Sir Jim Ratcliffe: I want to buy Manchester United | Will make a bid for the club [Telegraph]

Jezpeza

Full Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2018
Messages
2,046
I think a lot of their other investments have been failing according to that Twitter thread posted here. Fascinating stuff!
They own a lot of commercial real estate i thought - shopping malls and the like. With a recession looking those are about to take a pounding
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
14,113
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
 

BackfromtheRed

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 8, 2021
Messages
22
As someone who has the rare combination of being a Nice and Manchester United fan I would say Radcliffe's stint as owner of Nice has been solid if unspectacular.

You can't just pour in money and he clearly doesn't intend to. Nice don't have huge annual revenues ...typical gate is a little under 20k...and there are other clubs with bigger support (Lyon, Marseille).

But he's brought back the previously successful management team and clearly the club is less worried about cashflow. They aren't so pressed to sell players.

The aim is to be competing regularly in Europe at one level or another, hopefully sometimes CL, and look reasonably set to achieve that.

Anyway it would be miles better than what we've got...he's clearly serious about sports and football if still on a bit of a learning curve...
 
  • Like
Reactions: jojojo

Compton22

Knows that he knows nothing.
Joined
Jul 27, 2014
Messages
3,393
The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
They've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
 

Teja

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2014
Messages
5,872
The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
Yeah exactly this. I think other than broadcast they tapped out all other possible commercial revenues.

Performance is also not strong, I can only see downside risks, not upside.

It really should be time to sell.
 

JJ12

Predicted Portugal, Italy to win Euro 2016, 2020
Joined
Mar 30, 2016
Messages
10,939
Location
Wales
The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
The squad is shit (missing CL will be big again),
the stadium and other facilities needs renovating, constant protests. I think now is the right time for them to sell, hopefully they feel the same way.
 

devilish

Juventus fan who used to support United
Joined
Sep 5, 2002
Messages
61,729
They've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
The Super league's dream is not over yet. It will happen although in a different format (ie clubs would have to qualify to go into it). I think that the Glazers want out because the infrastructure is in shambles and they don't have the money to rebuild it. Also the sponsors are starting to bail out.
 

mitchmouse

loves to hate United.
Joined
Oct 8, 2014
Messages
17,637
They've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
we'd have been relegated from the Super League by now - even though that was technically impossible :devil: :nono::lol:
 

Marcelinho87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
7,240
Location
Barnsley
Exactly. Just cause Jim isn't a Glazer doesn't mean he is a better owner. At the end of the day if the investment isn't made into the club we are back to square one. Its the whole Mctominay situation in midfield. Just cause a player is better than Mct doesn't mean we need him cause that benchmark is so slow. And yes I prefer if a bunch of billionaires join together to get us rather than one person.
Ineos group, already discussed.
 

Real Name

Full Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2020
Messages
14,315
Location
Croatia
It's scandalous that it was allowed and the rules and regs that have been put it in place since to stop it happening to anyone else makes it even more infuriating
Can you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?
 

Marcelinho87

Full Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
7,240
Location
Barnsley
A 5bn asset they didn't pay for
Earning 20m on a 5bn asset is like us celebrating 20 quid interest on 5m in the bank..

The club is dangerously close to becoming a liability for them due to our recent performance, they sell now whilst it's still an asset or they lose out altogether.
 

Suv666

Full Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2016
Messages
8,789
I doubt the Glazers actively want to sell.
The fans will have to play an active part.
 

Wicked_Badger

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
1,566
Location
Glasgow, Scotland
Honestly, that is fine as long as they ensure that it is run properly on the field (and do put money aside for stadium and training ground improvements). The issue with the Glazer's isn't what they've allowed us to spend, it's the fact that the people they put in charge of running the club proved absolutely incompetent but stayed in their roles for a decade or so. There are also rumours that one or two of the Glazer's insist on having their own say on things like transfers which is also a huge issue if true.

The perfect owner for me would be one that did treat us as a business, but did so in a competent way. Take a small dividend out each year but otherwise all the money that the club makes stays with the club to spend. Headhunt the best-in-class for different positions throughout the club, ensuring that money is spent correctly. Stay out of the decision-making themselves, allowing those employees to run the business that they are hired to do. Doing it this way just ensures the long-term health of the club, rather than having to rely on a suger-daddy owner treating us as a plaything.

Other than maybe needing the owner to dip into their own pockets to help with something big like Old Trafford renovation (replacement?), I actively don't want an owner who puts their own money into the club. We are financially strong enough to not need it, and all it would do is cheapen any success we got afterwards in my eyes. Of course I don't want them taking out too much either (either directly into their own pockets or indirectly to handle debt). A small dividend each year, and then just enjoy the worth of the club increasing.

I have no idea if Ratcliffe would do it this way, but he does seem more likely than some others.
Great post, pretty much exactly my feelings on it.
 

pacifictheme

Full Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
7,762
Can you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?
Yes pretty much. They took out a loan that the club is liable for to buy the club. It is utterly mental to me.
 

Loon

:lol:
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
9,219
Location
No-Mark
You guys here who seemingly know more about the financials than I do are getting my hopes up...

