Saudi sports minister gives update on buying club from Glazers

[Pexbo]

A Saudi takeover might be the only way to get the glazers out. I don’t like what the Saudi regime represents but I’d take it, as I feel my club is dying.

Its literally just a form of entertainment where blokes run around trying to kick a sphere into a net.

I’d try caring more about what the Saudi’s do and represent.

 

[Florida Man]

Its literally just a form of entertainment where blokes run around trying to kick a sphere into a net.

I’d try caring more about what the Saudi’s do and represent.

Genuine question, but what do you think about what FIFA represent while you continue to follow world football?

Are you going to watch the 2022 World Cup that’s hosted in Qatar?

 

[red thru&thru]

All you stock boys must have noticed a lot of the siblings shares going towards Joel? From what I've been told, he now has majority of the shares? Happy to be corrected and given a clearer picture.

What I'm alluding with the above is, Joel and Avram are trying to become the two owners/majority shareholders of United with the other 4 siblings having no say. Apparently, the other 4 were just using United as a business, whereas it has been reported previously, Joel is an actual fan of United. You may have read in the other thread, Joel has already started to put his own stamp on things with the Bruno deal.

But like the other post was suggesting, we are missing the football experts and proper structure at the club. If we can get that correct, we will be back. Look at Lfc, they're not a washed with money, just intelligent investments. It's going to be a big summer of change this year, especially at ownership and board level. On top of that, the massive incoming deals of Alibaba and new shirt sponsors in 21

 

[TRUERED89]

We actually don't need Saudi billions to save the club. What we need is proper football people and structure at the club to reform and bring us into modern era.

Sadly, Glazers/Ed are cnuts investors and bankers who only care about money and nothing else. They should be at Wall Street and not Man Utd.

Hence, we are left without choice but pray for a takeover. Middle Eastern onwers (City and PSG) have shown they are good in commercial as well as football management of the club unlike Glazers.

Glazers have stolen 1 bil from the club and hope the Saudis are successful in buying us over to stop the leech.

You said we don’t need Saudi billions, but at the end you hope they buy us !!? Which one is it.

 

[Water Melon]

Manchester United’s current P/E ratio is around 190, implying that any investment in it will yield 0.5% in earnings. A rational investor therefore only has appreciation of the club’s valuation or dividends from the club’s operations to rely on to make up the gap with the price of their capital which is far more.

The Glazers knew this when they bought the club and expected the valuation to go up but planned to finance it from the dividends. This strategy has resulted in footballing wilderness. With the club now approaching mediocrity for 7 years, there is a real possibility that a generation of football fans will grow up without United at the top and the valuation and the operating revenue will fall substantially.

It is not surprising that the Glazers have taken a 700 mn investment which became 4 bn and used the proceeds to finance the cost of capital. However, if the club is unlikely to appreciate at this level of investment, investing in United is irrational. The only entity who could and should is one who has the resources to fund a multi billion dollar business to grow without commensurate economic returns but motivated by a non-financial benefit. Unfortunately, there are very few of those and, as Jim Ratliffe pointed out, these stock market valuations based on a small minority of shares might not be rational - no one has ever paid billions of pounds for a football club.


#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

What a post.

 

[dabeast]

This is a very erudite analysis, and highlights why the only prospect of a realistic buyer for the club, is a group whose strategic intent goes beyond a desire for ROI. United, as a brand, still provides a gateway to a number of international markets, and can make sense for a group looking to do an integrated expansion of a wider portfolio. There are multiple cross industry synergistic appeals, and from a branding perspective provides the opportunity for reputational rehabilitation. Hence the term “sports washing”.

All this said, there do remain opportunities for revenue growth through the proliferation of mobile broadcasting rights in emerging markets such as China; and the potential revenue boom from the creation of a long mooted European super league. My recollection of early analysis of the Glazer investment model, is that these were two of the four cornerstones essential to the long term growth of company value. The other two were (a) limiting expenses through the imposition of a salary cap, thus mitigating the greatest risk of accelerating costs I.e. player wages, and (b) the strict implementation of FFP regulations, thus suppressing the upward pressure on transfer fees brought about by the mega-rich state backed clubs. An assumption which was the basis for Woodward’s now infamous “We can do things in the market other clubs can only dream of. Watch this space.”

