Club Sale | It’s done!

[devilish]

Nothing but negative tweets

The Glazers had always had this obsession with having United hit the headlines. Woodward himself had stated that they use stats generated by clicks etc as proof of how much popular United is and why sponsors should invest in them. Which is why every big transfer we're involved in becomes a saga.

Thus we've got owners who know how to manipulate the media to their favour. Which is exactly what is happening right now.

a- its putting the spot light on United
b- its adding pressure on Jassim and SJR to up their bid.

The Glazers had been searching for outside investment for years. They had failed in achieving that which is why the club is for sale. If the Glazers had managed to find that investment then they would have ended the process by now. Instead we're going for a 3rd round of bidding.

 

[Pscholes18]

I guess Joel and Avram will buy some of the siblings shares to maintain majority ownership

No, because Joel/Avram's shares will be worth 10x the others in terms of voting rights post-sale: once, say, Darcie sells her shares, they go from being class B to being class A.

35% (or whatever it is - Joel and Avram) is more than enough to keep control of the club.

Why would his voting power increase x10 after th3 sale? Sorry, I dont really understand how a lot of this works.....

 

[ForeverRed1]

Yeah

Ratcliffe - Spurs
Jassim - our worst nightmare

imagine the glazers staying and Qatar buying liverpool with them turning into another city but with history and heritage. Yikes

 

[Chesterlestreet]

that what buying a minority stake would entail. The Glazers would still control the club's destiny.

A) The prevailing notion is that if - if - something like this is on the cards, the remaining Glazers will have to relinquish control to a considerable degree - they won't be able to run things as before.

B) I never said that I believe any of this will happen.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Why would his voting power increase x10 after th3 sale? Sorry, I dont really understand how a lot of this works.....

It won't increase: but the B shares (the type owned by the Glazers) will (or so people think) be converted to A shares once sold: this means that if e.g. Bryan Glazer sells a share to me, that share goes from being "worth" ten votes for him (class B) to being worth just one vote for me (class A).

 

[Member 125398]

imagine the glazers staying and Qatar buying liverpool with them turning into another city but with history and heritage. Yikes

I wonder if it would split their fans the same way it has ours? Can they even say Qatari in their language?

 

[clarkydaz]

i guess this means Jassim has to pay them 10b now then. Put it to them, theres a glimmer of hope they might accept

 

[Fanta Stick]

I wonder if it would split their fans the same way it has ours? Can they even say Qatari in their language?

Scouse and Arabic are very similar sounding. Plus lots of spittle and phlegm to dodge.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Difference in motivation. The vultures have a singular motivation - profit. They wouldn't be here if they don't sense it. They rely on the Glazers' greed. Both Jassim and Ratcliffe have other additional goals, presumably, which would have them stick around with the hope the parasites will instead be sensible and relent in their crazy demands. This couldn't be more evident in the difference how each of them approached this sale.

When it comes to the Glazers, if I'm forced to choose between their greed and their sensibility, I know which one I will choose. The only chance Jassim and Ratcliffe have is to pay up. They won't.

Okay, so why would going with the vultures be the "greedy" choice for the Glazers ahead of selling for a world record fee and the siblings getting over half a billion each?

What do you believe minority investment would entail? For example, who do you think pays for the stadium redevelopment and other capital investment?

And why don't you think INEOS or Sheikh Jassim will pay up?

 

[devilish]

Yeah, they're not daft. Money in the bank versus a chance they mighty not see much more upside in the price of United..coupled with the fact they'd have to invest far more in the infrastructure. Football is hardly American football where all franchises are guaranteed to be in all comps. Nor can they blackmail the local authority to pay for a new stadium or else they move elsewhere.

Cash is king during a recession simply because there will be many successful business out there who will be starving from money. That 5b will be worth more now then once the economy had started thriving again.

 

[devilish]

A) The prevailing notion is that if - if - something like this is on the cards, the remaining Glazers will have to relinquish control to a considerable degree - they won't be able to run things as before.

