How Manchester United came a cropper on 'The Rock' (A Christmas Boardroom Tale)

[Tincanalley]

It's been a long time since Rock and Roll ... I have often wondered what really happened with the racehorse Rock of Gibraltar and Sir Alex. How did this connect to the takeover, the departure of Edwards, etc? After reading as much as I could, I scripted a lengthy (3-4000 word) piece which tries to untangle the whole history, effectively tracing Edwards, ROG, to Woodward. It is a story which is key, in my opinion, to where we are now with the club. I am going to post this account in a series of (7) short posts here. I will link each factual element to published reports of the time. I welcome correction, additions, opinions. It is written from the perspective of a fan, who saw George Best on TV, who adored Cantona, etc. It will, for me, at least, lay out the amazing story of how we got from Matt Busby, manager, to Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, interim manager.

Much of this info comes from news reports of the time; from the Irish Independent, The Irish Times, and The Guardian. Later bits will cite Forbes, The Bleacher Report, etc.

 

[Tincanalley]

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (1)

The formative dramatic events that led to today’s sorry situation at MUFC has its seeds in a dispute between Alex Ferguson and Martin Edwards. Edwards was the son of Louis, United’s chairman of 15 years, the ‘local butcher made good’ who had overseen the Busby era. Louis Edwards had been at the receiving end of criticism for the treatment of players and especially the families of the Munich Disaster in 1958.

Martin was elected to the Manchester United board in March 1970 and became chairman in somewhat difficult circumstances. In January 1980, Granada TV screened a World in Action investigation into Louis's operations that triggered inquiries by Greater Manchester police and Inland Revenue. A month after the programme was screened, Edwards Senior died of a heart attack.

Martin became Chairman on 22 March 1980 following his father’s sudden passing. When the Football Association voted to allow football clubs to have one paid director, in January 1982, Martin Edwards became Chief Executive, on an annual salary of £30,000.

In 1983, Edwards took an initiative to bring new people to the board; Michael Edelson replaced Sir Matt Busby as club president, and in June 1984 club solicitor Maurice Watkins and much respected ex-player Bobby Charlton were appointed.

November 1986: United were floundering in the bottom half of the First Division and recently dumped from the Football League Cup. The four-man board decided a change of manager was needed. They decided unanimously to check if Alex Ferguson, manager of Aberdeen, was available. Fatefully, Ferguson agreed, and Ron Atkinson was dismissed.

Edwards rejected a £10m bid for the club by Robert Maxwell in 1984. In 1989, he tried to sell the club to the property developer Michael Knighton for £20m, but the sale collapsed after Knighton was given access to the club's books. What he saw was evidently not a pretty sight; the club was in serious debt. Knighton was still given a seat on the board.

After the failed sale, Edwards and his fellow directors decided to float the club company on the stock market. It was 1991. The flotation raised significant funds, the majority for the existing shareholders such as Edwards. The decision guaranteed Martin Edwards a 50.5% controlling stake in United while pocketing more than £5m.

The club, in this phase, received various takeover proposals by Rupert Murdoch's BskyB, with Edwards reportedly agreeing to sell his stake for multiple millions of pounds. In the 1998–99 season Edwards accepted a £623 million bid from BskyB, but the takeover was blocked by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission. Over time, gradual sell-offs of shares, worth tens of millions, led to the point in October 1999 when Edwards, his wife and trusts in which he had an interest, sold another 6.5% of the club to City institutions for £40.9m (today: £52m). According to Matt Scott in the Guardian, United would not be burdened with the debt they have today (or indeed the corporate owners) had Edwards not floated the company on the Stock Exchange.

 

[BeforeKeanetherewasRobson]

Next?

 

[Tincanalley]

Next?

I'll do part 3 tomorrow. Much of the following is based on this. (EDIT: its the long version of the dance video, yes )


How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (2)

Martin Edwards’ relationship with Ferguson had deteriorated. Edwards, as chairman, was involved deeply in every aspect of the club, in signings and in decision-making. After one dispute, Edwards remarked that he didn’t want another Matt Busby situation on their hands when Ferguson retired. The manager was so upset about this that he announced his upcoming retirement in 2001 (Alex was later persuaded to change his mind).

Why was Alex Ferguson so upset? In the football of the twentieth century, at Manchester United, like every other club, no matter how far you rose as a manager, you were still ‘staff’. A yawning gulf stood between ‘staff’ and those upstairs, the directors. Sir Matt Busby, the legendary manager of the Sixties, had felt he had a promise of a directorship for his family, and was gutted when this did not materialise.

Something changed on December 12, 1999; on that day, Ferguson, son of a shipbuilding labourer from Govan, Glasgow, was getting ready for a speech in the poshest of the posh. He was about to stand in for his friend John Magnier, an Irish horse baron, to address the annual dinner at the Gimcrack Stakes at York. But he never made that speech. Unimpressed by a mere football manager as a stand-in, the organisers of the Gimcrack Dinner turned Fergie down. It was not alone a stinging put-down for Ferguson, it was also an embarrassment for Magnier. Magnier resolved that Ferguson would make the Gimcrack speech, one day, whether the toffs of York wanted it or not.

Or at least, that was how the story was spun.