As we know, this latter aspiration became derailed, and the former looks unlikely to ever be ratified. Consequently, the Glazers are now facing a very real threat to their exit strategy as the club goes successive seasons without CL football. This will likely result in a 100m drop in revenues for the next annual financial results alone. All of their long term financial planning, investment strategy, and debt repayment strategy was predicated on the financial assumption that the club would, on average, achieve a QF finish in the CL every year. The lack of CL participation poses the biggest short term risk to their asset value, and something they likely never anticipated to be a long term concern. Sponsorship values will remain robust because the club has global appeal. It seems the most likely outcome that consistent failure to qualify for the CL, and the associated costs of building a squad capable of competing at the top table again, are the most likely drivers of a sale.

As painful as it is as fans to witness, it may be in our interests to sit out the CL for a couple more seasons and see the Glazers forced to sell before the asset depreciates significantly. There is a great deal of similarity to what happened to Liverpool under Hicks and Gillett. While United remain a far more robust economic entity, it still holds true that they are not immune to financial pressures. While these seem unlikely to ever threaten the survivability of the organization, they do nevertheless exist as significant drivers of potential change. In this case of ownership.

The bottom line is that the Glazers will never sell while returns are acceptable and asset value remains strong, unless they receive an offer which significantly exceeds market valuation. The sole domain of a handful of super rich or state entities. If value starts to significantly drop, such as through consistent failure to quality for the CL, and long term solutions such asa super league are effectively ruled out, then the club becomes a target for a wider group of investors, as there is growth potential in restoring it to previous glories.

I am fairly confident that these are the scenarios being weighed by the Glazers. And without being privy to the discussions of the larger European clubs, it is hard to say what the long term prospects and landscape looks like. From the outside, and a completely uninformed analysis, it would seem to me that in terms of the Glazer ownership model, the club has probably reached peak value and now would be the best time to sell. I just see too many sporting and financial challenges over the next 3-5 years; and there are considerable risks in tying an exit strategy to the rejuvenation of on field performances necessary to boost revenues. But I don’t have all the facts at my disposal, so I am just speculating.

I absolutely agree with this informed and erudite ( ) piece. The Glazers also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a badly run, perennially mid- to low-ranking NFL club even though the NFL is structured, by way of a salary cap and other collective bargaining agreements, to be much more equal than the PL. Despite this underwhelming on-field performance, the valuation has grown substantially - they bought it for $192 mn in 1995 and it now is worth about $1.2 bn on a revenue of $275 mn (all numbers from Forbes, cited by ESPN). The growth in valuation, therefore, appears to be a direct result of the fact that NFL clubs are a cartel where the under-performers have little risk of falling into oblivion. Therefore, under-investment is a winning strategy because the owners rely on the over-performers (New England Patriots, etc) to increase the interest in the entire league, thus improving the valuation of all the clubs.

This appears to be the strategy that the Glazers have imposed onto Manchester United. It is unlikely that we will now ever fall out of the Premier League and, with deep-pocketed, economically "irrational" investors like Roman Abramovich and sovereign wealth funds of Abu Dhabi buying competitors, the whole league is benefiting from their spending, thus pulling the valuation of Manchester United along with it. This strategy seems to be coming to fruition with Silver Lake Partners now willing to value City at 4.8 Bn. This valuation seems irrational and similar to other attempts like Etihad sponsorship to bring money into City, but even if it is 50% less it stands to reason that United's valuation is around there or even north of it. Thus, United have been under-financed since May 2005 and have under-performed for at least the past 7 years, yet spending at Chelsea and City is pulling up the valuation of Manchester United.

