TMRD no matter what you think of MUST they couldn't have done as much damage as the Glazers. Name one seriously positive thing the Glazers have done for the club? I can only see negatives
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
I personally believe they may own a lot more than the 20% estimate - quite possibly the whole lot in fact.
Anyway we shall see what tomorrow brings ...
Anyway we shall see what tomorrow brings ...
The majority all knew what they were protesting about. There were diverse opinions amongst those who wore it, yet it was a very visual and effective representation of disquiet amongst the fanbase against the ownership. Just picking up on a few kids waving the scarves is an incredibly poor argument.
The media don't report it as lies, that is mainly on the forums or in pubs/matches etc.
You haven't touched a nerve with the MUST criticism in the slightest, it just seems to be a bit personal with some of you against them when all they are are fans like you or I. They are unpaid volunteers who care about the club, whether you agree them or not is different, but some of the abuse and vindictiveness is above and beyond what can be classed as reasonable criticism and puts those attacking them in a very poor light.
The most amount of harm to United in recent years has been done by the Glazers themselves.
TMRD I am disappointed that is all you can come up with, you starting to see the light?
This is pretty much how everyone else sees it. There can be no better use of the money than to pay down the PIKs (as far as the Glazers are concerned).
The problem is is that they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
The PIK debt has nothing to do with Manchester United directly but it always seems to get added to "our" debt at every available opportunity (see the article posted on here tonight which quotes a "£700million debt").
I hate to see that money leave United but if it gets rid of those damned PIKs and puts us into a situation where we all know exactly where we stand then that will be a blessing as far as I'm concerned.
If the money isn't shown to have been taken out tomorrow then we're all in the dark again until the accounts come out (next month???) that give details of the situation with the PIKs.
I doubt if we'll find out. If the report Anders posted proves true (it seems a reliable source) then it should have been noted in the the 2009 accounts, but wasn't, so unless they have bought the whole lot and written it will be difficult to find out the true position.
Well, I had to start somewhere. Now it's your turn to give me a positive from MUST.
Take a ganders at the Ronaldo bit TMRD, settles that arguement about whether or not we would have made a loss without selling Ronaldo. If this report is accurate the picture is not as rosy for the Glazers as you lads would make us believe
Manchester United suffer new blow as accounts reveal £716 million debts - Telegraph
Manchester United suffer new blow as accounts reveal £716 million debts - Telegraph
MUST? They have the interest of the fans and club as their priority and other than that I don't know alot about them, I am not involved or have ever went out of my way to defend MUST but they are certainly not a threat to Manchester United, Glazers are
No it isn't. The boasts of the "swathes of green & gold" were including those kids. Look at that photo in the article Crerand posted tonight (and there have been many more like it) and look at the people in it. Now, I might be being incredibly judgemental here but most of them look like teenagers to me. Do they REALLY know what the hell is going on? Have they REALLY weighed up both sides of the argument?
And Anders' blog. See his ridiculing of Gill for a classic example.
Yes, I know all about how they're unpaid volunteers and I know how tough it all is for even Big Dunc himself. Anders himself has told me all this, too. I didn't feel guilty then and I don't feel guilty now. If you want to describe them as a bunch of amateurs, I won't stop you.
I also care very much for Manchester United but I show it in a completely different way. I'd rather give the Glazers the benefit of the doubt and see how they do... and on that note...
Yes, it's been absolute agony watching us enjoy our most successful period ever. Imagine how much worse it would have been had MUST et al not attempted to throw spanners in the works at every available opportunity?
Proof Crerand. Proof. You have to back that up with proof. Not ask me to disprove it.
The Glazers have been here for five years now and they seem to be running the club well, to me.
MUST have been doing everything in their power to undermine everything the Glazers are attempting to achieve.
Imagine how much better it might have been over the last five years if you remove the influence of MUST.
I'm sorry but whichever way you paint it, things could only have been better.
Bloody hell, Crerand. That article is from January.
Haven't you read anything in the meantime?
He's still saying it!!! WTF?!
MUST have been try to highlight how the fans have suffered, ticket prices the ACS etc with no real benefit to the club. What are the Glazers trying to achieve? I don't really know they have hiding behind Gills skirts now for 5 years, what ever it is it will be for their greedy good.
The Glazers might have done themselves a favour by talking to MUST and the only thing that would have made things better was the Glazers sticking to running poxy shopping malls in Florida and not taking on something they couldn't afford
You sound like a patronising old man here.
You seem obsessed with Anders. His blog is far less influential than you think. I would imagine the percentage of the fanbase who read it is very low.
There is nothing wrong with criticism or sceptisim. It is far healthier than apathy.
Excellent, the inevitable success argument! At least you are consistently predictable.
Please explain what damage that MUST have done that is greater than the cost to United of the debt imposed on it by the Glazers and the ticket price increases pricing out some of the core support?
Of course it is from Jan, just backing up points I made earlier, you forget?
Are these the same independently thinking fans that datura was referring to? I thought they don't need MUST to bring this stuff to their attention?
Crerand, forgive me if I am wrong but don't you run your own pub business or something? I have come to this conclusion from a couple of posts you have put on different threads recently. Answer me this and we'll go from there.
MUST might have done themselves a favour by talking to the Glazers before going all out to set the fans against them before they had even taken control of the club.
MUST and the Red Knights clearly can't afford it either but it doesn't stop them from making an absolute arse of themselves. I wish it would.
Could these be the figures we are waiting on sounds plausible to me. I can see a sea of green and gold....
Glazer debt drains Manchester United's £100m record profits | Football | The Guardian
Glazer debt drains Manchester United's £100m record profits | Football | The Guardian
No. The figures still come tomorrow, I'm afraid.
