Glazer and ManYoo

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Chubby

so what happens if Glazer can't get to 75%? All of the debt is still is? Can't he set the board of directors now that he owns over 50%?

Below 75% he would be like any other shareholder - except he would be able to out-vote the rest whenever he wanted.

Last I heard though he had 74.9%. Once he achieves 75% then he can de-list the company and the shares held by others become useless pieces of paper so he'll have no trouble taking the rest.

When the two Irishman sold their 29% then he had the company.

As a private company he will choose his own board of directors. Already three non-executive directors have resigned.

[ISiddiqui]

Mac, I'm guessing you are the same "machoward" on Big Soccer . It's nice arguing on your side there ... people don't understand what could reasonably happen if things go even a minor bit sour.

[Mr. Wednesday]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

British stock market rules say that when a PLC has 75%+1 of its ownership owned by one person, that person can change the company from a PLC to a private company (taking it off the stock market). When that happens, the owner can transfer his debt to the company.

Isn't the barrier for privatizing 90%, not 75%?

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

Isn't the barrier for privatizing 90%, not 75%?

At 75% he can 'privatise"or "de-list" the company (but doesn't have to) but others can hold on to their shares for what they're worth. At 90% he is compelled to buy all remaining shares.

An article here that might interest you guys as it refers to the NFL's interest in what Glazer is doing:

NFL to probe Glazer's Man Utd bid

The NFL finance committee will review Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner Malcolm Glazer's bid to assume full control Manchester United for £790m.

Glazer is set to buy a majority share at Old Trafford but there are growing concerns in the US about how he intends to pay back the £540m he has borrowed.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello confirmed there is a possibility Glazer intends to use the Buccaneers as collateral.

"The committee is just going to look for issues of concern," Aiello said.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Mac, I'm guessing you are the same "machoward" on Big Soccer .

Yep, that's me

people don't understand what could reasonably happen if things go even a minor bit sour.

It's by no means certain but it is a real possibility and a possibility that didn't exist a few days ago. The debt is so large - Utd's current profits would almost all disappear in the interest payments. A couple of years of relative economic failure - failure to qualify or progress in the CL for example - could produce real strains in the club's finances that could see asset sales to service the debt - players, OT sold. A lack of transfer funds could see a further decline in the club's on-field success and you have the start of a downward spiral.

A lot of criticism is made of the PLC status of the club as if that were the cause of this. But a privately owned club could be bought out with borrowed money in the same way that a plc can. The financial status of the club is irrelevant. What has brought Utd to the attention of Glazer, and the Irish duo previously, is the value of the club - it's sufficiently large to interest the corporate world.

A PLC was probably the best that they could have. The whole point of a stock market listing is that it brings financial stability to a company. Fluctuations in financial performance are partially taken care of by shareholders in reduced dividends and share price leaving the business to recover - dividends fall where interest on a loan would still be demanded. What has happened here is that the reverse to listing has happened - Utd have been (or will be) taken off the list and the insecurity has returned. They now have debt not flexible dividends to pay.

Maybe Glazer will increase profits sufficiently and plough some of the gains into the soccer-related activities of the club. A very big maybe, I think, but I'm now down to this sort of wishful thinking I'm afraid

[ISiddiqui]

Yeah, I agree that the risks have increased 10 fold (at least) from a few days ago. That's a massive debt. Giggs, Keane, Scholes will all have to be replaced soon and with top tier talent. The interest payments and payment on principal seem to indicate a tiny number for transfers. A 5th place finish could be the start of a Leeds like tailspin.

Also there are rumors that Sir Alex isn't too fond of these developments and may just retire.. which would be a HUGE blow.

It isn't the end of the world, yet, but it is far more likely to be the end of the world than it was when ManU was a PLC.

[condors]

If you want to look for a positive spin

On fox football friday Nick said Manutd may have up to 120 million to spend this offseason (and will doing the best to put a postive outlook on the club).