B) I never said that I believe any of this will happen.

The only way I can see that being viable is

A- The Glazers sell a majority stake thus relinquishing control over the club
B- The Glazers accepting a phasing out plan with them having to sell a chunk of shares every 1-2 years to the Hedge fund up until they leave the club
C- The Glazers accepting a partnership with LOADS of small print involved that would entail them losing the club/suffering huge fines if they fail to honour their side of the bargain

In all probability it would be a mix of all three.

Which is why I do believe that they are on the way out.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Which is why I do believe that they are on the way out.

It remains the likeliest outcome based on all available information.

The possibility of them remaining (in some shape or form) seems to be premised on a lot of things we do not know (for instance the idea proposed above: that broadcasting/TV/streaming income could skyrocket over the next few years. I don't consider this an outlandish idea, but it's just speculation at this point).

 

[Catalandevil]

A club like United is very difficult to price for multiple reasons. To name a few:

- Football clubs are not sold often, thus there are not many cases to compare
- Mid-term financial results are heavily dependent on today’s results on the pitch, and there is a risk you don’t get those results even if you invest the most
- There is huge uncertainty about what will happen with the Super League. Manchester United is worth much more in a future where the super league exists
- What may happen with TV rights is yet to be seen as well. A future where United can stream its own games is worth more to the owners than the current scenario. Streaming platforms and telecom bundle packages may lead overall premier league rights up, but there is no guarantee this will be sustainable

Obviously, the Glazers are selling the best possible scenario to buyers. In that scenario, 6bn and even 10bn offers make sense. However, most likely, those scenarios will never materialize, and as a result, none is going to bid that much for a club with our recent trajectory and with our current balance sheet.

We are spectators of a negotiation, and it’s very difficult to differentiate the real news from the propaganda game.

 

[Pexbo]

110% it will be a full sale and the Glazers will be gone.

I’ll quit the caf forever if that doesn’t happen* I’m that confident.

*for real this time. No bullshit.

 

[wolvored]

The Glazers had been searching for outside investment for years. They had failed in achieving that which is why the club is for sale. If the Glazers had managed to find that investment then they would have ended the process by now. Instead we're going for a 3rd round of bidding.

This! As said a 3rd bid is because no one is dancing to their tune

 

[Berbaclass]

What a coincidence that we now have 3 away games

 

[DownRiver]

Lowest share price since the process started. It can't be just one article that has caused this, people are hearing things in that world.

 

[rimaldo]

slightly disconcerting that none of the prospective new owners have released their fm saves, showing just exactly who they think we should purchase if their bid is successful.

 

[owlo]

slightly disconcerting that none of the prospective new owners have released their fm saves, showing just exactly who they think we should purchase if their bid is successful.

It would be unfair. Ratcliffe refused to buy the editor as he wanted a real challenge, the Glazers couldn't afford it, and Jassim turned Haaland into a potato and set Martials injury proneness to 0.

 

[Telsim]

Okay, so why would going with the vultures be the "greedy" choice for the Glazers ahead of selling for a world record fee and the siblings getting over half a billion each?

What do you believe minority investment would entail? For example, who do you think pays for the stadium redevelopment and other capital investment?

And why don't you think INEOS or Sheikh Jassim will pay up?

I already explained this, man. The feckers might just be dumb enough (or maybe genius in hindsight) to believe they can get more money down the line. And if they believe there's a path that offers more money, that's the path they will tread. Pathological greed mixed with some narcissism. I bet at least Avram enjoys being known as the owner of Manchester United. That's probably his "affinity". He doesn't give a shit about the club, obviously. The rest is for the Glazers and Elliot/Carlyle/whoever to work out. Cut costs, pull levers, whatever. The vultures are good at figuring this shit out, so I will defer to them. Otherwise, they wouldn't be offering to buy, unless their plan is solely to entrap the parasites in the fine print, and I already covered that. Either way, the vultures will win, as they always do.

