Club Sale | It’s done!

[croadyman]

We will be bought by the middle East for sure. There's not enough in it for the yanks at the prices being quoted.

I know I'm a hypocrite but right now it's the only way we are able to compete with City/Newcastle on a level playing field

 

[Sandikan]

We bought Eric Cantona for 1m in 1992 (confirmed in documentary with Edwards). 7 years later that didn’t even buy you Andy Impey. In fact Wim Jonk or Impey cost you more than double.
Within 10 years of that transfer Inter were paying Coventry City almost 20 times as much for Robbie Keane.

Cantona isn't a great example of your point in general though.
He was a knockdown price to get rid of a player they couldn't handle.

Even the British record was 5.5m in 92, and the world record already 10m, moving to 13m the same year.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

But no one is getting United off the Glazers for a bargain deal, that's simply not happening. They are paying a premium.

meh, people said that when FSG bought Liverpool for 300m.

It might be a premium, although more likely we’ll be looking back in 15 years calling it a bargain.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Cantona isn't a great example of your point in general though.
He was a knockdown price to get rid of a player they couldn't handle.

Even the British record was 5.5m in 92, and the world record already 10m, moving to 13m the same year.

Shearer went for €4.5m then, what did that get you 10 years later?

We got Veron for 10 times that, and RVN for 28.5m.

The point stands, with each decade there’s a strong case for “hyper inflation” in the transfer market.

 

[Rozay]

@Messier1994 some top quality stuff in this thread.

 

[Doctor Thrax]

Re. the question if we are destined to be bought by a US consortium:

1. I think it’s the most likely option. This buyer would 100% be a placeholder for another buyer, over a period of like 5-15 years.

There is zero percent risk that someone buys us to live on the cash flow generated by the club, like the Glazers. We are way to expensive for that. The dividend would be completely irrelevant at a 6bn price, and if investments aren’t made they get less for the club when they sell it than when they bought it. They would be buying Manchester United and be selling (an asset worth as much as) West Ham United.

If you buy this club as a hedge fund, you do it to acquire an asset on decline due to lack of available funds for necessary investments, to invest it in, and then in the future make a profit when you sell the club. Simple as that.

You can get this club and turnt it into one of the top 4-5 clubs in the World in 10 years with brand new top facilities for a cost of app. 9bn. 6bn to buy the club, 1.5bn for New Old Trafford and Carrington and 150m per year extra for transfer funds over 10 years.

2. The fact that there is little strategic value in owning Manchester United today, does not mean that this will be the case forever. We have not reached the end of the road as to how the media landscape will look until the end of time. There have been tremendous changes the last 30-40 years in this industry. There will be more changes in the future. Sport rights have built tremendously powerful media corporations. As it is now, the broadcasting rights are more valuable than ever — but the individual clubs have little power over how they are distributed. This is not written in stone and have been challenged — constantly — before. With the super league dead, who knows, someone might want to dent the PL's joint selling arrangement.

Ultimately, we are heading toward universal broadcasting models. How would that impact the strategic value of a club?

So are Apple, Tencent, Amazon, Xiamoi, Alibaba, Rakuten, Netflix, Samsung, Google or Disney buying us? Would of course be tremendously surprising. But at the same time, we are worth 6bn with another 3bn needed in investments to maintain the club's value. That is not a lot of money. You cannot buy any of the top 600 listed companies in the us for 6bn.

3. One of the points I have is that 1. and 2. are connected. If you buy us now, make the necessary investments, you should get your money back and a decent return in 10 years. The value of assets like our club just goes up. In addition, owning Manchester United brings status. Open doors. That is always important. But the big value lies in that for such a tremendously big brand this club has -- its not valued at all. A big computer game title like Fortnite is worth like 5x as much as our club.

I don't for a second believe that someone -- today -- can come in and turn this club into an immensely profitable operation. But a hedge fund buyer is definitely looking 10 / 15 / 20 years and coming to the conclusion that our brand should at least not be worth "less" when they are looking to sell the club, and there is potential to add a lot more value.