The question is, as the quoted post points out, is this the peak and therefore the right time to sell? At at $3.25 Bn market cap, there is still significant room for a global brand who once was measured to have nearly 1/10th of the worlds population (650 mn) under its mostly-tribal spell. One way of increasing the valuation is to invest massively now, but the Glazers simply don't have the resources to do that. The Saudis do, and will invite competitive investment from Abu Dhabi as well as other deep-pocketed players. If that happens, we will return to the top but, if the Glazers hold onto the (relative) under-investing, but economically rational, strategy riding on the coattails of the other PL owners, we will continue to be the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of Europe.

#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

 

[TRUERED89]

Nothing I said was false or misleading. Let’s also stop pretending to be marauders of morals participating in the most corrupt sport in the world. Everyone here is already treading a level of hypocrisy to some extent or another but too many are so emotionally vested to see it clearly in my opinion.

Look, if it was up to me, we’d be a club owned by supporters.Or we’d have far more benevolent owners who give a shit. But the reality is that we’re far too expensive for that kind of takeover. It’s one of the few downsides to our amazing success and history. I’m personally not interested in watching this club die slowly just to make a point about morals in football.

I agree, good posts in this thread. Doubt it’s going to happen though.

 

[Yakuza_devils]

I absolutely agree with this informed and erudite ( ) piece. The Glazers also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a badly run, perennially mid- to low-ranking NFL club even though the NFL is structured, by way of a salary cap and other collective bargaining agreements, to be much more equal than the PL. Despite this underwhelming on-field performance, the valuation has grown substantially - they bought it for $192 mn in 1995 and it now is worth about $1.2 bn on a revenue of $275 mn (all numbers from Forbes, cited by ESPN). The growth in valuation, therefore, appears to be a direct result of the fact that NFL clubs are a cartel where the under-performers have little risk of falling into oblivion. Therefore, under-investment is a winning strategy because the owners rely on the over-performers (New England Patriots, etc) to increase the interest in the entire league, thus improving the valuation of all the clubs.

This appears to be the strategy that the Glazers have imposed onto Manchester United. It is unlikely that we will now ever fall out of the Premier League and, with deep-pocketed, economically "irrational" investors like Roman Abramovich and sovereign wealth funds of Abu Dhabi buying competitors, the whole league is benefiting from their spending, thus pulling the valuation of Manchester United along with it. This strategy seems to be coming to fruition with Silver Lake Partners is willing to value City at 4.8 Bn. This valuation seems irrational and similar to other attempts like Etihad sponsorship to bring money into City, but even if it is 50% less it stands to reason that United's valuation is around there or even north of it. Thus, United have been under-financed since May 2005 and have under-performed since at least the past 7 years, yet spending at Chelsea and City is pulling up the valuation of Manchester United.

The question is, as the quoted post points out, is this the peak and therefore the right time to sell? At at $3.25 Bn market cap, there is still significant room for a global brand who once were measured to have nearly 1/10th of the worlds population (650 mn) under its mostly-tribal spell. One way of increasing the valuation is to invest massively now, but the Glazers simply don't have the resources to do that. The Saudis do, and will invite competitive investment from Abu Dhabi as well as other deep-pocketed players. If that happens, we will return to the top but, if the Glazers hold onto the (relative) under-investing, but economically rational, strategy riding on the coattails of the other PL owners, we will continue to be the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of Europe.

#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

Excellent post!

 

[Florida Man]

I absolutely agree with this informed and erudite ( ) piece. The Glazers also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a badly run, perennially mid- to low-ranking NFL club even though the NFL is structured, by way of a salary cap and other collective bargaining agreements, to be much more equal than the PL. Despite this underwhelming on-field performance, the valuation has grown substantially - they bought it for $192 mn in 1995 and it now is worth about $1.2 bn on a revenue of $275 mn (all numbers from Forbes, cited by ESPN). The growth in valuation, therefore, appears to be a direct result of the fact that NFL clubs are a cartel where the under-performers have little risk of falling into oblivion. Therefore, under-investment is a winning strategy because the owners rely on the over-performers (New England Patriots, etc) to increase the interest in the entire league, thus improving the valuation of all the clubs.

