Club Sale | It’s done!

[ayushreddevil9]

These fecks ain't leaving

 

[Tarrou]

These fecks ain't leaving

personally think the chances of that are tiny

 

[greenoffpearson]

Two pence worth, but, hopefully not a massive leap of logic, but if I were either main bidder and knew that I was about to be shafted by these scammers I would publicly withdraw.

I would cite the piss take process and lack of integrity as my reasons and no-one would disagree. I would save face and the Glazers will be blasted for being self serving, again.

I would owe them no duty and salvage some integrity.

The fact that it is still dragging on suggests that both bidders are still being fed crumbs of comfort.

 

[pascell]

Van Der Sar leaving Ajax, construction work underway at Carrington, Neymar linked, just all a coincidence right??

Suspect there will be an announcement not long after the cup final that indeed it is Qatar who are the new overlords.

VdS is leaving Ajax because he started getting involved in the transfer side and made an absolute mess of it, leading Ajax to underperform in the league and in Europe and their fans booing him.

He's likely taking a step back to have a break, or Ajax kind way of saying thanks but you're fired.

Carrington was more than likely had planned maintenance work scheduled in as its the end of season break and the best time to undertake any work without the players and staff being there.

We're linked with multiple players each season, yes it's a coincidence.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Purely as far as the journey goes this is a worse saga than even FDJ and Sancho (tranche 1)

 

[Moiraine]

Purely as far as the journey goes this is a worse saga than even FDJ and Sancho (tranche 1)

FDJ was never coming here, his thread was the most stupid threads of all time.

 

[grahamo]

Effing glazers. Just go already.

 

[whitbyviking]

VdS is leaving Ajax because he started getting involved in the transfer side and made an absolute mess of it, leading Ajax to underperform in the league and in Europe and their fans booing him.

He's likely taking a step back to have a break, or Ajax kind way of saying thanks but you're fired.

Carrington was more than likely had planned maintenance work scheduled in as its the end of season break and the best time to undertake any work without the players and staff being there.

We're linked with multiple players each season, yes it's a coincidence.

From what I remember Dutch employment law is exceptionally beneficial to employees (in comparison to other countries, it's all relative), so I can't imagine it would be easy to get rid of Edwin should they wish. So he may be on a gardening leave type arrangement while they either try to pay him off or move him sideways.

 

[Acquire Me]

I have seen an insane amount of misinformation about how this functions, and your post has literally inspired me to create an account to reply after lurking for a long time.

I really wish people would just say nothing when they are not knowledgeable on a particular subject, instead of spouting drivel with such confidence.

To be clear, this should not be taken as advice or a recommendation of any kind. Simply trying to share my knowledge and experience in this industry.

Here is the foundation of how it works.

• Manchester United plc is the holding company for our beloved football club. The Glazers hold around 69% of the shares, while the other ~31% trades on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
• The Glazers shares are Class B shares and are held privately, but can be converted to Class A shares if they wanted to sell on the NYSE. The NYSE shares are Class A shares and trade publicly.
• The Glazers essentially hold all of the voting power. Class B shares have 10 times the voting rights of Class A shares.
• Nevertheless, one Class A share entitles the holder to the same amount of equity in the company as a Class B share.

To provide some information and correct the two biggest falsehoods I've seen:

1. Enterprise value is typically the method used in these kinds of transactions. In plain English, this means debt is included in the "number" you see as the bid. Example: suppose United has no cash, the debt is £1B, and the bid is £6B. This means the equity (shares) of the club are valued at £5B (in this example).
2. "Only the Glazer shares are for sale." Not necessarily. The Glazers control the Board and the votes. It is certainly within the realm of possibility that, if a 100% takeover is sought (ie. Qataris), it can be executed in one transaction. People seem to be fixated on this Class A vs Class B share distinction, but these are shares of the same entity. I do not see why it would have to operate any differently than any other take-private transaction. If a scheme of arrangement was in place and since the Glazers control the Board and the voting power, this is doable.

The bottom line as I see it is this, in my opinion: If there is no full takeover, the shares give no meaningful voting rights, paid no dividends for almost 2 years, and even back when they paid dividends, the Class A shares got peanuts.

"Okay, then why would the Qataris (or anyone) bother with 100% when they do like Jimmy Rat allegedly started with and send a bid on the Glazer shares only?"

1. Eliminate the ample regulatory and reporting requirementa that come with having it as a plc on a stock exchange.
2. If the Qataris believe the club will increase in value under their ownership, owning 100% makes more sense in the long run.
3. Status, pride, etc.

Great post. Thank you for sharing your experience and knowledge.

