Yep. I think 4bn is the sort of number the Glazers are looking for.
Have we been underestimating United's worth? Chelsea sold for £2.5BN (plus £1.75BN pledge) makes United worth how much?
- Thread starter Fortitude
- Start date
Depends on the nature of the buyers. A lot of clubs are used as massive marketing vehicles for either political or bigger commercial endeavours. As a pure investment focused on the operations, I think there are easier ways to make money that are less capital intensive.
Plus the debt?
Title updated.
The stock price went on a rampage a few weeks ago when news about chelsea's sale starting circulating.
The market then did the math and saw how much chelsea sold for, and united's stock tanked.
It's not a club that makes enough to justify any higher of a valuation.
The market then did the math and saw how much chelsea sold for, and united's stock tanked.
It's not a club that makes enough to justify any higher of a valuation.
Our market cap is about $2.08b as of today for class A shares. Class B shares, owned by Glazers, are entitled to higher dividends + 10 times the voting power. Glazers control 69% of the shares in the club. Our finances are significantly better than Chelsea's as well. All of this would put us in the ball park of $4.5b for equity + debt.
Depending on the debt.
the advantage built up over the Fergie years has pretty much evaporated
they're close off the pitch and light-years ahead on it
Before the death of the Saudi journalist, weren't the Saudi crown prince proposinng a buy for 5b? Given the mess the world is in, that number probably hasn't increased too much.
Glazers have destroyed the club. Whatever the selling price it would cost another billion to fix the damage and then there is the debt to clear
With outdated facilities, a worn down stadium, no major stars in the squad, no UCL and a tonne of debt? Wonder what could be the value....
5b in dollars or euros because there's no way its pounds. If rumours where true the Saudis where prepared to bid between £3.5b - £4b to buy the Glazers out. Can't see the club being worth anymore when so many things need attention at the club.
Under the Soviet Union Putin was part of a committee designed primarily to ensure Jews were rooted outflow of important positions, including Universities.
The idea that they are “friends” is a media creation. Nobody cares if you go after the 3rd board member of some bank no one’s ever heard of. Roman became the “Right hand of Putin we vow to make an example of” because they needed someone people had actually heard of for the gesture to have the impact they wanted. That simple really.
Putin used Roman when he needed him, like with the World Cup. Aside from that it’s more likely he tried to have him killed, like he did Romans business partner.
Roman also knew he would eventually have to be made an example for optics reasons alone. It’s why, after the invasion, he consolidated his business shares in banks that were easy to seize and freeze; in hopes, like with Chelsea, the businesses themselves wouldn’t be hurt. Businesses like Evraz do a ton of good in this world, they do not make Russian military armor, and I still expect the UK to get sued for what were broad and reckless attacks on a global company under false pretenses.
Remember: the man has children who are Russian citizens, children who are UK citizens, AND children who are US citizens. He had invested his money heavily in global cooperation projects that attempted to drag Russia into the modern economic world. Philosophically he is closer to anAnti-Putin than someone like Nvalny, who is essentially just a different brand of “pure” Leninist.
Aww maybe I'm too jaded and should try to be more positive
Whoever buys the club would have the debt on top of purchase price
£2.5bn with £1.6bn liability owed to someone else? If government policy changes, Abramovich's (trust) might get it back yet.
The big financial difference between Utd and Chelsea is rather obvious of course. Whilst Abramovich gave Chelsea that £1.6bn since 2004, the Glazers took hundreds of millions? out of Utd over the same period. Utd are actually profitable, even if on the pitch is a shambles these days.
The big financial difference between Utd and Chelsea is rather obvious of course. Whilst Abramovich gave Chelsea that £1.6bn since 2004, the Glazers took hundreds of millions? out of Utd over the same period. Utd are actually profitable, even if on the pitch is a shambles these days.
Comparing United’s current market value (based on the Forbes report) and the price at which Chelsea was bought isn’t a valid comparison imo. There will likely be a sizeable gap between United’s market valuation and how much it’ll get the Glazers to consider selling it too.
Does anyone really know What actually defines the largest proportion of a football clubs value, as it is very different to a 'normal' business? I.e. is it the value of the ground, training ground and other assets. Do player values have a large influence (in which case we are bleeding money)? Commercial contracts may play a part (in this we are doing well). Estimated size if fan base (in which case we have a huge huge advantage over plastic clubs). Or is it history long term (we are very strong) or short term (we're stuffed).
I guess it is a combination of all these factors, but wondering taking this into account we can say we are worth more than club X but less than club Y.
