Three strikes and you’re out for Glazer IPO



The Glazer family’s very long mooted Manchester United flotation may be off for a third time after the Financial Times confirmed that an initial public offering (IPO) planned for New York this summer is on “pause” for an undetermined period. Citing volatile market conditions, the FT says that the IPO may now not take place before the new football season kicks off in August. The Manchester United Supporters Trust (MUST) and blogger Andy Green claim the IPO is now ‘dead in the water’.

But after failing to get the listing away in both Hong Kong and Singapore, there is suspicion an age-old problem has risen its head: Glazer family greed, and an over-valuation of the club.

United executives had planned to hit the road this week, meeting investors in Europe and Asia, before heading to the States to sell the listing amid a rash of negative articles in the financial press on both sides of the pond. But referencing insider sources, the FT claims that the Glazers have been spooked by a downturn in market conditions and increased volatility this week.

“The pause comes as US markets have been unsettled by further concerns over debt and economic growth in the eurozone, with the S&P 500 index falling 2 per cent since the start of the week,” said the paper’s editorial on Wednesday.

“People familiar with United’s IPO plans suggested the current delay had to do with market conditions. The Vix index, a widely monitored measure of implied volatility on the US market, has risen by more than 23 per cent since Monday. Bankers consider a sudden rise in the Vix as a sign of potential risk aversion from investors, making them less likely to participate in new offerings.”

The delay means a valuation is unlikely to be set until mid-August at the earliest; the smart money suggests the listing is to be pulled in its current form.

This comes just days after reports emerged that the Glazer family was keen to list before the new football season begins, with Sir Alex Ferguson repeatedly wheeled out to the defend the Americans in the past week. The owners’ enthusiasm to avoid another round of ‘Green and Gold’ style protests at Old Trafford ahead of listing, and a seeming desperation to get the listing away, were perhaps behind the media blitzkrieg.

Yet, volatility and poor market conditions are excuses that will fool few, with the two per cent S&P index fall barely a blip in historical terms. Meanwhile, the Vix has been running at around 20 this week – far lower than in previous months this year. Indeed, the Vix – an aggregated market nervousness score amusingly dubbed the “fear index” – has jogged between 15 and 20 this month, but up to 48 in the past year, and at 80 during the widespread market panic in October 2008.

The pandemonium, if there is any, resides in the United boardroom, not the NYSE floor.

But if market conditions are not genuinely to blame for delay – temporary or permanent – then lack of institutional interest in the sale is almost certainly a factor. The family’s dual-class share structure, determination to pay no dividends, a market unfamiliar with UK sports ‘franchises’ and the aggressive valuation consistently demanded by the Glazers are all in play.

In fact, a consistent pattern has emerged in the past 18 months, with the family willing to sell at least part of the club, but unwilling to lower a £2 billion plus valuation that neither the Qatari Royal family, Red Knights, nor institutional investors in two continents are willing to match.

Whether the family reinvigorates the IPO in the coming weeks is the real question, of course, with the FT casting doubt that the process can be completed in the current market window if the club is not priced by August. After all, if the market has spoken, the Glazers cannot return to New York without amending the structure and value of the listing. As the Wall Street Journal argued on Wednesday, while the fans love United whatever the financial outlook, US investors most certainly do not.

What next? Time for a full listing, with single class share structure that could bring partial ownership to the United fanbase, says MUST.

“The Glazers have been forced to pull the New York flotation of Manchester United due to lack of interest at the valuation they were placing on the club,” said ceo Duncan Drasdo on Wednesday.

“We now call on the Glazers to come back with a full flotation of Manchester United with a single class of full voting shares. Should they choose to do this, with no strings attached, we would support such a flotation wholeheartedly and encourage the global fan base of Manchester United to seize such an historic opportunity to secure a meaningful fan ownership stake where the priorities of the club are the same as the fans – not absentee owners.”

In the short-term United’s failure, once again, to list means that the club will continue haemorrhage money in interest and bond buy-backs – around £71 million in the first three quarters of the financial year. In the longer term the Glazers may be forced to re-value the club before sale, or flotation.

