ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lee Sharpe today branded the £700 million debt mountain amassed at Manchester United by its controversial American owners as 'disgraceful'.

The 38-year-old former Old Trafford 'wonderkid' said the Glazer family's running of the club had 'undermined' two decades of success at the club under Sir Alex Ferguson.

Speaking ahead of tonight's Carling Cup semi-final clash between Manchester United and Manchester City, Sharpe said: “It’s disgraceful and a huge shame what is going on with the debt.

"The hard work carried out by Sir Alex Ferguson and everyone at the club over the last 20 years is at threat."

“United have been winning titles galore, building the club up in to a force. The Glazer’s have undermined all this hard work and stole its thunder.

“Who made the decision to sell to the Glazers? It’s wrong that the club has been put in to so much debt and then you hear stories of them taking money out of the club as well…
 
theimperialinn said:
If you take the Ronaldo sale our of the equation we would have made a loss of £74m.

That's £27m more lost than in 2008. I would have expected to see an improvement as the Glazer ownership moves forward but no, things are getting worse.

Those figures are on the back of us winning the champions league as well.

Also do not forget that this years turnover was almost £300m.

Turnover improved but profit nose dived. You don't have to be a financial whizzkid to work out we are in shit street.

No wonder they are desperate for this bond issue to go through.
Click to expand...

They're not chumps, I just don't understand their plan? Growth has been beyond their original forecast, ticket prices have increased beyond original forecast, transfer spending has been less than original forecast to the tune of about £200 million... success of the pitch has to be beyond their expectations, because if we're planning for that level of constant success we'll be up shit creak... I just can't make any sense of it
 
peterstorey said:
No way are the turkeys voting for Xmas. In any case the FIFA/UEFA and EU pressure is for collective agreements.
Click to expand...

I agree its a long shot BUT the loss of revenue without United in the EPL would far outweigh the tiny amount the clubs get from the overseas deal. the marketing manager at Ford stated that United represented about 50% of the money they pumped into the deal they had with Sky. In other words the EPL TV deals and sponsorships could drop dramatically with any decline in United's fortunes.
 
B Cantona said:
They're not chumps, I just don't understand their plan? Growth has been beyond their original forecast, ticket prices have increased beyond original forecast, transfer spending has been less than original forecast to the tune of about £200 million... success of the pitch has to be beyond their expectations, because if we're planning for that level of constant success we'll be up shit creak... I just can't make any sense of it
Click to expand...

I think they were planning on refinancing at a lower rate, AND getting the overseas TV right.
 
B Cantona said:
They're not chumps, I just don't understand their plan? Growth has been beyond their original forecast, ticket prices have increased beyond original forecast, transfer spending has been less than original forecast to the tune of about £200 million... success of the pitch has to be beyond their expectations, because if we're planning for that level of constant success we'll be up shit creak... I just can't make any sense of it
Click to expand...

I suspect they expected the market to be more favourable to refinancing the crippling interest rates a lot sooner. If they had managed to do that, getting them down to a more reasonable percentage, then they wouldn't be in too bad a shape now. As it is, we're looking more and more fecked.
 
B Cantona said:
They're not chumps, I just don't understand their plan? Growth has been beyond their original forecast, ticket prices have increased beyond original forecast, transfer spending has been less than original forecast to the tune of about £200 million... success of the pitch has to be beyond their expectations, because if we're planning for that level of constant success we'll be up shit creak... I just can't make any sense of it
Click to expand...

I'd say they invested at a time - when the global economy was on the up, things looked rosy, money was available from the bank. They thought hold the club for 3-4 year then sell on for a £100-£120 profit for them.

Sadly it does not look good
 
Bread said:
we're fecked
Click to expand...

Scary thing is without investment will will not keep up with our rivals. If we don't keep up we will not win. If we don't win the revenues will drop dramatically.

We could go into a death spin pretty bloody quickly once it starts.
 
I like a few supporters have probably tried to kid ourselves about the situation but its very clear that right now we are in a very dangerous position both on and off the pitch. It's actually sicknening to see some of the figures we not only owe overall but just in interest alone.
 
even God can't save us now.

Anyone who wants to buy United is going to have to pay 1.2-1.5 billion, who is actually going to do that. I can't see it.

We are so royally screwed it's not even funny :annoyed:
 
B Cantona said:
They're not chumps, I just don't understand their plan? Growth has been beyond their original forecast, ticket prices have increased beyond original forecast, transfer spending has been less than original forecast to the tune of about £200 million... success of the pitch has to be beyond their expectations, because if we're planning for that level of constant success we'll be up shit creak... I just can't make any sense of it
Click to expand...

I think it's the growth that has let them down.