4. The process will not be designed to find a buyer in the form of a US consortium. There have been talks about how the Glazer's would prefer a US buyer and so forth, I don't for a second believe that. The Saudi's bid for Chelsea. Why wouldn't they bid for us? You have the Chinese. I wouldn't at all rule out that a rich person in India or Spain buys us, that a Saudi investment fund buys us, that a Chinese individual or company buys us. The Chinese owns 13 percent of City. It is not hard for a state fund to buy us -- just because we are a public company.

This does not mean that we won't be buy by a US investor, which seem most likely.

I have done further research on the topic and discovered some really relevant facts about Manchester United and the football business as a whole.

As one in-depth analysis at seekingalpha.com pointed out:

"In FY22 (June), employee benefit expenses made up 66% of total revenue, a primary reason why operating margin was a negative-15% even though revenue had largely recovered to pre-Covid levels. For FY23, management guided revenue of £590 million (+1.2% YoY) and adj. EBITDA of £105 million at the midpoint (+29% YoY). However, if we strip out all the financial shenanigans such as amortization, operating margin is expected to be another negative 10% for the year, as management will continue to invest in new players."

Src: https://seekingalpha.com/article/45...ted-more-like-chinese-art-marrying-french-rap

So as a summary one can say that the high salaries for players literally threaten the business model of football clubs as profitable corporations.

Following this information, I looked for sources that could give an impression about some concrete numbers and I found the following:

https://www.spotrac.com/epl/rankings/

2022-2023 Annual Salary Rankings in the EPL

	PLAYER	TEAM	ANNUAL SALARY
1	Cristiano Ronaldo FORWARD	MUFC	£26,800,000
2	Kevin De Bruyne MIDFIELDER	MCFC	£20,800,000
3	Erling Haaland FORWARD	MCFC	£19,500,000
	David De Gea GOALKEEPER	MUFC	£19,500,000
5	Mohamed Salah FORWARD	LFC	£18,200,000
	Jadon Sancho FORWARD	MUFC	£18,200,000
7	Raphael Varane DEFENDER	MUFC	£17,680,000
8	Raheem Sterling MIDFIELDER	CFC	£16,900,000
9	Jack Grealish MIDFIELDER	MCFC	£15,600,000
	Carlos Casimiro MIDFIELDER	MUFC	£15,600,000

Of course depending on how reliable this source is (I can't judge it tbh), this would mean that Man Utd has 5 of the 10 highest paid players under contract while sporting success does not even closely reflect those immense spendings.

I think that's the core problem that any investor would have to face.
And I expect that there will be more players that will feel "betrayed" when this issue gets fixed by the management.

Besides investments into stadium and club infrastructure there must also be a bigger focus on improving the youth academy.
Scouting and developing homegrown talents is considered one of the few possible determining factors for a football club to grow intrinsic value without expanding spendings too much and achieve sporting and more importantly economic success.

 

[Jippy]

So as a summary one can say that the high salaries for players literally threaten the business model of football clubs as profitable corporations.

That's been the case for years on end. Add in spiralling transfer fees and a scary dependence on TV money continually increasing and you have a business model built on sand.

 

[clarkydaz]

Well that would be a sickener after all the excitement this week of a possible sale

The first reports glazers were looking for investment was quite a while ago, and indicated US. You would assume middle east would pay more money, but the process is likely further down the line than we think with their US network

 

[pascell]

You think Arsenal will be there at the seasons end?

If they invest properly in January, yes.

City have also looked shaky in games and unconvincing.

They will if it is somebody who intends doing something about it. The Glazers have done as little as was needed to fool people.

The Glazers haven't but if the proposed buyers want to increase the club value, the infrastructure is where they'll make the most profit.

That also means settling for fourth every year and being knocked out of UCL early (if we can even guarantee a place there annually) while being skint like Wenger era, and the field is now even tougher with doped up Newcastle.

Not necessarily, Liverpool have kept up with City the previous 4-5 seasons, aren't oil state backed and have improved their infrastructure by extending stands at Anfield.

It comes down to having the right manager and buying the right profile of players. The next owners will improve the infrastructure because as I said above, that is where they'll increase the value of the club as a whole the most.

 

[Adnan]

i thought that was a fairly pointless interview, he said nothing of worth. Of course it will be overpriced if people are willing to pay it

He did say a few things of worth and one of them being that a potential new owner needs to engage with the fans or will have a miserable existence.