Much, of course, depends on just how much the family borrowed to refinance the Payment in Kind (PIK) loans last year, and whether the financial strain has become significant. In other words, not what motivated the Glazer family to change track and seek an IPO in the first place, but how big the financial need has become.

Share Button

Comments

  1. the kaizer says:

    More years of crippling interest payments. More years of buy backs, more years of rising ticket prices, more years of pappering over cracks, more years of “no value in the market” more years of raping fans. Only a buffon would buy these shares under the current condition. Even yanks aren’t that stupid.

  2. Bad sort term certainly but hopefully a step towards forcing the Glazers out. Rather get the pain out of the way soon.

  3. The bullshit never ends with this shower of inbred parasites.

  4. Minus The Bear says:

    Some idiot was claiming that this was a financially intelligent move due to the “current global economy”. I don’t have a great grasp of economics but I’m fairly certain that the “current global economy” hasn’t moved a great deal since the Glazers decided that the IPO was for them.

    • Minus The Bear – it really hasn’t. Small drop in S&P index this week, small rise in volatility (but historically still quite low). All excuses about market are crap… it’s all about valuation. When the only thing you’re offering investors is capital gains, valuation at IPO is everything.

  5. Minus The Bear says:

    Ha cheers Ed, I was being slightly factitious about it. Who’d have thought that the offer of shares which gave about the sum total of zero to the investors weren’t all that attractive.

  6. Wouldn’t you agree that the only realistic option Glazers have is to sell the club now, and that is good ?

  7. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Why do the Glazers have to sell?

    It costs them nothing to own United… it pays for itself… the only problem for the Glazers is, it’s not making them much/any profit… it’s all being wasted on debt payments…

    • Alf – it depends on what motivated the IPO? Did they want to extract some cash (from a potential over-subscription on IPO?) because they have a $400 million loan used to pay off the PIKs last year?

  8. @Alfonso It cost them £500 million of debt to buy united, and they are sucking money out of the club to pay for it. They are parasites.

  9. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Ed – yeah, to be honest most of this financial frippery is over my head… what I do understand, is that the Glazers are being outrageously greedy… but still… if the Glazers truly were desperate… selling United wouldn’t really be a problem… it’s still an incredibly valuable football club… it may not be worth what the Glazers “WANT”… but it’s worth more than enough to pay off it’s debt and still make those parasites a couple hundred million in profit.
    It seems to me that if they’re willing to take a punt on this fanciful flotation,(even to me it looked a ridiculous investment)… then they’re not really desperate enough yet… just testing the waters to see what MIGHT be possible.

    “Badges, to god-damned hell with badges! We have no badges. In fact, we don’t need badges. I don’t have to show you any stinking badges, you god-damned cabrón and ching’ tu madre! Come out from that shit-hole of yours. I have to speak to you.”

  10. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Commenter said:
    @Alfonso It cost them £500 million of debt to buy united, and they are sucking money out of the club to pay for it. They are parasites.

    Really?

    You’re new here aren’t you?

  11. Damian Garside says:

    Don’t all Hollywood sports film blockbusters start with a team in dire straits rising to eventual triumph against seemingly hopeless odds? Cue our forthcoming season, the film of which sweeps the 2015 academy awards starring (put name of perfect choice of actor) as Sir AF as he rises above all challenges ( including his own fatuous arrogance) to win a glorious second treble. Or not.

  12. RobDiablo RobDiablo says:

    Commenter said:
    … starring (put name of perfect choice of actor) as Sir AF as he rises above all challenges ( including his own fatuous arrogance) to win a glorious second treble…

    I nominate Albert Finney or Bill Paterson. If he can do a Scots accent, I’d prefer Mr. Finney, as he looks to be nearly pickled in whiskey and wine already and wouldn’t have to go through a Robert De Niro/Raging Bull experience in order to look the part.

  13. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    If Hollywood was involved, it would be Patrick Stewart or Harrison Ford.

    “Badges, to god-damned hell with badges! We have no badges. In fact, we don’t need badges. I don’t have to show you any stinking badges, you god-damned cabrón and ching’ tu madre! Come out from that shit-hole of yours. I have to speak to you.”

  14. Damian Garside says:

    If Sir AF had a say in the matter it would no doubt be Colin Farrell. But, wait a minute, didn’t Brad Pitt play the manager of a sports team (baseball)? There we go.

