- Joined
- Apr 27, 2014
- Messages
- 30,017
Great insight, thanks a lot. I wasn't sure who could afford it until this.
Great insight, thanks a lot. I wasn't sure who could afford it until this.
A lot of sense made here imoSell to whom ? We don't seem very good value atm. We're still good value for the glazers , but for a new owner, it would be a 2.5 billion outlay for a team that no longer comes with a guarantee of success. The glazers got lucky & bought at the right time and the right price , they've had to speculate very little and still seen the club's value quadruple.
The next owners won't be so lucky. To get a return, you need success, a 2.5 billion outlay requires a fecktonne of success.
Maybe the only way we become a feasible proposition is if we go through a prolonged period with little success on the pitch , maybe that would force the asking price down... To be honest though , that scenario doesn't bear thinking about .
There's also no guarantees that any new owners would be any better, catch 22 .
It is what it is. Not much point moaning about it.
It would be a big part of the negotiations. It could stay part of the clubs/parent company's balance sheet and thus carried over to the new owners. It could be paid offf as part of the purchase price ( I'll pay x to the Glazers but they immediately have to use y to clear the debt. And all sorts of combos in between.So the debt will just carry over to the next owners along with the club?
That's brilliant.Well Apple have cash reserves of £200bn so they could buy United without it meaning anything to them financially.
I remember Keith lemon doing a few sketches on such things as an iSock, which is just a normal sock and showed how you can use it to house your iPhone, by putting in down the side of your leg, also the iJacket which is just a jacketThey'd probably claim to have invented football kits and shirts would suddenly cost £250.
Yeah and you'd probably have to rewire your house to be able to plug in the iWasherAnd then bring out the apple washing machine, the only washing machine compatible with the shirt material.
Sell to whom ? We don't seem very good value atm. We're still good value for the glazers , but for a new owner, it would be a 2.5 billion outlay for a team that no longer comes with a guarantee of success. The glazers got lucky & bought at the right time and the right price , they've had to speculate very little and still seen the club's value quadruple.
The next owners won't be so lucky. To get a return, you need success, a 2.5 billion outlay requires a fecktonne of success.
Maybe the only way we become a feasible proposition is if we go through a prolonged period with little success on the pitch , maybe that would force the asking price down... To be honest though , that scenario doesn't bear thinking about .
There's also no guarantees that any new owners would be any better, catch 22 .
It is what it is. Not much point moaning about it.
Not sure what's more irritating, the bone-deep nausea that engulfs this place when we inevitably break a transfer record every other transfer window or the collective panic that ensues when we don't.
Nobody is saying they've been bad or anything, try reading the op.Why would they want to sell the Golden Goose?
I personally think the Glazers have been ok, as far as I know they seem to be happy to stay in the background and have spent big over the years.
Would certainly much rather the Glazers than some other owners I could think of ....better the devil you know.
The white Apple logo would look better than that hideous Chevy oneThat's brilliant.
Our kit is red anyway, so an Apple would fit right in
Thanks Simon, good post.I'd wager that short term the Glazers don't give a shit about transfer fees. The club can afford to self fund. So the bottom line is increasing the valuation of the club through revenue growth and positive ebidta. The club is still trending strongly in both directions.
Longer term they, like all owners (except the sugar daddy clubs) will be hoping for some sort of salary cap or FFP replacement, to mitigate against the bulk of increased tv revenues going straight to players and agents.
The Glazers put nothing up to buy the club, they'll sell it when they believe the value has been maximized or they receive an offer way above current valuation. I'd wager that the massive capacity still unexplored in mobile and developing overseas markets, means they'll hold for a good while longer yet.
Current valuation is around 2.6bn. My guess is that it would take an offer closer to 4bn for them to sell now. This was a genius investment strategy from them; and despite the club spending hundreds of millions on the debt they leveraged onto the club in their buyout - their growth of revenues and the clubs operations, has been incredible.
Best time to sell in fact.The glazers are hardly going to sell the most profitable football club on the planet.
I read that the Facebook guy is interested in owning a football club in England, just imagine Facebook on our jerseys. NightmareThat's brilliant.
Our kit is red anyway, so an Apple would fit right in
Just have this...I read that the Facebook guy is interested in owning a football club in England, just imagine Facebook on our jerseys. Nightmare
Success doesn't really matter any more. We've been in a fallow period for over half a decade and yet the club's value continues to grow. All that the Glazers need to do is to occasionally invest in a marketable player or two (e.g. Ibra, Pogba and potentially Griezmann in January), and as long as we don't do shockingly poorly we'll maintain our global fanbase. It's not really about football now, it's about brand and the one thing that the Glazers have done well is to promote our club as a brand, particularly abroad. Kids in Asia don't care about the quality of football we play or the trophies that they win. They just like to wear our shirts or eat our noodles or drive our tractors.Sell to whom ? We don't seem very good value atm. We're still good value for the glazers , but for a new owner, it would be a 2.5 billion outlay for a team that no longer comes with a guarantee of success.