This appears to be the strategy that the Glazers have imposed onto Manchester United. It is unlikely that we will now ever fall out of the Premier League and, with deep-pocketed, economically "irrational" investors like Roman Abramovich and sovereign wealth funds of Abu Dhabi buying competitors, the whole league is benefiting from their spending, thus pulling the valuation of Manchester United along with it. This strategy seems to be coming to fruition with Silver Lake Partners is willing to value City at 4.8 Bn. This valuation seems irrational and similar to other attempts like Etihad sponsorship to bring money into City, but even if it is 50% less it stands to reason that United's valuation is around there or even north of it. Thus, United have been under-financed since May 2005 and have under-performed since at least the past 7 years, yet spending at Chelsea and City is pulling up the valuation of Manchester United.

The question is, as the quoted post points out, is this the peak and therefore the right time to sell? At at $3.25 Bn market cap, there is still significant room for a global brand who once were measured to have nearly 1/10th of the worlds population (650 mn) under its mostly-tribal spell. One way of increasing the valuation is to invest massively now, but the Glazers simply don't have the resources to do that. The Saudis do, and will invite competitive investment from Abu Dhabi as well as other deep-pocketed players. If that happens, we will return to the top but, if the Glazers hold onto the (relative) under-investing, but economically rational, strategy riding on the coattails of the other PL owners, we will continue to be the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of Europe.

#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

Good post with a lot of interesting points. Only disagreement I have is the Glazers’ lack of resources. I’m convinced it’s not a lack of resources but more a lack of willingness to invest.

 

[sullydnl]

A Saudi takeover might be the only way to get the glazers out. I don’t like what the Saudi regime represents but I’d take it, as I feel my club is dying.

If keeping the Glazers was the only way to keep the Saudi regime out of the club, I'd do it. Better to be "dying" than be zombified as an extension of a brutal regime's PR arm, thanks.

Though of course the club isn't actually dying. It's just struggling. With "struggling" in this case meaning "being 5th in the league". I doubt many are weeping for us.

 

[Florida Man]

If keeping the Glazers was the only way to keep the Saudi regime out of the club, I'd do it. Better to be "dying" than be zombified as an extension of a brutal regime's PR arm, thanks.

Though of course the club isn't actually dying. It's just struggling. With "struggling" in this case meaning "being 5th in the league". I doubt many are weeping for us.

I think we can agree that our struggles are much more than just being 5th in the league.

 

[Fortitude]

Good posts @dabeast & @simonhch

That the club is willing to forgo the CL (by even attempting to compete to get in it this season) becomes all the more baffling.

 

[jimmyb2000]

All you stock boys must have noticed a lot of the siblings shares going towards Joel? From what I've been told, he now has majority of the shares? Happy to be corrected and given a clearer picture.

What I'm alluding with the above is, Joel and Avram are trying to become the two owners/majority shareholders of United with the other 4 siblings having no say. Apparently, the other 4 were just using United as a business, whereas it has been reported previously, Joel is an actual fan of United. You may have read in the other thread, Joel has already started to put his own stamp on things with the Bruno deal.

But like the other post was suggesting, we are missing the football experts and proper structure at the club. If we can get that correct, we will be back. Look at Lfc, they're not a washed with money, just intelligent investments. It's going to be a big summer of change this year, especially at ownership and board level. On top of that, the massive incoming deals of Alibaba and new shirt sponsors in 21

I heard a rumour from a fairly reliable source that Ed will be standing down as CEO in the summer .

 

[stevoc]

Nothing I said was false or misleading. Let’s also stop pretending to be marauders of morals participating in the most corrupt sport in the world. Everyone here is already treading a level of hypocrisy to some extent or another but too many are so emotionally vested to see it clearly in my opinion.

