All change of ownership and Red Knights related posts here please

If United could ever negotiate their own TV deal like Madrid and Barca ( something I don't want to happen), the value of the club would explode and dwarf any other team.

Yes. It would kill the Premier League as we know, but the box -office names like United and Arsenal would earn fortunes.

The vast difference in TV money is really starting to show in La Liga now, with more and more games being Real Madrid or Barcelona versus random cannon fodder.

The sad thing is that that's what people in Asia and elsewhere will want to watch. Their favourite out of Madrid or Barcelona getting easy victories most weeks. And then the league is decided when they play each other.
 
Yes. It would kill the Premier League, but United would earn a fortune.
The vast difference in TV money is really starting to show in La Liga now, with more and more games being Real Madrid or Barcelona versus random cannon fodder.

The sad thing is that that's what people in Asia and elsewhere will want to watch. Their favourite out of Madrid or Barcelona getting easy victories most weeks. And then the league is decided when they play each other.

Absolutely, the reason I don't ever want it to happen. Having a strong league gives us a more competitve and interesting game, so that in seasons when we don't have superstars anymore we play at a competitive enough level that we can create new ones whilst still being competitive in Europe.
 
I'm not saying they shouldn't sell, I'm saying they are making money and their business plan is working so they do not need to sell. The only way they would need to sell is if the fans backlash takes affect and the club is boycotted, which would affect their buisiness plan. They are making money, they don't need to sell.

But they are not making money - well not real money. They've drawn out £26m and there is a potential for capital back of say £484m if they accepted an offer of say £1.2bn gross.

I must say I have no idea what a TV deal would do in terms of boosting revenue or if such a deal is likely in the next few years.
 
Interesting. They'll need to pay back on average £100m a year in principal alone in order to achieve that. The club's current pre tax profit is probably around £90 m at the present and that's before interest repayments. They could of course sell off players and other assets. But that would be self defeating wouldn't it ?

Will the fans sit around as if nothing has happened whilst Rooney is sold, OT naming rights and Carrington are sold off ? No chance.

It worries me that a lot of people would wait until these wheels are set in motion before doing anything about it - one of my best mates insists that he'll "only be bothered if they sell OT" by which time it'd be too late.
 
But they are not making money - well not real money. They've drawn out £26m and there is a potential for capital back of say £484m if they accepted an offer of say £1.2bn gross.

I must say I have no idea what a TV deal would do in terms of boosting revenue or if such a deal is likely in the next few years.

I'd hazard a guess at armchair season tickets, pub season tickets, etc so that you can watch United throughout the world without going to Old Trafford. That would truly tap into the Far East and indeed the casual UK market plus north America, South Africa and any other ex-pat territories.
 
But they are not making money - well not real money. They've drawn out £26m and there is a potential for capital back of say £484m if they accepted an offer of say £1.2bn gross.

I must say I have no idea what a TV deal would do in terms of boosting revenue or if such a deal is likely in the next few years.

Yes but thanks to the Bond issue they now have a stopgap on the debts leakage for a time and all they have to worry about for the near future is the piks. They will now start raking the money in.
 
It worries me that a lot of people would wait until these wheels are set in motion before doing anything about it - one of my best mates insists that he'll "only be bothered if they sell OT" by which time it'd be too late.

People are generally apathetic until things start to really change. Most don't see any problem at all whilst things are going well on the pitch.

They wont sell OT but they'll sell the naming rights. They'll sell Carrington on some sort of lease back arrangement and then, who knows, Rooney suddenly wants to play for Madrid who come knocking with another £80m. I fear this type of thing could happen if they dig their heels in. Come on the RK's let's see the colour of your money !
 
Yes but thanks to the Bond issue they now have a stopgap on the debts leakage for a time and all they have to worry about for the near future is the piks. They will now start raking the money in.

It's more settled but they still have an interest bill of 9.25% pa on the £500m and another £86m at 12% (?) pa, plus as you say the PIKs which will be around £130m if they pay down the reported £70m. Even without the PIKs they have an interest bill of around £56m per annum. With the PIKs it amounts to £75m - increasing in July/August. They also want to draw out fees, loans or what have you for themselves as well as meeting the needs of the team and club infrastructure. Unless revenues increase substantially and costs are contained I don't see where the money is coming from.
 