I just know they're going to say the club's not for sale.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
14,113
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
They've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
They’ve wanted to sell since they bought the club. That’s always been the plan. It’s all about timing. I’m fairly sure when this has been discussed in previous years and the glazers valued the club at 2bn, then 3bn, then 4bn everyone said they’d never get that much. Yet here we are with Bloomberg saying if it were to be sold 5bn is the price and at least one very viable buyer.
 

Tarrou

Full Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
25,664
Location
Sydney
The Glazers clearly aren't going to sell their entire holding. We have to hope that someone comes in, buys a big enough chunk to have a say in how things are done with the potential and desire to buy more and convince the vampires to sell up further down the line.

I know little about Ratcliffe, how he does things, what sort of owner he'd be. He can't be richer than City's owenrs or Newcastle's but hopefully he or someone else is rich enough - and actually wants the club to succeed again while not behaving like an utter cnut.

Not sure how much of a supporter of the club he really is but he does seem to know how to run a business. Not sure either that I agree with what I've read about him being shy and liking to stay out o the headlines...
I think the chances somehow comes in to buy a minority stake whilst the Glazers remain in control are basically zero at this point.

For your money you get a dog-shit dividend ROI, a huge loan whilst interest rates are increasing and the economy is in the toilet, a decrepit stadium, an ever disenfranchised fan-base, a diminishing brand-value, no CL for the foreseeable and a first-team full of over-paid tossers. With the cherry-on-the-cake being the people who ran this once flourishing business into the ground will get paid (from the business profits) for the privilege of fleecing it until it finally keels over and pegs it.
 

AdNani

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
1,689
Can you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?
Yeah they took out a massive loan to payfor it and then lumped that debt onto the club, so they've essentially took out hundreds of millions for nothing as they've never been liable to pay it back

Woodward structured the deal, and despite the years of failure under him it remains the worst thing he's ever done.
 

Loon

:lol:
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
9,219
Location
No-Mark
They’ve wanted to sell since they bought the club. That’s always been the plan. It’s all about timing. I’m fairly sure when this has been discussed in previous years and the glazers valued the club at 2bn, then 3bn, then 4bn everyone said they’d never get that much. Yet here we are with Bloomberg saying if it were to be sold 5bn is the price and at least one very viable buyer.
They were always speculating to accumulate. The oldest business model.
 

Lentwood

Full Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
6,860
Location
West Didsbury, Manchester
Have a look at that Twitter thread posted here. I don't pretend to know ANYTHING about money (which is why I don't have a pot to piss in), but it was a real eye-opener and they've taken more than you'd think.
It looks like the bulk of that is from selling shares though (I think they sold some non-voting shares to Chinese investors at some point?)

Strictly from a revenue generation/dividend perspective, I don't think they have made much...and the clubs' in a worse state now than it's ever been.

Aside from selling shares or taking control of our TV rights somehow I don't see how they can generate significant funds right now
 

arnie_ni

Full Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
15,226
Earning 20m on a 5bn asset is like us celebrating 20 quid interest on 5m in the bank..

The club is dangerously close to becoming a liability for them due to our recent performance, they sell now whilst it's still an asset or they lose out altogether.
It's like earning 20k, but I understand your point.

however with united, it's not their own investment at risk. If they sell united and re invest it all in something its genuinely their own capital at risk.

Unless something goes massively wrong united will always be worth in and around this 5billion.

Their new investment may not.
 

Pyro19

Full Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
689
It would make sense for the Glazers to sell now considering a year into the future our market value would be lower than what it is right now. This is keeping in mind the downward trajectory we've been seeing since Fergie left and our going to see into the foreseeable future.

Don't be surprised if we get sold for much lower than the 5bn valuation that is being touted everywhere. That is the highest valuation the club/media has disclosed and nobody is going to respect those valuations for a sinking ship that is us.
 

Wicked_Badger

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2009
Messages
1,566
Location
Glasgow, Scotland
No, i assume it would be the same as chelsea's ownership? Boehly fronts it but it's A capital group as well who are extremely wealthy

United are capable of spending on players themselves, they've done it for 17 years without owner input
If he personally buys it, Ineos won’t be signing a blank cheque for us to buy players.

But we don’t need anyone to as long as we’re well run. We make enough to compete.

Ineos are much more likely to hand us title sponsor money and if required something like a stadium/training centre rights name deal.
 

The Midnight Rambler

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 19, 2017
Messages
74
At our size, anyone who can afford to buy us will either be like the Glazers (milking it for the business it is), or worse (a cnut), or some dystopian shitty state.

Situation is hopeless.
Agreed. Cautiously optimistic.

If there is real movement here and JR is a genuine option then he’s on the more digestible scale of billionaires. Even if I personally disagree with his worldview.

Unfortunate reality of modern football is as you say where the only heads of big clubs are evil regimes butchering people or hedgefund managers interested purely for profit.
 

Flexdegea

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
2,342
You just know a "not for sale" statement from the Glaziers is imminent. They just want a bit of cash, not to give up the cash cow.
It's not a cash cow anymore. The heat is cranked up at the moment on and off the pitch. The finances are waning. The club need massive investment to stay at the top, they aren't going to dip into their pockets. More mass fan protects, brand going to take a another hit.