 

[johnnyteutonic]

We’re broke, cuz they’re greedy
We’re poor, cuz they’re rich
Weg’s tall, but he’s useless, yeah
The debt’s high, but they’re staying
Jim’s in, and we’re underwhelmed
Jassim’s lost, but we’re hopeful, baby

And what it all comes down to
Is that it’s gonna be just like Nice, Nice, Nice
'Cause Jim’s got one hand in our pocket
And the other one is giving Avram a high five

Joel’s drunk, but we’re sober
Our captain’s crap and he’s overpaid
Pep’s wired, on something, yeah
Fletch cares, but he’s clueless
FFP’s here, but it’s fooling none
Jim’s won and I'm sorry, baby

And what it all comes down to
Is that the Glazers are gonna be quite alright
'Cause Jim’s got one hand in our pockets
And the other one is flicking off Darcie

And what it all comes down to
Is that Jassim hasn’t got it all figured out just yet
'Cause he’s got one hand in his pocket
And the other one is ripping up a rainbow sign

Bruno dives, but he’s focused
Martial’s crocked, but he’s wise
Luke Shaw’s not fat, but he’s big-boned, baby
Klopp’s sad, but we’re laughing
Arteta caved, cuz he’s chicken shit
Varane’s old, but he’s pretty, baby

And what it all boils down to
Is that no one's really gonna come and clear the debt
Well, Jim’s got one hand in our pockets
And the other one is holding a Brexit sign
And what it all comes down to my friends, yeah
Is that everything’s gonna be just like Nice, Nice, Nice
'Cause Jim’s got one hand in our pockets
And Jassim is hailing a taxi cab

Absolutely genius!!!!
Love the line 'Luke Shaw's not fat, but he's big-boned, baby'.

Incidentally I watched her doco Jagged last year.

 

[devilish]

I have seen an insane amount of misinformation about how this functions, and your post has literally inspired me to create an account to reply after lurking for a long time.

I really wish people would just say nothing when they are not knowledgeable on a particular subject, instead of spouting drivel with such confidence.

To be clear, this should not be taken as advice or a recommendation of any kind. Simply trying to share my knowledge and experience in this industry.

Here is the foundation of how it works.

• Manchester United plc is the holding company for our beloved football club. The Glazers hold around 69% of the shares, while the other ~31% trades on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
• The Glazers shares are Class B shares and are held privately, but can be converted to Class A shares if they wanted to sell on the NYSE. The NYSE shares are Class A shares and trade publicly.
• The Glazers essentially hold all of the voting power. Class B shares have 10 times the voting rights of Class A shares.
• Nevertheless, one Class A share entitles the holder to the same amount of equity in the company as a Class B share.

To provide some information and correct the two biggest falsehoods I've seen:

1. Enterprise value is typically the method used in these kinds of transactions. In plain English, this means debt is included in the "number" you see as the bid. Example: suppose United has no cash, the debt is £1B, and the bid is £6B. This means the equity (shares) of the club are valued at £5B (in this example).
2. "Only the Glazer shares are for sale." Not necessarily. The Glazers control the Board and the votes. It is certainly within the realm of possibility that, if a 100% takeover is sought (ie. Qataris), it can be executed in one transaction. People seem to be fixated on this Class A vs Class B share distinction, but these are shares of the same entity. I do not see why it would have to operate any differently than any other take-private transaction. If a scheme of arrangement was in place and since the Glazers control the Board and the voting power, this is doable.

The bottom line as I see it is this, in my opinion: If there is no full takeover, the shares give no meaningful voting rights, paid no dividends for almost 2 years, and even back when they paid dividends, the Class A shares got peanuts.

"Okay, then why would the Qataris (or anyone) bother with 100% when they do like Jimmy Rat allegedly started with and send a bid on the Glazer shares only?"

1. Eliminate the ample regulatory and reporting requirementa that come with having it as a plc on a stock exchange.
2. If the Qataris believe the club will increase in value under their ownership, owning 100% makes more sense in the long run.
3. Status, pride, etc.

Thanks for such post. Its evident that you've got experience on such matters. Who do you think will get the club?

 

[Sir Erik ten Hag]

FDJ was never coming here, his thread was the most stupid threads of all time.

At least that thread was funny. This thread is just like a chore.

 

[greenoffpearson]

Only the Glazer shares are for sale." Not necessarily. The Glazers control the Board and the votes. It is certainly within the realm of possibility that, if a 100% takeover is sought (ie. Qataris), it can be executed in one transaction. People seem to be fixated on this Class A vs Class B share distinction, but these are shares of the same entity. I do not see why it would have to operate any differently than any other take-private transaction. If a scheme of arrangement was in place and since the Glazers control the Board and the voting power, this is doable

Are you referring to the quorum.