FERGUSON DISTANCES HIMSELF FROM THING THAT DOES SEEM TO BENEFIT EVERYONE INVOLVED
08-03-10

orville.jpg


MANCHESTER United manger Sir Alex Ferguson last night rejected claims he was involved in a plan that will help millionaires become richer and shut thousands of miserable fans the feck up.

Sources suggest Ferguson is blocking the move because Rio Ferdinand is terrified of ducks
Ferguson said a plan by a group of City financiers, known as the Red Knights, to buy the club from the evil Glazer family while giving a greater say to ordinary supporters, offended his simultaneous beliefs in both capitalism and socialism.

Sitting atop his third favourite racehorse, Ferguson said he had always hated money and stressed he was comfortable with the concept of people power unless it accidentally led to actual people having actual power.

He insisted: "The Glazers, the Red Knights and myself will all no doubt make vile amounts of money from this revoltingly obvious thing to do, while the chances of the new owners replacing me with Avram Grant remain disgracefully non-existent."

Ferguson did also stress that if he is the person controlling the budget for new players and the person complaining he does not get enough money to buy new players, it will simply increase the frequency with which he goes absolutely mental.

The Red Knights takeover bid is being organised by millionaire financiers Keith Harris, Jim O'Neill, Paul Marshall and Keith's best friend Orville.

Speaking through Orville, Harris said: "I wish I could fly way up to the sky in a consortium made up of high net worth individuals, private equity funds and supporter-shareholders with limited voting rights, but I can't."

Meanwhile the Glazer family have refused to relinquish control of the club insisting there are still some nice crispy bits of skin towards the back end they can pick at.

from The Daily Mash :lol:
 
It's more settled but they still have an interest bill of 9.25% pa on the £500m and another £86m at 12% (?) pa, plus as you say the PIKs which will be around £130m if they pay down the reported £70m. Even without the PIKs they have an interest bill of around £56m per annum. With the PIKs it amounts to £75m - increasing in July/August. They also want to draw out fees, loans or what have you for themselves as well as meeting the needs of the team and club infrastructure. Unless revenues increase substantially and costs are contained I don't see where the money is coming from.

I do wish you would stop going on about this debt of '£86m at 12%' - it doesnt exist !
Without the PIKs the interest on the bond is max £45m and that is clearly what they are aiming for.

Revenue and profit has gone up every year since the Glazers turned up and I think there is still room for them to increase further. They do seem to be reaching satuation on matchday revenue and also home TV rights but they are only just starting to tap the income potential of overseas markets.

Basically, they are in a comfortable position and the longer they stay, the more profit they will make - the Red Knights will have to come up with a very attractive offer to convince them to go.
 
I do wish you would stop going on about this debt of '£86m at 12%' - it doesnt exist !
Without the PIKs the interest on the bond is max £45m and that is clearly what they are aiming for.

Revenue and profit has gone up every year since the Glazers turned up and I think there is still room for them to increase further. They do seem to be reaching satuation on matchday revenue and also home TV rights but they are only just starting to tap the income potential of overseas markets.

Basically, they are in a comfortable position and the longer they stay, the more profit they will make - the Red Knights will have to come up with a very attractive offer to convince them to go.

Exactly- I don't even think the glazers will consider selling when there is so much money still to be made in other places, mainly a self negotiated tv/media
deal....that's where the real money is going to be made by English football clubs in the coming years.

Hopefully I'm wrong but I cannot see the rk's gaining control, if glazers don't want to sell they won't. I'm sure it's also a status image for them owning the biggest sporting club in the world, so why would they sell???
 
Thank god, that 86 million was throwing me completely.
 
FERGUSON DISTANCES HIMSELF FROM THING THAT DOES SEEM TO BENEFIT EVERYONE INVOLVED
08-03-10


MANCHESTER United manger Sir Alex Ferguson last night rejected claims he was involved in a plan that will help millionaires become richer and shut thousands of miserable fans the feck up.

Sources suggest Ferguson is blocking the move because Rio Ferdinand is terrified of ducks
Ferguson said a plan by a group of City financiers, known as the Red Knights, to buy the club from the evil Glazer family while giving a greater say to ordinary supporters, offended his simultaneous beliefs in both capitalism and socialism.