  15. So United owe $1 billion due within 220 weeks? If there is no appetite for an IPO in that time does that force the Glazers to sell, or just some horrible refinancing?

    • marlon – refinance. They’ll go back to the bond market when the bonds mature in 2017. Unless they’ve all been bought back, either through United spending circa £90/year to do it, or via an IPO.

  16. Oh well. There aren’t enough billionaires in the world to meet a Glazer valuation, so I guess there really is no light at the end of the tunnel.

  17. Denton Davey says:

    “‘General Motors Co signed a sponsorship deal with Manchester United valued at as much as nearly $600 million (382 million pounds) one day after the U.S. automaker’s global marketing chief was ousted in connection with a deal with the popular English soccer club.’

    ‘Under the seven-year deal, which makes Chevrolet the jersey sponsor starting in the 2014-2015 season, GM will pay $60 million to $70 million a year — at least double the current fee paid by insurance broker Aon, said a person with knowledge of the contract who asked not to be identified. GM also will pay the club a $100 million activation fee, the person said.’

    No question, “the debt” is equivalent to the sky falling in. (“Alfonso Bedoya” continually tells us this so it must be true)

  18. there is only one way to get the scumbags out of OT and that is a massive boycott in whatever form it takes. Of course that will never happen,The glazers will continue to shit on all fans who will moan and do sweet f..all about it. Hope springs eternal and MUST/UNITED RANT/IMUSA and all other parties have to continue their quest to rid the leeches from us. LUHG

  19. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Commenter said:
    “‘General Motors Co signed a sponsorship deal with Manchester United valued at as much as nearly $600 million (382 million pounds) one day after the U.S. automaker’s global marketing chief was ousted in connection with a deal with the popular English soccer club.’
    ‘Under the seven-year deal, which makes Chevrolet the jersey sponsor starting in the 2014-2015 season, GM will pay $60 million to $70 million a year — at least double the current fee paid by insurance broker Aon, said a person with knowledge of the contract who asked not to be identified. GM also will pay the club a $100 million activation fee, the person said.’
    No question, “the debt” is equivalent to the sky falling in. (“Alfonso Bedoya” continually tells us this so it must be true)

    You’re not only an idiot, who can’t read… but you’re also an asshole… quit trying to pick fights just for the fuck of it, with stupid arguments and snide remarks…
    … instead…
    why don’t you take your pissy attitude, and go suck cock down at the stock exchange where they like drooling capitalist fan boys like yourself…

    “Badges, to god-damned hell with badges! We have no badges. In fact, we don’t need badges. I don’t have to show you any stinking badges, you god-damned cabrón and ching’ tu madre! Come out from that shit-hole of yours. I have to speak to you.”

  20. uncleknobheadffs uncleknobheadforfucksake says:

    that’s a hell of a deal tbf

  21. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    If it true, it’s a wicked deal… doubt very much United will see any of it though… Fergie doesn’t seem to think we need the money anyway.
    I am a bit curious, why an American car maker, that doesn’t shift many cars outside of the States would make such a deal though.

    “Badges, to god-damned hell with badges! We have no badges. In fact, we don’t need badges. I don’t have to show you any stinking badges, you god-damned cabrón and ching’ tu madre! Come out from that shit-hole of yours. I have to speak to you.”

  22. Epic deal – must be why the VP got fired.

    The bloomberg report said the IPO was looking for about $300 – half the sponsorship deal. The article spends most of the time saying how awesome United’s finances are though so might be part of a PR pushback from the Glazers. (http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-30/manchester-united-is-said-to-be-poised-to-begin-ipo)

    Interesting to see where the money goes form the initial $100 (£63) million. IPO said they’d use any cash from that to pay off debt – surely a more attractive proposition with $100 million less debt. Our debt is £423.

    Wow. Just read IPO is on: 16,666,667 shares priced at $16-$20 each. Works out at a total of between $266,666,672 – $333,333,340

  23. Underwriters have an option to buy further 2,500,000 shares. So an extra $40,000,000 – $50,000,000.

    Potential total in £: 169,735,000 – 244,000,000 (from $16 per share without option to $20 per share + option)

  24. Reading Glazers are personally taking half proceeds from IPO. We will repay £73 million of £425 debt (so down to £350). Net interest saving from that debt reduction is £4.2m per year.