Magnier, at the time, was in a financial partnership with the legendary Limerick gambler JP McManus and Dermot Desmond, a billionaire financier, who held a major stake in Glasgow Celtic. These were characters on a mythic scale in Ireland. In 2001 Stephen Moss and Alan Ruddock rang the alarm bells for anyone daring to cross them. Magnier and McManus fancied having a stake in another - even bigger - British club with a big following in Ireland; Manchester United.

Magnier’s courtship of Sir Alex, and eventual granting of an interest in a valuable racehorse in 2001, Moss and Ruddock pointed out, seemed not incompatible with the group's wider plans; 'a sharp-eyed business deal that anticipates further moves towards globalisation in the sport'.

In 2001 (with or without Ferguson’s knowledge; this is uncertain) Magnier and McManus formed a company, Cubic Expression, to purchase a £30m stake in Manchester United FC. It seemed to be right up Ferguson’s street; his friends were assuming positions of power within the club. Alan Ruddock wrote: 'Ferguson has been at war with his board and particularly his chairman, Martin Edwards, over the past few years. Entering the final straight of his career, he appears to have won the major battles by getting enough money to buy big-name players as well as getting a £5m pay package for himself last year.'

In 2001, a horse called Rock of Gibraltar won the Railway Stakes, at the Curragh. In early August of that year Magnier lifted the phone to tell Alex Ferguson about the horse and his plans for it.

This was the phone call that would later become of vital importance to both men. The exact details of that conversation are still a mystery, and much disputed. But on August 17, 2001 Ferguson was registered with Horse Racing Ireland as a 50 per cent owner of Rock of Gibraltar. The other half was vested in Mrs John Magnier. Susan Magnier was the daughter of the famous Irish horse trainer, the late Vincent O'Brien.

On that same day in 2001, Rock of Gibraltar was declared for the prestigious Gimcrack Stakes, to be run five days later on August 22. From that day on, the horse ran in the red and white colours of Alex Ferguson. It would mark Ferguson's return to the site of his earlier snub, by the toffs of York.

 

[Tincanalley]

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (3)

Having progressively disposed of his equity in the club, Martin Edwards resigned as Chief Executive of Manchester United in 2000, appointing Peter Kenyon as his successor. But Edwards still held the post of chairman; he broke the national transfer record twice in 2001 by signing Van Nistelrooy and Veron. But in November 2002, Edwards was forced to resign as chairman after allegations of sexual misconduct. Despite this, he continued to represent the club at FA and UEFA meetings. It was the end of an era; the last vestige – in family terms – of the legacy of the Butcher’s Boy Made Good.

In 2002, Alex Ferguson told The Observer: "My first real memory of (the racehorse) Rock of Gibraltar was at the Gimcrack Stakes at York in August. I had bought him a couple of months earlier and he had already won once." But Ferguson hadn't actually paid any money for the horse, and was never charged training fees. He was listed, as stated earlier, in Horse Racing Ireland as 'joint owner' with Susan Magnier. So what did ‘bought’ in this sense, actually mean?

‘It would later turn out that, as far as John Magnier was concerned, it was just a formality to give Ferguson a thrill that many wealthy and powerful people crave: having a top-class horse win prestigious races in their name and pick up a share of the lucrative prize money involved. But there can be little doubt that Ferguson believed that he was the true owner of a half-share of a blueblood of the turf’.

In reality, the Turf Club “registration” with Horse Racing Ireland had no legal standing. According to Martin Hannan in his book, Rock of Gibraltar, in Weatherbys' General Stud Book, the bible of horse-breeding in England and Ireland, the owner of Rock of Gibraltar was listed as ‘Rock of Gibraltar syndicate’ and not Alex Ferguson or, indeed, Susan Magnier.

The Manchester United boss was unable to attend the racetrack at York to see Rock of Gibraltar win the Gimcrack Stakes on August 22 2001; United had an away game at Blackburn Rovers that day. But he must have taken immense delight in making the speech at the poshest-of-the-posh Gimcrack Dinner later that year, not as a stand-in, but as winning owner. He talked proudly about his Clydesdale origins. He made disparaging reference to selfishness, factionalism and cliquishness - tendencies that could be 'death to a football team', but just as destructive for racing. And he expressed his ‘deepest gratitude’ to his friends Sue and John Magnier. ‘I have been given the privilege of teaming up with them, and standing up before you this evening. Nobody could be blessed with better partners on the Turf.’

Rock of Gibraltar had developed a habit of winning. In 2002, as a three-year-old, the stallion won seven Group One races in succession, including the Grand Criterium at Longchamp and The Dewhurst Stakes at Newmarket. ‘You always have to be surprised when something like this happens,’ said John Magnier in a rare RTÉ interview. ‘He is a tough, durable, versatile horse. No doubt about that. And Alex is lucky.’ Then, on October 26, 2002, the Rock of Gibraltar lost an important race and was promptly retired to stud at Coolmore.

 

[Tincanalley]

Ah, feck it. On the happy day of the return of OGS maybe no-one may be interested, but I think I'll continue the story to the end.

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (4)

Ferguson now saw himself as half-owner of the most talked-about thoroughbred in the world. It’s easy to imagine his hubris and excitement. An article in The Daily Telegraph in November 2002 speculated that the stud value of Rock of Gibraltar could be as high as £50m, and that a half-share would mean a colossal windfall profit for Ferguson, enough to dwarf the millions he was getting from managing the most valuable club in world football.