To meet their demands Ratcliffe will have to take on even more debt, and I significantly doubt he will do that at present. Jassim is the only one who has the means to jump that high, but once you overpay it will weaken your position in future deals. And the Qatari already told FSG to feck off when they tried to swindle them. They are hard bargainers. Besides, they may want Manchester United, but they don't really need Manchester United. They could just turn to another club down the line. And they will in due time.

I'm certain the Glazers are staying. The only question in my mind is which vulture firm they will invite. And then long term if they will get screwed.

 

[devilish]

If hedge funds believe that United can significantly increase its worth in a short period of time then why on earth they don't buy the club themselves? Whoever is going for a minority stake is gambling less on the club and more on the Glazers ability to achieve such goals.

 

[jm99]

If we are worth around 5bn right now, imagine how much that would be if we started winning the league again and going deep in the CL.

Glazers would be mugs to take the money now, unless it's a stupid offer.

We aren't worth 5bn now, according to the stock market we're worth about 3bn, the sheikh and sir Jim are already paying a premium for the brand, sporting success won't change that value significantly, it'll make us more valuable in the stock market, but still below the premium that these bidders are paying

 

[Infra-red]

If hedge funds believe that United can significantly increase its worth in a short period of time then why on earth they don't buy the club themselves? Whoever is going for a minority stake is gambling less on the club and more on the Glazers ability to achieve such goals.

United are worth 7 or 8 times as much now as they were when the Glazers bought them. How much of that is due to Glazer competence? You might argue that most of it is in spite of Glazer incompetence. The value of these clubs is not really tethered to how well they are actually run. Any Glazers who remain (and any PE funds who buy in) will no doubt be doing so under the assumption that United's value will continue to rise even if the Glazers keep fecking everything up. Streaming rights and/or a possible ESL will have a much bigger impact on the value of the club than anything the Glazers do (or don't do). That being said, you'd still expect any investor to want some controls put in place and representation on the Board.

 

[Telsim]

If hedge funds believe that United can significantly increase its worth in a short period of time then why on earth they don't buy the club themselves? Whoever is going for a minority stake is gambling less on the club and more on the Glazers ability to achieve such goals.

That lot know to how to maximize profit and minimize risk. So, they will bet on both.

Ultimately, this comes down to what you believe about the Glazers. Will they take the seemingly sensible and logical approach and sell now? Or will they be greedy and stupid enough to take on a whole lot of risk and make a deal with the devil because they might make more money in the future?

And if I were a betting man...

 

[Canuckred64]

Starting to get a sick feeling in my gut that the Glazers are going to stay. They will take money from some hedge fund for a minority share and pocket the money. No investment in infrastructure, no rebuild of the stadium and less money on transfers then we need.

 

[devilish]

That lot know to how to maximize profit and minimize risk. So, they will bet on both.

Ultimately, this comes down to what you believe about the Glazers. Will they take the seemingly sensible and logical approach and sell now? Or will they be greedy and stupid enough to take on a whole lot of risk and make a deal with the devil because they might make more money in the future?

And if I were a betting man...

The likes of Elliott group are filthy rich. If there is an asset that these Hedge Funds believe that can make a 50%-60% profit in let's say 5 years time then it makes more sense for them to buy it in full. It's not as if these Hedge Funds weren't able to manage football clubs before. For example Elliott group were able to take AC Milan from the brink of bankruptcy to a Serie A title. So whoever is buying a minority stake is investing more on the Glazers expertise in making it work then on the club. Which is moronic considering that they ran this club to the ground

 

[Chesterlestreet]

If hedge funds believe that United can significantly increase its worth in a short period of time then why on earth they don't buy the club themselves?

Because Joel and Avram believe the same thing and won't let go of their shares?

I mean, this whole idea hinges on two basic premises: 1) the structure of the ownership/the share-to-vote ratio thing means that it is possible for Avram and Joel to remain in control of United even if the other four sell their shares. And - crucially - 2) United actually is a (very) good investment (because of growth potential). The hedge fund vultures want in on the action (i.e. make some deal or other with the remaining two brothers) even if they would've preferred to just sweep up all the shares in one go.