Currently the Glazers retain control of the structure. They own 78/9 % of the shares. The memo/articles allow them to retain control of the quorum via the way the structure is configured regardless of purely shares.

If they sell to a non Glazer, then the shares get relegated to class A and carry less voting power. Therefore the Glazers have retained 75% incase they sell. A buyer would then be able to retain the quorum even with the reduced authority of class A shares.

The problem with SJR's Rat Pack plan is that although he takes 51% of the shares, he still needs scumbag A and J to form a quorum and control the structure of the club/business. He does not have full control and that is a big issue.

The shares A and B may have the same financial value in theory however the voting rights skews their value. 6 percent of class B shares gives them over 50 % of the voting rights and the memo/articles still provides them with a quorum.

However if sold to a third party then that is no longer the case. The third party, spending that kind of money, would want some control. At least over 50 percent of the shares for a simple majority or over 75 percent for full control, like the Glazers enjoy now.

That is probably why the Glazers have nevever reduced their holding to less than 75 % of the business, because it is attractive to a buyer looking for full control.

 

[Voteon]

We seem to be waiting for the Qataris to make a bigger last-time bid than previously (I think Jassim hasn’t got the cash, Qatar do, not Jassim and the Raine Group are feeding this to the Glazers), but can anyone explain why Ineos cannot just increase their offer after (or before) Qatar do?

 

[wolvored]

Ratty and Qatar should set a date and say after xxx we will pull the bids. I think the longercthis goes on the longer the leeches are working on minority investment deals to see if they can milk it and keep control.

 

[buchansleftleg]

We seem to be waiting for the Qataris to make a bigger last-time bid than previously (I think Jassim hasn’t got the cash, Qatar do, not Jassim and the Raine Group are feeding this to the Glazers), but can anyone explain why Ineos cannot just increase their offer after (or before) Qatar do?

Because INEOS will have had to agree a number of hard amounts with their financing and they won't be able to go above those without extensive remodelling of the bid - paid off at different rate / longer term etc. Given they are borrowing to buy the club...and will have to borrow further amounts to fund redevelopment of Carrington and Old Trafford stadium then they will be far more restricted in what they can "wiggle" out as extra cash to cram the Glazers mouth with gold.

The only potential for the glazers to get more is to apply pressure on the Qatari's who essentially have access to a massive wealth fund they can dip into or borrow against that collateral at a lower rate than INEOS can probably get.

 

[Berbaclass]

Because INEOS will have had to agree a number of hard amounts with their financing and they won't be able to go above those without extensive remodelling of the bid - paid off at different rate / longer term etc. Given they are borrowing to buy the club...and will have to borrow further amounts to fund redevelopment of Carrington and Old Trafford stadium then they will be far more restricted in what they can "wiggle" out as extra cash to cram the Glazers mouth with gold.

The only potential for the glazers to get more is to apply pressure on the Qatari's who essentially have access to a massive wealth fund they can dip into or borrow against that collateral at a lower rate than INEOS can probably get.

Yeah this is something often overlooked. They also presumably have some sort of hard deadline on that financing agreement surely.

 

[Voteon]

Because INEOS will have had to agree a number of hard amounts with their financing and they won't be able to go above those without extensive remodelling of the bid - paid off at different rate / longer term etc. Given they are borrowing to buy the club...and will have to borrow further amounts to fund redevelopment of Carrington and Old Trafford stadium then they will be far more restricted in what they can "wiggle" out as extra cash to cram the Glazers mouth with gold.

The only potential for the glazers to get more is to apply pressure on the Qatari's who essentially have access to a massive wealth fund they can dip into or borrow against that collateral at a lower rate than INEOS can probably get.

Thanks, Buchan, that’s what I was wondering.

It will be interesting to see if Ineos has put any contingencies in place with regards to the ‘remodelling’ you refer to. I can’t imagine them not doing so, especially, as you refer to, they are going up against a state bid. Ratcliffe himself may dip into his own pocket.

I’d wager they’ve intimated this to Raine, also.

 

[Loon]

Has to be an announcement next week. Staying, going, whatever. What’s the point in delaying it? I doubt either of the bidders is going to blink and throw in any more extra money and I imagine they too will want to know if their bid is successful when they can actually get on with prepping for the new season.

Or, if not, that they can walk away.

 

[Marcelinho87]

Again, just because it's quiet in public doesn't mean it is in reality.

 

[Bestietom]

I will be Sick if Ratcliffe wins over Qatari's. I dont want to see the Glazers having anything to do with us whatsoever.

 

[Berbaclass]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

That is a plausible theory since them staying would lead to protests.

I just don't want them to stay in any capacity, but I worry they will.

 

[Solius]

My prediction about them staying and waiting until the season is over to announce is looking scarier by the day.

Small day today btw.