    The 16.6 million shares will buy 10.2% of the club. ‘Senior management’ to get a further 16m shares – Gill + Fergie? I assume they are class a (non voting) as well but I don’t know.

    So Glazer ownership of the club down to 80%.

  25. 6 Glazers get $25m each from IPO.

  26. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    marlon said:
    6 Glazers get $25m each from IPO.

    Tell me you’re joking…

  27. Paying £75 m of debt but debt expected to have risen to £437 by the end of this financial year.

  28. Half of IPO proceeds going to debt so if the IPO is successful and gets over £200 million, I assume the £75 would rise. Of course the Glazers would get more too.

  29. No official figures released for GM deal in prospectus even though it’s mentioned. Perhaps the rumours are better than the reality.

  30. Pikey McScum Pikey McScum says:

    If half is going to the Glazers as reported, they’d be advised to approve some big money signings or there will be a lot of very pissed off people

  31. After the IPO there will be three more Glazers on the board of directors:
    “Messrs. Bryan and Kevin Glazer each will become a director on our board of directors upon consummation of this offering. Ms. Darcie Glazer Kassewitz will become a director on our board of directors in September 2012.”

  32. For % club ownership, 8,333,333 shares are being sold by the glazers, 8,333,334 being sold by United and a potential 16,000,000 to be awarded to employees. All Class A (1 vote compared to 10 for class b).
    Total shares are: Class A: 39,685,700; Class B: 124,000,000.
    After IPO:
    Glazers own all class B and 58% (assuming 2.5m extra shares aren’t sold) of class a shares. Works out at 98.7% of voting power.

  33. So United getting proceeds from 8 million shares and glazers the other 8 million. If they sell at the mid point of the $16-20 that gives $141m each at current exchange rates – would allow United to pay of £75m of debt (we have to pay 108% value of the debt). If shares sell for $20 United would get a bit more. If the option to sell 2.5m more shares is taken up, I believe the Glazers are entitled to take all of that (another $45m).

  34. All remaining shares are eligible for sale in 180 days

  35. ‘We’ is United:

    We estimate expenses payable by us in connection with this offering, other than the underwriting discounts and commissions referred to above, will be approximately $12.3 million. We are paying all such expenses of this offering. The selling shareholder will not pay any expenses of this offering, other than underwriting discounts and commissions in connection with the Class A ordinary shares sold by the selling shareholder.

  36. What the fuck is shit, seriously

  37. Peter K says:

    I just turned away two dumb Yankie mormon looking mother fuckers from my door selling Manchester United Magic Beans, they said their whole family were in town and there were only 2 billion beans left so I needed to get in quick.
    Ed, should I have bought them? Oh yeah I forgot to mention, they said they’d never grow and if they did I had no legal rights to pick the fruit (if any) off them, I wasn’t even allowed to tell my neighbours I had them (or everyone would want one). But alas, as I type I see them getting on the back of a unicorn and flying into the Sun, well that’ll teach me to leave the can of industrial glue open.

  38. Peter K says:

    @Damian Garside. I’d have Christopher Lambert play Ferguson and Sean Connery play all the Glaziers- It worked in Highlander didn’t it, I mean Connerys Egyptian/Spanish accent was wonderful so I’m sure an American one is no bother, and Lamberts linguistic touch with the Scottish tone was a masterclass.

  39. Damian Garside says:

    Thanks for all your suggestions re the casting of Fergie for the film of the 2012-2013 Treble. Enjoyed both the realistic and the over-the-top. What about the Irish actor Brendan Gleeson (In Bruges, Gangs of New York)? Think he would be perfect.

    Like to think I’m smart but these figures make my head reel: it’s like suddenly our team has entered a world best filmed by Tim Burton. Alex’s Adventures in Glazerland

  40. Minus The Bear says:

    So the Premier League are totally cool with the Glazers taking £150 million odd, whilst still leaving the club in over £550 million pounds debt? Wonder if Ferguson is one of the select employees entitled to the IPO payout. Jesus christ, the IPO wasn’t exactly attractive before hand…

  41. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    If this is all true… then I think more fans will start to get genuinely pissed off… Ferguson will no doubt we wheeled out to tell the fans a few more porkies about his wonderful employers.