 

[devilish]

United are worth 7 or 8 times as much now as they were when the Glazers bought them. How much of that is due to Glazer competence? You might argue that most of it is in spite of Glazer incompetence. The value of these clubs is not really tethered to how well they are actually run. Any Glazers who remain (and any PE funds who buy in) will no doubt be doing so under the assumption that United's value will continue to rise even if the Glazers keep fecking everything up. Streaming rights and/or a possible ESL will have a much bigger impact on the value of the club than anything the Glazers do (or don't do). That being said, you'd still expect any investor to want some controls put in place and representation on the Board.

Thaksin Shinawatra bought Manchester City for 80m. The Abu Dhabis bought it for 210m. Chelsea were bought by Roman for 140m they were sold for 2.5b. Ashley bought Newcastle for 55m. He sold it to the Saudi for 305m. Most of these clubs were run horribly and were way smaller then United are. Yet they still produced a nice profit to its owner.

So no, the Glazers has nothing to do with our worth going to the roof

 

[devilish]

Because Joel and Avram believe the same thing and won't let go of their shares?

I mean, this whole idea hinges on two basic premises: 1) the structure of the ownership/the share-to-vote ratio thing means that it is possible for Avram and Joel to remain in control of United even if the other four sell their shares. And - crucially - 2) United actually is a (very) good investment (because of growth potential). The hedge fund vultures want in on the action (i.e. make some deal or other with the remaining two brothers) even if they would've preferred to just sweep up all the shares in one go.

Can they hold ownership on the club without external investment? The answer is no. So we all know who really hold the cards here and its not the Glazers.

 

[Cantonagotmehere]

Feck me, getting very worried. Rightly or wrongly the stock price is my main barometer.

 

[AneRu]

It will take at least £2bn for the VC to buy out the four who want out, that money isn't coming into the club so it won't solve the stadium and training ground issues which will still need money. So suppose they also put up a loan of £2b to the club to sort out those issues, will United ever make enough per year to service that debt and keep the squad competitive?

If the squad isn't kept in a competitive state we it be in a position to take advantage of the expected streaming and ESL booms? I just dont see how it will work, there are just a lot of questions to justify walking away from over £5b.

The touted minority investments sound a lot like the sort of entrapment that happened to the Chinese guy who bought AC Milan. By the time these vultures are through with the Glazers the club will be on its knees because there will be a lot of squabbling, unrealistic demands and so on until the Glazers cave in. The next three or four years will be tough.

 

[Woziak]

Well, I don't think this is too far away. I believe Jassim will pull out of the process before the deadline and won't submit a third bid, with the statement that it has become obvious the owners have no intention to sell the club or something along those lines, made through Keegan of course. It would make for a better look than getting rejected.

Joel and Avram are just 2 out of 6 siblings. They also have the least amount of shares. Therefore if the other 4 decide to sell all their shares to a hedge fund then that hedge fund will have control over the club. Then investment will be need to be made to increase the value of the club. Will Joel/Avram put their hands in their pockets to pay their share cause no hedge fund will be putting their money in their pockets just to make the Glazers richer? What happens if that HF decide not to issue any dividends and to invest everything on the infrastructure? Will the Glazers be happy with no say and no money?

The Glazers had been searching for external investment for years and they have failed miserably. Then they placed the club for sale and even though they managed to attract HF they still pushed the third bidding process button. Its evident what's happening here.