 

[Messier1994]

@Messier1994 some top quality stuff in this thread.

Thanks, I am most obliged!

 

[HookedOnAPhelan]

I have done further research on the topic and discovered some really relevant facts about Manchester United and the football business as a whole.

As one in-depth analysis at seekingalpha.com pointed out:

"In FY22 (June), employee benefit expenses made up 66% of total revenue, a primary reason why operating margin was a negative-15% even though revenue had largely recovered to pre-Covid levels. For FY23, management guided revenue of £590 million (+1.2% YoY) and adj. EBITDA of £105 million at the midpoint (+29% YoY). However, if we strip out all the financial shenanigans such as amortization, operating margin is expected to be another negative 10% for the year, as management will continue to invest in new players."

Src: https://seekingalpha.com/article/45...ted-more-like-chinese-art-marrying-french-rap

So as a summary one can say that the high salaries for players literally threaten the business model of football clubs as profitable corporations.

Following this information, I looked for sources that could give an impression about some concrete numbers and I found the following:

https://www.spotrac.com/epl/rankings/

2022-2023 Annual Salary Rankings in the EPL

	PLAYER	TEAM	ANNUAL SALARY
1	Cristiano Ronaldo FORWARD	MUFC	£26,800,000
2	Kevin De Bruyne MIDFIELDER	MCFC	£20,800,000
3	Erling Haaland FORWARD	MCFC	£19,500,000
	David De Gea GOALKEEPER	MUFC	£19,500,000
5	Mohamed Salah FORWARD	LFC	£18,200,000
	Jadon Sancho FORWARD	MUFC	£18,200,000
7	Raphael Varane DEFENDER	MUFC	£17,680,000
8	Raheem Sterling MIDFIELDER	CFC	£16,900,000
9	Jack Grealish MIDFIELDER	MCFC	£15,600,000
	Carlos Casimiro MIDFIELDER	MUFC	£15,600,000

Of course depending on how reliable this source is (I can't judge it tbh), this would mean that Man Utd has 5 of the 10 highest paid players under contract while sporting success does not even closely reflect those immense spendings.

I think that's the core problem that any investor would have to face.
And I expect that there will be more players that will feel "betrayed" when this issue gets fixed by the management.

Besides investments into stadium and club infrastructure there must also be a bigger focus on improving the youth academy.
Scouting and developing homegrown talents is considered one of the few possible determining factors for a football club to grow intrinsic value without expanding spendings too much and achieve sporting and more importantly economic success.

1. Ronaldo is no longer under contract.
2. De Gea's contract expires in the summer. If he stays after that, his wages will in all likelihood be significantly reduced.
3. Despite our extravagant wage spending these last few years, we still have a healthy wage/turnover ratio.
4. Your source is shit.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

1. Ronaldo is no longer under contract.
2. De Gea's contract expires in the summer. If he stays after that, his wages will in all likelihood be significantly reduced.
3. Despite our extravagant wage spending these last few years, we still have a healthy wage/turnover ratio.

Also, City’s player wages

 

[croadyman]

The first reports glazers were looking for investment was quite a while ago, and indicated US. You would assume middle east would pay more money, but the process is likely further down the line than we think with their US network

Hopefully that lines breaks down due to an eye watering approach from the middle east

 

[dinostar77]

Hopefully that lines breaks down due to an eye watering approach from the middle east

The way interest rates are going in USA, any US consortium trying to borrow the capital for a $5billion + offer will have eye watering repayments. Hence i think it will be a bid from middle east.

Cant be a coincidence that glazers put Utd up for sale just after FSG put liverpool up for sale.

 

[croadyman]

The way interest rates are going in USA, any US consortium trying to borrow the capital for a $5billion + offer will have eye watering repayments. Hence i think it will be a bid from middle east.

Cant be a coincidence that glazers put Utd up for sale just after FSG put liverpool up for sale.

I want a middle east bid now,yes I will openly admit it makes me a hypocrite for blasting City in the past. However it has now reached the stage if you can't beat em join em.

 

[Plant0x84]

I want a middle east bid now,yes I will openly admit it makes me a hypocrite for blasting City in the past. However it has now reached the stage if you can't beat em join em.