Sitting atop his third favourite racehorse, Ferguson said he had always hated money and stressed he was comfortable with the concept of people power unless it accidentally led to actual people having actual power.

He insisted: "The Glazers, the Red Knights and myself will all no doubt make vile amounts of money from this revoltingly obvious thing to do, while the chances of the new owners replacing me with Avram Grant remain disgracefully non-existent."

Ferguson did also stress that if he is the person controlling the budget for new players and the person complaining he does not get enough money to buy new players, it will simply increase the frequency with which he goes absolutely mental.

The Red Knights takeover bid is being organised by millionaire financiers Keith Harris, Jim O'Neill, Paul Marshall and Keith's best friend Orville.

Speaking through Orville, Harris said: "I wish I could fly way up to the sky in a consortium made up of high net worth individuals, private equity funds and supporter-shareholders with limited voting rights, but I can't."

Meanwhile the Glazer family have refused to relinquish control of the club insisting there are still some nice crispy bits of skin towards the back end they can pick at.

from The Daily Mash :lol:

Roflcopter.gif
 
16 out of 20 clubs would have to vote 'yes' to breaking up the TV deal individually


Thankfully, that will never happen.


How are the Glazer's making any money?

In 5 years they have taken 26 million out of the club.

But their personal debt, the PIK's has increased by about 80 million.

Only way they might be said to have made money is if they increased the club's value.


They would need a buyer, though! If they re-floated on the LSE, I think they would make a loss on there personal investment once they paid the PIKs off.
 
How are the Glazer's making any money?


Only way they might be said to have made money is if they increased the club's value.

Looks like you answered your own question there ...

Their plan has always been a long term game to increase the value of the club - depending on what value you give the club today, they have increased it by 50% to 100%.
 
16 out of 20 clubs would have to vote 'yes' to breaking up the TV deal individually


Thankfully, that will never happen.


How are the Glazer's making any money?

In 5 years they have taken 26 million out of the club.

But there personal debt, the PIK's has increased by about 80 million.

Only way they might be said to have made money is if they increased the club's value.


They would need a buyer, though! If they re-floated on the LSE, I think they would make a loss on there personal investment once they paid the PIKs off.

You are right of course about the 16 but I feel an effort may be made shortly to break it, the threat by clubs like ourselves to breakaway into a superleague may be the tactic used. There is some reason why Americans are buying top soccer clubs over here when they could make much bigger profits investing their money elsewhere, some how I dont think it is for the love of soccer.
 
Opinions on the following please-


Would Fergie possibly support the RK's if they made a bid?

I am certain, somewhere down the line, Fergie might have a little chat with Jim O' Neil about their plans.

Would Fergie ever press the Glazer's to sell? As in lead a pre-season strike maybe?

Remember his socialist links and history of involvment in protests.


Fergie has major influence and power if a situation arose that the RK's made a real, noteworthy bid. Would he use it?


Personally, if the RK's are shown to be credible in their goals, I think Fergie would.
 
Looks like you answered your own question there ...

Their plan has always been a long term game to increase the value of the club - depending on what value you give the club today, they have increased it by 50% to 100%.


I can't see much scope for growing the club's value drastically in the coming years.

Ticket prices are at price equilibrium and match day revenue will not go up, especially with the recession that is about smack the public sector - massive in the North West - right on the arse, finally.

The domestic TV deal will not grow much. Look what happend to Setanta. Now the competition for rights is less as ESPN will be cautious in its committments, one would think.

International TV will continue to grow, but its still only about 40% of the value of the domestic rights.


Just my opinion.
 
The Glazers may argue that they should be allowed given that it's allowed in Spain and all Euro nations should be equal these days.
 
The Glazers may argue that they should be allowed given that it's allowed in Spain and all Euro nations should be equal these days.

You could actually be right. UEFA, with a few brown envelopes to the right officials will not stand in their way either
 
You could actually be right. UEFA, with a few brown envelopes to the right officials will not stand in their way either

UEFA would have no say in it. If Madrid and Barca can have exclusive TV contracts, then so could English clubs.

