Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Messier1994 said:
I agree, but it is important to remember that the first thing you look at when doing a valuation -- and what trumps everything else by a mile -- is transactions or similar transactions. Any independent valuation tends to give you what could be referred to as "Fair Value". But -- of course depending on the times and climate on the market -- it is extremely common with transactions being made at prices way way above "fair value", and it is those prices that de facto are "market value". Musk bought Twitter for 44m. If you google "What is Twitter worth?", you will find a bunch of people claiming that Twitter is worth 13.3bn or whatever number way below 44bn. If someone asked what Twitter was worth right before Musk bought the company, there was one 100% correct answer, and that was 44bn. If someone said 30bn, they were incorrect by 14bn. The market decides what something's market value is. And when a club like Manchester United plc is sold, the value is what people from time to time is willing to pay for it. Nothing else. The value is never what someone think that someone else should pay for it if they were smart, because that is rarely how the market works.

In addition, lets say that there is a big dispute with some type of connection to the Manchester United plc and in this dispute, the question what Manchester United plc is "worth" becomes relevant, and a claimant and a respondent respectively obtains external "independent" valuations from the best valuation experts available in all of UK, to see one showing that Manchester United plc is worth 1.5bn and the other saying that Manchester United plc is worth 12bn would be more the norm than the exception. You can simply dribble a ton with these valuations if you want to. And in reality, its basically as easy to make a forecast about the future as it is to predict the weather. You are entering a very unsecure field to start with.
Click to expand...
Wow, this is insightful. Thanks.

Rightly or wrongly, when I want to sell something I ask for double its value in case I get lucky. Then I lower the price slowly over time if no one bites. Do you think the Glazers are trying this?
 
United can compete with the state owned clubs provided the right structure is in place and they spend the money sensibly. Ratcliffe sounds about as good as it gets in terms of realistic options even though I’m sure he’s a bit of a cnut (as anyone that rich tends to be). It does sound a bit too good to be true though - I expect an increased offer from a despotic regime or a Todd Boehly-like figure. That tent at the WEF in Davos is there for a reason…..
 
Id like to offer a counterpoint to the SJR excitement.
I think he would make us successful in the long term, however it will take time.

Midle eastern investment would go big to get it right now. Worth considering.
 
Not sure about Ratcliffe but Ineos teams have done well in cycling and F1.

Nice on the other hand...

At least we have movement.
 
mitchmouse said:
probably a stupid question but is he rich enough? will he be able to fund bringing in the number of players we still need - and be able to go on doing so?
Click to expand...

He is potentially wealthy enough, if he had the idiocy of selling some of the shares he owns. But he isn't the one that would purchase the club, it would be INEOS.
 
I don’t know why fans get so hung up on ‘what we want’. It’s moot, it doesn’t matter what we want. The Glazers will do what they want, like they’ve always done. And now they will sell to the highest bidder.
 
Messier1994 said:
I can see a businessman coming in and not liking a Thomas Tuchel, but no businessman will not like Erik Ten Hag. It is as likely as a male not liking Samantha Fox or Pamela Andersson.
Click to expand...
What age were you in 1994?
 
Rightnr said:
Not sure about Ratcliffe but Ineos teams have done well in cycling and F1.

Nice on the other hand...

At least we have movement.
Click to expand...

One could argue that Nice and the French league are small enough that they don't really care enough to compete with PSG.

You would hope like with Mercedes at United they would care enough to try make us the best
 
phelans shorts said:
I fail to see a downside to Ratcliffe here.
Click to expand...
Ratcliffe doesn't have the cash to spend on a stadium and buy us the players to compete right now, especially if he gets near the Glazers' asking price.

Dubai for me.
 
Rozay said:
We can compete, financially, regardless. As much as I can agree that the Glazers are not good owners, I have never understood this rhetoric over the past decade plus that our ownership model prevents us from competing in the transfer market, despite annual evidence to the contrary. Unless what we are after is total financial dominance over every other club in the world, the narrative is just clearly false.
Click to expand...
We can compete - but not the same way as if we were debt free or having money taken out by the glazers
 
Rightnr said:
Ratcliffe doesn't have the cash to spend on a stadium and buy us the players to compete right now, especially if he gets near the Glazers' asking price.

Dubai for me.
Click to expand...

United can continue to outspend everyone on players as we have been doing (whilst saddled with debt) for most of the last decade and EtH seems perfectly capable of coaching any player we bring in. We don't need new owners for that, we need them to clear the Glazer debt, put an end to dividends and secure funding for the OT/Carrington refurbs.
 
If the cnuts want £5B the least they can do is clear any debt before leaving.
 
Good news, but what worries me is if there are loads of bids, then who is there to stop the Glazers taking the one that is the best for them, ie the highest price, but the worst for United, ie debt funded buyout?

Dubai is appealing, but I'd take Ratcliffe now personally.
 
I don't think they will be the winners. We will receive plenty more bids and still think someone from the ME is the likeliest buyer.
 
Glazers will sell to the highest bidder and it's difficult to beat the ME bids
 
phelans shorts said:
Good job it’s INEOS and not Ratcliffe alone bidding then, isn’t it.
Click to expand...
They're worth what? £60bn? That is assets, not cash.

So they need to shell out 15-20% of their asset base to get us competing.

Not enough
 
TrebleChamp99 said:
Id like to offer a counterpoint to the SJR excitement.
I think he would make us successful in the long term, however it will take time.

Midle eastern investment would go big to get it right now. Worth considering.
Click to expand...
But middle eastern investment is off putting. State owned clubs shouldn't be allowed regardless; especially morally questionable ones.
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
Good news, but what worries me is if there are loads of bids, then who is there to stop the Glazers taking the one that is the best for them, ie the highest price, but the worst for United, ie debt funded buyout?

Dubai is appealing, but I'd take Ratcliffe now personally.
Click to expand...

Clearlake have taken £800m of debt to purchase Chelsea

So long as it’s not leveraged against the club
 
Status
Not open for further replies.