Bayern Munich president criticises Glazers

SteveJ · 20th January 2012, 02:59

Quote:

Bayern Munich president Uli Hoeness has delivered a damning criticism of Manchester United’s owners, the Glazer family, by claiming it is unacceptable for the Americans to have plunged the club into debt.

Bayern president Uli Hoeness attacks Glazer family - Telegraph

w'or bobby · 20th January 2012, 03:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveJ

Bayern president Uli Hoeness attacks Glazer family - Telegraph

Clear and to the point.

gooDevil · 20th January 2012, 03:15

Quote:

Hoeness, a powerful figure within European football, is the most high-profile name to question the running of Manchester United under the Glazers, who completed their leveraged takeover of the club in May 2005.

Having borrowed £540 million to complete the buy-out of United seven years ago, the Glazers subsequently loaded the debt on to the club, who continue to pay in excess of £40 million-a-year on interest payments.

Although United’s annual commercial earnings have more than doubled under the Glazers, the club remains in debt to the tune of £433 million.

And Hoeness has hit out at the Florida-based family, claiming their only motivation for buying United was financial gain.

Speaking to Bloomberg, Hoeness said: “Before Mr Glazer bought Manchester United, he didn’t know there was air in the ball. That’s not something that I accept. His target is making money.

“I would accept Mr Glazer immediately if he says ‘OK, the price of Manchester United is £800 million.

"That’s my money, my risk and now we are working.’

"But what did he do? He bought the club and said ‘OK, I don’t have the money.

"How can we finance it?’ That’s something that I never accept.”

In response to Hoeness’s comments, a United spokesman said: “Mr Hoeness has a right to an opinion, but results over the last seven years speak for themselves and Manchester United is in a healthy position, both on and off the pitch.

“The Glazer family have been integral in boosting of the club’s revenues, which have seen Manchester United become world leaders in the breadth and depth of our commercial partnerships.”

While insisting that they have no intention of selling the club the Glazers are aiming to raise £600 million from a partial float of United on the Singapore Stock Exchange.

Plans for the float to take place before the end of 2011 failed to materialise due to the volatile nature of the financial market and it is now unlikely to happen until mid-2012 at the earliest.

Despite the delay in launching the Initial Public Offering, United manager Sir Alex Ferguson has been told that money is available for new players this transfer window.

But so far this month, the only addition to United’s squad has been Paul Scholes following his retirement about-turn, with the club’s wage bill being reduced by the £1 million sale of Darron Gibson to Everton and loaning of Federico Macheda and Joshua King to Queens Park Rangers and Hull respectively.

The Glazers’ attempt to raise new funds to drive down the club’s debt has been partly instigated by the rise of Manchester City, whose financial power in the transfer market under the ownership of Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed al Nahyan has transformed the club.

Hoeness has warned, however, that clubs such as Manchester City and Chelsea, owned by Roman Abramovich, cannot rely solely on the funds of one individual.

He added: “In this moment, will he [the wealthy owner] one day say now I go on my ships and I buy pictures and so on? But if you say which option [Glazers or benefactor], you want to have I would say I take the guy from Abu Dhabi.”

With Bayern positioned as vociferous advocates of Uefa’s Financial Fair Play regulations, which could see clubs barred from Champions League participation if they fail to reduce losses and adhere to the financial strictures by 2015, the German club's chief executive, Karl-Heinz Rummenigge insists that Europe’s governing body must get tough with those who ignore the rules.

Rummenigge said: “It’s time to finalise everything because clubs must know what is happening in case they break the rules.”

..

ecantona7 · 20th January 2012, 03:21

Agree with everything he says, glazers are a cancer to our club

Kid Cunto · 20th January 2012, 03:27

Fair play to him. None of his business, but fair play to him.

NewDawnFades · 20th January 2012, 03:35

Can't disagree with the Hoemeister. Bayern are another big club but with a constantly invested in squad and sitting on cash to spend, it's no wonder he sees flaws in United right now.

marchi-91 · 20th January 2012, 03:41

It seems strange to me that he's commenting on something he probably has as much information about as ourselves. Once the debt is cleared, which we've done a good job over the past 2 years in gradually removing, the club will arguably be one of the strongest and healthiest in Europe. I don't know the interest levels on Bonds, but surely, it's not a whole lot more expensive than having shareholders?

The problem is that United are footing the bill for Glazers ownership, but at the same time, we've had the benefit of immense stability within the club. Only Barcelona have had a more successful period since the Glazer's take over of the club.

But really he should be saying that the debt issues started in the 90's when the Edwards floated the club and allowed such a situation to arise.