It's only if the big clubs broke away from the PL, in search of more TV money, that UEFA could hurt them by denying them CL participation. Of course that would lead one direction... Euro Superleague.
 
UEFA would have no say in it. If Madrid and Barca can have exclusive TV contracts, then so could English clubs.

It's only if the big clubs broke away from the PL, in search of more TV money, that UEFA could hurt them by denying them CL participation. Of course that would lead one direction... Euro Superleague.

You are most likely right, you can see why the Glazers are hanging on
 
I can't see much scope for growing the club's value drastically in the coming years.

Ticket prices are at price equilibrium and match day revenue will not go up, especially with the recession that is about smack the public sector - massive in the North West - right on the arse, finally.

The domestic TV deal will not grow much. Look what happend to Setanta. Now the competition for rights is less as ESPN will be cautious in its committments, one would think.

International TV will continue to grow, but its still only about 40% of the value of the domestic rights.


Just my opinion.

I agree that matchday revenue looks like it is peaking.
But there is still room for growth - as you say overseas TV rights are now rising and I expect huge growth there plus there is still a lot of scope to increase overseas revenue through sponsorship deals and selling merchandise etc.
We have a large international fanbase but so far these fans are not bringing a lot of money into the club - I expect the club to focus on this now that domestic revenues seem to be reaching saturation. Although as others mention, there is also the unknown area of individual TV rights.

The only angle I can see the Glazers wanting to sell is about replacing Fergie - they know that once he is gone the club will have a period of uncertainty, so that being on the horizon might convince them that now is a good time to take the money and run.
 
There are all kinds of anti-competition angles to take on that though. You can argue that it is a restraint of trade that all the clubs form a cartel when it comes to TV rights.

OFCOM Intervention May Smash Broadcasting Cartel Premier League View

Restraint of Trade? I don't think so.

You could mount a challenge under Chapter I of the Competition Act, but the Restrictive Practices Court threw a similar one out in 1999.

And now the European Commission seem to have stopped their objection to collective sale and have agreed to new collective deals that have replaced previous ones (e.g. with the Europa League).

Individual TV rights for the Premier League or Champions League now look further away than at any stage in the last 20 years.
 
Restraint of Trade? I don't think so.

You could mount a challenge under Chapter I of the Competition Act, but the Restrictive Practices Court threw a similar one out in 1999.

And now the European Commission seem to have stopped their objection to collective sale and have agreed to new collective deals that have replaced previous ones (e.g. with the Europa League).

Individual TV rights for the Premier League or Champions League now look further away than at any stage in the last 20 years.

Even though it's allowed in Spain?
 
Sam Wallace: Manchester United fans should look long and hard at spin and promises of City slickers

Monday, 8 March 2010

The Conservative Party strategists who have sought to insert David Cameron into government with the minimum of policy promises must look with envy and awe at the Red Knights and their reams of positive publicity.

This is not intended to belittle the basic principle that United need to be free of the Glazers. We can all see that. The bond issue document that the Glazers issued in January was as heartbreaking a piece of corporate literature as you will ever read, offering up stadium, training ground and even players to serve the debt.

So far the Red Knights have operated in the shadows and the unattributed claims yesterday that they had the secret support of Sir Alex Ferguson, despite his vehement denials, were the clearest indication yet that they could be fighting a dirty war.

Even the name Red Knights invites us to assume that they are automatically the good guys. The concept of Red Knights is a thrillingly ingenious play on the myth of white knights who, of course, always ride to the rescue of those in distress. The Page Ranking firm really earned their money there.

The executive types of the City love to make themselves sound more glamorous with monikers such as these. Just for the hell of it some of them have pictures of footballers on their office walls and proclaim themselves "footy mad". They give interviews to the business pages in which they compare themselves to football managers and even take their ties off when they go to games.

It is all very heart-warming that people such as Jim O'Neill, the putative head of the Red Knights, is so willing to share with us his Moss Side childhood and passion for United, but that does not really answer the basic question. How would his consortium offer a stable alternative to the Glazers?

What O'Neill seems to be proposing is a collective fund of anything up to £1.5bn which is made up of, according to some reports, as many as 60 investors, at least one of which could put up as much as £600m. It presupposes an extraordinary alliance of rich, powerful people all of them used to having their own way, yet all pulling together for an institution that may never return them any profit.