    Funny how you never hear from Charlton about the Glazers…

  42. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Ed… can you explain what’s in it for the investor… cause I honestly don’t see any appeal in these shares at all.

    • Biscuitbarrell says:

      It’s about increase in the overall value of the company. The company is worth £100 there are 100 shares, each is worth £1. If the value of the company goes up to £200 (in the markets opinion) the shares are worth £2. The IPO is being offered on the basis that the value of the company will increase in the future. Should the club be taken over in the future, the purchaser has to offer the same price for all shares regardless of voting rights.

      One might argue that the club is currently overvalued, that future growth won’t match previous performance and that the value of your investment could go down as well as up. We’ll know better when we see what the interest in the IPO is. I personally wouldn’t touch them at that price.

      For all you defenders of the Fergie faith, if Gill and SAF do both get shares as part of the IPO, how do you feel now about their defence of the glazers? £100 million plus in shares is quite a bonus. Still think they’ve got your best interests at heart?

      Fergie has only one priority – himself. Don’t be expecting him to look out for you, the fans or the team.

  43. Damian Garside says:

    Can’t believe that AF would be scheduled for an IPO payout especially if it is an amount close to the money which we received for Ronaldo and which went t service the debt.

  44. Interesting that there have been no glazer apologists on this yet. Not on sky sports article comments either.

  45. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    That’s because there’s no way to justify this.

  46. There are plenty on the Caf

    I go on there to gauge reaction and try and understand the financial bollocks better. But there is so much spin on there it’s unreal. It’s like RT reporting on Syria. Or Saddam’s right hand man who kept insisting there were no American tanks in Iraq. And it’s all done with a subservient “well it IS their club after all” mentality, and a resigned “we’re better off today than we were yesterday so how can it be a bad thing” (actual quote).

    • Biscuitbarrell says:

      That would be the glazer PR system in full swing. There’s lots of phoney posts on united and football blogs generally. It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a dedicated PR department for “viral marketing” on the forums. I’ve yet to meet anyone in real life at the games or in England, who express the opinions in some of the posts. The mistake is believing they’re real opinions from real people – particularly on red cafe!

  47. Minus The Bear says:

    Alfonso Bedoya said:
    Ed… can you explain what’s in it for the investor… cause I honestly don’t see any appeal in these shares at all.

    Alf, I think its like Biscuitbarrell explained that the shares don’t really have value to long term investors or to actually get a “share” of the company, they are simply for trading based on market movement.

    Why do people not think Ferguson is going to be included in the Glazers 2012 Equity Incentive Award Plan, which 16 million shares will be “awarded to selected employees, consultants and non employee directors” after his wonderful ‘real’ fans and pro Glazer rant?

  48. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Commenter said:
    That would be the glazer PR system in full swing. There’s lots of phoney posts on united and football blogs generally. It wouldn’t surprise me if there was a dedicated PR department for “viral marketing” on the forums. I’ve yet to meet anyone in real life at the games or in England, who express the opinions in some of the posts. The mistake is believing they’re real opinions from real people – particularly on red cafe!

    I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I’ve often considered the possiblity.

    What would it cost the Glazers to employ a 4/5 twats to surf around the various United forums, and argue in favour of anything they do? Relative to the money being spent,(and not spent in our case) not much.

  49. It seems even less attractive to investors then the initial offering. They are valuing the club at such ridiculous levels.

  50. BiscuitBarrell says:

    No doubt if the uptake of shares is poor, Fergie will be wheeled out in front of the press suggesting that “real” fans would buy the shares if they “really” supported the club.

    We are one short step from Derren Brown coming in – “you love Manchester United, and you want to give them all your money”

  51. Alfonso Bedoya said:
    I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I’ve often considered the possiblity.

    What would it cost the Glazers to employ a 4/5 twats to surf around the various United forums, and argue in favour of anything they do? Relative to the money being spent,(and not spent in our case) not much.