Also said this deal only works for Glazer if he is successfull and because he has been tight lipped about his plans alot of the gloom and doom is speculation. He is a successfull buisnessman and has plans to be successfull to make alot of money with Manchester United. Manchester United needs to be in the Champions League and remain at least a top 4 club so the team falling on hard times is a bit premature.

[Francis_Cole]

On fox football friday Nick said Manutd may have up to 120 million to spend this offseason

They won't have £120m to spend this offseason. Maybe £20m, but nowhere near £120m!

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Francis_Cole

On fox football friday Nick said Manutd may have up to 120 million to spend this offseason

They won't have £120m to spend this offseason. Maybe £20m, but nowhere near £120m!

It'll take about 120m to make them title contenders again.

[ISiddiqui]

Hell, I heard Wigan Athletic are going to have 25 million to spend this offseason!

[Celeval]

We hate Wigan.

[ice4277]

Early favorites to go right back down, but Roberts and Ellington should do quite nicely at that level of play.

[Critch]

According to one of the English newspapers yesterday (Sunday People), Glazer's first move will be to bring Beckham back from Real Madrid. If that's not just newspaper talk, and if they can actually pull it off, it may go part way to placating some Man Utd fans. It would be a smart move, if he doesn't cost a fortune.

[Chubby]

Glazer controls Man Utd

ESPN Soccernet.com News Services

LONDON -- Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner Malcolm Glazer took control of Manchester United on Monday by increasing his stake in the world's richest soccer club to more than 75 percent. Man United fans protest against Malcolm Glazer's takeover bid. (NealSimpson/Empics) Glazer bought more shares to take his ownership level to 75.70 percent by the end of Monday's trading, Glazer's Red Football Ltd. said in a statement to the London Stock Exchange. With 75 percent, Glazer can place his personal debt on United's books and take the club off the stock exchange and into private ownership. Manchester United has been listed on the stock exchange since 1991. The NFL, which usually frowns upon cross-ownership, isn't sure if its rules would prevent Glazer from owning a foreign club. The league's finance committee will discuss it during spring meetings in Washington next week. Glazer is expected to submit a formal document to shareholders on Wednesday. Reaction to Glazer's takeover has been mostly negative and defiant. Fans fear Glazer will sell off the club's 67,000-seat Old Trafford stadium and raise prices. They also oppose foreign ownership. Fans groups are calling for a boycott of Man United sponsors and planning demonstrations at the FA Cup final against Arsenal on Saturday in Cardiff, Wales. "We won't do anything that endangers safety, but they may have to draft in the army to police the match," said Oliver Houston, a vice chairman of Shareholders United. "We are calling on all supporters to wear black in Cardiff on Saturday," said Mark Longden of the Independent Manchester United Supporters Association. "If they can get hold of black flags, they should wave them because it represents what is happening to the club." The group is also calling on fans not to renew their season tickets, to cancel subscriptions to Manchester United's in-house television station, and boycott sponsors Vodafone, Nike, Budweiser and Audi. Financial analysts said Glazer could soon raise his stake to 90 percent. At that level, remaining shareholders would be required to sell their stocks to Glazer. Glazer told the stock exchange Friday he would borrow $490 million to fund the $1.47-billion takeover. Glazer said the bid also included $503 million of his own money, and another $509 million to be generated by issuing preferred securities to large investors. Glazer's ownership reached 56.9 percent on Thursday after he bought out joint majority shareholders J.P. McManus and John Magnier, Irish racehorse owners. He previously owned 28.1 percent of the club. Glazer is not the only current NFL owner to take more than a passing interest in soccer. Kansas City Chiefs owner Lamar Hunt owns 3 MLS teams: The Kansas City Wizards, Dallas Burn and Columbus Crew. He also owned the Dallas Tornado of the old NASL. New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft owns MLS' New England Revolution and is believed to be backing a consortium that might buy into Liverpool of the English Premiership League. The 64-year-old tycoon is evidently keen to add a Premiership franchise to his portfolio.