Never go full City

 

[sparx99]

How does Miele remotely access my vacuum to make it suck less? How does Vitamix access my blender remotely to make it blend less? That's just a lazy argument that you can't back up for a second because you want to protect the company you love or make yourself feel better for continuing to buy their products after they openly mugged you off.

I don’t particularly care but what apple did with their products made a lot of sense. It was doing it secretly that was the problem. They support their hardware a lot longer than android manufacturers do and to keep a decent battery life with newer software comprises have to be made in performance. They give you the choice now which is maybe how it should have been.

If you would rather not continue receiving software updates etc then you don’t need to install them.

 

[croadyman]

Never go full City

I didn't want us to but then Newcastle got middle east money and fear the scousers could well too

 

[sparx99]

I agree it probably won't happen but we all know these companies are not all run on a common sense approach at all times. It's not like paying £6bn for United is going to register as a big shambles on Apple's bottom line.

Disney invested $30bn in Disney + content last year alone supposedly. These companies have tonnes of money.

 

[sparx99]

We are not in a position to rule it out.

I see the pros from Apple’s POV — but there are also big cons.

If Apple bought Liverpool, how many of us would go “I am never buying an iPhone again. Why would I want to sponsor Liverpool?” That is the downside.

The upside is of course in Apple’s ambition on the broadcasting rights. If you get exclusive rights to all United — and expand that with more documentaries, more behind the scene things, more PCs, pre-season games — how many fans would get Apples TV rights? Same with Amazon, Netflix and so forth. The value isn’t massive, but it’s there. We are said to have a global fan base of 40m people.

The back ground is of course that of today’s youths — nobody is watching linear TV anymore. There is no draw that gets you viewership, except the biggest TV series, some reality shows etc. Besides live sport.

Lastly, won’t the PL stop an owner with broadcasting interests?
This has become a bit of an urban legend, which isn’t odd since it went down a long time ago.

The thing that we know is that at a time Manchester United was tremendously strong in British football and Sky/Murdoch was tremendously strong on the cable TV side — one minister said that they would ‘very completely and extremely searchingly’ examine any transaction in which Murdoch bought United.

At this point, we aren’t by far the most powerful club and the buyer would be extremely far from having a monopoly on the monopolistic cable TV market.

Would anybody stop buying an iPhone? I didn’t stop buying dove body wash or whatever cos Liverpool are sponsored by them. It’s a ridiculous take.

 

[Adnan]

Just to remind ourselves how bad the current owners are, and I very much doubt we could be bought by anyone worse if we're purely looking at it from a football perspective.

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Mr. Robot]

It’s going to be an oil state who purchases us I think, and I’m not happy about it but what can I do?

The game has changed so much and the ‘big boys’ are funded by human right’s abusing oil rich countries these days.

Utd and Liverpool will both follow suit. It will be an ultra competitive league and we might get a shiny new stadium. But they are the only positives I have.

The 16 City fans that they’ve got will probably support Utd again as well.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

Bring on the Kuwaitis, Dubai lot or whoever. It will be far better than under the parasites and football opened Pandora's box with Middle Eastern money long ago. There's no going back now. We either join in or fall behind.

 

[LordSpud]

Bring on the Kuwaitis, Dubai lot or whoever. It will be far better than under the parasites and football opened Pandora's box with Middle Eastern money long ago. There's no going back now. We either join in or fall behind.

Completely agree. The annoying this it might still take a few years to catch up to City's standard but the sooner we can start the better.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

Completely agree. The annoying this it might still take a few years to catch up to City's standard but the sooner we can start the better.

We aren't catching City in the next 2-3 years regardless. It would take something incredibly unlikely for that to happen.

But if we can get new owners, new stadium / current stadium development in the works and back ETH in the market....we can't really ask for more than that tbh.

We need to pick up a few of the minor trophies though whilst we build to keep the spirits up though.

 

[Sviken]

It greatly saddens me that club football has become a dick measuring contest between actual countries instead of an actual sport. It's a crime that the FA ever allowed this shit to infest the game.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

It greatly saddens me that club football has become a dick measuring contest between actual countries instead of an actual sport. It's a crime that the FA ever allowed this shit to infest the game.