He was even in the process of setting up a trust to deal with the mega amounts of cash about to come his way. But John Magnier saw things in an entirely different light. When Ferguson and Magnier eventually sat down (in the winter of 2002) to thrash out the financial details of the horse's future, the stark differences between their reading of the situation became apparent.

Magnier was clear – the ownership was a nominal honour that would entitle Alex Ferguson to 50% of Rock of Gibraltar's earnings of £1,164,804 (and high-class replicas of his trophies) or one stud nomination a year in Ireland and one in Australia, where the horse would ‘stand’ in the winter. The probable value of these was more than €150,000 a year for an expected 10 years.

What a body blow, what a bone chilling shock – the idea that his ownership was no more than nominal – had been delivered to Ferguson. His conviction that his was real ownership was, at that point, unshakeable. In his eyes, 50% was 50%. By the summer of 2003, the stallion master of Coolmore and the manager of Manchester United were haggling over money in an unseemly public feud, and the friendship was decidedly over.

Magnier, intensely discreet, the king of racehorse breeding in Ireland, didn’t love ruckus, didn’t love the media spotlight. It was an irritation. As a compromise, Liam Collins reported, he offered Ferguson four stud nominations per year – two in Ireland and a further two in Australia. It was a tempting offer. It was also a watershed moment in the wider drama. But Ferguson eventually decided to hold out, asking for between 15-20% of the stud value of Rock of Gibraltar.

Magnier and Co., having bought Edward's share, now owned 13% of the club. Denis Desmond had also purchased shares. Very close to the time of the first disagreement between Alex Ferguson and Magnier, in March 2003, an American businessman, Malcolm Glazer, was reported to have bought a £9m (2.9%) slice of Manchester United FC.

On October 7, 2003, it was disclosed that the Magnier and McManus firm Cubic Expression had spent a further £62m acquiring another 10% stake in Manchester United held by BSkyB. They now owned 23% of the club. The move progressed their company agenda of garnering some of the action from British football, and had the added benefit (from their perspective) of increasing the pressure on Alex Ferguson.

By late 2003, the row over the ownership of Rock of Gibraltar reached the Irish courts. Ferguson began formal legal proceedings in the High Court in Dublin against John Magnier and Coolmore Ltd.

The statement of claim lodged on behalf of Ferguson in the Dublin courts asserted that Ferguson's name had contributed to the massive stud fees now earned by the horse; that he, Ferguson, was a half-owner of Rock of Gibraltar and therefore entitled to half its earnings. This was estimated as up to €50-€70m over the following 10 years. Magnier was incensed. He believed that his word, so important in his business, was being questioned. Furthermore his private affairs were now open as never before to public scrutiny.

On November 17, 2003 Magnier issued a statement on behalf of Coolmore Stud that the proceedings advanced by Ferguson would be keenly contested.

 

[Tincanalley]

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (5)

By creeping degrees, Magnier and McManus had come to own a significant share of Ferguson’s beloved club. And the battle over the ownership of Rock of Gibraltar still raged. Famously, a series of 99 questions were put directly by Cubic Expression to the board of Manchester United. The questions were clearly directed at Ferguson's stewardship of the club. The horsey men, it seemed, knew Ferguson’s vulnerabilities, and were happy to exploit them (Some of this material would later be aired in a May 2004 BBC documentary which led to Sir Alex refusing for many months to talk to the national broadcaster).

What, they asked, was the relationship between the manager of United and his son, Jason Ferguson, who ran the sporting agency Elite Management and who was involved in receiving commission from United on the transfer of players, notably Jaap Stam? They also questioned the Manchester United board and its solicitors on topics relating to payments to players, the financial organisation of transfer deals and payments to Ferguson himself (In May 2004 Jason, as a football agent, was banned from acting for Manchester United). In reply, other journalists asked 99 searching questions of the Cubic Expression owners.

Things started to get very dirty indeed. A private individual and four friends of his bought United shares and attended the 2003 AGM and asked very similar questions to the 99 posed by Magnier (they denied links with Magnier). As the dispute escalated, Ferguson, at the time the most famous football manager in the world was put on a rolling yearly contract rather than signing the normal five-year deal that would have been expected. This was a result of the influence of the new shareholders. By February 2004, Cubic Expression owned 28.39% of Manchester United and there were strong indications that Magnier and McManus might take over the club.

As Ferguson came under more and more pressure, he turned to a group of Irish advisors. A team led by Dublin barrister Colm Allen SC, began a secret fightback. The ‘Rathgar Project’ advised Ferguson on the legal, financial and PR aspects of the battle over the Rock of Gibraltar. Among those who contributed advice was Tony Blair's former adviser, Alastair Campbell. According to Liam Collins, one of those involved said it was like a "covert operation".

Although this must have been – to put it mildly – an uncomfortable time for Ferguson, his United team won the title again in 2003. These were the glory days, days which seem forever frozen in a gilded haze. It was the terrifying United of Van Nistlerooy, Keane, Beckham and Giggs. Ferguson was tough. He could still engineer glory on the playing field, but there must surely have been sleepless nights, as well.

 

[SteveJ]

Thanks very much for the story.

 

[Tincanalley]

Thanks very much for the story.

YW, @SteveJ - halfway there.

 

[Adzzz]

This really is fascinating, I've always been interested in this affair, didn't Roy Keane get involved?

