Surely I don’t need to explain the positives to you?
so why are you concerned about them not having enough money when they have more than Clearlake and pretty much everyone else?!
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Because got doubts he will allow the club to spend as we wish. He will run it more as a business than how a Middle Eastern state would
Nope. The Glazers have no debt. The club has the debt and whoever buys us is under no obligation to clear it. SJR in particular seems very unlikely to drop 500 million of his own cash on paying off debt he did not incur and so we will still be saddled with it going forward.
Why do you have these doubts? Why would running a debt free United as a business be an issue? What teams aren’t run as a business?
Out of all the potential arguments against Ratcliffe, lack of money is the silliest one. They have enough about them to put in what is needed and then some, then the behemoth that is United can take care of the rest. Remember that the leeches were stealing 100 million a year or so out of us. Even just having that 100 million back, plus no more interest repayments will make a staggering difference. With Ratcliffe/Ineos in there's no doubt we'll be up there among the top two or three spenders every year.
I think the more valid criticism might be about their executive appointments and tinkering based on what goes on at Nice but I don't think the situation is particularly comparable to United. Plus hopefully they have been learning lessons along the way.
I think the more valid criticism might be about their executive appointments and tinkering based on what goes on at Nice but I don't think the situation is particularly comparable to United. Plus hopefully they have been learning lessons along the way.
the debt will be factored in to the price
I love how people are saying we need owners with over 100 billion rather than just 60 odd billion
I doubt it. This is not a private sale, it is for a listed company and in order to buy the club you simply have to buy the shares from the current shareholders once a price per share is agreed. The clubs assets and liabilities will remain as they were prior to the sale and the decision to pay off the debt will come down to the new owner. I have grave doubts that Jim is going to pay off debts he did not run up himself. He might obtain more preferable terms to refinance it and he may choose not to add to it or take dividends but the idea that the debt is going to be wiped out is very optimistic.
I think it is very likely that any new owner would look to clear the Glazer acquisition debt as quickly as possible, to give themselves flexibility around a potential stadium rebuild/refurb. You'd certainly factor in the bonds, the RCF and the outstanding balance owed on transfers, in the acquisition price (total about a billion pounds).
I suspect it will be.
Whoever purchases the club knows the what the debt is. They will negotiate this into the price paid.
Especially now that we have a manager who almost guarantees top 4. Ugh. They probably see him a walking dollar signA cold shudder just went down my spine when reading about this. Partial sale's always been hovering in the background and has never gone away. That's what's going to happen, isn't it.
Feck Elon Musk. No way to verify that account.
Who owns the club? The Glazers. When you borrow money and use your property as equity, this is basically what the Glazers did to buy the club. The outstanding debt is their Mortgage. If someone buys the club for 6 billion, they aint taking on the Glazers mortgage. It will be factored into the sale. Not an add on.
That is what you hope but is by no means certain. This is a hell of a lot more complicated than a mortgage. The Glazers own shares in the club, the club owns the debt, the purchaser is buying their shares. It would require the Glazers to be willing to give a discount on the valuation of their shares to cover the cost of the debt, what have they ever done to make you believe they would be willing to do that? They will want to make as much as they possibly can and are said to be demanding a price well in excess of the current valuation of the clubs shares to sell, the debt is not their problem and they do not give a stuff what happens to the club once they are doing leeching off it.
It's interesting to discuss. I was just wondering why we needed to be careful. I guess it was just an odd turn of phrase for the situation. Needing to be careful suggests we can make a poor decision, but obviously can't do that as fans.
Its pretty incredible that even with the end of the Glazer's it still has to be the toxic positivity vs the toxic negativity lot, much like the rest of this club this fanbase has been proper ruined
Dont know if this has already been mentioned.
https://www.cityam.com/barcelona-refinancers-preparing-minority-bid-for-manchester-united/
https://www.cityam.com/barcelona-refinancers-preparing-minority-bid-for-manchester-united/
My wacky theory - Glazers want a US consortium, they will still keep minority interest in aftermath.
I think they want this because the US consortium will push again for an ESL, whilst ME ownership wouldn't.
I think they want this because the US consortium will push again for an ESL, whilst ME ownership wouldn't.
posted and debunked.
They’ve denied it.
This is somewhat material news, but a bit undersold for once by the media:
“[Ineos] are not, however, the first to register their interest with the New York merchant bank overseeing the sale, with groups from America, the Middle East and Asia already formally entering the process to undertake due diligence.“
A due diligence in a bigger auction like this will include a so called Vendor Due Diligence. In a VDD, the seller (vendor) commission external independent advisors to conduct a review of a company and highlight potential issues etc. The “normal” way is of course that it is the buyers’ lawyers and financial advisor who gets access to and reviews a target. The advantage with a VDD is of course if you have a bigger number of potential buyers, you can’t have them all interview management and requesting every possible type of document. It’s just too time consuming for the management of target company, it becomes a circus.
