s not a bad bloke.

    go on then, what have they done which is soooo bad apart from the debbt

    • Seriously are you a WUM? Read this link. It tells it better than I can.

      http://andersred.blogspot.com/p/about-this-blog-and-about-me.html

      Like I said earlier, from our perspective, as fans who are genuinely part of the Manchester United community i.e. those who understand and agree that it’s more than what is portrayed on Sky Sports and who’s lives are improved by the enjoyment and opportunities that the club, community and the sport provide for us and the children that participate, they the Glazers are bad for the club, the community and football on the whole. We and all of Manchester United employees are to a greater or lesser extent being treated with contempt just so they can make a profit. We are no different in their eyes than a company that makes washing powder or cars. If they could make £10 Billion by eliminating Manchester United off the football map they would. That’s who they are. I don’t want to get into a slanging match with you as this is a forum and freedom to discuss points of view are what all this is about. That said, I think you would find respect on these pages if you offered some evidence behind your points rather than just contrarily posting single statements. Why not back up your position on the Glazers by explaining what the positives of the ownership are and the benefits the club have enjoyed because of the Glazers since 2005.

    • Mongoletsi says:

      // go on then, what have they done which is soooo bad apart from the debbt //

      I think you got lost mate, you’re probably looking for this: http://community.manutd.com/forums/

  13. that debt is what is weighing us down.. our net spend is probably zero, we cant compete with other top sides in wages and transfer fees
    the prices of tickets and all other aspects of the matchday experience have risen
    our fans are being pocket raped by a bunch of clueless cunts who are only interested in making a few quid and having our club bought for them….

    does this sit welll with you???? FFS

  14. itel, could’nt agree with you more, we were supposed to be in the market for Nasri, look where he’s going to end up and thats because we cant/wont spend the money. But you know what, most man utd fans dont give a toss about the glazers and we will get the club we deserve, less and less competitive. The ONLY reason we are successful is because of Fergie and time is not on his side

  15. AsherMUFC says:

    ltel said:
    that debt is what is weighing us down.. our net spend is probably zero, we cant compete with other top sides in wages and transfer fees
    the prices of tickets and all other aspects of the matchday experience have risen
    our fans are being pocket raped by a bunch of clueless cunts who are only interested in making a few quid and having our club bought for them….

    does this sit welll with you???? FFS

    obvs we cant compete with man city cause of the oil money they have! but we can compete with nearly every other club in the world, this ipo will clear most of the debt so it will be gone, in the process the fans gain some power. I would say ticket prices are very reasonable, for example an under 16 member can buy a ticket to any match for £10 and an adult member can buy a ticket for about £35 which compared to some other pl clubs (arsenal, qpr) it is amazing value for money considering the players that you get to watch.

    • Mongoletsi says:

      // this ipo will clear most of the debt so it will be gone, in the process the fans gain some power. //

      1. There wouldn’t have been any DEBT without these scumcunts.
      2. This deal gives now real power whatsoever to anybody.

      Which one are you really? Bryan? Avram? Joel? Fuck it… you’re Malcolm aren’t you?

  16. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    Seriously are you a WUM? Read this link. It tells it better than I can.

    http://andersred.blogspot.com/p/about-this-blog-and-about-me.html

    Like I said earlier, from our perspective, as fans who are genuinely part of the Manchester United community i.e. those who understand and agree that it’s more than what is portrayed on Sky Sports and who’s lives are improved by the enjoyment and opportunities that the club, community and the sport provide for us and the children that participate, they the Glazers are bad for the club, the community and football on the whole. We and all of Manchester United employees are to a greater or lesser extent being treated with contempt just so they can make a profit. We are no different in their eyes than a company that makes washing powder or cars. If they could make £10 Billion by eliminating Manchester United off the football map they would. That’s who they are. I don’t want to get into a slanging match with you as this is a forum and freedom to discuss points of view are what all this is about. That said, I think you would find respect on these pages if you offered some evidence behind your points rather than just contrarily posting single statements. Why not back up your position on the Glazers by explaining what the positives of the ownership are and the benefits the club have enjoyed because of the Glazers since 2005.

    I agree but nearly all owners want to make a profit, I think one man owning a club should be illegal in football tbh and all clubs should be owned by the fans but compared to some other owners in world football they are OK! And on the whole spending money on transfers and wages, financial fair play is coming in and clubs are really serious about it, it is why inter are haveing to get rid of eto’o and want to let sniejder go. Man Utd have spent £50 million this summer and some fans still moan that it isnt enough! I think united do need a creative midfielder and maybe one of jones or young wasn’t a nessecary signing

    • Sorry you’re wrong. Firstly, you can’t take the figure of £50 million in isolation and tag it with the word ‘investment’. We have spent £47 million of the £180 million reserve (made up of profits and the sale of players).