Snow · 20th January 2012, 03:47

Erhmm, what?

marchi-91 · 20th January 2012, 03:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow

Erhmm, what?

Yeah I just re read that and it wasn't correct.

anver · 20th January 2012, 07:03

Where is GCHQ? I kinda miss the bloke. He has all the figures (not the facts) to shield Mr.G.

amolbhatia100 · 20th January 2012, 07:13

Our debt has reduced hugely and still stands at 433 million?

Surely with the debt still so huge after 5 or so years, it means that everything is being pumped into paying interest.

Although its been so long I still find it hard to believe how they were allowed to buy the club taking such a huge loan. 25% I get. But you have the half the fucking money?

acrebo · 20th January 2012, 09:54

I agree with the principle of what he is saying but it's a bit irksome to hear it to be honest:

1, He's speaking out when Bayern are the best they have been for over a decade. Where were his condemnations when they were struggling to make even the slightest footprint no the European stage? I agree their business model is fantastic, but why now?

2, He first says that he would have had no problem with it if the Glazers bought the club with their own cash but then goes on to criticise the billionaire owners by saying those clubs can't rely on the cash of one person alone. Contradictory.

But, yeah, it'll be nice once the debt is reduced to a level where it's merely a by-product of the business operation and not the deciding factor.

marchi-91 · 20th January 2012, 10:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by amolbhatia100

Our debt has reduced hugely and still stands at 433 million?

Surely with the debt still so huge after 5 or so years, it means that everything is being pumped into paying interest.

Although its been so long I still find it hard to believe how they were allowed to buy the club taking such a huge loan. 25% I get. But you have the half the fucking money?

Given that most journalist's were claiming the debt at 750m only 2 years ago, the fact we're at 433 now is a massive chunk. At that rate, it'll be gone is 4 years. Obviously, the wiping off of PIK's has compounded such a large number over a shot time, but we're seemingly getting rid of debt very very quickly. Alot quicker than most anticipated.

The only thing as a United fan i'm truly concerned about anymore, is how much the Glazers will take from the profits.

Feeky_Magee · 20th January 2012, 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by marchi-91

Given that most journalist's were claiming the debt at 750m only 2 years ago, the fact we're at 433 now is a massive chunk. At that rate, it'll be gone is 4 years. Obviously, the wiping off of PIK's has compounded such a large number over a shot time, but we're seemingly getting rid of debt very very quickly. Alot quicker than most anticipated.

The only thing as a United fan i'm truly concerned about anymore, is how much the Glazers will take from the profits.

Yeah, just a bit, given they were £220m. £750m-£220m=£530m. So less than £100m wiped off in real terms given the PIKs were almost definitely simply refinanced.

Irwinwastheking · 20th January 2012, 11:00

I think a lot of people will have to start changing their opinion of where the club stands now financially. The debt will be pretty much gone by the end of this decade and we will have one of the largest revenues in world football. What people failed to see in the early days of the take over was that when you have a large debt the first few years seem to get you no-where when paying it off. However, like with a mortgage once you get into the actual capitol amount it seems to go quite quickly. Of course people will have problems with the glazers, and rightly so. The match going fans are getting screwed more than ever, but financial instability, for the time being anyway is not as much of a problem as is being made out.

Crustanoid · 20th January 2012, 11:15

Without SAF we'd be in a much poorer position now IMO

Irwinwastheking · 20th January 2012, 11:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crustanoid

Without SAF we'd be in a much poorer position now IMO

statetheobvious.com

Reapersoul20 · 20th January 2012, 11:18

Without SAF we'd be up shit creek without a paddle.

::sonny:: · 20th January 2012, 11:19

Sign Hoeness

Sir A1ex · 20th January 2012, 11:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crustanoid

Without SAF we'd be in a much poorer position now IMO

Well that has to be the most crazy, out-there opinion I've ever read on the caf.

marchi-91 · 20th January 2012, 11:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feeky_Magee

Yeah, just a bit, given they were £220m. £750m-£220m=£530m. So less than £100m wiped off in real terms given the PIKs were almost definitely simply refinanced.

Given that everybody claims what a brilliant job Arsene is doing when they're paying off at 25 million a year, it makes Fergie look like the second coming of christ as 50 million pa over the past 2 years.

Irwinwastheking · 20th January 2012, 11:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by marchi-91

Given that everybody claims what a brilliant job Arsene is doing when they're paying off at 25 million a year, it makes Fergie look like the second coming of christ as 50 million pa over the past 2 years.