[Franklinnoble]

Waaaaahhhh. The Europeans had one of their precious soccer teams bought out by a rich American. Boo hoo. Maybe Glazer will change the uniforms and build a new stadium with a working pirate ship in one of the end zones.

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Waaaaahhhh. The Europeans had one of their precious soccer teams bought out by a rich American. Boo hoo. Maybe Glazer will change the uniforms and build a new stadium with a working pirate ship in one of the end zones.

I'd be all for that. So long as the cannons were also used to neutralize soccer riots.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Critch

According to one of the English newspapers yesterday (Sunday People), Glazer's first move will be to bring Beckham back from Real Madrid. If that's not just newspaper talk, and if they can actually pull it off, it may go part way to placating some Man Utd fans. It would be a smart move, if he doesn't cost a fortune.

Are you kidding? Most ManU fans don't WANT Beckham back. They think he was overrated and don't speak very highly of him.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Waaaaahhhh. The Europeans had one of their precious soccer teams bought out by a rich American. Boo hoo. Maybe Glazer will change the uniforms and build a new stadium with a working pirate ship in one of the end zones.

And another person who just simply doesn't get it and goes for knee jerk responses .

[Critch]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Are you kidding? Most ManU fans don't WANT Beckham back. They think he was overrated and don't speak very highly of him.

Well he is seriously over-rated, but I'd bet they'd be happy if they got him back for less that half what Real Madrid paid for him.

[ISiddiqui]

Do you think Madrid would really sell Beckham for 12 million? I'd assume they'd want a ton more than that.

[Galaxy]

What happens if the NFL steps up and tells Glazer its against the rules?

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Waaaaahhhh. The Europeans had one of their precious soccer teams bought out by a rich American. Boo hoo. Maybe Glazer will change the uniforms and build a new stadium with a working pirate ship in one of the end zones.

I think if he'd paid cash, there would have been much, much less of an outcry. Most of the controversy has centered around the amount of debt being used to finance the purchase. The fact that he's an American isn't a plus, but isn't central to the issue.

[Critch]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Do you think Madrid would really sell Beckham for 12 million? I'd assume they'd want a ton more than that.

They've lost the league, there's going to be a shake up, and Beckham's stock isn't nearly as high as it was a few years ago. Beckham was getting grief in the Spanish press for being more hype than actual talent, one opponent said he wasn't in the top 10000 players in the world, never mind the top 10. So he could get scapegoated out along with a few other players.

I guess his pricetag is mostly dependent on who's after him, if the rumors of Arsenal or Chelsea being interested are true then he would go higher. I don't know, the transfer market doesn't seem to make sense any more

[andy m]

for fans of real football in the lower divisions of England, this deal means nothing whatsoever. we can continue to go to see our shitty teams play a technically inferior brand of football, but one that features more sincerity and heart than the pr£mi£rship. money has been making a mockery of the sport in England for a fair few years, my interest in the top flight has dwindled, and this business move is just the cumulation of the destruction of the soul of the game at the highest level. personally, i have a great deal of trouble caring. business is business, and united would never have had the extreme level of success that they did back in without lowering their boxer shorts, bending over, and inviting the great god of the almighty pound to apply the lubricant and, well, the rest writes itself. united have reamed football, and now they are being reamed themselves. poetic justice.

[Wolfpack]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

What happens if the NFL steps up and tells Glazer its against the rules?

That would be a twist to the tale. If the NFL forced him to sell, would it assuage ManU fans if he put the proceeds of the sale of the Bucs into the debt? I'm not sure how much the franchise is worth, but the Redskins set the benchmark a few years back at something like $800 million if I remember right. The Bucs aren't quite that valuable, but a Super Bowl winner with a shiny stadium that's less than ten years old I think should be worth around $500 million.

On the other hand, if the NFL told him no-go, would he rather have TB over ManU? I'm guessing not, because if he's as money-grubbing as people make him out to be, ManU has far bigger money-making potential than the Bucs.