      More importantly we have significantly reduced our wage bill by about £11 million a year.

      What this has equated to in terms of the squad is replacing world class players VDS Scholes, Ronaldo (World Player of the Year) with unproven youth on the cheap. They may turnout to be world beaters. They may not.

      When you consider what we have lost in terms of quality and what we need to compete with City, Chelsea, RM and Barca, the cost of world class midfielders and the players we have brought in coupled with the money we have in reserve the £50 million is not investment. Actually when you look solely at the finances the figure of £50 million does not represent investment at all.

      I have no problem with a person owning and turning a profit at the club providing they do so in a sustainable and ethical manner. However, I would like to see legislation preventing any leverage buyouts of any company in the UK. If you can’t afford it and you don’t have a transparent sustainable stable business plan then fuck off we don’t want your business.

      And please stop suggesting that because someone somewhere is a worse owners than the Glazers then that makes them OK. It does not! It means that whilst they are not as shit as owner A they are still very, very, very, very, very shit.

  17. Mongoletsi says:

    // I think one man owning a club should be illegal in football tbh and all clubs should be owned by the fans //

    Finally! We agree on something :o ) I don’t think it should be illegal, but certainly fan-ownership is a Good Thing.

    p.s. Both Jones and Young are really good additions to our squad, especially in the mid/long term. Expect to see Jones playing in front of the back four in a 4-1-3-2 or 4-1-4-1 mark my words.

  18. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    // Glazers aren’t bad owners //

    Fuck off. They’ve ripped the heart out of the club. Without them, we’b be debt free, able to spen more on players, no piss-ripping with the season tickets, etc, etc.

    HOW MANY TIMES, THE SEASON TICKETS COMPARED TO OTHER PL CLUBS CONSIDERING HOW MANY TROPHIES UNITED WIN AND THE QUALITY OF FOOTBALL IS EXCELLENT VALUE FOR MONEY!!

  19. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    // I think one man owning a club should be illegal in football tbh and all clubs should be owned by the fans //

    Finally! We agree on something :o ) I don’t think it should be illegal, but certainly fan-ownership is a Good Thing.

    p.s. Both Jones and Young are really good additions to our squad, especially in the mid/long term. Expect to see Jones playing in front of the back four in a 4-1-3-2 or 4-1-4-1 mark my words.

    yes but were they more vital than a creative midfieler scholes replacement?

  20. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    Sorry you’re wrong. Firstly, you can’t take the figure of £50 million in isolation and tag it with the word ‘investment’. We have spent £47 million of the £180 million reserve (made up of profits and the sale of players).

    More importantly we have significantly reduced our wage bill by about £11 million a year.

    What this has equated to in terms of the squad is replacing world class players VDS Scholes, Ronaldo (World Player of the Year) with unproven youth on the cheap. They may turnout to be world beaters. They may not.

    When you consider what we have lost in terms of quality and what we need to compete with City, Chelsea, RM and Barca, the cost of world class midfielders and the players we have brought in coupled with the money we have in reserve the £50 million is not investment. Actually when you look solely at the finances the figure of £50 million does not represent investment at all.

    I have no problem with a person owning and turning a profit at the club providing they do so in a sustainable and ethical manner. However, I would like to see legislation preventing any leverage buyouts of any company in the UK. If you can’t afford it and you don’t have a transparent sustainable stable business plan then fuck off we don’t want your business.

    And please stop suggesting that because someone somewhere is a worse owners than the Glazers then that makes them OK. It does not! It means that whilst they are not as shit as owner A they are still very, very, very, very, very shit.

    when the glazers took over in 2005 the title had eluded Man Utd for a few years, they gave fergie as much money as he wanted to rebuild the squad and trophy after trophy has followed! Look, I went on the protest march when they took over and it was because of the debt they were going to saddle the club with, if that is gone and they don’t raise ticket prices then I dont mind them for now tbh. I am not saying they are the best owners in the world and I have already said that the fans should own Man Utd but it could be worse is all I am saying

  21. This thread

    My head

  22. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    // Glazers aren’t bad owners //

    Fuck off. They’ve ripped the heart out of the club. Without them, we’b be debt free, able to spen more on players, no piss-ripping with the season tickets, etc, etc.

    so if this ipo goes through and the debt is gone then what is your problem??

