If you give me £900 a year and random other payments when I think you should come and look at it, you can suggest via an internet forum when the lawn needs mowing or the path weeding.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
If you give me £900 a year and random other payments when I think you should come and look at it, you can suggest via an internet forum when the lawn needs mowing or the path weeding.
"Sitting quietly, doing nothing,
Spring comes, and the grass grows by itself." Zenrin Kushû (The Way of Zen 134, 222)
Spring comes, and the grass grows by itself." Zenrin Kushû (The Way of Zen 134, 222)
Don't take this personally (because honestly it's not - I'm sure you're a perfectly nice bloke, but you're just very wrong about this) but that's about the most offensive thing I've ever read on this forum.
If you are a robot who sees the world purely in monetary terms, then it makes sense, but anybody with anything to do with football knows that not only do supporters have a massive emotional stake in the game, but moreover, it is that very irrational involvement which makes the game everything it is.
Or to put it simply, without the supporters there would be no club, and the owners would have to look elsewhere for their chance to get rich.
How about if the only reason I could afford to own my house was because when you compulsively turn up every Saturday and Sunday and sit outside and admire it, in return you give me the cash I need to pay the mortgage? I don't think I'd be dismissing you as having no stake in the place...
To be fair, I reckon you'd have to come up with moderate compensation... like it or not the owners were only gonig along with opportunities afforded to them by the law of the land.
Other than that I agree 100% though, how do I get involved in your campaign to become PM?
FAO finance guys
As part of the IPO will the club disclose future revenue forecasts? Have the club done so recently?
As part of the IPO will the club disclose future revenue forecasts? Have the club done so recently?
Ayn is that you?
If it is, that's the nicest thing she ever said in her life.
Wouldn't she be arguing it's a business and we're all robots?
Then again, I used her book as a doorstop.
Wouldn't she be arguing it's a business and we're all robots?
Then again, I used her book as a doorstop.
Here is another good analysis of the club by Swiss Ramble:
The Swiss Ramble: Manchester United - Introducing The Brand
The Swiss Ramble: Manchester United - Introducing The Brand
Good idea - reading any of them is painful.
Thanks to Gene:
Manchester United to limit voting shares - FT
Manchester United [MNU.UL] is planning to raise up to two-thirds of a planned $1 billion initial public offering in Singapore through non-voting preferences shares, the Financial Times reported on Wednesday.
The newspaper reported that the move would keep as much as 88 percent of voting rights in the hands of the Glazer family, its American owners.
Plans being drawn up for the IPO would see the English soccer's Premier League champions selling about a third of the equity in the club, which is valued at about $3 billion.
According to people with knowledge of the transaction cited in the article, the balance of the shares would be in the form of non-voting perpetual preference stock without dividend guarantees or the right to sell the shares back to the club, both common features of preference share issues.
The preference shares would rank ahead of the ordinary shares in the event of an insolvency, potentially making them attractive to institutions such as Temasek [TEM.UL], the Singapore state investment agency, which is considering taking a large stake as a cornerstone investor.
The two classes of shares would be sold as a package, although the relative values have not been finalised, according to the FT.
Manchester United to limit voting shares - FT
Manchester United [MNU.UL] is planning to raise up to two-thirds of a planned $1 billion initial public offering in Singapore through non-voting preferences shares, the Financial Times reported on Wednesday.
The newspaper reported that the move would keep as much as 88 percent of voting rights in the hands of the Glazer family, its American owners.
Plans being drawn up for the IPO would see the English soccer's Premier League champions selling about a third of the equity in the club, which is valued at about $3 billion.
According to people with knowledge of the transaction cited in the article, the balance of the shares would be in the form of non-voting perpetual preference stock without dividend guarantees or the right to sell the shares back to the club, both common features of preference share issues.
The preference shares would rank ahead of the ordinary shares in the event of an insolvency, potentially making them attractive to institutions such as Temasek [TEM.UL], the Singapore state investment agency, which is considering taking a large stake as a cornerstone investor.
The two classes of shares would be sold as a package, although the relative values have not been finalised, according to the FT.
if they manage to pull off this IPO at a valuation like that (which is higher than most would have expected) PLUS do it with a majority of nonvoting shares then it really is going to be an impressive manouvre from a business perspective.
but what if they dont?