I think they were banking on an individual TV deal, more sponsors, etc.

If you look at the new sponsors we have they are very low rent (Hublot, Saudi telecom, etc).
 
theimperialinn said:
I think it's the growth that has let them down.

I think they were banking on an individual TV deal, more sponsors, etc.

If you look at the new sponsors we have they are very low rent (Hublot, Saudi telecom, etc).
Click to expand...

There fecking idiots if they ever thought that was going to happen.

In the Premier League, you need 16 of 20 clubs to vote yes to pass a motion like that. Individual TV deal would only only benefit 4 or 5 clubs, so it wont happen.

And how do you mean that our sponsors are "low rent"?
 
theimperialinn said:
I think it's the growth that has let them down.

I think they were banking on an individual TV deal, more sponsors, etc.

If you look at the new sponsors we have they are very low rent (Hublot, Saudi telecom, etc).
Click to expand...

They never even tried to push for an individual TV deal in 2007. So I don't think can can have been part of their plan.
 
The overseas TV deal was their target. Back in 2005 the deal was only worth a couple of million a year per club. United could probably rake in 100 million with proper marketing and pay-per-view over the web.
 
The worst part of all this is the complete lack of control we have over our own club.

Your everyday United fan had no say in them coming and has no say in getting them out.

We can express our concern and anger - but where is that gonna get us? When have the Glazers ever shown any ounce of respect or concern for the real United fans?

It's a sorry situation.
 
theimperialinn said:
I think it's the growth that has let them down.

I think they were banking on an individual TV deal, more sponsors, etc.

If you look at the new sponsors we have they are very low rent (Hublot, Saudi telecom, etc).
Click to expand...

I've never seen anything that says THEY were after the individual TV deal, nothing in the leaked original business plan... that seems to be something of a myth assumption

How much more were they expecting to get from sponsorship?!

It just smacks of being overly optimistic, and it blowing up in their faces
 
There is no way that they thought that they could break the TV deal - it is immposible and will never be done!

Not sure about the international TV deal but I imagine it is highly unlikely!



What is sure is that we have ONE worldclass player that people all around the world will pay to see. We had two but we sold Ronaldo.

Without buying new outstanding talents every few years, as we have always, the interest and revenues will fall substantially!

That quote from the Ford Marketing guy - he won't be saying that in four or five years if Fergie's gone and the team hasn't won regular trophies with top players.


What the feck the Glazer's were hoping for is immpossible to tell. They definitely were counting on moving the debt to far, far lower interest rates.


BAD INVESTMENT, basically, eh?
 
Surely they're looking for a way out?

Don't know how true it was but a post on a forum said that it was front page news there was a guy in Dubai interested...
 
I'd love to know how they convinced anybody this business plan would work.

I fancy borrowing a couple of million.
 
Number7 said:
Don't know how true it was but a post on a forum said that it was front page news there was a guy in Dubai interested...
Click to expand...
I'm sure there a plenty of similar rumours.

If Manchester United, even with this debt, cannot attract a buyer then there's something wrong.

The important thing is getting the 'right' buyer.
 
blythy said:
I'd love to know how they convinced anybody this business plan would work.

I fancy borrowing a couple of million.
Click to expand...

I could never understand how they passed the 'fit and propper owners' test of the premierleague. Surely a test which allows a club to opperate with such debt under such ownership cannot be considered fit and propper.

The premierleague, UEFA and Fifa were 5 years behind groups like shareholdersunited in showing concerns over club debt.

Ridiculous.
 
Manchester United's debt passes £700m
Manchester United's parent company's overall debt has swelled to £716.5million, latest accounts reveal.

The company Red Football Joint Venture Ltd, which is owned by the Glazer family, filed accounts today for the year ending June 30 2009 showing their overall debt has gone past the £700million mark for the first time, increasing by £17million from £699million.

The biggest rise has come in the payment in kind (PIK) loans, which typically have a higher interest rate, which show a £27million increase to £202million. Bank loans, meanwhile, have dropped by £9million to £509million.

The overall debt figure, not contained in the prospectus for a £500million bond issue released last week, illustrate why the Glazers are so keen to raise cash through bonds to reduce the interest on the debt.

.....................
Red Football Joint Venture paid out £68.5million in interest on their debts in 2009 but unlike the previous year, returned an overall profit of £6.4milllion in 2009. In 2008, they returned a £47million loss.

Manchester United's debt passes £700m | Football

According to these figures, if they manage to sell the bonds at 9% they will save 68-45 = 23 million on interest alone (at 10% they will save 18 million). However the PIK's, which now amount to 202 million at 14.25% will increase to 230 million next year.
 
blythy said:
I'm sure there a plenty of similar rumours.