  23. Twisted Blood says:

    We are where we are folks. The float could be a good thing if it reduces debts. No oil rich Sheik or oligarch is riding to our rescue and I’m not sure I’d want them to. If we were publically held still or owned by Red Knights or whoever, these people would seek a DIVIDEND–interest payments by another name. Maybe the float would wash out the PIK loan and provide some more cash, also not necessarily a bad thing. I’m waiting for the scare tactics to come out now about the massive dividend the Glazers will post-float most definitely take just as it was said when the bond was issued and when the PIKs were issued. Still hasn’t happened. It seems when anything bad happens to the club (no Sneijder or Nasri) it’s always Glazernomics and when the purchases are made, ticket prices stay flat or we win the league, it’s despite them or due to their fear of supporters. They are running the club sensibly with a budget, albeit one caused by their own LBO. But let’s get real, it hasn’t been ruinous. There have been some positives: doubled turnover, no interference with the manager, (unlike Roman and the Sheik up the road), the purchase of Ando, Nani and Hargo the year before Moscow, oh yeah, and all the titles, the CL, and three CL finals in four years as well as knocking Chelsea, a non-profit run club off the perch. All of this despite the Glazers, eh? Possibly, but given the realistic alternatives I’ll stick with the devil I know.

  24. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    We are where we are folks. The float could be a good thing if it reduces debts. No oil rich Sheik or oligarch is riding to our rescue and I’m not sure I’d want them to. If we were publically held still or owned by Red Knights or whoever, these people would seek a DIVIDEND–interest payments by another name. Maybe the float would wash out the PIK loan and provide some more cash, also not necessarily a bad thing. I’m waiting for the scare tactics to come out now about the massive dividend the Glazers will post-float most definitely take just as it was said when the bond was issued and when the PIKs were issued. Still hasn’t happened. It seems when anything bad happens to the club (no Sneijder or Nasri) it’s always Glazernomics and when the purchases are made, ticket prices stay flat or we win the league, it’s despite them or due to their fear of supporters. They are running the club sensibly with a budget, albeit one caused by their own LBO. But let’s get real, it hasn’t been ruinous. There have been some positives: doubled turnover, no interference with the manager, (unlike Roman and the Sheik up the road), the purchase of Ando, Nani and Hargo the year before Moscow, oh yeah, and all the titles, the CL, and three CL finals in four years as well as knocking Chelsea, a non-profit run club off the perch. All of this despite the Glazers, eh? Possibly, but given the realistic alternatives I’ll stick with the devil I know.

    finally someone with some sense who appreciates what he is given from the club he loves, thankyou!

  25. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    AsherMUFC said:
    finally someone with some sense who appreciates what he is given from the club he loves, thankyou!

  26. AsherMUFC says:

    Alfonso Bedoya said:

    exactly how I feel after nearly every single one of your posts

  27. AsherMUFC says:

    Alfonso Bedoya said:

    also could you actually explain (sensibly) what the Glazers have done that is so wrong, apart from the debt?

  28. apart from the debt ffs.. the debt is the whole issue you moron.
    what did peter sutcliffe do apart from murdering a few women.

  29. captainhormone captainhormone says:

    ltel said:
    apart from the debt ffs.. the debt is the whole issue you moron.
    what did peter sutcliffe do apart from murdering a few women.

    made me fail my HGV test for wanking during observation answers

    Tester” whats that sign over there”

    Me “Balaclava, Chloroform, rohypnol, anal……”

    Bastards

  30. AsherMUFC says:

    ltel said:
    apart from the debt ffs.. the debt is the whole issue you moron.
    what did peter sutcliffe do apart from murdering a few women.

    so once the ipo gets rid of the debt, what is the problem with them being owners??

    • mongoletsi says:

      // so once the ipo gets rid of the debt, what is the problem with them being owners?? //

      Right that’s it… you’re David Gill aren’t you?

  31. captainhormone said:
    made me fail my HGV test for wanking during observation answers

    Tester” whats that sign over there”

    Me “Balaclava, Chloroform, rohypnol, anal……”

    Bastards

    Fucking lol, you ‘orrible cunt!

    so once the ipo gets rid of the debt, what is the problem with them being owners??

    It won’t get rid of the debt. It’ll pay off the PIK loan and, according to what they are saying at the moment, allow them to put more money into the club. This is rhetoric, nothing more. They will not plough more money into United. They will take more money out of the club in the form of dividends. Because they are a set of cunts who only ‘bought’ United to make money out of it, not to run as a successful football club. Jesus fucking christ. When will people realise this? And don’t say we have to be successful in order for them to to make money. They have concentrated so much effort on increasing turnover from overseas that it really doesn’t matter how successful United are as a football club, because the global merchandise money will keep flowing and flowing…

    • reddread – too right, it doesn’t fit the Glazers normal model of doing business to pay off all the club debt. What they’ll do is pay off the £250m they borrowed to pay off the PIK loans last year – almost certainly from another hedge fund at exhorbitant interest rates – and then some will be used to buy back some bond notes. Talk about spending in the transfer market is utter nonsense. United generates plenty of cash to do that if the Glazers wanted to. Moreover UEFA FFP precludes United going on a spending spree that the club can’t afford anyway. I’ve continually said this – it doesnt make an awful lot of financial difference to United if we win Champions League or come second.. (see recently released figures) but it might cost a huge amount to compete with Real Madrid, Chelsea, Barcelona and City in the coming years.