Nah it doesn’t work like that, the contract has been written in such a way that their shares are worth 10* A Shares and even if the two just stayed they would still be in charge due to the strength of their B shares but with the caveat that would be rife for a hostile takeover like I said there has to be a complete financial restructure of the company if four siblings leave and are bought out by VC and they are not doing that unless they have a major say in the club going forward which means they would want a rewritten contract of ownership and registration guaranteeing their £2bn is worth at least 49% of the voting shares, plus if they were financing the new stadium refurb and paying off the debt, so basically a debt consolidation package worth £2bn over 10 years, that pays the debt of £600m off, makes £1bn available for new stadium and £400m for transfers in next two windows. All this would have to be repaid, probably at a much reduced interest rate on a 10 year period. Putting this into perspective we would need to make a profit of £200m per year to repay the loan Even If it’s interest free. The only way this works is if the club owns its own digital and broadcasting rights and Saturday 3pm games are no longer broadcast black outs.

 

[Giggsyking]

Percentage of total voting power

Joel Glazer - 19.11%
Darcie Glazer Kassewitz - 18.15%
Bryan Glazer - 17.23%
Avram Glazer - 14.38%
Kevin Glazer - 13.77%
Edward Glazer - 12.99%
Edward Woodward - 0.05%

So, Joel and Avram hold - 33.49%

The rest siblings is around - 62.14%.

So in other words, who buys the other siblings shares, can send Joel and Avram to clean OT broken toilets?

 

[seegoblu]

Just want to point out that these potential minority shareholders are neither venture capital investor (who primarily invest in early stage companies) nor hedge funds (open ended funds that in order to provide investors with the right to redeem their shares primarily invest in liquid assets). They are investment managers who are registered as investment advisers with the US SEC. The strategies under management that could invest are their private equity and/or private credit funds and do not represent a significant portion of their assets under management. The size of these potential investors being quoted in the press (e.g., Carlyle having $360+ bn) is the total amount of all the assets they have under management across all funds and accounts and across all strategies. A mere fraction of their AUM is available to be invested in privately issued preferred shares.

VCs and hedge funds do not typically strip value from their investments. VCs are accretive and add value to their portfolio companies; hedge funds typically do not hold illiquid assets for the aforementioned liquidity issues they can create and are usually involved in trading liquid assets like stocks, fixed income and foreign exchange instruments.

The “barbarians at the gate” are the private equity investors. They take mature but underperforming companies and “rationalize” them by reducing headcount, selling off assets/divisions that detract from the bottom line and then sell the company for a profit down the line (either through a sale of the company or a public listing).

Sorry for the screed, but seeing VCs and hedge funds being lumped in the PE investors was off base and worthy of correction.

 

[Strootman's Finger]

Investment in United seems like a bad option at this time and value. I don't remember the actual number but I know our real value has been quoted more around 3 bil, so if the glazers value the club at 6 bil and want investment at that value then that means the actual value of United will have to double before investors start to see any sort of growth. Factoring in the fact another 4 or 5 bil has to be invested into the club, for new stadium, facility upgrades, squad upgrades, etc, means they're in the hole another half of whatever that cost is, say 4 mil to upgrade, so another 2 mil. That means the investor is in the hole 3.5 before anything gets going. What investor is signing up for that?

Add to the fact that the Glazers have already bled the club dry, you cant get blood from a stone. Where do they think all this profit will come from without investment in the team, and success, investment in the stadium, investment in the academy and in the grounds.

 

[Plant0x84]

So in other words, who buys the other siblings shares, can send Joel and Avram to clean OT broken toilets?

Not quite. Glazers shares are worth 10x voting rights, any shares sold will convert to class A which are worth a single vote. Joel and Avi would still have significant control of the club.

 

[devilish]

Nah it doesn’t work like that, the contract has been written in such a way that their shares are worth 10* A Shares and even if the two just stayed they would still be in charge due to the strength of their B shares but with the caveat that would be rife for a hostile takeover like I said there has to be a complete financial restructure of the company if four siblings leave and are bought out by VC and they are not doing that unless they have a major say in the club going forward which means they would want a rewritten contract of ownership and registration guaranteeing their £2bn is worth at least 49% of the voting shares, plus if they were financing the new stadium refurb and paying off the debt, so basically a debt consolidation package worth £2bn over 10 years, that pays the debt of £600m off, makes £1bn available for new stadium and £400m for transfers in next two windows. All this would have to be repaid, probably at a much reduced interest rate on a 10 year period. Putting this into perspective we would need to make a profit of £200m per year to repay the loan Even If it’s interest free. The only way this works is if the club owns its own digital and broadcasting rights and Saturday 3pm games are no longer broadcast black outs.