 

[Bestietom]

Sqeezing more monies out of the bidders is their game. Fecking hat to see them having anything to do with club, so hope it's a full sale.

 

[cyberman]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

To be fair Gary has been throwing out stupid takes on this since it was announced. Remember when he was sure they were just getting a valuation of the club so the two can buy the other 4 out?
It’s like two months to the start of next season, I just can’t see how this is a consideration

 

[Rampant Red Rodriguez]

We're being told INEOS is to big to have any trouble with loan servicing, all by themselves.

I haven't read anywhere about loan servicing costs. If you or anyone else has then please share with me. Obrigado. And those interest rates make loans very expensive to keep..

.I doubt SJR would ask Ineos to pay for the loan.

 

[Berbaclass]

Simon Stone on his podcast suggested that he’s been told that we have a transfer budget and we can make deals.

 

[Infra-red]

Simon Stone on his podcast suggested that he’s been told that we have a transfer budget and we can make deals.

This is just as you would expect. The club will have included projected transfer spend this summer in their financial forecasts in the presentations given to prospective buyers/investors. Reports have suggested it is something like £100m plus sales. The uncertainty is not ideal, but the ownership situation should not have a terribly adverse impact on this summer's transfer activity. For Murtough and Ten Hag, it should largely be business as usual and I would expect them to get three or four deals over the line, even as the sale process continues in the background.

 

[Berbaclass]

This is just as you would expect. The club will have included projected transfer spend this summer in their financial forecasts in the presentations given to prospective buyers/investors. Reports have suggested it is something like £100m plus sales. The uncertainty is not ideal, but the ownership situation should not have a terribly adverse impact on this summer's transfer activity. For Murtough and Ten Hag, it should largely be business as usual and I would expect them to get three or four deals over the line, even as the sale process continues in the background.

Yeah hopefully the case.

 

[Pexbo]

Simon Stone on his podcast suggested that he’s been told that we have a transfer budget and we can make deals.

I wonder if part of the negotiations included the ongoing concern and all parties negotiating had to agree that in the case of protracted negotiations business would continue as usual and a net spend of £Xm would be the target.

EDIT - @Infra-red has basically said the same

 

[Berbaclass]

Never really considered the fact they can’t release the shirt until this is all done as Adidas aren’t going to produce millions of shirts with TeamViewer on if as soon as we’re bought we announce a new primary sponsor.

 

[Berbaclass]

Kieran Maguire on the Simon Stone podcast also said he thinks the takeover will be done (“we will have a new owner announced”)by the time the transfer window opens

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Simon Stone on his podcast suggested that he’s been told that we have a transfer budget and we can make deals.

If the two Glazers are settling in under Ineos for a few more years before selling their remaining shares, it's in their interests to keep the club running smoothly before the transition. One bad transfer window can set a club back a couple of years.

 

[Berbaclass]

If the two Glazers are settling in under Ineos for a few more years before selling their remaining shares, it's in their interests to keep the club running smoothly before the transition. One bad transfer window can set a club back a couple of years.

It’s in both the buyers interest to keep the club running smoothly.

Yes the Glazers (Joel) have final sign off of any deal we do but it’s the clubs money. I don’t see transfers being an issue if it’s within our budget.KMJ for example I think will get done as soon as the clause kicks in.

 

[Appletonred]

It will be a very dark day in the history of the club if the current owners remain, it is quite despicable when you see such a great club being blatantly asset stripped
by people with zero affinity whatsoever for the club and its history, and am afraid a fan base that just walks around Manchester with green and gold scarves will not be making one
iota of difference.

 

[Traub]

If the two Glazers are settling in under Ineos for a few more years before selling their remaining shares, it's in their interests to keep the club running smoothly before the transition. One bad transfer window can set a club back a couple of years.

I think their shares are at a minimum guaranteed price, so no difference for them really.

 

[Berbaclass]

I think their shares are at a minimum guaranteed price, so no difference for them really.

The price will also plummet to it’s actual value if INEOS buy us because it’s already inflated. True price is probably 12-14 dollars.

I doubt there will be a significant increase in value over just 3 years to make it a gamble worth taking. Qatar and the cash up front is a much better offer.

 

[dacore]

If the two Glazers are settling in under Ineos for a few more years before selling their remaining shares, it's in their interests to keep the club running smoothly before the transition. One bad transfer window can set a club back a couple of years.

Agree. I´m hoping for Qatar and I feel it they were fine with the SJR bid, everything would have been solved by now (if it´s not a tactic to announce after the season so they can hide). But a crappy transfer windows would damaged their own interests, like you are saying, if they would like to stay. Hopefully they feel that selling the club is the most appealing option.

 

[MDFC Manager]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Can't see Qataris buying us after this