g = window.googletag || {}; googletag.cmd = googletag.cmd || []; window.googletag = googletag; googletag.cmd.push(function() { var interstitialSlot = googletag.defineOutOfPageSlot('/17085479/redcafe_gam_interstitial', googletag.enums.OutOfPageFormat.INTERSTITIAL); if (interstitialSlot) { interstitialSlot.addService(googletag.pubads()); } });

Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.

InfiniteBoredom

Full Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
13,672
Location
Melbourne
Can someone please confirm:
The Glazers had 69% and have sold 25% to Ratcliffe leaving them with 44%.
If Ratcliffe can buy up the remaining 31% from other shareholders, that will make him the majority shareholder.
I know there are A class Shares and B Class Shares which complicates things which is why I’m doubting the above statement.
They sold 25% of their shares (69%) which comes to 17% in real terms. Jimbo is also obligated to buy 25% of the 31% class A shares on NYSE, and it seems he has offered to buy it all.

The brain rot from the jilted Qatar crowd is real, this is a ruthless corporate tycoon who has no qualms about fecking with the lives of thousands of people, and somehow he’s committed nearly 10% of his net worth just to line the pocket and do the biddings of some trust fund kids.
 

spiriticon

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,523
So whilst the Glazers had 69% of the total shares, they had 100% of the B Shares? Ratcliffe has bought 25% B Shares from them.
You’d wonder what is the point of owning any A Shares.
Nothing apart from dividends. I have a small handful of Class A shares and I have no say in any decision the club makes, not that I expect to have any with that small investment.
 

Cantonagotmehere

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2015
Messages
3,359
Location
Charm City, MD
This can only be a good thing….might not be the utopian sale that we all wanted but it became clear that they were never going to sell up and allowing the sporting side of operations to be managed by other shareholders is a big win for the Glazers and hopefully the fans.

Our current malaise while this has been dragging on has helped nobody. On the pitch we are currently in a terrible place.

Let’s hope that the sporting organisation that Ineos bring in helps ETH with the current mess we need to get out of and sets us on the right path to far better player acquisition and helps to get some of the complete dross out of the door.

Nothing will change overnight but will be very interesting to see who comes in and what the new structure looks like.
Great post mate. This is how I have to think about it to survive. Ha.
 

hobbers

Full Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
28,738
They aren’t though?
Right so if the Glazers decide to take dividends out of the club at any point and divert funds that might have been used for footballing objectives, do you think Brailsford and Blanc can block them?

You think Joel and co wont get any say or vote on any decisions regarding the fate of Old Trafford?
 

rimaldo

All about the essence
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
41,125
Supports
arse
interesting how they will only commit to spending $300m dollars. convenient to be spending in a currency that’s not legal tender here and won’t be accepted by anyone.
 

colombianmancunian

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 26, 2022
Messages
732
I’m an optimist. So I hope this is the first step for Ratcliffe to buy more shares over time and eventually become majority owner. With this 25% b shares he is the individual with most shares in United.

If the leeches have agreed to give him full control over the sport side of business, that means Jim will have the opportunity to hire the right people to take us into the right path. Getting a new CEO and a DOF will be great steps in the right direction.

Also he will invest 300 million on infrastructure and that is desperately needed. I also hope another big investment in players, the injury crisis showed us we have no bench, and Højlund is a good prospect but is not enough to lead our line (dead man Martial doesn’t count). It’s too late to get Kane now, but we still can go after Osimhen.

I preferred Qatar with a 100% ownership, but sir Jim being the individual with lost b shares and getting in control of the sport side of business is the next best thing we could get.
 

Castia

Full Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
18,476
So what? They didn’t use any of their own money when they bought this club. They will never make a loss on it. They could sell for 3 billion or 7, it doesn’t matter. Either way it earns them billions of profit. And you would be naive to think the club’s value would suddenly crash if we finish 10th and can’t buy anyone due to FFP.

They couldn’t continue without investment they aren’t selling for a laugh
 

RedRocket08

Full Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2023
Messages
270
Location
Sri Lanka
This makes me very very happy. It's the little things in life.
You have to appreciate these moments though! Genuinely think this is the only good thing about this deal after reading the club statement, I mean it's nice that a person who knows a little bit about our history gets to own a decent chunk of this football club - fingers crossed that the rest of his tenure here is as good as his United trivia skills.
 

DevilRed

Full Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2011
Messages
13,003
Location
Stretford End
Will the Glazers still have a veto in transfer and playing/coaching staff appointments?

I guess we will not be expecting any new "investment" from the glazers, not that they have provided any in the past.

