Discussion in 'Manchester United Forum' started by sammsky1, Jan 2, 2010.
All I'm saying, is that Roodboy has gone very quiet.
What it does do is it opens up the market for the RKs to make a solid bid.
Whereas currently the GLazers are playing hardball, believing they are in a position of power, this reveals that they are in fact in dire shit and at some point a sale is almost inevitable, unless of course they use Uniteds money to stave off the banks at First Allied.
If they start leaking money out of United then believe me, there will be a riot inside OT. Heads will roll, and I suspect the first one will be David Gill.
Can you seriously believe that the fans will accept the money from Ronaldo going off to pay his mortgages in the US... No neither can I.
The Glazers are now in a very sticky position, because ultimately they need to get those shopping mall debts down, and the only place they have the spare funds is within United. They touch that money and the last bit of credibility they have with hte fans goes right out the window.
We would then be in a position where Uniteds debts are increasing ( they would obviously use the overdraft to fund player purchases ) whilst their other businesses are being bailed out on Uniteds strength.
There is however one small problem.
Will the Glazers sell their most prized asset in order that they can lump money into two other businesses that are failing.. A smart businessman would do it the other way around. Sell the Buccs and First Allied and wham the money into United... The difficulty comes in selling two businesses that arent doing very well.
Hopefully there'll come a point where we understand that making scapegoats out of United staff achieves nothing positive at all. The Glazers won't be sacking staff they need.
If heads do roll though what will they be replaced by? Worse heads from our pov most likely.
At the end of the day, Gill is now just a Glazer puppet, spieling off their rhetoric. Would it really make a difference who is in his seat. You are going to get the same bullshit no matter what.
All it will be is a different face feeding you the very same crap
Put your brakes on mate, are you saying it doesn't matter if we get rid of Gill and replace him with anyone?
Quite, so what would be the point of Gill not being there then? It wouldn't be any advantage to the Glazers or to us if he wasn't there. It would certainly be a disadvantage to United.
let me turn that around. Why would you want him to stay ?
Would it not make you feel slightly better knowing that the two faced parasitic, arse licking shitbag isnt going to benefit out of all of this.
Personally, I just long for the day the cnut is hoofed out on his ear, never ever to set foot inside OT again. It doenst change anything, but feck me, it makes me feel 100% better.
Of course it wouldn't make me feel any better. My main concern is that United have the best CE possible, someone who has a good rapport with Fergie and the rest of the staff and someone who runs United smoothly and efficiently. We've got that now.
Your option would just be to stick a true Glazer, parasitic, arse licking shitbag into United who doesn't have a clue how to run the club and doesn't care about us either.
Come on fred, United come first, not personal gripes and animosity against someone who is doing a good job but may not agree with you publicly. Vindictiveness just for the sake of appeasing folk isn't going to help United now is it.
Agreed, would be nice to hear what he (Gill) has to say regarding this new info though....
I havent got a clue what you are all on about!
I couldnt give a flying feck if the Glazers business empire is collapsing (which it isnt anyway).
I have never ever talked about First Allied or the Buccs because they are of little relevance to Manchester United. I have only looked to analyse the financial situation at our club and in my opinion things are not so bad, any negative situation at any of the other Glazer companies does very little to change that.
As I said previously, the only difference any of this makes to us is that if the Glazers are stuggling elsewhere (and I doubt things are anywhere near as bad as some may try to make out), then it means they would be more likely to sell if a decent offer came in.
I dont usually post stuff like this but it seemed particularly apt today:
Of course their business empire is relevant to United, you dopey plum.
They used their other business assets as collateral to buy a stake in United.
Taking out feck off big loans which now have to be repaid. Read Andersreds blog. They are reaching the end of their interest only periods on many of their malls, and now they have to start repaying the debts.
The malls arent generating anywhere close to enough money to pay off those debts. Some arent even managing to cover the interest as it is, let alone covering future payments of the actual debts themselves.
The bucs dont have any money..
So where is that money going to come from ? They dont have any more assets, they've sold them all.
The shopping malls need money to pay off their debts
The bucs dont have it
United does have it.
Do the sums....
If you seriously cannot see where all this is heading then you are either extremely naive or extremely stupid. I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say its the former.
They used their shopping malls to buy into United, and now they are going to ask for that money back...
Thats the bottom line.
If you cant see how thats relevant to United, then I truly despair.
Still no more info on this? you can't post stuff like this and then not back it up or go missing...
This is what does my head in, I'll call this bs until you come back and at least link where you heard it from...
What I tend to do in situations like this is to imagine myself doing Gill's job and try to think what I would do if I was in the same situation as him.
Unfortunately I have to say that I would do as he is doing atm. Not necessarily because I wanted to at all but because I would have no choice in the matter. Yes, I would want to keep my job, just as every single person in his shoes would want to keep their job. I would look at the situation and ask myself if United would be better off without me and the conclusion I would come to is "No".
I would have thought that was clear to everyone though.
Well, no, it wouldn't really would it?
Unless somebody had injected him with a truth serum beforehand, I think we can all predict pretty accurately what he'd say.
I've not got the personal vendeta some have against him. I've said before that CEOs and the like are all the same (ie self-serving shit-bags) so I don't really give a shit if he stays or goes. But I don't expect a word of truth out of him.
I too would like some evidence of this, because I've not heard about it until he mentioned it.
I am not for one moment suggesting he is lying, I'd just like conclusive proof that this is the case.
What a load of crap Fred - scaremongering bullshit as usual.