[rexallllsc]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

On the other hand, if the NFL told him no-go, would he rather have TB over ManU? I'm guessing not, because if he's as money-grubbing as people make him out to be, ManU has far bigger money-making potential than the Bucs.

A few NFL owners have MLS teams. I doubt the NFL will say anything.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by Wolfpack

That would be a twist to the tale. If the NFL forced him to sell, would it assuage ManU fans if he put the proceeds of the sale of the Bucs into the debt? I'm not sure how much the franchise is worth, but the Redskins set the benchmark a few years back at something like $800 million if I remember right. The Bucs aren't quite that valuable, but a Super Bowl winner with a shiny stadium that's less than ten years old I think should be worth around $500 million.

On the other hand, if the NFL told him no-go, would he rather have TB over ManU? I'm guessing not, because if he's as money-grubbing as people make him out to be, ManU has far bigger money-making potential than the Bucs.

I would be suprised if he put his own cash into the Man U's debt.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Do you think Madrid would really sell Beckham for 12 million? I'd assume they'd want a ton more than that.

As Critch said, the word out of Madrid is that a major shake-up is planned. Despite the plan of buying tons of world class players, the team hasn't really performed up to expectations (i.e. win everything, handily), and it's possible they'll take another tack. In such a case, Madrid are more likely to view Beckham (and others) as "what can we get for him?" as opposed to "can we recoup our original investment?"

I, for one, didn't think he was overrated at Man U. He fit the right wing of their 4-4-2 perfectly, and was an integral part of that team in its glory days. The major problem Man U had, really, was that he wanted to move inside, where he wasn't nearly as effective.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Critch

They've lost the league, there's going to be a shake up, and Beckham's stock isn't nearly as high as it was a few years ago. Beckham was getting grief in the Spanish press for being more hype than actual talent, one opponent said he wasn't in the top 10000 players in the world, never mind the top 10. So he could get scapegoated out along with a few other players.

I guess his pricetag is mostly dependent on who's after him, if the rumors of Arsenal or Chelsea being interested are true then he would go higher. I don't know, the transfer market doesn't seem to make sense any more

If Madrid puts Beckham on the market for 12 million, I'm sure a number of English teams will line up to get him. With so much debt, can ManU win the bidding war? Most likely not.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

If Madrid puts Beckham on the market for 12 million, I'm sure a number of English teams will line up to get him. With so much debt, can ManU win the bidding war? Most likely not.

Beckham would only contribute to Man U's collection of aging stars. They need to get younger. I would be very suprised if they bring him back.

[ISiddiqui]

We're talking Glazier here. He's trying to market to Americans. He'd probably sign Beckham over the objections of the manager (NOT SAF next year).

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

We're talking Glazier here. He's trying to market to Americans. He'd probably sign Beckham over the objections of the manager (NOT SAF next year).

He also built a winning program in Tampa Bay. Like I said, I would be very suprised if Beckham is back.

[Mac Howard]

The Beckham thing might indicate that he will make decisions that maximise the commercial appeal of the club but are not the best for on-field performance. He might sell many replica shirts in China and up his income from TV deals in Asia if he has three or four Chinese players regularly in his first team.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

He also built a winning program in Tampa Bay. Like I said, I would be very suprised if Beckham is back.

It's easier to have a winning program in the NFL than in the EPL, if you aren't merely spending more than the competition.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

It's easier to have a winning program in the NFL than in the EPL, if you aren't merely spending more than the competition.

That goes without saying, since you can't really spend more than the competition in the NFL. The EPL is more comparable to MLB. But the desire to build a successful program was made evident with Tampa Bay. He could have gone the Vikings mode and stayed $20 million under the cap, sucking every last dollar out, but he didn't.

He's not an idiot, and obviously has to realize that to continue to generate revenue, Man U have to remain a top club.

[robbgmaier]

is it too early to start an office pool for the season that man u is relegated?

i'm just asking....