    It’s standard practice for big corporations and PR firms, isn’t it, influencing opinion on the internet. It wouldn’t be that hard to do regarding something complicated like United’s finances. You don’t have to outright convince people something is wrong, you just have to create enough confusion and doubt – then people don’t know what to think and the result is apathy.

  52. Haha honestly, I am not surprised by this, and in fact thought they may actually do this. It’s a joke.

    If they sell the shares, they’ll still have the cash – and my feeling is, if there’s a situation with the debt, they’ll pay off the debt via the club, loaning the club the money – effectively allowing them to drag yet ANOTHER pile of cash out of the club, and pay down external debt.

    So, in effect – IPO raises (as a figure) $300m – $150m in Glazers pockets. 2 months later, debt issues start to come in, Glazers lend that cash to the club, the club pays off the external debt, leaving the club endebted long term to the Glazers, allowing them to rake cash in, and allowing them to manipulate an interest rate such that they get the return they want on that cash.

    I mean, if the club is already paying £50m a season in debt, and “THE FRANCHISE IS STILL COMPETITIVE, 659M FOLLOWERS GUYZ!” then why in the heck would you want to see that cash disappearing in some other cretin’s pockets, when you could lend that money to the club and make it pay whatever the hell you like

    Honestly, this situation is so horrid, I am so angry I want to ragevomit

  53. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    One horrid aspect of this is that the Glazers see United fans as such suckers… but the worst part is that they’re right…

  54. Trying to look on the bright side, I suppose this way it means at least that the Glazers are making money off the club, but they’re not taking it directly out of the club’s revenues. It will be interesting to see if Fergie and Gill make a lot of money from the IPO. In any case, I suppose we have to hope that the IPO is a success at least, even if that means watching a bust of arseholes get even richer.

    The figures quoted for the Chevrolet deal can’t be true can they? $100M payment up front and $60M a season? That seems crazy high.

  55. Alfonso Bedoya Alfonso Bedoya says:

    Aye, it is crazy high… and apparently making this deal cost the man who made it his job.

  56. Why don’t the Glaziers, or Ferguson may be better just ask the apparently loyal 659 million supporters to donate 1 pound each to save the club? Is this because the 659 million is a figure randomly plucked out of the air (The survey was carried out by leading market research agency, Kantar, and gathered 54,000 respondents from 39 countries.) So to get this right, 54,000 people responded to the survey and the rest is taken from what or did they all say, well I’m Man U and so are my 1,000,000 imaginary friends????
    Does this work on, How many twitter followers they have, how many face book friends are out there? It’s strange that these figures come out when the Glaziers are in need of a boost for investors but its a shame that although the brand United is known it doesn’t mean 659 million people buy a jersey, watch a match or know who plays for them, it just means the brand is known, a bit like going around the world and asking anyone do they know a Cola drink, well odds are Pepsi and Coke are going to be the two biggest but that doesn’t mean people buy or drink the shit now does it?
    It just seems strange is all, and then with this massive sponsorship and the chap getting fired, maybe they’ve been planning this media circus to fool investors and fans, it wouldn’t suprise me that if part of the Chevrolet deal was in some way connected to Glaziers other business interests (non-ManU) and was set up to be an astronomical figure where as such the Glaziers other companies may well have agreed to spend X amount on Chevrolets over the next 7 years to reimburse them and both companies still come out smelling of roses, just remember, when it comes to smoke and mirrors in business there aren’t many as rutless and slimey as a feckin Yank. Another question, who paid Kantar to do the surveying? Anyone who works or worked with numbers knows with the right experience you can make numbers tell any story you like. (Lets say 100 people surveyed to see if they like being fucked by a bear by a company that makes bear strength vasiline and need to get themselves some good numbers, well lets see what questions they’d ask?
    1. Do you like bears? Yes 90% No 5% Don’t care 5%:
    Well our survey says that 92.5 people would consider a relationship with a bear.
    2. Do you like sex? Yes 95% No 2% Don’t care 3%:
    Well our survey says that 96.5 people would consider getting fucked by a bear.
    3. Have you ever been in or near a forest? Yes 100%
    Well our survey says that 100 people have gone out looking for bears with the intent of having a realtionship of the bear fucking kind.

    To summaries:
    On Average 96.3 out of 100 people would use the new Bear Strength Vasiline and have supported Bear/Human love pumping activities in the past.