Dodgy world the Horses...

 

[Moriarty]

This really is fascinating, I've always been interested in this affair, didn't Roy Keane get involved?

Dodgy world the Horses...

Keane is on record as saying he warned Fergie not to go into battle against Coolmore as it was a fight he did not think Fergie could win. After he left United, Keane made some pretty scathing remarks about the affair.

 

[Tincanalley]

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (6)

It was 2004 and the atmosphere around the Rock of Gibraltar affair was toxic. At one point a group of Manchester United fans called United4Action decided to bring the conflict to Magnier and McManus's own turf, with a series of protests planned to culminate at a rally in favour of Ferguson at Cheltenham Festival Gold Cup Day.

Perhaps advised by close friends (maybe @Moriarty has a point here), and alarmed by the escalation, Ferguson, in February 2004, decided to pull the plug. He came out on the steps of Old Trafford and read out a statement that effectively ended the Rock of Gibraltar affair. ‘The reputation of Manchester United is paramount. The private dispute I have is just that; and I don't want to exacerbate the whole thing. Cheltenham is such a great festival and I don't want it marred in any way. There is a lot of concern about what could happen and I would ask supporters to refrain from any form of protest. I am strongly opposed to any violent, unlawful or disruptive behaviour which may reflect badly on the club and its supporters in general,’ he said.

Ferguson’s reputation was now under maximum scrutiny, his job was at considerable risk and his family was finding the pressure intolerable. He even phoned representatives of various fan groups to inform them of his views and presumably cool the atmosphere.

On the Cubic Expression side of the fence, Magnier and McManus wanted things to calm down too. They urgently wanted to get this ‘over and done with’, one of the participants admitted. The Irish duo had become the subject of unseemly and unflattering chants at Old Trafford. And it was affecting their lives; they were finding it increasingly difficult to get on with their normal business around horse-racing, due to the insatiable appetite of the British and Irish press for stories about the feud.

The collapse of trust between the sides in the battle, especially between Magnier and Ferguson, added to the bad publicity may have led to Magnier, who had earlier committed to United for the long haul, wanting out. The reported plan for Sir Alex and Mr Magnier to join forces with other Irish tycoons to become a guiding force at Old Trafford (McManus was a fanatical United fan), and presumably help them navigate the treacherous waters of international finance, was in shreds.

Although Ferguson’s statement at Old Trafford got a lukewarm welcome from fan groups, it was the flag, the sign that all sides were on the look-out for. Dermot Desmond approached Ferguson with a deal – the basic settlement was that Alex Ferguson would be paid a lump sum of £2.5m. He would renounce all claims to Rock of Gibraltar, he would discontinue the action instituted in the Dublin courts and he would remain silent forever on the Rock of Gibraltar affair. ‘It is understood,’ the Telegraph reported, ‘that Ferguson has staged a significant climbdown on his original plan to sue for £110 million from Magnier – an amount detailed in the claim he posted at Dublin's High Court almost a year ago’.

Though he was reported to have settled for £2.5m, the settlement was a humiliation, no matter how you looked at it. After all his excitement, the amount on offer was far less than Magnier’s first ‘compromise’ offer, and only a miniscule fraction (2.7%), of what he pursued (legal costs would further erode that amount). But Ferguson’s options had narrowed; he signed on the dotted line.

But Cubic Expression now had one more deal to pull off. To sell off – at maximum profit – their holding in Manchester United.

 

[12bes]

If you don't know now you will never, Fergie got far too involved and out of his depth with people a lot more connected to him.

His background, and loyaltys went out the window and he fecked up massively. He then went on to deny it, got into bed with the enemy and used his expertise to get out of it which he undoubtedly did.... But it was his fault and issue that started the whole mess we are in. In a round about way.

 

[Tincanalley]

Desolé, readers. Turns out there are eight segments, not seven. One more after this.

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (7)

Malcolm Glazer, the 76-year-old Florida-based owner of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers American football team, had been quietly stalking United all through the Rock of Gibraltar drama. On May 11, 2005, John Magnier and JP McManus took a conference call from the American. The following morning an estimated £230m dropped into the bank accounts of Cubic Expression, netting Magnier and McManus an estimated profit of £80m on their Manchester United adventure. Their friend Dermot Desmond made about £12m when he threw in his stake a couple of days later (Desmond retains his interest in Glasgow Celtic today).

One of the most vocal objectors to the Glazer family takeover of Manchester United in 2005 was a star striker in the current team; one Ole Gunnar Solskjaer. In the boardroom, chairman Sir Roy Gardner emphatically opposed the move. Chief Executive David Gill, likewise, was deeply unhappy; he described the Glazer plan as aggressive and unworkable. As they moved to take control, Gill attended a meeting with the prospective new owners in Florida. Soon afterwards, however, reports emerged that David Gill had done an about-turn. He had agreed to support the takeover and stay on indefinitely, his reservations apparently put to rest.

David Gill was a key figure of the Ferguson era. Born and raised in Reading, Gill, a chartered accountant, worked in a number of senior financial roles in various companies, and joined the Manchester United board as finance director in 1997. He became chief executive in 2003, succeeding Peter Kenyon. Though Gill's professional experience was as an accountant, he was also highly regarded as a football man, with a genuine interest and deep involvement in the on-the-field affairs of the club.