If Manchester United, even with this debt, cannot attract a buyer then there's something wrong.

The important thing is getting the 'right' buyer.
Click to expand...

I was always suprised nobody 'fought' Glazer for ownership back in 2005, seemed he was the only interested party.

Are we, despite being a profitable business, worth £1billion+ of someones money?
 
Number7 said:
I could never understand how they passed the 'fit and propper owners' test of the premierleague. Surely a test which allows a club to opperate with such debt under such ownership cannot be considered fit and propper. .
Click to expand...
The 'fit and proper' thing is bollocks. Basically if you're not banned from that sport then you're in... ;)
 
Number7 said:
I was always suprised nobody 'fought' Glazer for ownership back in 2005, seemed he was the only interested party.

Are we, despite being a profitable business, worth £1billion+ of someones money?
Click to expand...

Well the Irish pulled out. Which suggests they thought United was overpriced.
 
gaffs said:
And how do you mean that our sponsors are "low rent"?
Click to expand...

Well the likes of Hublot and Suadi Telecom are not exactly household names. What happened to this 'global brand' they are trying to leverage off. Sounds like a load of old bollocks to me.

Number7 said:
Don't know how true it was but a post on a forum said that it was front page news there was a guy in Dubai interested...
Click to expand...

I think they paraded their roadshow around DIC and then there were rumours of a 1.2b bid.
 
Is a business that with annual profits of £70-80 million worth 1.2 Billion?


It seems there isn't any interest in buying United - in the past four years has anyone really looked at buying us?

I wonder how much we would float on the LSE for? Not enough for the Glazers I suspect!
 
probably our best chance is to get the glazers to sell asap and for as little as possible

we need an investor to come in and take on those debts

we are an attractive proposition given our fanbase and money making capability - we made a profit because of the ronaldo sale but surely we would have anyway if we didnt have the ridiculous interest payments

i think the directors who resigned after the takeover cared about the club - i wouldnt ask fergie to resign but major figures at the club need to stand up and be heard - they need to come out and openly criticise and question what is going on

i think the only way we are going to get these fecks to sell is to vote with our feet - i know some will say its counter productive and cutting our noses off but in 2 years whats to stop us being a billion in debt -as the debt grows the chances of getting investors who can buy those bastards out grow slimmer and slimmer

if they are allowed to sell OT/Carrington it will set us back years in our development - if we make their position as the clubs owners untenable they will have to sell surely

this is the worst crisis the club has faced in 50 years
 
Something else,

for the past year (2009) Red Football claimed that it made 80 million profit on "disposal of players" and an overall profit of 6 million. (i.e. without profit on disposal of players, they would have made 74 million loss)

For 2008, it made 21 million profit on "disposal of players" and an overall loss of 47 million (i.e. without profit on disposal of players, they would have made 67 million loss).
 
KingMinger22 said:
Is a business that with annual profits of £70-80 million worth 1.2 Billion?


It seems there isn't any interest in buying United - in the past four years has anyone really looked at buying us?

I wonder how much we would float on the LSE for? Not enough for the Glazers I suspect!
Click to expand...

Fergie would resist that for sure...
 
dev1l said:
Something else,

for the past year (2009) Red Football claimed that it made 80 million profit on "disposal of players" and an overall profit of 6 million. (i.e. without profit on disposal of players, they would have made 74 million loss)

For 2008, it made 21 million profit on "disposal of players" and an overall loss of 47 million (i.e. without profit on disposal of players, they would have made 67 million loss).
Click to expand...

Oh, come on, surely you know that the Glazers have been very generous when it comes to net spend on transfers? It's been pointed out by many on here ad nauseum. I believe ciderman in particular even has a chart showing how generous they have been. :D
 
ralphie88 said:
Oh, come on, surely you know that the Glazers have been very generous when it comes to net spend on transfers? It's been pointed out by many on here ad nauseum. I believe ciderman in particular even has a chart showing how generous they have been. :D
Click to expand...

It also shows what a great manager Fergie is..

In the last two seasons he managed to win 2 leagues and a CL, while other clubs have been pumping hundreds of millions of money in their squads and won nothing...

The Glazers know they are incredibly lucky to have someone like Fergie around. Imagine for a moment we had BEnitez...
 
They were definitely counting on the individual TV deal. They didn't expect to have to push for it as it seemed like the EU etc would do it for them. And they were wary of the bad publicity. They knew it wouldn't happen immediately and assumed there was still a lot of room to milk United in other areas. They overestimated how much more they could generate from the existing streams.

I know no-one will believe me but I'm not just making it up. That came from a direct conversation with an informed guy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.