I thought the Management fees would go following the IPO.
I haven't found any specific mention of this though. Anyone?
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
I thought the Management fees would go following the IPO.
I haven't found any specific mention of this though. Anyone?
Earlier in the document it states that the £10m directors loan had been repaid without mentioning that the proceeds for the repayment had come from a £10m dividend payment!
Confirmed that we've leased 500 square metres of office space in Hong Kong.
Bwin has replaced Betfair as our official betting partner.
Bwin has replaced Betfair as our official betting partner.
Can someone explain what happened with the PIKs? I thought those were the Glazer's debt, not the club's yet the club spent over £100m on it?
Anyone?
"Repayment of secured payment in kind loan" listed as £138m in 2011. Does this not completely contradict Gill?
The investors are no fools and they will came up with same conclusion as you but I think that buying shares in a football club isn't only about making profits, this has also to do with emotions and making a political and a culture statement. One reason to buy shares in a football club is to show who you are and who you support. Also values and culture identity comes in to the picture.
United has built their success on organic growth. Good management together with smart investments has made us to the biggest club in the world. Investors like this, especially when we compete with clubs who have other values. But not only this. The clubs is owned by people who knows how to do biz the right way. The Glazers isn't popular among a large pert of the local supporters but I'm quite sure the investors see it differently. Many leaders are also very impressed with our manager. Sir Alex Ferguson is a cult figure, many leaders use his management is a blueprint for success and successful leaders like other strong characters.
The IPO and how it's conducted isn't revolutionary or anything new, other company's have done this before. A famous car company did it 20-25 years ago with a successful result. It started as a fight about dividends between the minority owners and the board. In the end the company bought back the shares from the IPO for a fraction of the original price. You can practically say that the majority owners bought the rest of their own company for others money. Smart but not so ethical. Maybe our owners remembers this and tries to do the same.
Yes, the lying cnut.
We have more banks working on the IPO than fit center midfielders.
feck off. Absolute joke.
That's from Red Football Shareholder Ltd's accounts which was the company that held the PIK debt until it was repaid in November 2010.
Again, this is simply an accounting formality following the repayment of the PIK loan in November 2010 by the Glazer family (that £111m of interest was the interest accrued on the original £138m loan between Aug 2006 and Nov 2010). No club funds were used to repay the £249m PIK loan.
No. The principal amount of the loan (138m) plus all the rolled-up and accrued interest (110+m) was repaid by "Proceeds from issue of shares" of 249m in the 2011 financial year. The Glazers (via RF LLC Delaware) by buying the shares, injected the cash to cancel the PIKS.
The prior year cash flow accounts in the prospectus are for Red Shareholder and will therefore include the Glazer's own debt, the pik.
Edit: As said.
Cheers folks.
Not overly bothered by any of this.
Seems to be the long-game with the NYSE! United have been told that perhaps the club is overvalued. So let's get rid of some debt and increase the cashflow, with low-value, no-vote, no dividend shares.
Establish the price of those shares at issue and in the market - and then see what the appetite is for that. Worst case $100m (if that is the right figure) debt is paid down. Best case - company is worth more for it and Glazers can gauge the issue of up to 49% issue on better terms (for the investors - so therefore worth more).
Seems to be the long-game with the NYSE! United have been told that perhaps the club is overvalued. So let's get rid of some debt and increase the cashflow, with low-value, no-vote, no dividend shares.
Establish the price of those shares at issue and in the market - and then see what the appetite is for that. Worst case $100m (if that is the right figure) debt is paid down. Best case - company is worth more for it and Glazers can gauge the issue of up to 49% issue on better terms (for the investors - so therefore worth more).
The debt and the Glazer's will get some attention from United fans over the next week or so, by next week the majority of United fans will go back to having little interest in the debt of the club.
Always interesting reading your input lads. You must have a nous for business that I just don't have. Goes way over my head.
Keep up the good work!
Keep up the good work!
NYC flotation document
2010 net debt was £360m. Today £423m, despite £100m of bond buybacks. Hence need to raise equity to pay it down.
The A shares issued will have 10 times less voting rights than the B shares which are 100% owened by the Glazers.
The words Caman Islands are used 91 times throughout the document and indebtedness is not far behind.
Between 09-11 spent £125m on players and received £153m for players sold. -£28m nett. Loan interest payments of £244.9m
Document "our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and competitive position" - This is quite a contrast to the lies we have been told by Gill & SAF.
"We intend to use all the net proceeds to reduce the indebtedness"
A document of this nature does need to list all risks but it's pretty obvious which is the main one and that is our new word for the day, "indebtedness"
Essentially we don't have a Ronaldo to sell and we didn't make the finals of the CL so we need to raise cash and fast!