We have heard so much about the so-called Red Knights' impeccable financial acumen and their genius for tapping the emerging markets. What we have not been told is how they plan to unite this disparate group of investors; a job that sounds about as challenging as shepherding the mid-1980s United team out of the pub at closing time.

It is for this reason that United fans' groups, who have given so much of their time and energy to opposing and exposing the Glazers, need to think very carefully before they decide to back this particular horse.

In the Financial Times on Saturday, a source close to the Red Knights was quoted on the subject of the Glazers hiking ticket prices at Old Trafford in order to pay down the debt. He said: "To apply private equity principles to lower income levels of society is completely inappropriate. It is very harsh on these people."

Hang on a minute. The very principle of private equity is borrowing money to buy companies, cutting costs (which roughly translates as "sacking people"), using the cash-flow to pay the debts and selling the entity on for a profit. Goldman Sachs, for whom O'Neill is the chief economist, has a private equity department which, among other deals, was part of a 2002 buy-out of Burger King whose staff are regarded as low-income.

Are we to believe that those men among the Red Knights who have dedicated their lives to pursuing the margins of profit have suddenly been overcome by brotherly love for the average Stretford Ender with a season ticket and a terraced house in Urmston?

As for Keith Harris, the Red Knights' stockbroker who spends as much time being interviewed as he does raising finance, his call to arms for United fans to cancel season tickets and boycott matches should be treated very carefully. The Manchester United Supporters' Trust, the largest of the fans' groups, has not yet endorsed that nuclear option, which could yet do extreme damage to the club.

That is why it is understandable when United's chief executive, David Gill, reacts with anger to the Red Knights, a group that have managed that age-old political trick of winning prestige without actually doing anything. Gill opposed the Glazer takeover as long as his legal obligations as a director permitted and since then he has run United as best he can under the debt.

He deals in the reality of the situation, which is keeping United afloat under an unfavourable regime. Like the Tories, the Red Knights are very good at imagining how they would ride to the rescue but they should explain how that works in reality before they are granted the endorsement of the fans.

Full article:

Sam Wallace: Manchester United fans should look long and hard at spin and promises of City slickers - News & Comment, Football - The Independent
An article questioning the plans of the Red Knights.
 
Even though it's allowed in Spain?

Yes.

It's allowed in Spain because the Spanish regulations allow it. It wasn't the result of a legal challenge.

The Premier League aren't going to vote for individual TV rights, and the chances of getting a legal remedy are now,as I say, further away than ever.
 
Personally I am against individual TV rights.

But one has to question the wisdom of giving each PL team a single vote, considering the imbalance of the revenue that each of those teams would generate from the TV rights. The big clubs should have a bigger say.
 
Personally I am against individual TV rights.

But one has to question the wisdom of giving each PL team a single vote, considering the imbalance of the revenue that each of those teams would generate from the TV rights. The big clubs should have a bigger say.

There's probably only two clubs that would get a better deal from individual TV rights.

And personally I don't believe they should have a bigger say in how the league is run.
 
RIO FERDINAND AGENT'S £1BN UTD BID
Mr Fixit Zahavi fronting shock Glazer buy-out
Alan Nixon

Rio Ferdinand's agent Pini Zahavi is behind a shock £1bn bid to buy Manchester United from the Glazer family.

Israeli wheeler-dealer Zahavi is a long-term advisor to United skipper Ferdinand (far left) and a pal of boss Sir Alex Ferguson.

And the veteran agent has got together a team of foreign investors who have stashed the staggering 10-figure sum in a Swiss bank account for the project.

Zahavi is the man behind several big-money Premier League buy-outs and was responsible for bringing Roman Abramovich to Chelsea. He moves in powerful circles and has connections around the globe.

His bidders have hard cash and have already produced proof of funds - which is more than can be said for the Red Knights group. There is still no sign that the Glazers want to sell but the Americans are taking Zahavi's group seriously .

The Glazers - hated by most United fans - have an auction going and cannot lose.

The asking price will be at least £1bn, which would give them a healthy profit.