You would almost think you were talking about Arsenal there.Success doesn't really matter any more. We've been in a fallow period for over half a decade and yet the club's value continues to grow. All that the Glazers need to do is to occasionally invest in a marketable player or two (e.g. Ibra, Pogba and potentially Griezmann in January), and as long as we don't do shockingly poorly we'll maintain our global fanbase. It's not really about football now, it's about brand and the one thing that the Glazers have done well is to promote our club as a brand, particularly abroad. Kids in Asia don't care about the quality of football we play or the trophies that they win. They just like to wear our shirts or eat our noodles or drive our tractors.
It's right that we'd be unlikely to sell to someone who's after a football club as part of a vanity project. It's much more likely that we'd be sold to a company or consortium who are interested in leveraging our global brand for profit. It's sad really.
The value of United is about 3 times more than they bought the club for less than 15 years ago. There is no indication that the market has peaked. So ... we are not even close to them contemplating selling.Thinking about this just now, how do you think Glazers are reacting to development in current state of football?
The prices for average players are now £50 million. They're bound to be thinking: is it worth investing that much money into the club every summer whilst taking probably less dividends every year?
If we can't compete with likes of Madrid, PSG and Man City it's fair to think that we will be left behind somewhat in terms of our stature within the game. I'm mean, it's more difficult than ever to compete now, so there are hardly any guarantees that we will still be most valuable club in the few years.
Wouldn't the Glazers be thinking of cashing in while we're still at the top than risk falling behind?
Anyway, I could be horribly wrong, and they are planning to keep the club for the next thirty years. After all we're still getting a sponsorship deals etc. But if we stop competing, surely our pulling power will diminish?
What are you thoughts?
Ps - this isn't a Glazer bashing thread. Fwiw, I think we could have had much worse owners.
Yeah, Gill - the old rag - has a job to do there.They'll probably lobby for workable FFP rules to limit the abilities of the sugar daddy clubs.
Pretty much all that needs to be said. We could probably spend close to 200m each summer and Glazers wouldn't really be bothered. We're funding our transfers unlike the oil clubs.Glazers aren't giving their personal money for transfers. The money used is united's own with the revenue they generate. That is within the control of Woodward. So I doubt us spending makes any difference to the glazers.
I doubt they would sell. They have little involvement and make huge money. Why would that be a bad thing?
get a kickstarter running. I have 20 quid in my wallet that I am unable to spend so might as well donate.Let's pitch in and make them an offer they can't refuse.
I'll start by contributing 5£.
And people would still wait in line to get them.They'd probably claim to have invented football kits and shirts would suddenly cost £250.
Sky and BT are losing football subscribers in the thousands at the moment to people just streaming it instead. That contract is a large part of our income at the moment and it's not guaranteed to be the cash cow it has been moving forward. That along with us probably reaching peak marketing exploitation, we don't really have anything else left to hawk off, and generally fixed stadium revenue which isn't likely to increase dramatically moving forward. Means we have probably reached peak value.The bubble of PL isn't going to bust at least yet for the foreseeable future. It might not be able to extract much more from viewers in UK or even Europe but the potential is there in other markets, e.g. US, and Asia. Also the potential in streaming and those of digital contents been working on. So UTD as a brand will still gonna be good and expanding. Glazers won't want to sell in the immediate future.
Interesting bit about the possibility of Facebook or another internet provider entering the bidding war for broadcasting rights, Im always tempted to see these TV deals as the proof that football is in the midst of a bubble and that at one point someone will realise theyve overpaid and the whole thing will go into reverse but the possibility of more bidders certainly undermines that theory. I liked the rationale for paying so much for the rights too: sport is like a hit show every bit as engrossing as The Wire, it goes on season after season and there is no risk of it ever being cancelled. When you look at it like that its easy to dismiss concerns about the bubble.Well, they've sold a bit more to Nick Train, one the most respected UK fund managers. He certainly used to own a chunk of Juve too- not sure if he still does.
He reckons United's market cap is worth double its current value, saying that big internet incumbents will come into the TV rights bidding wars.
Another big name investor to go with Soros.
You can read his views here. http://www.finsburygt.com/
Facebook is very much serious for broadcasting rights of sports. I'm not sure if you're aware of Indian Premier League(Cricket related) but FB just bidded 610m dollars for the digital rights, they were outbidded but they were willing to spend such a large amount of what's essentially a two month tournament(The rights were of five years).Interesting bit about the possibility of Facebook or another internet provider entering the bidding war for broadcasting rights, Im always tempted to see these TV deals as the proof that football is in the midst of a bubble and that at one point someone will realise theyve overpaid and the whole thing will go into reverse but the possibility of more bidders certainly undermines that theory. I liked the rationale for paying so much for the rights too: sport is like a hit show every bit as engrossing as The Wire, it goes on season after season and there is no risk of it ever being cancelled. When you look at it like that its easy to dismiss concerns about the bubble.
Do you know if the shares being sold more recently had voting rights? The ones from the IPO didnt I dont think, so presumably these are the same? Or, if family members are selling their own shares now, does that mean these ones do have voting rights?