The buyer still conducts its own DD, of course. But on the basis of the report put together in the VDD and publicly available information. I would guess that more or less 90% of all relevant information for a potential buyer of Man Utd is available online. You might want to look at some sponsor deals, perhaps some minutes from Premier League owners meeting. Perhaps something relating to the stadium. What are the biggest issues? It’s probably (a) the EU initiative to ban geo blocking of broadcasting and (b) the UK initiative to govern sports. That is available. The financial reporting is state of the art. So that process don’t have to be that long.
“[Ineos] are not, however, the first to register their interest with the New York merchant bank overseeing the sale, with groups from America, the Middle East and Asia already formally entering the process to undertake due diligence.“
A due diligence in a bigger auction like this will include a so called Vendor Due Diligence. In a VDD, the seller (vendor) commission external independent advisors to conduct a review of a company and highlight potential issues etc. The “normal” way is of course that it is the buyers’ lawyers and financial advisor who gets access to and reviews a target. The advantage with a VDD is of course if you have a bigger number of potential buyers, you can’t have them all interview management and requesting every possible type of document. It’s just too time consuming for the management of target company, it becomes a circus.
The buyer still conducts its own DD, of course. But on the basis of the report put together in the VDD and publicly available information. I would guess that more or less 90% of all relevant information for a potential buyer of Man Utd is available online. You might want to look at some sponsor deals, perhaps some minutes from Premier League owners meeting. Perhaps something relating to the stadium. What are the biggest issues? It’s probably (a) the EU initiative to ban geo blocking of broadcasting and (b) the UK initiative to govern sports. That is available. The financial reporting is state of the art. So that process don’t have to be that long.
Last edited:
This is my take as well. I'm extremely cynical about this situation. I wouldn't trust the parasites to bring me a glass of water. They will seek to find a way to stay latched on in some capacity. They will try to get a partial investment first, failing that they will sell to someone of their ilk. At the very least leave an open door for the future. If they sell to a ME country for example, it's game over for them. One way or another, I'm absolutely certain it's going to be US based ownership.
Is that from the article which was posted above?
And I guess Ratcliffe let Dickinson know that he had entered the race, rather than Dickenson approaching Ratcliffe.
Yeah, sorry, thanks it’s from the Times:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1674070402
The club is only partially listed and those shares have essentially no voting rights, all that matters are the Glazer’s shares which have all the voting rights. I’d imagine the debt will have to be cleared, secured elsewhere or reduced for future borrowing which will be required for infrastructure.
Glazers won’t be clearing it from their end so potential buyers will have to factor that in alongside upgrading or rebuilding stadium etc etc.
It would be game over for them but they would make billions of pounds, like still 6 billion reasons to walk away pleased as pie with a full sale.
This article namechecks Bezos (Amazon) as one of the Americans who could potentially bid
Someone rich enough to even blow away the Middle East bids
Bezos would deliver the title
Haven't Amazon already distanced themselves previously, or am I recalling incorrectly?
I don't think they have commented, but it was reported last month that Amazon would be very unlikely to make a move as they are mindful of Sky's failed bid to buy United in 1999 (blocked by the Monopolies Commission) and would not want to do anything that could potentially jeopardise future Premier League streaming rights.
Would Bezos bring the purchaser rather than Amazon still fall foul?
It could mean Bezos himself is just buying us, and not him and Amazon. Bezos has stepped back a bit from Amazon much like Bill Gates did with Microsoft over 20 years ago.
I would find it pretty left field if Bezos did want to buy us. He seems more interested in monetising space tourism.
Ah right, thanks for the clarification. I could see Amazon being interested, purely for the exposure alone.
It is difficult for anyone (including Bezos) to predict, but it therefore seems unlikely that Amazon (or Bezos) would want to take the risk.
Jordon thinks it will be very very very surprising that the club will be sold in 4 months time.
Seems as though Jeff Bezos does/did want to buy the Commanders...
https://www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2023/01...-running-to-buy-commanders-report-josh-harris
https://www.si.com/.amp/nfl/2023/01...-running-to-buy-commanders-report-josh-harris
Well if the mastermind behind the pocket phone shop says that, who are we to argue
He's in a better position to know the process than almost 99.99% of the people here.
- Status