Horses for courses. We take in multiples of what they do.

Red_Jamie · 20th January 2012, 11:42

He's spot on. We could learn a lot from the Munich model of running a club. As could English football learn from Germany in general.

(oh and i'm sure GHCQ will be here before long to criticise)

Sir A1ex · 20th January 2012, 12:13

It's actually possible that Hoeness only said all this in a bid to lure GCHQ back into the caf...

Twigginater · 20th January 2012, 12:37

He's not wrong. However there's certainly a feeling (for me at least) that whilst they're pretty shite owners, we might be getting out of the woods now. We've paid quite a bit of our debt back, and we continue to spend quite well.

Redlambs · 20th January 2012, 12:44

He should be praising the Glazers, if it wasn't for them we'd have had the money to take their best midfielder away a long time ago.

misterredmist · 20th January 2012, 12:49

In principal, UH is bang on the money -

The trouble all along has been, there's no rule against leveraged buy-outs, the Glazers broke no rules and as soon as the Magnier and McManus accepted the offer, it was a fait accomplis.

One thing where United can stand proud, in the post-credit crunch financial climate, they've done amazingly well to keep their finances in order, with a leveraged buy-out,
plenty of other businesses haven't been so fortunate.

However, we're stuck with the Glazer situation for the foreseeable future, we just have to get on with it.

The ironic thing is, you look at the dramatic rise and even more spectaular fall of the RBS, their subsequent bail out by "Joe Public", and you have the bizarre situation yesterday where the RBS foreclose on a retail business, that was running ok, until it succumed to a leveraged, management buy-out........may be Joe Public should have foreclosed on the RBS too......

Cina · 20th January 2012, 12:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Twigginater

He's not wrong. However there's certainly a feeling (for me at least) that whilst they're pretty shite owners, we might be getting out of the woods now. We've paid quite a bit of our debt back, and we continue to spend quite well.

Optimistic thinking. We'll be paying off that debt for most of this decade, and with Sir Alex inevitable departure we could be in big trouble.

Sunny Jim · 20th January 2012, 12:53

I bet GCHQ is now getting instructions as how to tackle this interview on Redcafe.net.

[popcorn gif] ....[/popcorn gif]

Smores · 20th January 2012, 13:03

He's right that leveraged buyouts should have been prevented but the negatives of such have always been overstated by those who can't comprehend. We'd all rather profiteering stayed away from football but as long as the owners keep the club's future financial secure then it's an evil I accept.

Sir A1ex · 20th January 2012, 19:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smores

the negatives of such have always been overstated by those who can't comprehend.

Ah, things are warming up, the first play of what's known amongst seasoned Glazer-debaters as the "patronising gambit". GCHQ can't be far away now...

padzilla · 20th January 2012, 19:32

We won't really know the impact of how good/bad the Glazers are until Fergie leaves.

England1966 · 20th January 2012, 20:59

for me I don't get one thing: why United is in debt ?! If is a profitable club (100-200mil you call it Eu, Bp, UsDollars...) I don't get it. Aaaa Glazer are the owner and they are in debt...who gives a penny on this?! Glazers are in debt but not United!

Excal · 20th January 2012, 21:13

The four most mentioned people/groups of peoples in this thread:

1) The Glazers
2) Hoeness
3) Sir Alex
4) GCHQ

Red Dreams · 20th January 2012, 21:25

I like Hoeness.

I hope he will someday head UEFA or FIFA.

Blatter and Platini are the real cancer on football.

Red Dreams · 20th January 2012, 21:29

Rummenigge is ok too.

UnofficialDevil · 20th January 2012, 21:40

Quote:

United manager Sir Alex Ferguson has been told that money is available for new players this transfer window.

But so far this month, the only addition to United’s squad has been Paul Scholes following his retirement about-turn, with the club’s wage bill being reduced by the £1 million sale of Darron Gibson to Everton and loaning of Federico Macheda and Joshua King to Queens Park Rangers and Hull respectively.

It felt bad reading that

GCHQ · 25th January 2012, 19:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewDawnFades

Can't disagree with the Hoemeister. Bayern are another big club but with a constantly invested in squad and sitting on cash to spend, it's no wonder he sees flaws in United right now.

We're a similarly big club that constantly invests heavily in the first team squad and is sitting on a large amount of cash to continue that expenditure going forward.

kps88 · 25th January 2012, 19:34

There we go. I was wondering how GCHQ missed this thread. Part of the weekly Glazer thread search?