So the onus is now on SJR (and the club's revenues) to fund any further transfers in January?

Nothing about reducing the debt either.
 

Ady87

Full Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2011
Messages
8,493
Location
Now Accepting Positive Reps.
$200 million now and another 100m by the end of 2024. Better than nothing but was hoping for a much larger investment by the end of 2024.
Is that in players? It would take 12 months to plan to spend $200m on anything non-player related wouldn’t it, unless those plans for refurbishments etc are already drawn up.
 

NWRed

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
1,180
They pulled out a while back. I preferred Qatar too, but at this point they're no longer a viable option.
It's a moot point now but it was going to happen before Radcliffe gazumped them with the 25% bid, that's the reason they pulled out.

Yeah well that wasn’t going to happen? So your choices are this with Ratcliffe or no change at all.

which do you prefer?
Between the deal we've seen today and no deal, I'd take no deal. Without this they'd be forced to sell within 18-24 months, this is just a lifeline for the Glazers to keep their parasitic hands on the club.
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,487
Location
Manchester
Right so if the Glazers decide to take dividends out of the club at any point and divert funds that might have been used for footballing objectives, do you think Brailsford and Blanc can block them?

You think Joel and co wont get any say or vote on any decisions regarding the fate of Old Trafford?
I’m not involved in the deal mate
 

TheReligion

Abusive
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
51,487
Location
Manchester
It's a moot point now but it was going to happen before Radcliffe gazumped them with the 25% bid, that's the reason they pulled out.



Between the deal we've seen today and no deal, I'd take no deal. Without this they'd be forced to sell within 18-24 months, this is just a lifeline for the Glazers to keep their parasitic hands on the club.
Find that weird. Sorry.
 

spiriticon

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,523
Between the deal we've seen today and no deal, I'd take no deal. Without this they'd be forced to sell within 18-24 months, this is just a lifeline for the Glazers to keep their parasitic hands on the club.
I doubt that unless we got relegated. It would take a long time for things to get so bad that they'd be forced to sell ALL their shares. Why? Because we are still raking in high revenues despite our shitty football.

There are many things the Glazers can endure way before risking a big loss on the value of the club (even Covid can't stop them). As long as we are in the Premier League, the cash cow keeps paying.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
134,268
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Right so if the Glazers decide to take dividends out of the club at any point and divert funds that might have been used for footballing objectives, do you think Brailsford and Blanc can block them?

You think Joel and co wont get any say or vote on any decisions regarding the fate of Old Trafford?
Nothing you mention there are football decisions. SJR et al will obviously need to operate in accordance with a budget set by the Glazers. That is not the same thing as the Glazers making any decisions regarding how the footballing operation is run.
 

NWRed

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
1,180
Ratcliffe's purchase also came with class B shares.

All the reports say part of the agreement is Ratcliffe taking control of football side, and they all say that the Glazers don't have any veto on it. He's not buying into being the Glazers' employee. He is a class B shareholder like the Glazers are. And based on what I read before, he will have the highest proportion of all shares now going forward. This isn't a situation that can just be voted out, common sense is also needed here that nobody would give the Glazers 1.3 billion for something that can just be voted out in a few years. Don't be ridiculous.
He's purchasing 25% of their class B shares (total 17.25%) plus up to 25% of the class A shares (total 7.75%). That leaves the Glazers with 51.75%, all or mostly class B shares. If the Glazers weren't all one family who act collectively Ratcliffes status as the largest single shareholder would mean something. Unfortunately it doesn't as they have always and still do act as a single unit.

Your appeal to common sense works both ways, do you think the Glazers have turned over total control of their company to a minority shareholder without the ability to regain control, or have an over riding veto, in the event INEOS make even more of a mess of it than they have.
 

NWRed

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
1,180
Can someone please confirm:
The Glazers had 69% and have sold 25% to Ratcliffe leaving them with 44%.
If Ratcliffe can buy up the remaining 31% from other shareholders, that will make him the majority shareholder.
I know there are A class Shares and B Class Shares which complicates things which is why I’m doubting the above statement.
No, Ratcliffe is buying 25% of the class B shares and up to 25% of the class A shares, so his 25% total will be made up of 17.25% (25% of 69%) class B purchased from the Glazers and 7.75% (25% of 31%) class A shares purchased from other share holders (I presume, I think some of the Glazers also own some class A shares so maybe he's buying those)
 

miliebrowndivorceattorney

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 15, 2023
Messages
254
Im suprised but happy. Well done. Now get things moving, talk this week and sign Mbappek, Modric, Rodri, kane and De Jong. Kindly before february. Also get Davies left back from Bayern. And Donnarumma. And Barack Obama. And a guy that shouts a lot to the players.
 