Look, if it was up to me, we’d be a club owned by supporters.Or we’d have far more benevolent owners who give a shit. But the reality is that we’re far too expensive for that kind of takeover. It’s one of the few downsides to our amazing success and history. I’m personally not interested in watching this club die slowly just to make a point about morals in football.

A Saudi takeover might be the only way to get the glazers out. I don’t like what the Saudi regime represents but I’d take it, as I feel my club is dying.

Feck me.

By dying you of course mean we might not win a trophy for a few years, oh the horror.

Get some perspective lads its not as if the club is even remotely in danger of going out of business anytime soon, so lets stop with the ''dying'' nonsense.

 

[Florida Man]

Feck me.

By dying you of course mean we might not win a trophy for a few years, oh the horror.

Get some perspective lads its not as if the club is even remotely in danger of going out of business anytime soon, so lets stop with the ''dying'' nonsense.

My reference to dying was in response to people who said they’d see our club go to shit/die/liquidated than have the Saudis take over. Currently we’re a long way from dying but we’re certainly tanking.

 

[matt10000]

For those that say the owners have nothing to with the supporters, would you rent a house of a known murderer?

 

[DBT85]

@dabeast @simonhch

I wonder if either of you can answer the question, what happens to the club debt in the event of a buyout? How would paying off that debt be handled with regard to FFP? I'm sure some new dodgy sponsorship deals would appear for silly amounts of money as seen elsewhere which might help.



Regarding whether it were to happen or not, fans need to contemplate that pretty much the only way the Glazers go is if someone like this buys the club. Its too expensive for anyone else that woulnd't be interested in a financial return like the Glazers are. Sure Bezos could buy it with the amount his worth increases every 20 days, but he and people like him are clearly not going to do it.

 

[Water Melon]

I absolutely agree with this informed and erudite ( ) piece. The Glazers also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a badly run, perennially mid- to low-ranking NFL club even though the NFL is structured, by way of a salary cap and other collective bargaining agreements, to be much more equal than the PL. Despite this underwhelming on-field performance, the valuation has grown substantially - they bought it for $192 mn in 1995 and it now is worth about $1.2 bn on a revenue of $275 mn (all numbers from Forbes, cited by ESPN). The growth in valuation, therefore, appears to be a direct result of the fact that NFL clubs are a cartel where the under-performers have little risk of falling into oblivion. Therefore, under-investment is a winning strategy because the owners rely on the over-performers (New England Patriots, etc) to increase the interest in the entire league, thus improving the valuation of all the clubs.

This appears to be the strategy that the Glazers have imposed onto Manchester United. It is unlikely that we will now ever fall out of the Premier League and, with deep-pocketed, economically "irrational" investors like Roman Abramovich and sovereign wealth funds of Abu Dhabi buying competitors, the whole league is benefiting from their spending, thus pulling the valuation of Manchester United along with it. This strategy seems to be coming to fruition with Silver Lake Partners now willing to value City at 4.8 Bn. This valuation seems irrational and similar to other attempts like Etihad sponsorship to bring money into City, but even if it is 50% less it stands to reason that United's valuation is around there or even north of it. Thus, United have been under-financed since May 2005 and have under-performed for at least the past 7 years, yet spending at Chelsea and City is pulling up the valuation of Manchester United.

The question is, as the quoted post points out, is this the peak and therefore the right time to sell? At at $3.25 Bn market cap, there is still significant room for a global brand who once were measured to have nearly 1/10th of the worlds population (650 mn) under its mostly-tribal spell. One way of increasing the valuation is to invest massively now, but the Glazers simply don't have the resources to do that. The Saudis do, and will invite competitive investment from Abu Dhabi as well as other deep-pocketed players. If that happens, we will return to the top but, if the Glazers hold onto the (relative) under-investing, but economically rational, strategy riding on the coattails of the other PL owners, we will continue to be the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of Europe.

#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

A pearl after pearl by this lad. Hope you are promoted fast enough.