No idea, would this type of IPO be best offer or guaranteed by the underwriters?
I really don't understand the want to go towards fan ownership. Look at Barca, Madrid and their finances and comeback and tell me that fan ownership is the right option. Fans should have a say however none of you can tell me that you don't know a few United fans you wouldn't want having a say in our club.
Rarely are successful organisations/businesses run like a democracy.
The Singapore stock exchange has approved an application by English football giants Manchester United to sell their shares in the city-state, a source familiar with the deal said Friday.
But the club will gauge market sentiment before launching their initial public offering (IPO) because of the uncertainty sparked by the eurozone debt crisis.
"They have received approval but the timetable is not fixed," the source told AFP.
"The company is not in need of funds so they are not in a hurry to list. Basically, they are keeping a watching brief on market conditions."
For now, the target is for a listing at the Singapore Exchange later this year but the source described it as a "moving target".
"Now that there is approval, they can roll out any time," added the source, who asked not to be named.
United are expected to offer both voting shares and non-voting preference shares, said the source.
Analysts said such a structure will allow the American owners of the club -- the Glazer family -- to effectively retain control.
But the club will gauge market sentiment before launching their initial public offering (IPO) because of the uncertainty sparked by the eurozone debt crisis.
"They have received approval but the timetable is not fixed," the source told AFP.
"The company is not in need of funds so they are not in a hurry to list. Basically, they are keeping a watching brief on market conditions."
For now, the target is for a listing at the Singapore Exchange later this year but the source described it as a "moving target".
"Now that there is approval, they can roll out any time," added the source, who asked not to be named.
United are expected to offer both voting shares and non-voting preference shares, said the source.
Analysts said such a structure will allow the American owners of the club -- the Glazer family -- to effectively retain control.
I don't want any of the fans in the board. Business and Supporting a club is totally a different thing, what might seen as best for the fans doesn't always turns out as the best in business scenario.
Imagine if you're on the board of directors, you'd be making a very pro-fans / manager you like, players, etc, destabilising the business.
Imagine fans simply said "give rooney the 300K he wants" and stuff.
It doesn't always works that way.
And I don't think Barca / Madrid have any fans saying in their decision making other thank the fans probably voted for the President.
then it would be a massive own goal!
But thats the thing, fans vote in a president. If they don't do what the fans like, then they're gone. Calderon for example. In their position in spain, you either please the fans, or you get turfed out for another nutter that promises the world.
The thing is they get voted in on delivering massive name players and it is just not sustainable financially.
Prob a stoopid question: but does this move remove all the clubs debt ?
I was expecting another 200 posts about Singapore flotation now that it's been cleared by by someone, somewhere. But alas, Ciderman is probably dead and gone to heaven due to excessive happiness.
Yup, thank God we're not in the state they are. Yes their tickets are way cheaper than ours, but look at the dross they serve up on the pitch.
Yes, there was some talk of them having to borrow money on a short term loan, but it was a fraction of the debt we've been burdened with for years, and there don't seem to many signs that their in financial trouble from where I'm sitting.
I think almost entirely the opposite. The reason I wouldn't actually want the Barca model is that you get some egotist president promising big-name players to try and win the election, which is bullshit.
However, having strong fan representation on the board, to ensure that no decisions are made which screw the fans over or go against the ethos of the club, would be wonderful.
I've yet to hear a perfect structure, but ultimately a club run by businessmen who know what they're doing, but have the fans' interests as their main objectives would shit all over what we have now.
Surely this is a good thing?
That will lead to bigger problem, doing things to wins the race in the short run, like promising to buy mega players, hiring best coaches, etc.
The likes of Calderon are doing exactly that (because I suspect money's at play somehow), promising to buy galactico (while not always a bad thing, but more often than not they're interfering with managers).
Again back to square one, in terms of pleasing the fans, it's not always the best thing for the club.
The best thing for the club... sadly is a professional business plan that are having "conscience" and genuine care for fans.
It's back to back in the personality of whomever in the helm
A good chairman ala Moratti won't be a bad idea, a fully blown PLC could ended up as disaster.