The relationship of Gill with Ferguson was arguably a major contribution to the success of those years; yet the old barrier of ‘staff’ and ‘board’ that hurt Matt Busby still abided. ‘I would speak to Alex very regularly, once a day, twice a day some days, and would meet him every Friday morning very early … at the end of the day he was the most important employee at the club.’

According to Robert O’Connor writing in The Bleacher Report, while the story of the origins of the Glazer takeover is murky, a challenge to the club's ownership model back in 2003 had already laid much of the groundwork. It began with discussions between (what was then called) Shareholders United and the United board to form a trust that could buy shares in the club that would be held in perpetuity. The hope was that this might create a dam in the ownership model that would have made a full takeover, be it domestically or from overseas, impossible. It was a kind of safety net against the consequences of Edward’s 1991 stock market flotation. There was enthusiasm for the idea from within the boardroom, but the deal never came to fruition.

Duncan Drasdo, chief executive of (what is now called) Manchester United Supporters' Trust (MUST), said this was largely due to resistance from Shareholders United, which feared the new arrangement might be used by the board to further its own interests. This was a fatal error, another keystone in the bridge to the present setup. Because of the failure of the Shareholders United deal, when Malcolm Glazer and his family made their move in 2005, the club was a passive and helpless sitting duck. If the Glazers succeeded in commanding a majority stake in the club on the open stock market, minority shareholders like Gardner would have little choice but to accept their offer.

Ed Woodward was the key player in this move, working as an accountant on behalf of accountancy firm JP Morgan for the Glazers’ Manchester United acquisition company, Red Football. A critical moment came when United's third-biggest shareholder, Scottish mining millionaire Harry Dobson was persuaded to sell his 6.45% stake in the club to Red Football. The cumulative consequences of these moves led to the situation that prevails today. Effectively (following O'Connor's analysis), Woodward has commanded almost total (working) control of Manchester United since 2005.

 

[Moriarty]

Parts of this read like Upstairs Downstairs, and I don't mean that in a derogatory fashion. There's an underlying whiff of class here all right.

 

[Adzzz]

Keane is on record as saying he warned Fergie not to go into battle against Coolmore as it was a fight he did not think Fergie could win. After he left United, Keane made some pretty scathing remarks about the affair.

Yeah, I couldn't remember it, thanks.

Parts of this read like Upstairs Downstairs, and I don't mean that in a derogatory fashion. There's an underlying whiff of class here all right.

You're right, this is quality stuff.

 

[Tincanalley]

How Manchester United came a cropper on the Rock (8)

‘By 2005 there wasn't any really coherent counter-offer (to the Glazer’s bid),’ Drasdo said. The Glazer pursuit through 2003 had been viewed as hostile by the United Board. After all, the Company had been debt-free for 13 years. And they had contemplated a plan to avoid this very circumstance.

‘We'd had various approaches from representatives of Qataris and so on, but nobody came forward with a plan that would have been anything other than another takeover by another group that would have excluded the supporters’, says Drazdo, quoted by Robert O'Connor. The boat of United's commercial independence had sailed. Interesting to think how things might have turned out differently, at so many turns in this story.

Despite the lack of a counter-bidder, the takeover that culminated in 2005 was complex and delicate, and needed refined financial expertise to finally clinch the deal. There was a time limit, and one extremely legal complex corporate minefield to navigate.

Woodward - seemingly all on his own - dashed to the rescue of the failing deal at the 11th hour. For ‘pulling (them) out of this hole’ the Glazers will be forever grateful. ‘Without this thought in place’, O’Connor wrote, ‘it is impossible to make sense of the last decade at Old Trafford’.

In May 2005, Gardner and his board were forced to recommend that minority United shareholders accept the Red Football offer. Over the following month, Gardner and his fellow 'anti-Glazer' shareholders resigned. At the same time, supporter-shareholders were forced to relinquish their part ownership of the club.

In the new dispensation, Malcolm Glazer’s six children were all invited to sit on the United board. Woodward, recruited from JP Morgan after he engineered the £500 million of debt that funded their takeover, and rescued the final deal, became (in business terms) the seventh child.

Now it was time for payback. In the years leading up to David Gill's departure (and his replacement by Woodward), a carefully choreographed process of change was engineered at Old Trafford, with Woodward effectively becoming the chief executive's shadow. Gill ran the football club, presiding over correspondence with the FA and the Premier League and conducting transfer business, while Woodward took care of Manchester United the business as executive vice-chairman.

In 2007, Woodward was given charge of the commercial and media operations of Manchester United. He was brilliant at nailing down lucrative sponsorship deals with companies around the world. He soon trebled the commercial revenue of the company. Woodward was appointed to the board of directors and named executive vice-chairman in 2012. After the retirement of CEO David Gill the following year, Woodward was promoted to CEO, the top operational role at Old Trafford. Woodward was succeeded by Richard Arnold as the club's commercial ‘Group’ management director.

As we know, Sir Alex Ferguson stayed on under the new regime up until his resignation in May 2013 (just a few months after the departure of Gill). When the Green and Gold protest (organised by MUST) began, Ferguson had backed the supporters’ right to protest as long as it didn’t affect the team, but he defended the owners as well. As success on the field continued, the protests faded away. Woodward, 'the seventh child' was now firmly in place.