TMRD I am not a big expert on MUST I speak for myself but they are sincere in acting for fans and have been right in opposing the Glazers from the start, their fears well founded. Personally I would have kept some distance from the red knights until they were sure about them on all fronts, although they do remain atm the most viable avenue in removing the toxic Glazers, and yes I own a pub business
Havent seen that report as Ive not managed to keep with all the discussion of the last few days. However, I think we are unlikely to ever know the detail of the PIKs - they are after all the Glazer's personal debt so do not need to be covered in these accounts.
Most people expected to see a large outflow from our cash reserves in the annual results - the assumption was that any payment would be used to pay down the PIK loan.
i think it was around £100m cash in the bank last time and will probably be higher if no payment has been taken.
There is also the possibility that the Glazers take a dividend and use it for something other than paying off debt.
Look convincing to me but I could be wrong, if they are accurate you would surely be disappointed
On the current model any old cnut (like you for example) could own the club since club funds are being used to fund the acquisition.
Agreed, I did raise the possibility that they would just take the cash for other uses, but was shouted down that it 'wouldn't make business sense'.
That something their expensive lifestyle? We are the only business that they are able to take money out of, their cashcow
It could be that they just plan to redeem the whole lot together when they've been able to secure new borrowing and use the dividend cash to make up the difference. Maybe it all has to be redeemed together? Extremely unlikely I would have thought but who knows.
It's perfectly possible that they own more than 20% of the PIK debt, but even if they don't, the pressure to redeem part of the PIK debt isn't as great as we all thought prior to the news about the 20% purchase. If you put that together with the preference to redeem the entire PIK debt in one go along with the benefit of avoiding negative publicity for a little while longer then maybe that's the answer. Or maybe not.
It was a more a case that the covenants on the PIK loan wouldn't legally allow the cash to flow out of RFJV Ltd to be used for something else.
GCHQ sounds a little concerned, all not well in Glazerland? The 20% they own of the PIKs is of no benefit to the club, the club pays the interest and the Glazers personally collect it do they not
Does anyone know the covenants on the PIKs? I didn't think they were in the public realm.
Do be quiet Crerand. Either add something useful to the debate or don't post at all.
I thought I did, if you do not wish to respond that is your right. Looks like a difficult day ahead tomorrow, chin up
They aren't. It's thought to be inconceivable (by Anders included) that the PIK covenants don't restrict that level of cash leaving the group whist the PIKs remain in place.
OK. I presume you deliberately run this pub business at a loss and not for your own "greedy good"? I presume you sell your beer at a price well below all the other pubs in the local area even though you suffer financially because of your benevolence?
Yes. I am being sarcastic and, I would suggest, you are being hypocritical.
The Glazers are businessmen, just like you. The type of business might be different and the scale might be different but the motive behind it is just the same - to make money.
As a Landlord, you presumably know what it is that your customers want. A great atmosphere, perhaps good food and, basically, a place to come and relax and have a pint with friends. If you provide your customers with the things they want from your pub then they should be happy, yes? And keep coming back for more. This means that they are happy and you are happy (because you make a living and can feel good about yourself for making your customers happy).
Is this such a departure from what the Glazers are trying to do?
All things considered, should we, as United fans, be happy at the service we have received from our owners over the last five years?
If none of us were privy to the accounts. If none of us knew how the Glazers had come by the funds to purchase the club. If none of us had ever read the Bond prospectus. Would any of us really have a great deal to complain about with how the Glazers have run the club since 2005?
Removing all financial considerations for a moment. Have you seen a marked deterioration in the quality of "service" or "product" we have seen in the last five years?
Yes, we might complain that the price of the "product" has gone up over the last five years but have we still not had value for our money?
What else is there to complain about? Would you honestly attach such significance to the sale of Ronaldo and the departure of Tevez if we were not privy to the financial details?
Would you close your mind completely to all other explanations as to why they may have left in the manner in which you are doing?
Pre-exceptional EBITDA of over £100m eh. That would strongly suggest to me that the £6m management fee wasn't taken. The plot thickens. (Guardian numbers could very easily be wrong mind).
Excuse me, but I've been saying all along that could be the case, and you've stood here saying its just impossible.
Completely changed your tune now.
Is this still going?
We all know the glazers are parasites and all we are arguing about it how bad the financial situation is. So far we seem to have avoided the very worst but it does seem that the very top end of transfers is beyond our means or our wills. It also seems that currently their is also no viable alternative.
We need Bill Gates to buy us and give the club to the supporters
We all know the glazers are parasites and all we are arguing about it how bad the financial situation is. So far we seem to have avoided the very worst but it does seem that the very top end of transfers is beyond our means or our wills. It also seems that currently their is also no viable alternative.
We need Bill Gates to buy us and give the club to the supporters
Is there? I don't think there's any way the PIK terms would allow significant cash leakage from RFJV. Otherwise the Glazers could strip the club, funnel themselves the cash and leave the PIKs to default, with the PIK lenders then owning a worthless asset. No chance any lender puts themselves in that position.
YES YOU DOPEY TWONK..
THE TICKET PRICES ARE GOING THROUGH THE BLOODY ROOF...
HAVE YOU BEEN ASLEEP FOR THE LAST 5 YEARS.
I know they say ignorance is bliss, but you are abusing the privilige...
As I've tried to argue all the way along. We dont know how much of United is secured agaisnt the PIKs
We dont know the ins and outs of the covenants. So without knowing those details you cannot discount anything.
You could argue that taking loans or management fees is cash leakage. Albeit under another name.
One thing I am sure of. At some point, Glazer has to put money back into his shopping malls, because the money to buy United was taken from there. He can barely afford to cover the loans he's taken out so at some point or other he is going to get the money and put it back. I am absolutely convinced of it.
How he does it, thats a different matter.
- Status