Manchester United has been losing money for the past 3 years. Its infrastructure is mush, it hasn't won the league since SAF retired, its struggled to make it to the CL and its owners can't afford it. Things will work the way those who will investing the money want. Else the Glazers can keep their asset and sink with it.

 

[AneRu]

Nah it doesn’t work like that, the contract has been written in such a way that their shares are worth 10* A Shares and even if the two just stayed they would still be in charge due to the strength of their B shares but with the caveat that would be rife for a hostile takeover like I said there has to be a complete financial restructure of the company if four siblings leave and are bought out by VC and they are not doing that unless they have a major say in the club going forward which means they would want a rewritten contract of ownership and registration guaranteeing their £2bn is worth at least 49% of the voting shares, plus if they were financing the new stadium refurb and paying off the debt, so basically a debt consolidation package worth £2bn over 10 years, that pays the debt of £600m off, makes £1bn available for new stadium and £400m for transfers in next two windows. All this would have to be repaid, probably at a much reduced interest rate on a 10 year period. Putting this into perspective we would need to make a profit of £200m per year to repay the loan Even If it’s interest free. The only way this works is if the club owns its own digital and broadcasting rights and Saturday 3pm games are no longer broadcast black outs.

And that would be an easier way for Joel and Avram to lose control of the club beause all it would take is for the VC to buy enough shares to give it the extra 2% needed for absolute majority at an AGM and sell off the controlling shares to Qatar or Sir Jim at a premium.

I am certain that both minority investors are targeting some form of debt entrapment and the Glazers will have someone in the building smart enough to see this from a long way out. I am reasonably confident that the Glazers are entertaining this minority interest and briefing on it to put pressure on Jassim and Jim.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

I already explained this, man. The feckers might just be dumb enough (or maybe genius in hindsight) to believe they can get more money down the line. And if they believe there's a path that offers more money, that's the path they will tread. Pathological greed mixed with some narcissism. I bet at least Avram enjoys being known as the owner of Manchester United. That's probably his "affinity". He doesn't give a shit about the club, obviously. The rest is for the Glazers and Elliot/Carlyle/whoever to work out. Cut costs, pull levers, whatever. The vultures are good at figuring this shit out, so I will defer to them. Otherwise, they wouldn't be offering to buy, unless their plan is solely to entrap the parasites in the fine print, and I already covered that. Either way, the vultures will win, as they always do.

To meet their demands Ratcliffe will have to take on even more debt, and I significantly doubt he will do that at present. Jassim is the only one who has the means to jump that high, but once you overpay it will weaken your position in future deals. And the Qatari already told FSG to feck off when they tried to swindle them. They are hard bargainers. Besides, they may want Manchester United, but they don't really need Manchester United. They could just turn to another club down the line. And they will in due time.

I'm certain the Glazers are staying. The only question in my mind is which vulture firm they will invite. And then long term if they will get screwed.

It seems quite a jump to be “certain” when you don’t even know the reasons why them staying will benefit them more than a full sale

I’m 50/50 on it. So I’m not disagreeing that they’ll stay. But I see no reason minority investment offers a bigger long term return than a world record sale now

I also fail to see how United increase in value when they’re up against 3 oil money clubs and free spending Chelsea, with no new stadium or facilities and no money to replace their aging stars. You must if you’re “certain”

I also think Sheikh and Ineos are still in the race because they think they can do the deal

 

[CodeRed]

1, The glazers are now in the process of 3rd round bids. So that's what a sale is.

2, United put up season ticket prices. That indicates a non sale.

So no one knows what the hell is going on. The caf, media....and possibly the bidders.