To be fair to the owners, they are straight up about their intentions. To get a sense of the values of today’s board, listen to what they say. ‘Angel Di Maria saw a 12-times increase on Google searches on the day of his transfer from Real Madrid and Falcao saw a 10-times increase in searches compared with the day he signed from Atletico’. That was Ed Woodward’s message to investors, in November, 2014. Neither of these players would work out on the field of play under Louis Van Gaal, but in commercial terms they fitted the bill to a T. According to Richard Arnold, United see themselves as a ‘mobile-first media organisation, focused on consumable chunks of content fans can engage with on the go’.

Eventually the Glazer approach (if they continue in charge) may clear the debt they conferred on the Football Club. I don't know. It has already been reduced considerably; anyway that question lies beyond the scope of my 'story'.

The exercise of doing this ‘story’ is that I am now convinced that #WoodwardOut is futile, while the current owners are in place. I have restricted this story to – as best I can – a direct narrative, to sort out in my own head, the sequence of events and turning points.

I have not included the unfolding background story, the change in the culture of football over the quarter century, how other corporate entities, sponsorship and TV changed the character of UK, European and world football. All these are debates for another day. But under Woodward, we have seen the departure (in various circumstances) of Ferguson, Moyes, Van Gaal, Mourinho. Who will be next? And where do we go from here? Who could not feel a pinch of joy on seeing Sojskjaer return to the fold? His smiling face and optimistic outlook will surely buoy the club for a while, regardless of results. But the longer-term outworking of the Rock of Gibraltar affair is far more difficult to predict.

 

[Adzzz]

Take a bow @Tincanalley

 

[narnar]

Thank you, great read

 

[Class of 63]

It's always the quiet ones.....

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

Good this, I am a fan of a horse racing and remember Rock Of Gibraltar clearly, he was a phenomenal horse, but I'd never quite understood the full story of what transpired afterwards and why, so thanks for pulling it all together.

Interestingly SAF owned a few more race horses after this one, but non anything like on Rock Of Gibraltar's level, if only the 'Rock' hadn't turned out to be elite class, (which he wasn't probably supposed to be), then things could have been very different.

 

[el magico]

Good read, thank you for the effort.

 

[Tincanalley]

Thanks for the kind words, guys. It was a fascinating kind of journey of discovery for myself. @Moriarty highlighted rightly how class politics played a subtle part; both in the world of the Edwards' and of SAF. Also gave me awareness of how MUST (Manchester United Supporters' Trust) are still going strong, with 200,000 members. The Green and Gold thing may be over, but they still negotiate on behalf of Match Going supporters, to help improve facilities, and get better ticket prices. I made a few searches in here, and it's like they don't exist! Thinking about joining. Have a great Christmas everyone, and good luck to OGS for the next months.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Really good read but I don't see the link between Rock of Gibraltar and the Glazer takeover.

Cubic Expression, for whatever reason, became a large stakeholder in the PLC. Any large stakeholder would have accepted that offer from Malcom Glazer. The piece makes it seem like they had a plan to sell due to the Rock Affair but the £80 million profit suggests they weren't particularly desperate to sell. I'm not seeing enough evidence to support the hypothesis beyond:

But Cubic Expression now had one more deal to pull off. To sell off – at maximum profit – their holding in Manchester United.

As the reader, I have to infer from the story that SAF had convinced friends of his from the horse world to buy a stake in his employer to increase his power and influence. Then, a souring of their relationship occured over confusion surrounding Rock of Gibraltar's ownership that led seemingly savvy investors to sell a large stake in the best football club in the world at that time? This seems suspect considering that Magnier won so comprehensively. United were valuable, made money and had the potential to earn a lot more. The Glazer's recognized this and went all out to acquire it. They are really more of a super variable that occurred out of nowhere and were always a risk when Edwards floated the club in the stock exchange and the global economy expanded.

 

[Tincanalley]

Really good read but I don't see the link between Rock of Gibraltar and the Glazer takeover.

Cubic Expression, for whatever reason, became a large stakeholder in the PLC. Any large stakeholder would have accepted that offer from Malcom Glazer. The piece makes it seem like they had a plan to sell due to the Rock Affair but the £80 million profit suggests they weren't particularly desperate to sell. I'm not seeing enough evidence to support the hypothesis beyond:

As the reader, I have to infer from the story that SAF had convinced friends of his from the horse world to buy a stake in his employer to increase his power and influence. Then, a souring of their relationship occured over confusion surrounding Rock of Gibraltar's ownership that led seemingly savvy investors to sell a large stake in the best football club in the world at that time? This seems suspect considering that Magnier won so comprehensively. United were valuable, made money and had the potential to earn a lot more. The Glazer's recognized this and went all out to acquire it. They are really more of a super variable that occurred out of nowhere and were always a risk when Edwards floated the club in the stock exchange and the global economy expanded.

I agree that Edwards’ decision is the big one. But you could hardly argue that the Cubic Expression thing came out of nowhere! Far from it. Read the link to the Alan Ruddock piece. I think you could then argue that the ROG struggle bloodied the water, weakened the board (brought in members with agendas etc), and attracted other predators.

Not saying something like this would not have happened, without the ROG affair. But not perhaps in the way it did.

 

[Green_Red]

@Tincanalley this is a great article. Are you a professional writer? I think you have a great topic worthy of a book tbh.