 

[stubie]

If it happens would more than likely be in May this year depending on where we finish.

No Champions League qualification means Glazers aren’t likely to demand more than $4bn imo

 

[kafta]

Feck me.

By dying you of course mean we might not win a trophy for a few years, oh the horror.

Get some perspective lads its not as if the club is even remotely in danger of going out of business anytime soon, so lets stop with the ''dying'' nonsense.

Not to be dramatic, I know that its not going out of business. I just meant the club is on a downward spiral, and the people running it have no clue. The trajectory it’s on isn’t reassuring at all. I feel the owners won’t feel the urgency until the brand name Diminishes and at that point it could be a hundred times harder to bring united back to where it should be.

 

[YzWayne]

Are the Glazers really looking to sell?

 

[DBT85]

Are the Glazers really looking to sell?

If someone offers you 4bn for something that's cost you feck all, you're interested in selling.

 

[7even]

I absolutely agree with this informed and erudite ( ) piece. The Glazers also own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, a badly run, perennially mid- to low-ranking NFL club even though the NFL is structured, by way of a salary cap and other collective bargaining agreements, to be much more equal than the PL. Despite this underwhelming on-field performance, the valuation has grown substantially - they bought it for $192 mn in 1995 and it now is worth about $1.2 bn on a revenue of $275 mn (all numbers from Forbes, cited by ESPN). The growth in valuation, therefore, appears to be a direct result of the fact that NFL clubs are a cartel where the under-performers have little risk of falling into oblivion. Therefore, under-investment is a winning strategy because the owners rely on the over-performers (New England Patriots, etc) to increase the interest in the entire league, thus improving the valuation of all the clubs.

This appears to be the strategy that the Glazers have imposed onto Manchester United. It is unlikely that we will now ever fall out of the Premier League and, with deep-pocketed, economically "irrational" investors like Roman Abramovich and sovereign wealth funds of Abu Dhabi buying competitors, the whole league is benefiting from their spending, thus pulling the valuation of Manchester United along with it. This strategy seems to be coming to fruition with Silver Lake Partners now willing to value City at 4.8 Bn. This valuation seems irrational and similar to other attempts like Etihad sponsorship to bring money into City, but even if it is 50% less it stands to reason that United's valuation is around there or even north of it. Thus, United have been under-financed since May 2005 and have under-performed for at least the past 7 years, yet spending at Chelsea and City is pulling up the valuation of Manchester United.

The question is, as the quoted post points out, is this the peak and therefore the right time to sell? At at $3.25 Bn market cap, there is still significant room for a global brand who once was measured to have nearly 1/10th of the worlds population (650 mn) under its mostly-tribal spell. One way of increasing the valuation is to invest massively now, but the Glazers simply don't have the resources to do that. The Saudis do, and will invite competitive investment from Abu Dhabi as well as other deep-pocketed players. If that happens, we will return to the top but, if the Glazers hold onto the (relative) under-investing, but economically rational, strategy riding on the coattails of the other PL owners, we will continue to be the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of Europe.

#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

Excellent post!

Your perspective is much appreciated and a refreshing view instead of all the moral high driven shit that floating around this place. The way people look down at the Saudis and then swallow all the bs propaganda coming from their own governments is astonishing. My incompetent self declared feminist-government including.

And btw I’m with you.
#GlazersOut #SaudisIn

 

[Nou_Camp99]

The Saudis wouldn't need to pump billions after billions in after their initial cost to purchase the club. We make more than enough money to sustain ourselves. But with no debt repayments, interest and dividends being paid out we'd get to spend an awful lot more of OUR OWN money. It's a no brainer.

If you don't like Saudis fair enough but I bet you wear Nike trainers where kids as young as 9 and 10 are exploited for pennies a day. Where do you draw the line? The golf, boxing, tennis and wrestling have all just signed deals with Saudi Arabia. I don't see those sports all collapsing through shame.

 

[GDaly95]

Feck me.

By dying you of course mean we might not win a trophy for a few years, oh the horror.