    This survey has been carried out on behalf of a lunatic at the hands of a pervert.

  57. Denton Davey says:

    Alfonso Bedoya: “apparently making this deal cost the man who made it his job.”

    That’s not quite what was reported – what I read in the Guardian/Telegraph is that the guy who was sacked had made a deal with LiverPoo BEFORE the deal with UTD was announced.

    The reason why I think that those Guardian/Telegraph reports are accurate is that no middle-level manager would have the independent authority to seal a 600 million dollar deal on his own say-so. For a gigantic company like General Motors – Chevrolet is a division of that conglomerate – there’s a chain of command.

    You’re right, though, that the announced amount – 600 million, with a 100 million up-front “activation fee” – is crazy. But, maybe, that’s some sort of reflection of UTD’s pulling-power. Forbes Magazine reckons that UTD are the most valuable sporting company in the world and that its value has more than doubled since 2005. It seems that the key part of that equation is that UTD’s following is truly “global” whereas other large sporting companies – like the NY Yankees or Dallas Cowboys or RM or Barcelona – don’t have the world-wide following; for sure, none of those others have been as assiduous in pursuing “commercial revenue” even though the Yankees and the two Spanish footie clubs have what amounts to private TV deals which dwarf UTD’s income from their share of the EPL revenues.

  58. Denton Davey says:

    ooops.

    “DETROIT (Reuters) – General Motors Co (GM.N) signed a sponsorship deal with Manchester United on Monday after rewording the terms negotiated with the popular English soccer club by the U.S. automaker’s ousted global marketing chief.

    Under the seven-year jersey sponsorship deal starting in 2014-2015 for the Chevrolet brand, GM will pay $60 million to $70 million a year, said a person with knowledge of the contract who asked not to be identified. GM also will pay the club a $100 million activation fee, making the deal’s total value worth as much as $600 million, the person said.

    By comparison, insurance broker Aon Plc (AON.N) pays about $31 million a year for the current jersey sponsorship, which runs through the 2013-2014 season.

    On Sunday, GM ousted its global marketing chief, Joel Ewanick, without giving specifics. Sources told Reuters that Ewanick failed to properly report financial details about a recent sponsorship deal with the soccer club. That resulted in a rewording of the deal before it was announced on Monday, the sources said. The persons requested anonymity because they are not authorized to discuss contract details.”

    It seems that the link with LiverPoo was misleading. Sorry about that.

  59. I am wondering as to whether we are all getting a bit paranoid with the idea that the Glazers have actually commissioned people to blog on a site like this one putting out Glazer-spin disguising themselves as ” true supporters” , in other words people whose love for united is so deep it doesn’y matter how badly they are owned and ho0w badly they play, and people like me who misguidedly think there is a United tradition on the field which is committed to flair and attacking football, and that it would be good if we had a Barcelona type model of ownership, where money would not be syphoned out to pay off loan interest, and the manager would not insult fans/ intelligence (nae value) and spit on their loyalty (f.o. to Chelsea).

    We could be getting paranoid. On the other hand, it could be true. And if it is, it means that we are (1) taken very seriously and (2) seen as a potential enemy — if not that (3) war has been declared on us already

    But then, we probably ARE are being paranoid (and who can blame us). And if the Glazers looked for people to write for them(running a classic intelligence agency `disinformation’ campaign) — what they would come up with woul, I am sure, have `nae value’ anyway (beyond confusing and irritating the hell out of us)

  60. Plenty of companies have people regularly posting on blogs and forums, and there are PR/marketing companies that specialize in offering this kind of service. I would b surprised if Utd is doing it though — not least because any big football club has enough blind passionate defenders who already do that for free.

  61. But if anyone from Utd is reading this, I just wanted to say that my voice carries a lot of weight and my opinions are absolutely for sale.

    • Damian Garside says:

      They would have made an approach to hire you as a paid spin-scribe, but apparently when you played football at school u played central midfield and Fergie would never United sign one of those

  62. Damian Garside says:

    Obviously they won’t sign me: too many typos. Missed out the word “let”: wanted to say that Fergie would not let United sign ( a former CM)

Speak Your Mind

*