Manchester United reaches agreement for Sir Jim Ratcliffe to acquire 25% of the company

Status
Not open for further replies.

DJ_21

Evens winner of 'Odds or Evens 2022/2023'
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
12,190
Location
Manchester
jokes on you. i didn’t even support arsenal when arteta was shit.
That makes it jokes on you then.. started supporting them a couple weeks ago when you seen who was at the top of the prem… cute.
 

Drifter

American
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
68,364
It was my preferred choice to take over, but I never expected the Glazers to stay on
 

GwynnieJ

Full Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2012
Messages
1,278
Tone deaf again from the club just before Christmas. Here's another creepy old whopper to mismanage and leech off the club while keeping the probable inbreds in power. Mint!
 

rimaldo

All about the essence
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
40,974
Supports
arse
Tone deaf again from the club just before Christmas. Here's another creepy old whopper to mismanage and leech off the club while keeping the probable inbreds in power. Mint!
i have this crazy concept but maybe let’s give him a chance to be shit before we decide that he’s shit.
 

cpresc

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 5, 2016
Messages
530
I noticed how their quote mentioned giving support to the players, the board… but no specific reference to the manager
 

Big Ben Foster

Correctly predicted Portugal to win Euro 2016
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
12,805
Location
BR -> MI -> TX
Supports
Also support Vasco da Gama
Is it significant it saying up to 25%
Technicality - the class A shareholders need to accept his tender offer. They'd be stupid not to, as it's already at a significant premium over the market price of the shares.
 

rimaldo

All about the essence
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
40,974
Supports
arse
Club World Cup mean nothing to you? No, me neither! :D
they only beat two clubs that sound like things you overhear doctors saying at the hospital when you’re getting something removed from a cavity. urethra reds and influeminense. joke clubs.
 

Herschel Krustofsky

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
741
Location
Manchester
Supports
Balanced perspectives
I’ve had a lot of experience in acquisitions and limited partnerships. There is a lot of handwringing which really isn’t necessary. The reason the Glazers did it this way is that they didn’t reach their target valuation. Now, we don’t know if the 25% of the voting shares is coming from some of Glazer kids, or if all the Glazers will be diluted. When you realize that 69% of the corporation is owned by the Glazers, obtaining 25% of the company in Class B voting shares is essentially giving SJR full control. It means he’ll have roughly 38% of the voting shares, and he’ll be the largest shareholder.

Most major board level decisions require 66.7% of the shares/board to approve a resolution. When I say “major”, I mean new injection of capital, new shareholders, issuance of new shares, purchase of assets over, say, a certain amount, like 10m. As such, Sir Jim likely has veto power over any resolution raised by the Glazers, because they won’t have the 66.7% to outvote him. That’s why he has operational control. In addition, he’s added another 300m in capital injection commitments, which dilutes the Glazers further, by another 5-6%… meaning he’ll have 30%+ of total shares and 45% (roughly) of the voting shares.

On top of that, he’s committed to buy 25% of the class A non-voting shares @$33 a share. That’s a premium of $13 per share! As this happens, the value of the A shares will go up… and we know there is a vehicle to convert Glazers voting shares to non-voting shares which they can sell on the open market, or Sir Jim also has right of first refusal.

‘Look… the beginning of the end of the Glazers is here. This is a very savvy move by Sir Jim. TheCaf is saying the Glazers are “smart” and Sir Jim is “stupid”. No! This was the only way to get the Glazers out without meeting the undeserved sky high valuations they were demanding.

It’s happening people… the Glazers are on their way out. My guess is that Sir Jim will take full control, and own 51% of the voting shares with 18 month. The Glazers will be completed out, or just a minority shareholder, which is very common in These types of transactions.
Not sure the bedwetters and keyboard experts want to hear this to be honest.
 