Get some perspective lads its not as if the club is even remotely in danger of going out of business anytime soon, so lets stop with the ''dying'' nonsense.

You think this is as bad as it'll get under the Glazers?

Deary me

 

[red thru&thru]

I heard a rumour from a fairly reliable source that Ed will be standing down as CEO in the summer .

Well I heard Joel is taking over, buying the other 4 out with Avram second in charge. Ed is currently on board but will be voted out of power in summer.

 

[Rake]

Its literally just a form of entertainment where blokes run around trying to kick a sphere into a net.

I’d try caring more about what the Saudi’s do and represent.

My sentiment exactly! I`ve been supporting the club for over 17 years but I`d rather see us relegated than being owned by them. At the end of the day, it is only a game. There are much bigger things happening in the world.

 

[DBT85]

The Saudis wouldn't need to pump billions after billions in after their initial cost to purchase the club. We make more than enough money to sustain ourselves. But with no debt repayments, interest and dividends being paid out we'd get to spend an awful lot more of OUR OWN money. It's a no brainer.

They wouldn't need to, but they'd also not want to just have the club languishing for 5 years. The whole point would to have it be a powerhouse again. Be that spending on the stadium, players, training ground etc. While we are a profitable company even with debt, dividends and interest, but we're not THAT profitable that we could realistically spend say £500m on players, £250m odd on the ground to do the south stand and revamp the whole thing, and all the background shit that City have done. Make no mistake, City have done all the stuff in the city to help themselves appear benevolent and lovely and the Saudis would do the same shit. Sure, once its all up and running again actual imputs would be low or non existent. But I don't think someone can just buy the club, expunge the debt and suddenly we have enough cash to do everything that needs doing.

Well I heard Joel is taking over, buying the other 4 out with Avram second in charge. Ed is currently on board but will be voted out of power in summer.

Where do you hear this stuff becase there can't be more than 10 people that know this shit first hand if it were actually true

 

[stepic]

We actually don't need Saudi billions to save the club. What we need is proper football people and structure at the club to reform and bring us into modern era.

Sadly, Glazers/Ed are cnuts investors and bankers who only care about money and nothing else. They should be at Wall Street and not Man Utd.

Hence, we are left without choice but pray for a takeover. Middle Eastern onwers (City and PSG) have shown they are good in commercial as well as football management of the club unlike Glazers.

Glazers have stolen 1 bil from the club and hope the Saudis are successful in buying us over to stop the leech.

ugh why did you bring this godforsaken thread back from the dead for no reason

 

[red thru&thru]

Where do you hear this stuff becase there can't be more than 10 people that know this shit first hand if it were actually true

Check the stocks and share of Manchester United. Been told it's all there. I've been guided by a family member. I do keep on asking if the stocks and shares experts can verify the movement of shares. Has been going on since 2018 apparently.

 

[Nou_Camp99]

Well I heard Joel is taking over, buying the other 4 out with Avram second in charge. Ed is currently on board but will be voted out of power in summer.

If this turns out to be true......you will see people on mass protesting and stop going. I think the Glazer - Utd fan relationship is reaching rock bottom personally. Don't see it going on much longer. Fans have already started to vote with their feet. Huge gaps at most games this season contrary to the figures released. People can't give the tickets away evidently. Who would want to pay to watch the crap that's served up most weeks? Fewer and fewer by the week.

 

[DBT85]

Check the stocks and share of Manchester United. Been told it's all there. I've been guided by a family member. I do keep on asking if the stocks and shares experts can verify the movement of shares. Has been going on since 2018 apparently.

It may well show that its going to Joel but there literally can't be anything there to suggest they'd get rid of Woodward.

To the best of my knowledge Woodward only has Class A shares which in terms of power at the club is basically nothing. There are 120m class b shares (not publicly traded) who each have 10 votes each. Thats 1.2 billion votes versus the 500k votes that Woodward has. Even if he were to be bought out, its still nothing to do with his job. They could leave him with his shares and sack him. Or take his shares and keep him on.