If they cant pay the interest on their malls/Buccs then they will be repossed by the banks (the fact that this hasnt happened would suggest that they are surviving anyway) - I couldnt give a shit to be honest because unlike the way you have tried to portray me, I am not proGlazer and dont give 2 fecks what happens to them or their business interests outside of Manchester United.
I was just about to post the very same image.. You beat me to it.
David Gill and Comical Ali are a match made in heaven.
they are reposessing them you dopey feckwit.
Four have been taken already.
Read the fecking blog you muppet....
I can for the first time reveal that four centres have already gone into foreclosure. The majority of First Allied's properties are currently in negative equity leaving the family little or no room for manoeuvre
What part of that are you struggling to understand...
Oh dear Fred - after a couple of days of relative sanity you have gone back to the usual lunacy and scaremongering we are all accustomed to.
So tell me, why exactly do you think it is a problem for Manchester United if First Allied is struggling?
If it is true, then it means the Glazers are more likely to sell - does that not make you happy?
Not the time to be owning a load of shopping malls in this economic climate...
Or perhaps you would prefer this big
An incredible 44% (28) of First Allied's shopping centres have already been placed on "watchlist" by the trustee banks of the relevant CMBS, indicating they believe there is a significant risk of default on their loans
or how about this bit
The mortgages on 48% of the portfolio (31 centres) were taken out in 2004 and 2005 and have five year "interest only" periods which expire this year. At current levels of occupancy, 16 of these properties will see their DSCR fall below 1x when their interest only period ends and repayments kick in, meaning more than half the portfolio will be at very high risk of being seized by the mortgage trustees in the near future. Many of the assets remortgaged in 2005 are so over leveraged that they would be unable to pay their mortgages when repayments begin even if they were fully let at current market rents. Looking beyond the current year, a further 9 centres have interest only periods that end in 2011 or 2012
What potential impact, if any, does the financial problems of First Allied have on the finances of United or Red Football (and all the other associated companies)?
Where is there a problem for United..
THEY ARE GOING TO TAKE UNITEDS FUNDS AND PAY OFF THEIR DEBTS IN THE SHOPPING MALLS.
They used those malls to create the debts, which they subsequently used to buy into United with..
Now that they have access to Uniteds cash, they are going to take that money back and pay off the debts they accrued.
Yes indeed - it is hardly 'breaking news' that a company which owns US commercial property is going to be struggling in the current economic climate.
None - well nothing direct anyway as they are completely seperate entities.
Because they have now got access to Uniteds funds, they can use Uniteds money to clear off the debts at First Allied.
We wondered why they hadnt cleared off the PIK debts, and came out and said they were happy for the PIK debts to keep rising.
We now know why that is.
They were never going to clear off the PIK debts. THey are going to use the money to clear off the debts they ran up trying to buy United in the first place.
Does the structure of United's debt and the bond issue allow them to do this? There was some provision for them to use a certain amount of cash wasn't there?
You havent read that blog have you...
In fact, I suspect you are completely ignoring it, because you know that whats contained in it blows your pathetic little "everything is fine" argument right out the water.
They can take up to £70 million plus up to £300 million over the next 7 years subject to meeting certain EBITDA criteria. Which as Roodboy points out, they are currently doing.
As we already know, they can use cash from the club to pay the PIKs which relate to their initial purchase of the club (and the amounts that can be taken are clearly defined and set out in the bond prospectus).
The cant take money out of the club to pay interest on shopping malls (I could write this in bold supersized capitals if that means you are more likely to take it in?)
And this cash can be used for whatever purpose they see fit?
They can take the money out of United and pay it to RFJV.
Nowhere does it say it has to be used to pay off the PIKs. All it says is they can be used to clear off other indebtedness.
Given that Glazers owns RFJV then its up to him what debts he wishes to clear off. There is nothing that says he has to clear off the PIKs with it.
Of course, I read it - there is absolutely nothing there about Manchester United which has not been discussed in this thread already - we have already discussed at length how the bond issues allows the Glazers to use club cash to pay off the PIK.
Just because you now write the same thing again in bold capitals does not make it new information !!
You are either naive or perhaps in denial if you think what is happening elsewhere within the Glazer empire cannot effect United.
Personally if their businesses in the US turn sour then I expect them to hold onto United more than ever rather than sell it at some reduced price to cover losses elsewhere.
Glazers have £1.1bn of debt and a claimed £2bn of assets - I wonder at what price these assets have been valued at to get to the £2bn.
So it's impossible for the Glazers to take money out of United to support these businesses?
If the answer to that question is "no", then your above post is nothing short of an outright lie.
And the answer to the question is, indeed, "no". Not only is it possible for them to do that, but it is possible because they have specifically resturtuctred their debt to make it so.
Your trivial arguments about the details of how much cash United is turning over and holding in the bank are becoming more and more marginal and irrelevant the more we all look into the whole picture with the Glazers.
The exact wording from the prospectus
we may, without restriction, make a distribution or loan of up to £70.0 million to our immediate parent company, Red Football Joint Venture Limited, that may, in turn, use the proceeds of that loan for general corporate purposes, including repaying existing indebtedness.
That's odd because there are lots of things in there (the bulk of the blog in fact) that are entirely new facts that none of us* can have known previously. You're really losing the plot here Roodboy.
*Unless, of course, one of us had links to the Glazers and access to details of their finances not avilable to the rest of us.
Where does it say they will pay off the PIK debts with money they can now take from United.
Find me the EXACT piece from the propsectus that says they are obliged to pay off the PIKs with that money...
Separate names with a comma.