GCHQ · 25th January 2012, 19:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smores

He's right that leveraged buyouts should have been prevented but the negatives of such have always been overstated by those who can't comprehend. We'd all rather profiteering stayed away from football but as long as the owners keep the club's future financial secure then it's an evil I accept.

Indeed. Hoeness completely fails to acknowledge the cost savings (corporation tax and dividends) that the Glazers ownership has brought the club together with the vast increases in matchday and particularly commercial revenues from Glazer inspired decision making. It's perfectly reasonable to state that the first team squad would not currently be of the same quality and strength had the PLC structure remained in place due to their 50% wage cap on significantly reduced turnover.

RedCafe.net

The Leading Manchester United Forum

Member's Login

Bayern Munich president criticises Glazers

Latest Forum Topics

Jump to Forum

Not yet registered?

20th January 2012, 03:21	#4 (permalink)
ecantona7 First Team Regular Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Whatever happens, there are always things you could have done better. You score two goals and you usually feel you could have done better.You score two goals and you usually feel you could have scored a third. That's what makes you progress in life. Posts: 10,038	Agree with everything he says, glazers are a cancer to our club

20th January 2012, 03:27	#5 (permalink)
Kid Cunto Good Craig got his c'nuppins Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: I might be worst newbie, but I'm your worst newbie. Posts: 5,640	Fair play to him. None of his business, but fair play to him.

20th January 2012, 03:35	#6 (permalink)
NewDawnFades First Team Sub Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Giggsy 12 Gerrard 0 Posts: 5,706	Can't disagree with the Hoemeister. Bayern are another big club but with a constantly invested in squad and sitting on cash to spend, it's no wonder he sees flaws in United right now.

20th January 2012, 03:41	#7 (permalink)
marchi-91 First Team Regular Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: I may be the devil, but i'm not a monster Posts: 11,774	It seems strange to me that he's commenting on something he probably has as much information about as ourselves. Once the debt is cleared, which we've done a good job over the past 2 years in gradually removing, the club will arguably be one of the strongest and healthiest in Europe. I don't know the interest levels on Bonds, but surely, it's not a whole lot more expensive than having shareholders? The problem is that United are footing the bill for Glazers ownership, but at the same time, we've had the benefit of immense stability within the club. Only Barcelona have had a more successful period since the Glazer's take over of the club. But really he should be saying that the debt issues started in the 90's when the Edwards floated the club and allowed such a situation to arise.

20th January 2012, 03:47	#8 (permalink)
Snow First Team Sub Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: I like turtles Posts: 9,166	Erhmm, what?

20th January 2012, 07:03	#10 (permalink)
anver Shart stop Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Colombo. Sri-Lanka Posts: 4,150	Where is GCHQ? I kinda miss the bloke. He has all the figures (not the facts) to shield Mr.G.

20th January 2012, 07:13	#11 (permalink)
amolbhatia100 Has excellent taste in women Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: india Posts: 26,591	Our debt has reduced hugely and still stands at 433 million? Surely with the debt still so huge after 5 or so years, it means that everything is being pumped into paying interest. Although its been so long I still find it hard to believe how they were allowed to buy the club taking such a huge loan. 25% I get. But you have the half the fucking money?

20th January 2012, 09:54	#12 (permalink)
acrebo Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Exeter Posts: 2,686	I agree with the principle of what he is saying but it's a bit irksome to hear it to be honest: 1, He's speaking out when Bayern are the best they have been for over a decade. Where were his condemnations when they were struggling to make even the slightest footprint no the European stage? I agree their business model is fantastic, but why now? 2, He first says that he would have had no problem with it if the Glazers bought the club with their own cash but then goes on to criticise the billionaire owners by saying those clubs can't rely on the cash of one person alone. Contradictory. But, yeah, it'll be nice once the debt is reduced to a level where it's merely a by-product of the business operation and not the deciding factor.

20th January 2012, 11:00	#15 (permalink)
Irwinwastheking First Team Sub Join Date: May 2009 Location: All that he's done for this football club and he's been forced to eat shite from a trough out of fergusons arse Posts: 9,361	I think a lot of people will have to start changing their opinion of where the club stands now financially. The debt will be pretty much gone by the end of this decade and we will have one of the largest revenues in world football. What people failed to see in the early days of the take over was that when you have a large debt the first few years seem to get you no-where when paying it off. However, like with a mortgage once you get into the actual capitol amount it seems to go quite quickly. Of course people will have problems with the glazers, and rightly so. The match going fans are getting screwed more than ever, but financial instability, for the time being anyway is not as much of a problem as is being made out.