You're not wrong but they did so what can you do? This is where the future lies clearly and like you I don't like it either but if we don't do it we will become an also ran club permanently.

Qatar and Abu Dhabi should never have been allowed to get involved in football because they both clearly didn't do it for the football or for profit either as there are far quicker and easier ways to make money than professional football.

 

[Doctor Thrax]

1. Ronaldo is no longer under contract.
2. De Gea's contract expires in the summer. If he stays after that, his wages will in all likelihood be significantly reduced.
3. Despite our extravagant wage spending these last few years, we still have a healthy wage/turnover ratio.

I'd wish you were right about the healthiness of Man Utd's business prospects.
However, the reality is that the financials are not indicating a particularly sustainable business.

I'll give you some concrete numbers from the Man Utd Income statement:

(Currency in GBP. All numbers in thousands)

2019
Total Revenue: 627,122
Salaries and Wages: 332,356

2020
Total Revenue: 509,041
Salaries and Wages: 284,029

2021
Total Revenue: 494,117
Salaries and Wages: 322,600

2022
Total Revenue: 583,201
Salaries and Wages: 384,141

Src: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/Man Utd/financials/

Just to clarify the meaning of the aforementioned numbers:

Total Revenue = The total amount of money that Manchester United received from all of its business operations.
Salaries and Wages = The amount of money that Manchester United spent only to pay their employees.

Of course the Salaries and Wages aren't the only expenses that a company like Man Utd has to bear.
Especially Interest Expenses (£ 25.5 Million in 2022) and Other G and A (General and Administrative) Expenses appear to be worth mentioning here.

Total Expenses (Currency in GBP. All numbers in thousands) for the years mentioned above:

2019 = 582,289
2020 = 519,233
2021 = 537,550
2022 = 667,778

On the basis of these numbers: What are your concrete arguments to speak of a "healthy wage/turnover ratio"?

4. Your source is shit.

As much as I respect your well-founded opinion, I have to confess that I find the source more convincing than your argumentation.

Also, City’s player wages

What is wrong with it?

 

[soapythecat]

Anyone else get a feeling the Glazers will still be in charge this time next year?
I know they acknowledge that they are looking for investment, and I feel that is what they will get but it won’t be the buyout we are hoping for.

 

[Messier1994]

All it takes is for different tv deals or a super league to happen in 5 years time and they’ll make back buckets of money

It is a good point that you never know what the future will hold.

I heard something I found pretty fascinating a while back that supposedly has had a big impact in especially the media market.

So not that long ago, people read books, cartoons and watched TV, and played some games. I.e you on average consumed stories during a big portion of your free time. Now with the massive amount of time people spend on either playing computer games, watching YouTube, reality shows — ie not consuming stories — it have naturally resulted in that today younger consumer just aren’t nearly as good at understanding a story, figuring out a plot. I think it’s at the Unviersity of Berkeley that extensive testing have been done on large sample groups for the movie industry from like the 50s to catch trends like this, and the result is clear. If people are told the same story today compared to in the 50s/70s/90s, a much bigger portion are confused and don’t get the plot.

As a direct result, sequels, remakes, spin-offs have become a lot more popular. It’s hard to tell a story from start to finish in 2 hours. You get a head start with the viewer knowing the background before it starts, it’s much easier. Etc etc etc. Its the same with games too.

Consequently — “brands”, old and new, are being horded by content creator. I recently saw how a creator of board games was sold for the same amount Chelsea went for, just under 3bn. The big big value was deemed to lie in all the “brands” owned by the board game creator. Ticket to ride, Settlers of Catan and a bunch of others. And not only for computer games, but also to be used in movies and series (Ticket to ride coming to Netflix soon?) and so forth.

This is a change that surely nobody foresaw. Now it’s in full flights. There is a massive massive increase of sequels and remakes on a list of the top 100 movies at the ticket offices compared to 30 years ago. The value of brands like Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Marvel universe etc have increased astronomically.