      • mongoletsi says:

        Exactly Ed, the Glazer model doesn’t require outright success, it requires us to finish close to the top in the Prem and CL. It’s more profitable for them for us to lose to Barca in final, rather than buy big.

      • Ed, could we not see a situation whereby the UEFA FFP rules reduce the cost of competing with RM, Barca City etc to the point whereby even Glazer regulated spending would be enough?

        I think by the time the FFP rules start to take full effect then the Glazers will be long gone (3 years) with bags of our money a depleted squad and what type of manager I really don’t know. It wont be a top manager as we wont have the budget for that manager to compete.

  32. AsherMUFC says:

    reddread said:
    Fucking lol, you ‘orrible cunt!

    It won’t get rid of the debt. It’ll pay off the PIK loan and, according to what they are saying at the moment, allow them to put more money into the club. This is rhetoric, nothing more. They will not plough more money into United. They will take more money out of the club in the form of dividends. Because they are a set of cunts who only ‘bought’ United to make money out of it, not to run as a successful football club. Jesus fucking christ. When will people realise this? And don’t say we have to be successful in order for them to to make money. They have concentrated so much effort on increasing turnover from overseas that it really doesn’t matter how successful United are as a football club, because the global merchandise money will keep flowing and flowing…

    I do agree but they could sell up to 49% and keep control and that would give them more than enough money to pay off all debt involved, I believe (correct me if wrong) the club has about £550 million of debt). Yes, they have bought it to make money and that is the football world we live in! If they were taken over then it would be to someone else who would want to make a profit unless the fans bought it which probably wouldnt happen

  33. RobDiablo RobDiablo says:

    reddread said:
    …And don’t say we have to be successful in order for them to to make money. They have concentrated so much effort on increasing turnover from overseas that it really doesn’t matter how successful United are as a football club, because the global merchandise money will keep flowing and flowing…

    This is the only part of what you’ve said that I disagree with. I can remember going to Portland Timbers home matches a couple years ago and seeing a lot of United tops being worn, and then, at the first home match after Cheatski had won the league, being surprised and sickened by the number of shiny new Cheatski tops. So, while there is undoubtedly some lag time, if United falter domestically while Barca continue to stake a claim to being recognized as the greatest side of all time, I can assure you that vast majority of those “United supporters” in the U.S. and Asia will switch their allegiance accordingly.
    I imagine that the Glazers know this and, realizing that they cannot inject enough cash back into United to make it a side that could be the best in Europe, they have decided to start extricating themselves from the club while extracting as much money from it as they can. As someone pointed out in the comments on the AndersRed blog, people might want to consider how much the value of the stock would drop when the inevitable announcement of Sir Alex’s retirement is made. It cannot be that far away, and if they know something about when that might happen, it could be another good reason for the Glazers to start working on their exit.

  34. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    Ed, could we not see a situation whereby the UEFA FFP rules reduce the cost of competing with RM, Barca City etc to the point whereby even Glazer regulated spending would be enough?

    I think by the time the FFP rules start to take full effect then the Glazers will be long gone (3 years) with bags of our money a depleted squad and what type of manager I really don’t know. It wont be a top manager as we wont have the budget for that manager to compete.

    ffs! ‘It wont be a top manager as we wont have the budget for that manager to compete’, fergie gets paid a fucking mint!

    • I’m not talking about wages. I’m talkin about budget to bring in players. If you were a manager and had a choice of the same wages but one club had a better transfer budget and certainty about bringing in new players you would choose the latter.

  35. AsherMUFC says:

    Commenter said:
    I’m not talking about wages. I’m talkin about budget to bring in players. If you were a manager and had a choice of the same wages but one club had a better transfer budget and certainty about bringing in new players you would choose the latter.

    come on! Mourinho is fucking desparate to be United manager whatever budget, although I can’t stand him!

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Read more about what this means on the Andersred blog and at United Rant. [...]

  2. [...] Read more about what this means on the Andersred blog and at United Rant. [...]

  3. [...] means that ordinary supporters be able to own part of the club for the first time since 2005. The planned partial IPO was confirmed on Thursday when a preliminary application was made to SGX, reports Reuters: English [...]

  4. [...] Read more about what this means on the Andersred blog and at United Rant. [...]

Speak Your Mind

*