DJ_21

Evens winner of 'Odds or Evens 2022/2023'
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
12,190
Location
Manchester
they only beat two clubs that sound like things you overhear doctors saying at the hospital when you’re getting something removed from a cavity. urethra reds and influeminense. joke clubs.
And dominating English football for the past 3 years…
 

whitbyviking

Full Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2022
Messages
2,359
Good start, hopefully it is the sign of impending positive progress.

Wouldn’t surprise me if some of the less interested Glazers start to sell off their shares individually over the next year or two.

Not sure what else people expected; the Glazers weren’t selling the full club and we only had two real bidders, one of whom is sickened off and wasn’t bidding what the Glazers allegedly wanted anyways.
 

Herschel Krustofsky

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 12, 2020
Messages
741
Location
Manchester
Supports
Balanced perspectives
I don’t understand why a seperate thread has been started when we’ve had a sale thread for a whole year!?

Maybe they should be merged?
There at least 3 x ‘sack EtH threads so we’re still a bit light on takeover hot takes .

We should have a poll and a ‘would you keep or burn Ineos’ thread too.
 

DJ_21

Evens winner of 'Odds or Evens 2022/2023'
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
12,190
Location
Manchester
I don’t understand why a seperate thread has been started when we’ve had a sale thread for a whole year!?

Maybe they should be merged?
It’s the same for everything on here. We have about 3/4 threads on the same thing just worded differently :lol:
 

Lay

Correctly predicted Italy to win Euro 2020
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
20,038
Location
England
:lol: the last few posts have been gold
 

DJ_21

Evens winner of 'Odds or Evens 2022/2023'
Joined
Aug 31, 2015
Messages
12,190
Location
Manchester
Let's hope this is the beginning of the end of the Glazers. Radcliffe has got to be better than the shite we've had in charge previously.
Can see one of his first jobs being sacking the manager if we lose to villa and then forest.
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2014
Messages
22,148
Location
Behind the right goal post as "Whiteside shoots!"
I’ve had a lot of experience in acquisitions and limited partnerships. There is a lot of handwringing which really isn’t necessary. The reason the Glazers did it this way is that they didn’t reach their target valuation. Now, we don’t know if the 25% of the voting shares is coming from some of Glazer kids, or if all the Glazers will be diluted. When you realize that 69% of the corporation is owned by the Glazers, obtaining 25% of the company in Class B voting shares is essentially giving SJR full control. It means he’ll have roughly 38% of the voting shares, and he’ll be the largest shareholder.

Most major board level decisions require 66.7% of the shares/board to approve a resolution. When I say “major”, I mean new injection of capital, new shareholders, issuance of new shares, purchase of assets over, say, a certain amount, like 10m. As such, Sir Jim likely has veto power over any resolution raised by the Glazers, because they won’t have the 66.7% to outvote him. That’s why he has operational control. In addition, he’s added another 300m in capital injection commitments, which dilutes the Glazers further, by another 5-6%… meaning he’ll have 30%+ of total shares and 45% (roughly) of the voting shares.

On top of that, he’s committed to buy 25% of the class A non-voting shares @$33 a share. That’s a premium of $13 per share! As this happens, the value of the A shares will go up… and we know there is a vehicle to convert Glazers voting shares to non-voting shares which they can sell on the open market, or Sir Jim also has right of first refusal.

‘Look… the beginning of the end of the Glazers is here. This is a very savvy move by Sir Jim. TheCaf is saying the Glazers are “smart” and Sir Jim is “stupid”. No! This was the only way to get the Glazers out without meeting the undeserved sky high valuations they were demanding.

It’s happening people… the Glazers are on their way out. My guess is that Sir Jim will take full control, and own 51% of the voting shares with 18 month. The Glazers will be completed out, or just a minority shareholder, which is very common in These types of transactions.
I think I read it’s all Glazers reducing though maybe not a pro rata reduction for all.

If the 38% (and two thirds rule) are correct, seems odd the Glazers/their advisors would allow it? If correct, also mean they can block SJR as much as he can them?
 