So far... Imo the glazer have done superbly on the business side. Who would have thought few years ago that the protest and demonstration would quietly subdued, and nowdays, I believe the opinion on Glazer aren't always bad on their side.
So, here we are, almost seven years down the line. Protests galore. A fanbase divided. Millions - hundreds of it - exiting our club to service the debt of a family in Florida.
Harsh? Perhaps.
But with the IPO we have a chance to heal all those sores. For me, a season ticket holder, the only gripe was ever the debt leveraged against us.
If they don't use that money to service the primary debt, never mind the hidden PIKs, I can't wait for the fury that will be unleashed.
Harsh? Perhaps.
But with the IPO we have a chance to heal all those sores. For me, a season ticket holder, the only gripe was ever the debt leveraged against us.
If they don't use that money to service the primary debt, never mind the hidden PIKs, I can't wait for the fury that will be unleashed.
Guardian, not sure if it's been posted aopologies if so.
Glazer family to delay Manchester United's £600m Singapore flotation because of global volatility - Telegraph
What a deceptive article. Headlines by saying that they are "to delay" the flotation and then the article proceeds to say that they "may delay" ala The Sun.
Et tu Telegraph?
Rather misleading headline. It implies its a large bonus but its less than 8%. A lot of people I know get a 10-20% bonus each year. If the club over performs commercially its only fair the staff get a bonus.
It's still a record if it hasn't been done at Man Utd pay rolls before I guess.
Red Football Limited's full accounts are out today: http://www.mufplc.com/pdf/2010-11 Statutory Accounts.pdf
Some interesting stuff.
Kevin Glazer has been busy buying some of the club's bonds:
More significantly the club has bought back a further £23.23m worth of bonds at a cost of £25.1m since the end of the group's financial year (June 30 2011). The club now owns a total of £87m of its senior secured notes (bonds). Gross and net debt continues to fall.
'Commadus' will be pleased to know that the £3m consultancy fee to a Glazer company, allowed under the terms of the bond issue, has NOT been charged to the group in either the year to June 30 2010 or in the year to June 30 2011.
Some interesting stuff.
Kevin Glazer has been busy buying some of the club's bonds:
More significantly the club has bought back a further £23.23m worth of bonds at a cost of £25.1m since the end of the group's financial year (June 30 2011). The club now owns a total of £87m of its senior secured notes (bonds). Gross and net debt continues to fall.
'Commadus' will be pleased to know that the £3m consultancy fee to a Glazer company, allowed under the terms of the bond issue, has NOT been charged to the group in either the year to June 30 2010 or in the year to June 30 2011.
This reminds me happened with the shares that were going to be sold in Asia?
The IPO has been delayed due to the current level of uncertainty in the financial markets.
Red Football Limited's full accounts are out today: http://www.mufplc.com/pdf/2010-11 Statutory Accounts.pdf
Some interesting stuff.
Kevin Glazer has been busy buying some of the club's bonds:
More significantly the club has bought back a further £23.23m worth of bonds at a cost of £25.1m since the end of the group's financial year (June 30 2011). The club now owns a total of £87m of its senior secured notes (bonds). Gross and net debt continues to fall.
'Commandus' will be pleased to know that the £3m consultancy fee to a Glazer company, allowed under the terms of the bond issue, has NOT been charged to the group in either the year to June 30 2010 or in the year to June 30 2011.
In your haste to report the good news to commandus wrt the zero consultancy fee you obviously overlooked mention of the 10+m in management fees paid to the Glazers over the last two years. The accounts now transitioning to an IAS basis reveal fees of 6m for 2011 (4+m for 2010).
The 2010 fee was not disclosed in the 2010 RF accounts.
Other ownership costs include exceptional pre-IPO professional fees of around 3m.
All-in, it has been a very expensive year for the club as far as ownership goes; my estimate allowing for all the bond buybacks (including the post YE transaction) is 145m. Better we deal with our own debt than a pik or pik replacement but the cash outflow from the club has been severe.
You are aware that when we were making £38m in profit back around 2003.... we were paying around £9m a season in dividends to the shareholders?
We clocked over £100m in profits this year, put's a little perspective on it.
- Status