 

[Tincanalley]

@Tincanalley this is a great article. Are you a professional writer? I think you have a great topic worthy of a book tbh.

Cheers, mate. I am not in the field of sports. Just now, I am in the process of trying to get my hands on Martin Hannon's almost-out-of-print 'Rock of Gibraltar'. But no, I have no ambitions to go further, other than to try and clear up the story for myself. As @Dwazza Gunnar Solskjær points out, there is more to be cleared up, lots of ambiguities. Even as I was doing my small bit of research, more questions cropped up. I have a feeling that someday maybe, a more complete story will be known.

 

[Moriarty]

I agree that Edwards’ decision is the big one. But you could hardly argue that the Cubic Expression thing came out of nowhere! Far from it. Read the link to the Alan Ruccock piece. I think you could then argue that the ROG struggle bloodied the water, weakened the board (brought in members with agendas etc), and attracted other predators.

Not saying something like this would not have happened, without the ROG affair. But not perhaps in the way it did.

The Ruddock piece is interesting and has the impress of truth about it. Fergie has never hidden the fact that he wanted control. Sidelining Martin Edwards would have been a big step to achieving that and Fergie's position would have been unassailable as long as Cubic held shares. Not much was said about Murdoch's (BSkyB) interest in the club and, for once, he seems a peripheral figure.

In any event, Edwards, considerably richer, was on the outside looking in by the time the Glazers moved in. He had a good old moan about the debt a few years later speculating that the full extent of their stewardship on't be known until they sell the club: “The crunch time will come when they exit. Will they saddle the club with the debt or just sell the club on for a profit because that’s all they are interested in? How will they leave the club? Time will tell.” This question, of course, remains unanswered.

For me, Martin Edwards was the man who set the ball rolling on this. Floating the club opened the doors wide to allow sharks like the Glazers to leverage ownership. Maurice Watkins, a very astute lawyer, and David "debt is the road to ruin" Gill were both in a position to anticipate such a move, yet did nothing. Gill took the Glazer shilling then, when Fergie left, slunk off with his money. Watkins left in 2012.

For me, the Rock affair was significant in that it could, and should, have been resolved amicably without the threat of litigation. The sum at stake was not a meagre one so why didn't such savvy businessmen reduce the agreement with Fergie to a writing? Such a fundamental requirement and yet it wasn't done. Whatever was discussed between Magnier and Fergie on the phone has never been revealed, but what is certain is that Fergie believed he had "bought" ownership and, as far as I know, Magnier never contradicted that; at least not until it all went tits-up.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I agree that Edwards’ decision is the big one. But you could hardly argue that the Cubic Expression thing came out of nowhere! Far from it. Read the link to the Alan Ruccock piece. I think you could then argue that the ROG struggle bloodied the water, weakened the board (brought in members with agendas etc), and attracted other predators.

Not saying something like this would not have happened, without the ROG affair. But not perhaps in the way it did.

Fair point. It's possible that the board level turmoil attracted outside investors seeking a way in. I think I've read the Ruddock piece before. Just to clarify, I don't think Cubic Expression got involved in the club out of the blue. They definitely had intentions as far as making money goes. Glazer certainly came out of nowhere, though.

 

[Tincanalley]

The Ruddock piece is interesting and has the impress of truth about it. Fergie has never hidden the fact that he wanted control. Sidelining Martin Edwards would have been a big step to achieving that and Fergie's position would have been unassailable as long as Cubic held shares. Not much was said about Murdoch's (BSkyB) interest in the club and, for once, he seems a peripheral figure.

In any event, Edwards, considerably richer, was on the outside looking in by the time the Glazers moved in. He had a good old moan about the debt a few years later speculating that the full extent of their stewardship on't be known until they sell the club: “The crunch time will come when they exit. Will they saddle the club with the debt or just sell the club on for a profit because that’s all they are interested in? How will they leave the club? Time will tell.” This question, of course, remains unanswered.

For me, Martin Edwards was the man who set the ball rolling on this. Floating the club opened the doors wide to allow sharks like the Glazers to leverage ownership. Maurice Watkins, a very astute lawyer, and David "debt is the road to ruin" Gill were both in a position to anticipate such a move, yet did nothing. Gill took the Glazer shilling then, when Fergie left, slunk off with his money. Watkins left in 2012.

For me, the Rock affair was significant in that it could, and should, have been resolved amicably without the threat of litigation. The sum at stake was not a meagre one so why didn't such savvy businessmen reduce the agreement with Fergie to a writing? Such a fundamental requirement and yet it wasn't done. Whatever was discussed between Magnier and Fergie on the phone has never been revealed, but what is certain is that Fergie believed he had "bought" ownership and, as far as I know, Magnier never contradicted that; at least not until it all went tits-up.

Spot on comment.

I suppose there is another side to all this worthy of exploration, even if it is somewhat spectulative. Denis Desmond invested in Glasgow Celtic around the turn of the century (starting in 1994), just prior to Magnier and McManus (and - independently - himself) getting involved with Manchester United. But Desmond is still a shareholder - even though he's rarely seen there - of Glasgow Celtic FC. He sees himself as a 'protector' of the club, and has been part of the effort bring them to the English league. Desmond is wealthy enough to resist financial temptation and is on record regarding his emotional connection to the club.