Plant0x84

Shame we’re aren’t more like Brighton
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
13,201
Location
Carpark and snack area adjacent to the abyss
There at least 3 x ‘sack EtH threads so we’re still a bit light on takeover hot takes .

We should have a poll and a ‘would you keep or burn Ineos’ thread too.
It’s the same for everything on here. We have about 3/4 threads on the same thing just worded differently :lol:
So irritating and unnecessary!
 

bstb3

Full Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2023
Messages
496
I think I read it’s all Glazers reducing though maybe not a pro rata reduction for all.

If the 38% (and two thirds rule) are correct, seems odd the Glazers/their advisors would allow it? If correct, also mean they can block SJR as much as he can them?
You can't buy 25% of the shares in proportion Class B and Class A and get to 38%. Maffs don't work out.
 

Dr. Dwayne

Self proclaimed tagline king.
Joined
May 9, 2006
Messages
97,601
Location
Nearer my Cas, to thee
First of all them being good commercial wise is a myth. United was already a commercial juggernaut by the time they bought us and the Glazers were lucky to be riding the EPL money wave on the biggest and meanest super yacht in football. Actually prior to them coming, we were the top dogs commercial wise. These days our infrastructure is rotting, we're serving raw chicken to customers, our debt keep piling up and we're losing money. That's hardly the gold standard of running a club commercially
And the Glazers have gone onto maximize the commercial potential of the club through numerous record sponsorship agreements, which you've conveniently ignored. Your three examples offer nothing to counter that.
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,259
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
I’ve had a lot of experience in acquisitions and limited partnerships. There is a lot of handwringing which really isn’t necessary. The reason the Glazers did it this way is that they didn’t reach their target valuation. Now, we don’t know if the 25% of the voting shares is coming from some of Glazer kids, or if all the Glazers will be diluted. When you realize that 69% of the corporation is owned by the Glazers, obtaining 25% of the company in Class B voting shares is essentially giving SJR full control. It means he’ll have roughly 38% of the voting shares, and he’ll be the largest shareholder.

Most major board level decisions require 66.7% of the shares/board to approve a resolution. When I say “major”, I mean new injection of capital, new shareholders, issuance of new shares, purchase of assets over, say, a certain amount, like 10m. As such, Sir Jim likely has veto power over any resolution raised by the Glazers, because they won’t have the 66.7% to outvote him. That’s why he has operational control. In addition, he’s added another 300m in capital injection commitments, which dilutes the Glazers further, by another 5-6%… meaning he’ll have 30%+ of total shares and 45% (roughly) of the voting shares.

On top of that, he’s committed to buy 25% of the class A non-voting shares @$33 a share. That’s a premium of $13 per share! As this happens, the value of the A shares will go up… and we know there is a vehicle to convert Glazers voting shares to non-voting shares which they can sell on the open market, or Sir Jim also has right of first refusal.

‘Look… the beginning of the end of the Glazers is here. This is a very savvy move by Sir Jim. TheCaf is saying the Glazers are “smart” and Sir Jim is “stupid”. No! This was the only way to get the Glazers out without meeting the undeserved sky high valuations they were demanding.

It’s happening people… the Glazers are on their way out. My guess is that Sir Jim will take full control, and own 51% of the voting shares with 18 month. The Glazers will be completed out, or just a minority shareholder, which is very common in These types of transactions.
Trying to understand, if Ratcliffe can veto anything major that the Glazers want to do, because they don't have 66.7% of the voting shares, then that should equally mean the Glazers can veto anything Ratcliffe wants to do, because he doesn't have 66.7% either. So how can owning 51% in 18 months be described as taking full control?

What happens normally when two sides of a board disagree, does it just mean no major action can be passed ad infinitum? that seems crazy. I can't get my head round the 66.7% thing I must admit.
 

AFC NimbleThumb

New Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2019
Messages
8,363
$300m investment is bad because… the Glazers have previously taken money out of the club and SJR has to pay for his shares?
The trainwreck is your comprehension of that’s your conclusion. Been around this forum long enough to see this play from you many times. Jog on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.