20th January 2012, 11:15	#16 (permalink)
Crustanoid First Team Regular Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 12,790	Without SAF we'd be in a much poorer position now IMO

20th January 2012, 11:18	#18 (permalink)
Reapersoul20 Reserve Team Player Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Ireland Posts: 2,865	Without SAF we'd be up shit creek without a paddle.

20th January 2012, 11:19	#19 (permalink)
::sonny:: First Team Sub Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Milan Posts: 5,314	Sign Hoeness

20th January 2012, 11:42	#23 (permalink)
Red_Jamie Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,836	He's spot on. We could learn a lot from the Munich model of running a club. As could English football learn from Germany in general. (oh and i'm sure GHCQ will be here before long to criticise)

20th January 2012, 12:13	#24 (permalink)
Sir A1ex First Team Regular Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Where the goals come from. Posts: 19,668	It's actually possible that Hoeness only said all this in a bid to lure GCHQ back into the caf...

20th January 2012, 12:37	#25 (permalink)
Twigginater WUM Alert! Join Date: May 2008 Location: Obertans #1 fan. Posts: 5,035	He's not wrong. However there's certainly a feeling (for me at least) that whilst they're pretty shite owners, we might be getting out of the woods now. We've paid quite a bit of our debt back, and we continue to spend quite well.

20th January 2012, 12:44	#26 (permalink)
Redlambs First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Officially the best poker player on RAWK. Your cash has been donated to the Gary Neville for Prime Minister fund, cheers you scouse twats. Posts: 10,989	He should be praising the Glazers, if it wasn't for them we'd have had the money to take their best midfielder away a long time ago.

20th January 2012, 12:49	#27 (permalink)
misterredmist Reserve Team Player Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baguley Posts: 1,532	In principal, UH is bang on the money - The trouble all along has been, there's no rule against leveraged buy-outs, the Glazers broke no rules and as soon as the Magnier and McManus accepted the offer, it was a fait accomplis. One thing where United can stand proud, in the post-credit crunch financial climate, they've done amazingly well to keep their finances in order, with a leveraged buy-out, plenty of other businesses haven't been so fortunate. However, we're stuck with the Glazer situation for the foreseeable future, we just have to get on with it. The ironic thing is, you look at the dramatic rise and even more spectaular fall of the RBS, their subsequent bail out by "Joe Public", and you have the bizarre situation yesterday where the RBS foreclose on a retail business, that was running ok, until it succumed to a leveraged, management buy-out........may be Joe Public should have foreclosed on the RBS too......

20th January 2012, 12:53	#29 (permalink)
Sunny Jim First Team Regular Join Date: May 2007 Location: Warsaw...that's too far away from Edinburgh... Posts: 13,951	I bet GCHQ is now getting instructions as how to tackle this interview on Redcafe.net. [popcorn gif] ....[/popcorn gif]

20th January 2012, 13:03	#30 (permalink)
Smores First Team Sub Join Date: May 2011 Location: Dark side of the moon Posts: 5,517	He's right that leveraged buyouts should have been prevented but the negatives of such have always been overstated by those who can't comprehend. We'd all rather profiteering stayed away from football but as long as the owners keep the club's future financial secure then it's an evil I accept.

20th January 2012, 19:32	#32 (permalink)
padzilla Reserve Team Player Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 662	We won't really know the impact of how good/bad the Glazers are until Fergie leaves.

20th January 2012, 20:59	#33 (permalink)
England1966 Cuckoo Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Canada, Posts: 1,703	for me I don't get one thing: why United is in debt ?! If is a profitable club (100-200mil you call it Eu, Bp, UsDollars...) I don't get it. Aaaa Glazer are the owner and they are in debt...who gives a penny on this?! Glazers are in debt but not United!

20th January 2012, 21:13	#34 (permalink)
Excal Chica Time! Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: California Posts: 7,326	The four most mentioned people/groups of peoples in this thread: 1) The Glazers 2) Hoeness 3) Sir Alex 4) GCHQ

20th January 2012, 21:25	#35 (permalink)
Red Dreams First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Thunder Road to Old Trafford Posts: 22,409	I like Hoeness. I hope he will someday head UEFA or FIFA. Blatter and Platini are the real cancer on football.

20th January 2012, 21:29	#36 (permalink)
Red Dreams First Team Regular Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Thunder Road to Old Trafford Posts: 22,409	Rummenigge is ok too.

25th January 2012, 19:34	#39 (permalink)
kps88 First Team Sub Join Date: Feb 2008 Posts: 7,517	There we go. I was wondering how GCHQ missed this thread. Part of the weekly Glazer thread search?