NWRed

Full Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
1,180
The reason they started looking for investment a couple of years ago was because they desperately needed cash. The club owes nearly £1bn and needs investment in the stadium, the training facilities and the team. This deal is a sticking plaster on that allowing them to maintain their death grip.
 

Yorke to Cole

Full Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
924
It seems that good old Nick from the United Hour Podcast, was right all along.

He always said this deal would not guarantee that the Glazers would go entirely.
 

spiriticon

Full Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
7,523
The reason they started looking for investment a couple of years ago was because they desperately needed cash. The club owes nearly £1bn and needs investment in the stadium, the training facilities and the team. This deal is a sticking plaster on that allowing them to maintain their death grip.
I think those two bolded words contradict each other. They would like to have more cash but they are certainly not desperate for it. If so, they could not have strung Sir Jim or the Sheikh along for nearly two years.

The Glazers have all the cards. To remove them completely, you need patience, strong will, a smart strategy and plenty of time. Oh and of course, plenty of cash :lol:
 

TrebleChamp99

Supports Liverpool
Joined
Dec 27, 2021
Messages
1,101
Well looks like I was a month out but none the less good to be vindicated.

Fantastic news ahead of xmas, I'm very optimistic about this, its the first step of a few to have them removed.
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
2,544
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
That's what will ultimately hold us back. Jim/Ineos aren't going to pump millions into something they don't own 100% whilst the leaches sit back and profit

Short term we should benefit with the improved football setup of the club but long term I think we're fecked. I don't see where the stadium money/cash for players is coming from under this structure

Lets see I cant wait to see his plans for the club.
That doesn't seem to be the case. Already a 300 million initial investment by Ineos. Pretty great considering they only own 25%

I'd say while there is no guaranteed path to full 100% ownership it's very likely we will see them work towards majority over the next two years.
Had a feeling that would be the case with his additional investment. No way he was about to give the other shareholders a free ride.
But you realise thats like throwing 50 pence into the ocean? the stadium and training ground need a redevelopment or a brand new build 300m in getting us nowhere

Madrid's just done a redevelopment and it cost 1.4 billion
Well not really theres no road to a full takeover. The debt is still there. The stadium needs doing in which 300m will give it a lick of paint

Shit deal. The only shining light is the Glazers no longer have sporting control but he's not exactly set the world alight at his other clubs and with only 25% he wont be pumping millions in i think
And rightly so

Look at the deal its awful

Sir Jim/ Qatar whoever takes control I couldn't care less but at 25% its awful for the club

300m dollars will get us a new roof at OT and a new coat of paint

Glazers were on their knees and Jim has given them a lifeline.
This is why I wanted Qatar btw, all this is utter BS. Nothing will change
yeah. i’d rather no investment whatsoever.
Shower thought #1: The statement says it is Ratcliffe that is buying the shares, while INEOS will take over football control.

Shower thought #2: The statement of Ratcliffe buying 'up to 25%' of Class A shares is strange. Very deliberately worded differently than the simply 'buying 25% of Class B shares'. I presume it's because Class A is owned by other parties so it's reliant on those people agreeing to sell, but then again what actually limits him only buying 25%? Or will they be issuing 25% new Class A shares that he can choose to buy?

Shower thought #3: I wonder if the Glazer siblings are all selling equally (ie. they are all selling 25% of what they own), or if some are selling more, or even all, of what they own while others (most likely Joel and Avram) sell less.
It really is a wonderful deal from their side. I think Jim is mad personally but I guess he has the cash and he’s sick of his mates down the billionaire pub “taking the piss out of him” because we’re a bit shit. I have my doubts but hopefully INEOS know what they’re doing.
25% in company law is enough to block any board decisions. It's a good day, not a great day. Hopefully it's the beginning of the end for those Glazer parasites.
I’ve had a lot of experience in acquisitions and limited partnerships. There is a lot of handwringing which really isn’t necessary. The reason the Glazers did it this way is that they didn’t reach their target valuation. Now, we don’t know if the 25% of the voting shares is coming from some of Glazer kids, or if all the Glazers will be diluted. When you realize that 69% of the corporation is owned by the Glazers, obtaining 25% of the company in Class B voting shares is essentially giving SJR full control. It means he’ll have roughly 38% of the voting shares, and he’ll be the largest shareholder.