Made in Manchester, owened in America registered in the Cayman Islands!
2010 net debt was £360m. Today £423m, despite £100m of bond buybacks. Hence need to raise equity to pay it down.
The A shares issued will have 10 times less voting rights than the B shares which are 100% owened by the Glazers.
The words Caman Islands are used 91 times throughout the document and indebtedness is not far behind.
Between 09-11 spent £125m on players and received £153m for players sold. -£28m nett. Loan interest payments of £244.9m
Document "our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and competitive position" - This is quite a contrast to the lies we have been told by Gill & SAF.
"We intend to use all the net proceeds to reduce the indebtedness"
A document of this nature does need to list all risks but it's pretty obvious which is the main one and that is our new word for the day, "indebtedness"
Essentially we don't have a Ronaldo to sell and we didn't make the finals of the CL so we need to raise cash and fast!
Made in Manchester, owened in America registered in the Cayman Islands!
Net debt is a useless figure for discussion. It's clear the debt will become a problem eventually, if not now. It's better to support the Glazer's on the point of this share issue. It's a good move, with the end goal, a debt-free club.
I am shocked at what I have just heard on Sky about this floatation.
Saying that the debt was affecting our ability in the transfer market, well we all knew that despite what was being said but saying that the debt is affecting day to day running and ability to pay the staff was a surprise.
Saying that the debt was affecting our ability in the transfer market, well we all knew that despite what was being said but saying that the debt is affecting day to day running and ability to pay the staff was a surprise.
Is this from the Risk Factors section of the prospectus?
There is, however, a formal warning that United's debts, wholly imposed by the Glazers' original takeover, "could adversely affect our financial health and competitive position"
Tell us something we didn't already know! All of this despite the Gills denials obviously.
Tell us something we didn't already know! All of this despite the Gills denials obviously.
Why do people keep having a go at Gill?
What is the CEO meant to say? It's like we've got a bunch of kids in here...Of course we would be better off with the 50mil we pay in interest for our loans, it doesn't take David Gill to spell that out for people, does it?
Of course in an ideal world, we wouldn't have been taken over via a LBO...but this is the hand we were dealt. So Gill, Fergie and everyone else has tried to put a positive spin on things, while we try to ride out the worst of it.
What is so revealing about any of that?
What is the CEO meant to say? It's like we've got a bunch of kids in here...Of course we would be better off with the 50mil we pay in interest for our loans, it doesn't take David Gill to spell that out for people, does it?
Of course in an ideal world, we wouldn't have been taken over via a LBO...but this is the hand we were dealt. So Gill, Fergie and everyone else has tried to put a positive spin on things, while we try to ride out the worst of it.
What is so revealing about any of that?
I think this is more to do with a prelude to a sale rather than servicing the debt.
Prelude to listing 49%, I'd say.
I think the problems people have with Gill are his comments before the takeover then subsequent complete about turn. I'm sure the fact that he has almost doubled his wages since the Gazers took over has nothing to do with it though.
Sorry no idea.
I was just quoting what the reporter said, I presume he was reading from an official source.
A rather longish but informative post by a newb regarding this.
Yes, I think.
Yes it is. Later on in the same report they show how well we're coping with it all. Everyone is going to concentrate on this now instead of the far more substantial issues it raises.
I ask because these risk factors aren't exactly what's happening. Its just a list of things that MAY happen.
Most companies have this in the prospectus. Like for egs, Samsonite's had: Disrepute of the brand name, disingenuous activities of outsourced work etc. Doesn't mean its happening.
I know, I've been saying it all night yet all everyone is doing is coming on saying look its proof Gill is lying I was right and acting smug. The same risk factors also says we're in danger of relegationor getting banned by fifa, uefa, fa, yet no one is reporting on that.
I'll add myself to the list.
"Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and competitive position." Finally admitting what a lot of us have effectively been saying for years...
Why aren't they selling more shares and pay off all the debt?
I'll add myself to the list.
"Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health and competitive position." Finally admitting what a lot of us have effectively been saying for years...
Could being operative.
Not lie, keep quiet?
A simple "We do have a high debt burden, but we're managing fine at this moment in time, and working very hard to alleviate the situation" would work well, I would think...
could a kind friendly mod please promote him.
@ Sultan - He can't keep quiet, and you know that. You let one side speak without responding, they get to control the tone of the conversation in the media.
Once he decided to speak, he had to toe the company line, which he did.
Once he decided to speak, he had to toe the company line, which he did.
good work.
For that amount they would surely be looking at a 30-40% stake?
- Status