I am 41 y/o, and of my younger colleagues that are perhaps 23-27, nobody watch linear TV ever. They stream everything they watch. We all know that physical newspapers have died. 90% of the subscribers are like 60+. All this happened in 30 years, how will the land lie in 30 years? Nobody knows. But it will surely be something else then what we have right now. In this context, a super strong brand always have value more than you can calculate on today. To some extent, it’s like having a lottery ticket.

 

[Skåre Willoch]

I want a middle east bid now,yes I will openly admit it makes me a hypocrite for blasting City in the past. However it has now reached the stage if you can't beat em join em.

This is just sad.

Edit: This goes for you guys as well.

Bring on the Kuwaitis, Dubai lot or whoever. It will be far better than under the parasites and football opened Pandora's box with Middle Eastern money long ago. There's no going back now. We either join in or fall behind.

Completely agree. The annoying this it might still take a few years to catch up to City's standard but the sooner we can start the better.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

On the basis of these numbers: What are your concrete arguments to speak of a "healthy wage/turnover ratio"?

It’s widely agreed within top flight football that a 50%-60% wage to turnover ratio is extremely healthy, 55% might just be the gold standard.

Appears you certainly need to do some more research into this one: https://www.footballbettingsites.org.uk/blog/what-is-wages-to-turnover-ratio-in-football/

Not sure where you’re getting your figures from, appears they may include the likes of Pogba? but all the sources I can find current have our playing staff wage bill including Ronaldo at $238m. With Ronaldo gone that now lands close to $205m.
Extremely healthy.

What is wrong with it?

We know they are absolute bollocks. We know City pay double wages due to the footy leaks stuff.

 

[Mr. Robot]

Anyone else get a feeling the Glazers will still be in charge this time next year?
I know they acknowledge that they are looking for investment, and I feel that is what they will get but it won’t be the buyout we are hoping for.

I think we will have new owners by Q1 2023, Glazers are panicking about the global recession which is predicted plus it makes sense to why they’re throwing money around on Casemiro etc as they want to leave the new owners “a good squad” of players as it makes the package more attractive maybe?

They want cash. They won’t want to drag this out for a few years. And according to a few journalists/ITKs; we’ve been ‘For Sale’ since August.

Of course, we are all predicting stuff without knowing any of the hard facts.

We might have a buyer right now and it’s all been agreed. Who knows what’s going down in Florida?

 

[Infra-red]

Anyone else get a feeling the Glazers will still be in charge this time next year?
I know they acknowledge that they are looking for investment, and I feel that is what they will get but it won’t be the buyout we are hoping for.

I think that there's a chance that some of them will remain, but there has been speculation for a while that at least a couple of the siblings are looking for a way out. A partial sale with Joel and Avi remaining in overall control of the club, could be a possibility. The investment would likely be used to fund significant refurbishment works on Old Trafford and Carrington.

A full sale is possible too, of course, but by no means guaranteed and would probably take six months or so.

 

[Chief123]

This is just sad.

Edit: This goes for you guys as well.

Add me too. I’ll take some Middle Eastern money too!

Unfortunately I genuinely believe it’s going to be an American based sourced owner. Most likely a consortium. I have a feeling the glazers have already got into some advanced discussions with potential parties.

 

[Plant0x84]

This is just sad.

Edit: This goes for you guys as well.

Glad someone said it. Years of mocking City and their oil financed sport washing cash doped victories, or laughing at PSG and their hopelessness in the CL but the moment the cash is potentially on our table many have sold out quicker than they can say ‘bye glazer scum!’

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Glad someone said it. Years of mocking City and their oil financed sport washing cash doped victories, or laughing at PSG and their hopelessness in the CL but the moment the cash is potentially on our table many have sold out quicker than they can say ‘bye glazer scum!’

Sadly we’ll have a tonne of fans dressed as Arabs dancing outside OT if they buy the club, lapping up the new away kit in their state colours.

I didn’t think United fans would stoop to that, but as you can see in here, so many are absolutely desperate for it they are jumping from thread to thread slagging off any other viable option (INEOS, US investors etc), as they try to work backwards from a position of desperately wanting state ownership to buy them Mbappe & co.

 

[Skåre Willoch]

Some serious evidence in this thread that sports washing works like a charm.

 

[Plant0x84]

Some serious evidence in this thread that sports washing works like a charm.

Absolutely. Tragic really….