They literally going to have to sell soon or pump their own money in, which we know they won't do.


It's make as much sense to sell now than ever before
 

Dr. StrangeHate

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2013
Messages
5,516
This is exactly my point though, they only make serious cash with United by selling (parts of) it
So Barca sells parts of itself to buy players, while United sells parts of itself to feed the Glazers. I have seen enough, I am calling it, buy us Jim.
 

pocco

loco
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
22,595
Location
Keep a clean shit tomorrow, United is my final bus
As someone who has the rare combination of being a Nice and Manchester United fan I would say Radcliffe's stint as owner of Nice has been solid if unspectacular.

You can't just pour in money and he clearly doesn't intend to. Nice don't have huge annual revenues ...typical gate is a little under 20k...and there are other clubs with bigger support (Lyon, Marseille).

But he's brought back the previously successful management team and clearly the club is less worried about cashflow. They aren't so pressed to sell players.

The aim is to be competing regularly in Europe at one level or another, hopefully sometimes CL, and look reasonably set to achieve that.

Anyway it would be miles better than what we've got...he's clearly serious about sports and football if still on a bit of a learning curve...
From what I've read, it was never his intention to pour money into Nice. He wanted to build a self sufficient club that focused on producing players and signing at the right stage rather than going down the route of spending to buy success.
 

redcucumber

Full Member
Joined
May 18, 2022
Messages
3,250
People won't be happy unless they own the club themselves. The internet hates rich people.
Yeh, insane cost of living crisis, stagnant wages, massive inflation, chronic housing shortage, rampant inequality. It's a mystery why people are getting pissed off with obscene and unnecessary levels of wealth.
 

Mickeza

still gets no respect
Joined
Aug 21, 2012
Messages
14,113
Location
Deepthroating information to Howard Nurse.
They were always speculating to accumulate. The oldest business model.
Yup. From a business perspective what they’ve done will be in textbooks of what to do. They bought the club with 200m of their own money, got the club to pay off 550m debt with its own revenue and increased the value of the club by 7 times - all while paying themselves dividends, consultancy fees and then selling lesser shares when we went public. They still control 70% of the club yet have already made what they put in 6 times over. And when they sell they’ll get at least 4bn on top.

From their POV (and ours obviously!) I think now is the time to cash out though. Whilst I can definitely see this club being worth more in the future I don’t see it happening under their ownership which is now toxic and actively holding the club back. They’re a PR disaster which will impact commercial deals and they don’t have the level of investment needed to keep us competitive and do the infrastructure work required.
 

diarm

Full Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
16,812
That doesn't really stack-up though....it's quite complex but I don't believe the Glazers have actually made that much from United (yet) have they?

I know people bang-on about the dividends and I don't have the exact figures to-hand (Google suggests about £80m) but I am sure they haven't actually taken much, especially when you consider what they could have made investing elsewhere. Not a great return is it that...£80m over 17 years between 6 major shareholders.

Likewise, £1.5BN has been drained out of the club, however, that's been paid to the financial institutions which lent them the money, it hasn't gone into their pockets.

Basically, I am sure they have made some money but when you consider their wealth and what else they could have bought/invested in...seems a poor return.

I think the plan was always to continue to grow the brand/business, have a (somewhat) successful team on the pitch and the perfect 'instagrammable' product off the pitch.

The problem is, growth has stalled, new avenues for revenue generation seem to have dried-up, fan/sponsor confidence is at rock-bottom and none of them have a clue how to run a football club. As it turns out, the clubs performance on the pitch does have a material impact on their ability to generate revenue/profit!

At this point, with the recent knock-back of the ESL proposal, I think the Glazers have realised that the club requires major investment to make it profitable again...and they don't have the cash, the appetite to do it or the expertise. A sale is now the best option for them to see a return...and it would be a very handsome return, given they never actually used a penny of their own money to buy the club!
According to Swiss Ramble's figures, they've taken £166m in dividends, £55m in Directors Fees, £23m in Management Fees and at least £465m in Class A share sales.

£709m. They've tripled the money they spent to buy the club and now stand to pocket £4bn from selling it.
 

Kill3r7

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jul 25, 2015
Messages
98
Earning 20m on a 5bn asset is like us celebrating 20 quid interest on 5m in the bank..

The club is dangerously close to becoming a liability for them due to our recent performance, they sell now whilst it's still an asset or they lose out altogether.
Sports clubs/franchises throughout the world have gone up on average something like 40% in their valuation over the last 5 years. As bad as we have been on the pitch we are up 27% over the last 5 years (according to Forbes). Between Chelsea and Denver Broncos there are now buyers willing to spend over $3.2B and $4.6B respectively. The Broncos sold for $1.4B over their Forbes valuation and Chelsea would have sold for a lot more (arguably did as Boehly committed additional funds to building a new stadium and team transfers) if not under the special circumstances.

The next round of TV deals could result in a massive influx of revenue. Also the Super League looms in the background. There is still more growth to be had. That’s not to say the future is risk free financially but the potential is there if they want to roll the dice.
 
Last edited: