I think the original number for the refinanced PIK was £135M (which correlates with the £202M which is quoted as the debt July 2009 -135 x 14.25 compound= 201.3). Add this year's damage gives £230M. I think they'll at least wipe out the rolled up interest. This would leave them with an interest bill of £45M for the bonds, £20M for the PIKs (plus the revolving credit if used - probably not more than £5M). That's £70M out of a gross income of £90-100M (£20M of the vig being rolled up).
All change of ownership and Red Knights related posts here please
- Thread starter Gunnar
- Start date
Are you saying that the 272m was then reimbursed to them through further borrowings - in 2006 ? What would be the sense in that unless they were in need of cash themselves ? Was the latter publicised at the time ?
On the broader view, you've put up a reasoned case that the financial situation is not as critical as most are making out. I think most agree that the club is over indebted but that's not a problem if you can service it and indeed reduce it which you say is likely - even in the short term. Now, assuming the RK's put together a deal whereby the debt is substantially reduced but there is uncertainty as to how the club will be run goign forward due to the disparate new ownership, would you prefer the devil you know - the Glazers - or would you go with the RK's who are an unknown quantity as a collective ?
Another thought on the takeover.
Has David Gill backed himself into a corner where he needs the Glazers to stay on to keep his job or has he the ability to be a suitably sycophantic Associate Bob type of character who will brown-nose whichever paymaster takes charge?
Has David Gill backed himself into a corner where he needs the Glazers to stay on to keep his job or has he the ability to be a suitably sycophantic Associate Bob type of character who will brown-nose whichever paymaster takes charge?
I would think it's right out of his hands. I was surprised at his remarks about Harris which were quite unnecessary and might preclude him from staying at the administrative helm should the RKs succeed. It's a pity because he does seem to have done a good job as CEO, except perhaps public relations with the fans, and he would provide continuity with new owners in place.
He is good at his job and I would rather he stayed, although he is making that more and more difficult for himself. He has been a dream, albeit a well paid one for the Glazers, he took the flak while the Glazers do whatever it is they do in their various houses in Florida and New York. Quite honestly I think it is time they appeared at a press conference and explained themselves, instead of hiding behind Gill
Could well be - I never do remember the details between the original and refinanced PIK.
I had £150m x 3 years @ 14.25% compound = £225m
The outcome is virtually the same anyway.
At the moment I have not seen enough information about any Red Knight proposal to be able to make that decision.
I am interested to know where the money to takeover the club is coming from, who exactly is involved and how they plan to work toward a position where fans own some of the shares.
I have been a shareholder of the club in the past and I would like to be again - so some of the noises are encouraging but I am not getting too excited just yet.
On the otherhand, there are negatives about the current ownership - primarily for the matchgoing fan - but it is undeniable that it has been an exceptionally successful period in the history of the club.
At the moment, I am not worried about the financial situation so am happy to enjoy watching one of the best teams we have ever had challenging for an unprecedented 4 titles and 3rd CL final in a row.
According to the accounts the PIK was 175m at the end of 30/06/08 and at the time of the bond issue, presumably 30/12/09 was 202m.
The thing we don't know is whether they have been paying some of the PIK interest as they have been going along.
It can probably be extracted from the interest paid in the P & L.
I can't be arsed to do it though ...
The thing we don't know is whether they have been paying some of the PIK interest as they have been going along.
It can probably be extracted from the interest paid in the P & L.
I can't be arsed to do it though ...
Red Knights urge season ticket holders not to renew | Football | guardian.co.uk
How very interesting.
With these guarantees (obviously a system is yet to be set in place), what excuses are people going to make?
Here's one: Keith Harris is a publicity hungry prick. If he had so many billionaires lined up then why does he not make an offer. If the only way he can afford to buy the club is if it goes bankrupt, then exactly what financial catastrophe are we supposed to be avoiding?
If stopping supporting the team is the way forward then what exactly are you trying to save? If you've given up on supporting the team then you've given up on the club.
You must have been gutted that United won on Wednesday. Still, Barca will hopefully knock them out and stop the Glazers getting more cash eh?
I do not think that is their aim Charles. The Glazer's have repeatedly said they are not interested in selling, so it's our job (Or at least the fans who have had enough and want the club sold) to make it in their best interests to sell it. If they see that fans are no longer willing to pay for ST's, buy from the megastore, etc, then it won't really be financially viable for them to keep it. Rather than be stubborn and refuse to sell and let the club slip out of the top 4 and go into financial meltdown, it'd be best to sell whilst the club is still worth something to them and they can make a profit, however small.
They will be tough to budge though. I think I read somewhere by 2017 when the bond issue is due, the club could be worth around £2bn. May have dreamt that though.
I was just about to post something similar, agree with most of what Elvis said.
I read this one: funnily enough, it's yet another post where you've twisted my words.
But are people against the Glazers because the club is in debt? Or because they are yanks/jewish/ginger?
Because hitting the clubs revenue only increases that debt and pushes the club closer to bankruptcy
And the logic of hitting the clubs revenue means that you must hope that United do nor win the league or CL.
Now, this obviously makes perfect sense to some, but it makes no sense to me.
If Keith Harris can get some Asian billionaires together to make an offer then happy days. But if his first action is to ask fans to give up going to support the team, then he can't be too confident of getting the cash together because it's a pretty desperate route to go.