Furthermore, Desmond sold his share in Manchester United at the same time as his fellow Irishmen, in 2005. While this might have been purely for financial reasons, his record with Celtic would suggest otherwise. So, the question I would ask is, what if SAF had gracefully accepted Magnier's first offer on the stud fees of Rock of Gibraltar?

Would Cubic Expression, Desmond and the supporter's group still be the owners (and protectors) of MUFC?

I would dearly love to know if the drama over the racehorse had more effect than the ruination of the friendship between Ferguson and the Magniers and their supporters. It had the Stretford End singing rude songs about Magnier.

Though he was very much a money man, the ROG affair very possibly gave Magnier a bad taste in his mouth about the club, its supporters, and, critically, corporate supporters of Ferguson who had played dirty in the battle over the racehorse. Why would John Magnier want anything further to do with Ferguson, or the ship he sailed in?

I also wonder if the reported settlement had more to it than meets the eye. Did Ferguson really get any money? And did Magnier agree (or privately decide) that he would not jeopardise the role of Ferguson in the club, by leaving the stage himself?

 

[Tincanalley]

Fair point. It's possible that the board level turmoil attracted outside investors seeking a way in. I think I've read the Ruddock piece before. Just to clarify, I don't think Cubic Expression got involved in the club out of the blue. They definitely had intentions as far as making money goes. Glazer certainly came out of nowhere, though.

Yes, see my other post above. I think the collapse of the friendship between Ferguson and Magnier may have had the effect of leaving MUFC without a corporate 'deflector shield'.

 

[Tincanalley]

Fair point. It's possible that the board level turmoil attracted outside investors seeking a way in. I think I've read the Ruddock piece before. Just to clarify, I don't think Cubic Expression got involved in the club out of the blue. They definitely had intentions as far as making money goes. Glazer certainly came out of nowhere, though.

I strongly suspect that the change of direction (and departure) by Magnier was caused by the SAF fall-out. I think his original vision was long-term and serious. He and McManus said they were long-term investors - in general it seems Magnier was very anxious to be seen as a man of his word. His last comment on the affair "Let's talk about horses now", speaks volumes.

He was ready for the exit. The Glazer family just happened to be the group with the wherewithal to take advantage.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Yes, see my other post above. I think the collapse of the friendship between Ferguson and Magnier may have had the effect of leaving MUFC without a corporate 'deflector shield'.

I don't think so. Cubic owned less than 30% and the rules at the time meant that anyone owning more than 30% would be required to launch a formal takeover bid. Not much of a shield if 70 percent of shares were available elsewhere.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

I strongly suspect that the change of direction (and departure) by Magnier was caused by the SAF fall-out. I think his original vision was long-term and serious. He and McManus said they were long-term investors - in general it seems Magnier was very anxious to be seen as a man of his word. His last comment on the affair "Let's talk about horses now", speaks volumes.

He was ready for the exit. The Glazer family just happened to be the group with the wherewithal to take advantage.

That's entirely possible. Reading up on it again, it seems the Glazers were lurking with intent for some time and would have taken over even without Cubic Expression selling to them so early.

 

[Sparky_Hughes]

@Tincanalley excellent work mate, I really enjoyed reading that.

 

[Tincanalley]

I don't think so. Cubic owned less than 30% and the rules at the time meant that anyone owning more than 30% would be required to launch a formal takeover bid. Not much of a shield if 70 percent of shares were available elsewhere.

Cubic owned less than thirty percent. But add in the other shareholders, including Desmond, and 'the Magnier faction' had a majority. That's why Dobson's shares, etc, to get to a certain threshold were critical for the Glazers. If Magnier and SAF were best buddies, Cubic Ltd and pals could still be here. In an alternative universe SAF would finally have moved upstairs; he would be on the board!

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Cubic owned less than thirty percent. But add in the other shareholders, including Desmond, and 'the Magnier faction' had a majority. That's why Dobson's shares, etc, to get to a certain threshold were critical for the Glazers. If Magnier and SAF were best buddies, Cubic Ltd and pals could still be here. In an alternative universe SAF would finally have moved upstairs; he would be on the board!

I think, if anything, Cubic's attempts to reduce or remove Fergie's influence were the catalyst for the Glazer takeover. Maybe exploring part 5 further would be a good addition?

 

[Tincanalley]

I think, if anything, Cubic's attempts to reduce or remove Fergie's influence were the catalyst for the Glazer takeover. Maybe exploring part 5 further would be a good addition?

Agreed. Actually I think this debate has cleared it up a bit better in my head. It would be a fecking great stage play, a tragi-comedy in two acts!!

 

[Tincanalley]

I think, if anything, Cubic's attempts to reduce or remove Fergie's influence were the catalyst for the Glazer takeover. Maybe exploring part 5 further would be a good addition?

Roy Keane (and the guy from the Irish Times with the warning in 2001) was right.
1. Ferguson was misreading the situation and entering a battle he would not ever have won.
2. Magnier and company were the very people who he should never have gone to war with. They were - arguably - the erstwhile saviours of the fecking club.

 

[Dr. Dwayne]

Roy Keane (and the guy from the Irish Times with the warning in 2001) was right.
1. Ferguson was misreading the situation and entering a battle he would not ever have won.
2. Magnier and company were the very people who he should never have gone to war with. They were - arguably - the erstwhile saviours of the fecking club.

Aye, there's a good lesson in here about never mixing money and friendships.