Most major board level decisions require 66.7% of the shares/board to approve a resolution. When I say “major”, I mean new injection of capital, new shareholders, issuance of new shares, purchase of assets over, say, a certain amount, like 10m. As such, Sir Jim likely has veto power over any resolution raised by the Glazers, because they won’t have the 66.7% to outvote him. That’s why he has operational control. In addition, he’s added another 300m in capital injection commitments, which dilutes the Glazers further, by another 5-6%… meaning he’ll have 30%+ of total shares and 45% (roughly) of the voting shares.

On top of that, he’s committed to buy 25% of the class A non-voting shares @$33 a share. That’s a premium of $13 per share! As this happens, the value of the A shares will go up… and we know there is a vehicle to convert Glazers voting shares to non-voting shares which they can sell on the open market, or Sir Jim also has right of first refusal.

‘Look… the beginning of the end of the Glazers is here. This is a very savvy move by Sir Jim. TheCaf is saying the Glazers are “smart” and Sir Jim is “stupid”. No! This was the only way to get the Glazers out without meeting the undeserved sky high valuations they were demanding.

It’s happening people… the Glazers are on their way out. My guess is that Sir Jim will take full control, and own 51% of the voting shares with 18 month. The Glazers will be completed out, or just a minority shareholder, which is very common in These types of transactions.
 

MackRobinson

New Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
5,134
Location
Terminal D
Supports
Football
It's a moot point now but it was going to happen before Radcliffe gazumped them with the 25% bid, that's the reason they pulled out.


Between the deal we've seen today and no deal, I'd take no deal. Without this they'd be forced to sell within 18-24 months, this is just a lifeline for the Glazers to keep their parasitic hands on the club.
The bolded is completely made up.
 

lysglimt

Full Member
Scout
Joined
Jun 1, 2008
Messages
15,365
What a dream for Radcliffe - as long as he doesn't perform right at the bottom, he will have done better than United have in the last 10 years. What a wonderful position to be in - just average will be considered a massive improvment
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
2,544
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
I think those two bolded words contradict each other. They would like to have more cash but they are certainly not desperate for it. If so, they could not have strung Sir Jim or the Sheikh along for nearly two years.

The Glazers have all the cards. To remove them completely, you need patience, strong will, a smart strategy and plenty of time. Oh and of course, plenty of cash :lol:
No no no no.

See my above post. sir Jim is effectively the owner of the club now.
 

Berbaclass

Fallen Muppet. Lest we never forget
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
39,567
Location
Cooper Station
I’ve had a lot of experience in acquisitions and limited partnerships. There is a lot of handwringing which really isn’t necessary. The reason the Glazers did it this way is that they didn’t reach their target valuation. Now, we don’t know if the 25% of the voting shares is coming from some of Glazer kids, or if all the Glazers will be diluted. When you realize that 69% of the corporation is owned by the Glazers, obtaining 25% of the company in Class B voting shares is essentially giving SJR full control. It means he’ll have roughly 38% of the voting shares, and he’ll be the largest shareholder.

Most major board level decisions require 66.7% of the shares/board to approve a resolution. When I say “major”, I mean new injection of capital, new shareholders, issuance of new shares, purchase of assets over, say, a certain amount, like 10m. As such, Sir Jim likely has veto power over any resolution raised by the Glazers, because they won’t have the 66.7% to outvote him. That’s why he has operational control. In addition, he’s added another 300m in capital injection commitments, which dilutes the Glazers further, by another 5-6%… meaning he’ll have 30%+ of total shares and 45% (roughly) of the voting shares.

On top of that, he’s committed to buy 25% of the class A non-voting shares @$33 a share. That’s a premium of $13 per share! As this happens, the value of the A shares will go up… and we know there is a vehicle to convert Glazers voting shares to non-voting shares which they can sell on the open market, or Sir Jim also has right of first refusal.

‘Look… the beginning of the end of the Glazers is here. This is a very savvy move by Sir Jim. TheCaf is saying the Glazers are “smart” and Sir Jim is “stupid”. No! This was the only way to get the Glazers out without meeting the undeserved sky high valuations they were demanding.

It’s happening people… the Glazers are on their way out. My guess is that Sir Jim will take full control, and own 51% of the voting shares with 18 month. The Glazers will be completed out, or just a minority shareholder, which is very common in These types of transactions.
Interesting insight thanks.
 

DSG

Full Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2014
Messages
2,544
Location
A Whale’s Vagina
Oh, and by the way, I expect the club to be very active in the transfer market. Normally, profits for operations and sales of players fund transfers. With 300m in additional capital, it’s possible the club will shell out 300-400m in transfer fees.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.