I still live in hope that a billionaire Man United fan with no political issues comes out of the shadows to rescue us from the evil Glazers.
I guess it is a combination of all these factors, but wondering taking this into account we can say we are worth more than club X but less than club Y.
I still live in hope that a billionaire Man United fan with no political issues comes out of the shadows to rescue us from the evil Glazers.
The purchase price would reflect the debt though, so the value is lower due to it
10 fags and a curly wurly. Can't say fairer than that.
Sadly, the oil folks, UAE and Qatar, aren't leaving football. As things stand, UK and France will be begging them for further investments and the flow of oil and gas. So, if we are to be sold, it would be either the Middle Easterns folks or the Americans. Either isn't really good. At this point, I don't think I have a preference.
I think Ten Hag is the last roll of the dice for the parasites. This one has to work out or they are done for. Us fans aren't going to keep buying into this BS reset button.
A mid table club that finished 2nd in the league just 12 months ago.I think we might be underestimating how much others are catching up to United or maybe even how much United are falling…. probably a bit of both.
I read a tweet that got me thinking after AC Milan won Serie A. Their fans literally stopped attending matches to protest crappy owners. Also Liverpool got rid of their fans with proper protests and revolt, I can’t remember if they stopped going to matches.
The problem with United is our size. If people stop going to matches there are always million who will see it as a chance and I can’t blame them.
What I can blame us for is 1) The social media protests (not live on the ground ones) are mostly just people crying about transfers. A good, apparently, transfer window shuts them up. It really has become cringe seeing #glazersOut simply because United didn’t spend £150m
I always hear talk of our huge debt in these sort of discussions, and it has ballooned massively under the Glazers tbf, but we're still on the lower end when compared to fellow big clubs nowadays tbf
Only the sugar daddy clubs backed by Nation states have the luxury of operating without any
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Only the sugar daddy clubs backed by Nation states have the luxury of operating without any
Other people have touched on this, but a wholesale sale of Chelsea is not comparable to the market cap of United. Market cap is share price x number of shares, but the share price is the marginal price, meaning what at least someone is willing to sell a share for. Other shareholders might value their shares differently, and as you start buying a lot of shares the price will go up.
Don't forget Leicester City.
The level of debt some of those clubs have is crazy. If its like Tottenham due to building a new stadium, then fine. But if it's just bad management then you have a problem. Italy's big clubs not looking too good to be honest.
I mean considering Spurs, Arsenals, Athletico's and a lot of reals debt is related to new stadiums/stadium upgrades i wonder where we will be if we do revamp the stadium.
But yeah we could be worse off.
Let's put it this way, if someone were to offer £2.5b to buy us, it's very unlikely the Glazers will sell.
Then again £2.5b might not be a fair price for Chelsea as well considering Abrahamovich's circumstances.
Then again £2.5b might not be a fair price for Chelsea as well considering Abrahamovich's circumstances.
I‘d be happy if United was worth 180 minutes of my time every week again. If I could watch us, enjoy watching us and go back to my life afterwards thinking that was worth watching.
Millions, billions, trillions, kazillions? I don‘t care. I just want to enjoy watching my club again.
Millions, billions, trillions, kazillions? I don‘t care. I just want to enjoy watching my club again.
I don't really understand how you value football clubs. It's obviously not how I'd value a regular asset - ie - return on equity, because most elite football clubs operate at a loss for many years, particularly Chelsea (whose only positive years came from their 'lucky' sales like Hazard etc). The typical valuation models just don't make any sense.
You could look purely at the increase in brand value as a proxy for 'how much could I get if I sold it', but that appears to just be: is there an oil-rich state looking to sportswash right now?
I don't believe CFC's land is worth 2.5bn, but maybe a chunk of it?
Anyway, I don't think anyone knows how much football clubs are 'worth' in the traditional economic sense, because there is so much variability in the few sales that happen and because the underlying cash flows are garbage relative to required capital.
You could look purely at the increase in brand value as a proxy for 'how much could I get if I sold it', but that appears to just be: is there an oil-rich state looking to sportswash right now?
I don't believe CFC's land is worth 2.5bn, but maybe a chunk of it?
Anyway, I don't think anyone knows how much football clubs are 'worth' in the traditional economic sense, because there is so much variability in the few sales that happen and because the underlying cash flows are garbage relative to required capital.
Who - and I ask this question with all due respect - gives a flying feck exactly what it would cost to buy Manchester United? I literally could not care less.
People having wet dreams about Glazers actually wanting to sell the club...