Who says he can't get the money together? Having money and the Glazer family wanting to sell are completely different things, not really hard to grasp.
I think it may have something to do with the debt and rather high ticket price increases. It'll be interesting to see what they do this summer with regards to ticket prices actually.
Not really. If barely any fans turned up in the stadium (Wouldn't happen anyway, I think the best we can hope for is to maybe get it down to about 50k - still 26k empty seats and a hell of a lot of money being lost) I'm sure the team would still cope. They'd realise why it was happening. And with still enough fans in the stadium which outnumbers that of most other PL grounds, the team could still get that vocal support.
I don't see why boycotting the club has to lead to an immediate decline. I don't think it would. But it would affect matchday revenue which accounts a large part of our revenue.
I'm not going to bash you or anything, divisiveness is not something I'm interested in getting involved in really.
Again it's not really being able to get the funds together, he probably can. They've said, or it's been reported, that they've had pledges totalling £1.5bn, so it does seem to have some credence to it.
The value of the club and football is increasing season on season however, so the longer the Glazers can keep hold of it, the bigger their profit will eventually be. They're due to pay some of the PIK's off in August I think, but how much I don't know.
Then it's just finding £500m to pay the bonds in 2017. And we all know who'll be paying for that.
(Not M13)
If the boycotters was going for this after an obviously good offer had been made for the club, as a final push, then it would make some sense. But until that offer is made, then it reeks of desperation. Fergies opinion of Harris certainly seems spot on.
I'd like to hear if Jim O Neill agrees with this. I doubt he would have made any statements like that at this stage. Does not seem like good business at all.
it is too big...reign it in a little
I often get told it's too big.
Just seems that way in proportion to your anus
you should cut it then
it is too big...reign it in a little
I request this as an avatar.
omg stop threating me!
Get a hobby Mockney.But that 'jacket' he's wearing, where can I get one of those?
It will take months to get an offer in place. I think events are moving at lightning pace but to expect them to have stuck an offer under the Glazers noses by now is just ridiculous.
But are people against the Glazers because the club is in debt? Or because they are yanks/jewish/ginger?
as for the rest of your post, I think achieving MUST's aims (not necessarily the Red Knights aims) is more important than winning the CL.
We want our club back from these leeching Yank, Jewish, Ginger bastards!! (Ooops)
It's never just as simple as saying here is the money and that's our offer. It involves creating a detailed proposal that can be taken seriously and this could take months!
Still don't know where I stand on the boycott, I mean probably that might be the only way to get them to think about selling, but on the other hand I wouldn't put it past them to ruin the club in revenge.
Quite right and probably not until well after the end of the season - which would be a good thing
I don't think you are understanding what is happening. KH is providing the vehicle with which people can invest. He doesn't have billionaires lined up he is putting together a team, including some very high power banks which will presumably be providing the finance, in order to get enough investors money to put a bid in. These banks have access roads into the type of people they want to attract. He needs the publicity in order to create awareness and hopefully potential backers.
It's the philanthropic nature of it all that sounds a bit wild to me.
If people don't boycott then its the end of any protest.
Hmmm not so sure ......
How can anyone protest after handing over effectively £1000+? They'd have absolutely no incentive to sell.
I'm quoting Andersred:
A minor personal sacrifice and they're gone (particularly with a ST renewal guarantee). There should be no excuses.
It's not philanthropic at all. Whoever invests will expect a return and why shouldn't they get one. The difference is that the club will be in the hands of supporters, the bulk of whom, shareholding wise, will be a number of extremely wealthy individuals who can put in big money as well as the mass fan base, at least those who want to and are in a position to invest - perhaps 25%. From a financial viewpoint the aim is that any debt will be reduced to more manageable proportions - say 250m.
Admittedly this is all speculation at the moment but I imagine the above scenario is the general idea.
Match day revenues only account for 1/3 of our total revenue and you will never get a mass boycott because people have to balance out what is more important to them, their love of United or their hate for the Glazers. Gill announced some figures last week that showed matchday income up by 19%, and commercial revenue up by 33%, the TV deal is also increasing year on year and despite the debt we still generate a shit load of cash year on year. Even if attendances dropped significantly their model would withstand it for a few years because of the declining importance of match day revenue. From that 1/3 60% is also from corporate seats. If everyone boycotted the maximum decrease in revenue would be 13%. It will not have a material affect on their finances. Add to that the fact that we are coming out of a recession so some of the ST's will be naturally replaced while other seats will become available to daytrippers who spend in the megastore, concourse, etc. You will end up with the same situation as 2005, the rabble out the door and a fresh intake of wide eyed punters with cash on the hip.
For me a boycott will not work.
It amazes me how KH can declare boycotters will be reinstated when their seats may already be sold. Logistically he has no hope of fulfilling that promise.
I thought the proposal involved the profits being invested back into the club. We will also be asking the investors to dip further into their pockets as well as paying for the club? We don't know what the plans for the debt are lets be honest. If we take on the bond and pay out a dividend on balance the money going out of the club will be on par with the Glazers, if not higher ...
These Red Knights that hoping to get control of the club, how will this benefit the average fan.If they took over are they going to drop the prices of the season tickets , give cheaper Man united jerseys. Does anyone know what the benefits shall be to the average fan.
If they drop ST prices, clear debt, buy players, pay out dividend then where is all this money going to come from?
I doubt they ill reduce shirt priced because it looks like that's Nike's domain.