While Keith Harris and his high-profile Red Knights have made their plans public, Zahavi and his investors are operating in secrecy. There are no clues to where the money has come from, but Zahavi has access to some of the world's wealthiest men.

Their identities would have to be disclosed if the United bid progresses.

While Zahavi's match-making between Chelsea and Abramovich was an unqualified success, his attempts to inject Israeli and Arab money at Portsmouth back-fired, with the club in big financial trouble.

United and the Glazers would need to know more about the background of Zahavi's investors before dealing with them.

However, Zahavi has good relations at United through his friendship with Ferguson and his help in landing Ferdinand and Juan Sebastian Veron.

People.co.uk - RIO FERDINAND AGENT'S 1BN UTD BID
 
Guy Dawson joins up with Red Knights

Tuesday, 9th March 2010 SPORT FINANCE


STEVE DINNEEN


CITY stalwart Guy Dawson will advise a string of wealthy backers on their bid to wrest control of Manchester United.
The Nomura banker, who sold his Tricorn Partners advisory firm to the Japanese bank and now works there, will advise a group of United fans who plan to buy the club for £1.25bn.
Dawson advised the United board when the Glazers took control in 2005. The move is the most serious indication yet that a bid could be forthcoming.
The City figures behind the fans’ revolt include former Centrica boss Sir Roy Gardner; Jim O’Neill, chief economist at Goldman Sachs; Keith Harris head of Seymour Pierce; Paul Marshall, founder of the London hedge fund Marshall Wace; Mark Rawlinson, of law firm Freshfields and Richard Hytner, from Saatchi & Saatchi.
But a source close to the Knights sounded a note of caution yesterday. He told City A.M. the growing complexity of the deal means it could take months to put together a meaningful bid.
He also said the Glazers would almost certainly not engage them there is evidence the fans are willing to forgo their beloved season tickets in protest. The Red Knights and the Manchester United Supporters Trust hope 15,000 will decline to renew tickets this year.
The Red Knights believe it will take £1.25bn to force the Glazers around the table. This would include an estimated £750m handed to the maligned owners, almost trebling the £272m they paid for the club. The rest of the value was absorbed as debt.
The Knights, now said to number as many as 60, will each pledge a slice of their sizable fortunes totalling £750m. Ordinary fans will be expected to stump up £250m. The consortium will keep the club’s £500m bond issue in place.


Glad to see you're all willing to give up your season tickets. :wenger:



Guy Dawson joins up with Red Knights | City A.M.
 
right now they're asset rich/cash poor but they have an excellent "rental property" with ideal/perfect tennants paying their asset off for them.

Us.

If they hang on, it's just a matter of time before their equity increases and their debt decreases.

Unless a more suitable owner (for us) comes along
 
I do wish you would stop going on about this debt of '£86m at 12%' - it doesnt exist !
Without the PIKs the interest on the bond is max £45m and that is clearly what they are aiming for.

Revenue and profit has gone up every year since the Glazers turned up and I think there is still room for them to increase further. They do seem to be reaching satuation on matchday revenue and also home TV rights but they are only just starting to tap the income potential of overseas markets.

Basically, they are in a comfortable position and the longer they stay, the more profit they will make - the Red Knights will have to come up with a very attractive offer to convince them to go.

I do wish you'd tell me how the £716m debt is made up then. Just to say they are liable for £45m on the bonds is misleading (actually £46.25m pa paid quarterly). The PIKs cannot be dismissed as you seem to want to suggest. They were £200m and now are £130m - rolling up at 14.25% and increasing to 16% odd in July/August. Simple arithmetic says that there is still another £86m somewhere. The reported interest rate on that was 12% which I imagine is in keeping with an unsecured loan arrangement.

They are not in a "comfortable" situation at all. Revenue may be going up every year but so are costs. The club made £42m net profit last yearwith the Ronaldo money. So work it out. Revenue may not continue to increase either. The whole atmosphere is likely to become increasingly antagonistic when/if the RKs put an offer on the table and its rejected. Even a partially successful boycott will be damaging.
 
Just one thing. Althought it was widely acknowledged as £716m BEFORE the bond issue, what's to stop it being £1.216billion now? Who says that they've actually cleared the senior debt with the half billion issue? Where are they getting the money to clear the PIKs from without the bond issue?