 

[arthurka]

There is nothing indicating that a value of these behemoth sporting entities will fall even if the results aren't steady or positive. These companies will keep on rising maybe not as much as for the last 10 years but still.

For example New York Knicks haven't won shit in years and have been mismanaging their squad for years were number 2 behind the Lakers in 2009 valued at 586$m in 2019 still mismanaging their squad they are number 1 with the LA Lakers at number 2 worth 4$bn .

It shows that the Glazers haven't done shit to add to the valuation, its the market in general that has done it. Higher TV contacts, commercial contracts and in general each fan is worth more and spends more on sports entertainment.

It's bad news for us who want the Glazers out as they are in no hurry to sell. Tampa Bay was bought 1995 for 192$m but is worth 2.2$bn in 2019. That just shows what we are up against, it will need to get really hostile for them before they even start to think about leaving.

 

[red thru&thru]

It may well show that its going to Joel but there literally can't be anything there to suggest they'd get rid of Woodward.

To the best of my knowledge Woodward only has Class A shares which in terms of power at the club is basically nothing. There are 120m class b shares (not publicly traded) who each have 10 votes each. Thats 1.2 billion votes versus the 500k votes that Woodward has. Even if he were to be bought out, its still nothing to do with his job. They could leave him with his shares and sack him. Or take his shares and keep him on.

But he's part of the board members? But there was an article yesterday by the Express saying there were first signs of Ed being sacked as Joel won't sign off an over the top deal for Bruno. There's already signs of this kind of stuff slowly coming out into the media.

I don't know where any of this will lead to but all of us will hope, as a bare minimum, that changes are made to the football part of the business, with a Rangnick or Campos being appointed. If we do get this type of signing, it will show some sort of progress, in my eyes.

 

[DBT85]

But he's part of the board members? But there was an article yesterday by the Express saying there were first signs of Ed being sacked as Joel won't sign off an over the top deal for Bruno. There's already signs of this kind of stuff slowly coming out into the media.

I don't know where any of this will lead to but all of us will hope, as a bare minimum, that changes are made to the football part of the business, with a Rangnick or Campos being appointed. If we do get this type of signing, it will show some sort of progress, in my eyes.

He can still be a board memeber with no shares or a shareholder and not be on the board.

On the basis that it was the Express and its not been reported by anyone that I'd even wipe my arse with, assuming that its true seems like folly.

If they finally do ditch him then great, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[red thru&thru]

He can still be a board memeber with no shares or a shareholder and not be on the board.

On the basis that it was the Express and its not been reported by anyone that I'd even wipe my arse with, assuming that its true seems like folly.

If they finally do ditch him then great, but I'm not holding my breath.

I understand the scepticism. I'm personally of the belief that change is a foot. But time will tell.

 

[matt10000]

You think this is as bad as it'll get under the Glazers?

Deary me

Yes, things could get worse under the Glazers and I would like them to be replaced but frankly replacing a family of parasitic leeches with a murderous thuggish de facto ruler who denies his own people of human rights, imprisons his own people for criticising authorities or advocating political and rights reforms, systematically discriminates against women and religious minorities, curtails academic research deemed sensitive, bans political parties, censors local media and executes people who were involved in anti-government protests when they were under 18 years old, hacks peoples phone accounts in an attempt to influence news coverage of the kingdom......nah this is not the answer

#GlazersOut #SaudisNotUntilHellFreezesOver

 

[Bestietom]

I feel a takeover is getting nearer. No stadium restructure plans, and less funds for transfers this past 2/3 years, show the signs.

 

[Im red2]

I feel a takeover is getting nearer. No stadium restructure plans, and less funds for transfers this past 2/3 years, show the signs.

Looks like they are not finished the milking job yet. Avram Glazer is in Switzerland..

 

[Bestietom]

Looks like they are not finished the milking job yet. Avram Glazer is in Switzerland..

Yep, seen that.