[ice4277]

2150

[Desnudo]

Has anyone ever had them relegated in FM? They came close in my Norwich game, finishing 17th a few seasons in a row.

[ice4277]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

Has anyone ever had them relegated in FM? They came close in my Norwich game, finishing 17th a few seasons in a row.

In some of the older CM's I used to have some of the big teams relegated quite often. Hasn't happened that I can recall in FM though.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

That goes without saying, since you can't really spend more than the competition in the NFL. The EPL is more comparable to MLB. But the desire to build a successful program was made evident with Tampa Bay. He could have gone the Vikings mode and stayed $20 million under the cap, sucking every last dollar out, but he didn't.

He's not an idiot, and obviously has to realize that to continue to generate revenue, Man U have to remain a top club.

However, with the debt payment compared to ManU's profits, they aren't going to have nearly enough money to make the transfer payments they need to bring in enough talent to compete with Chelsea and Arsenal.

I think Glazer hasn't realized all the pitfalls of this debt deal.

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

However, with the debt payment compared to ManU's profits, they aren't going to have nearly enough money to make the transfer payments they need to bring in enough talent to compete with Chelsea and Arsenal.

I think Glazer hasn't realized all the pitfalls of this debt deal.

I'm sure he has a very good understanding of the risks involved. It's not like he rushed into this situation out of the blue. I think it's far more likely that no one understands the poential upside as well he does. For that, we'll just have to wait and see.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I'm sure he has a very good understanding of the risks involved. It's not like he rushed into this situation out of the blue. I think it's far more likely that no one understands the poential upside as well he does. For that, we'll just have to wait and see.

Quite frankly, I don't think the previous ownership was slacking on money making possibilities. Why is he the only one that sees the potential upsides? Where the previous owners dumb?

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Quite frankly, I don't think the previous ownership was slacking on money making possibilities. Why is he the only one that sees the potential upsides? Where the previous owners dumb?

He was one of the previous owners.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Quite frankly, I don't think the previous ownership was slacking on money making possibilities. Why is he the only one that sees the potential upsides? Where the previous owners dumb?

The public management pushed the United, but they didn't truly capitalize on the brand and club. Glazer likely sees a much more potential global market that can be tapped.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

He was one of the previous owners.

Not a managing owner. IIRC, he didn't even control a board seat.

Originally Posted by Galaxy

The public management pushed the United, but they didn't truly capitalize on the brand and club. Glazer likely sees a much more potential global market that can be tapped.

The public management didn't want to be lynched by the fans, which is exactly what is happening to Glazer. And the 'potential global market', what is he going to do? Resign Beckham so he can sell more shirts in the US? Sign Chinese players to get money from there? Decisions on those grounds will kill the club that much faster.

ManU is the richest club the world and is known by every football fan... what greater market is he going to tap?

[Desnudo]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Not a managing owner. IIRC, he didn't even control a board seat.

He owned 27% of the club, which, whether you're active in day to day decision making, means that you're paying attention to what's going on.

[Galaxy]

Anyone catch Outside the Lines last night? Focused on Glazer-ManU.

Also, saw on BBC that Sir Alex will likely get 25 million pounds to spend.

[terpkristin]

Curious, any update on the NFL being annoyed with Glazer over the ManU/casino stuff?

I heard about it briefly (probably on the radio) and then never saw mention of it again (including a very quick and non-thorough look at Soccernet)...

/tk

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by terpkristin

Curious, any update on the NFL being annoyed with Glazer over the ManU/casino stuff?

I heard about it briefly (probably on the radio) and then never saw mention of it again (including a very quick and non-thorough look at Soccernet)...

/tk

They can't be overly upset about it as they've just scheduled a SB at Raymond James...

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

Also, saw on BBC that Sir Alex will likely get 25 million pounds to spend.

I saw that too... OUCH. That may push Sir Alex out. That is no where NEAR enough to catch Chelsea... or even Arsenal.