ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances

[Sir Matt]

It was a ridiculous time for an IPO. The markets are completely on edge, with China looking weaker just as Spain teeters.

It hasn't been a good time for an IPO since about 2007, especially after all those mugs investing in Facebook lost so much money. I think the Glazers probably thought it was as good a time as any since Spain had been "bailed out" and markets were decent when they started looking into it.

I don't see why anyone would invest in the club if given no returns or influence, but that's just me. Fans aren't going to bail out the Glazers with investment, and what does it offer to professional investors?

 

[Wumminator]

Nightmare. I'm very worried about that.

 

[VoetbalWizard]

there would be interest if they didn't persist with two tier share structure.

Float class b shares underwritten at a reasonable valuation and even in this market, there would be demand for it IMO.

 

[Drifter]

Guess nobodies biting in this current climate

 

[TuTuHimm]

Postponing it sure will fill investors with confidence.

 

[Nate Dogg]

Will this affect our transfers in the short term?

 

[Doogie]

Edit: missed bsc post so nothing to see here

 

[bsc]

Guess nobodies biting in this current climate

They probably would if they were getting a fair deal: this seems to be a you pay your money for the privilege of being associated with United type offering, something as an earlier article suggested only interests diehard fans. No serious investor it seems is willing to associate themselves with shares where they have no vote/influence on the business and very little return on their investment.

As mentioned before, if this is the case, it really is embarrassing. We shouldn't have to live in this environment. We survived well enough before the Glazers.

 

[bsc]

Serious question for the whizzes here - redjazz, etc: if the IPO has been binned as suggested by many - including Anders - just how serious is it?

Finance isn't my specific field, but I understand that IPOs are the usual route leveraged buyouts eventually go; if this get out is restricted for a year or two, not just due to a lack of interest, but the wider financial problems, just how far behind can you see us falling behind City and the rest?

**paranoid head**

 

[Rood]

the success or failure of the IPO has little impact on what happens on the pitch - the Glazers were not giving up much if any control so even if it goes ahead then it is unlikely that much will change.

However, it will be a massive own goal for the Glazers if they have to pull the float - very embarassing for all involved.

 

[Redjazz]

Reuters now reporting that it's going ahead but warns that "market conditions could lead to further delays".
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/...120725?feedType=RSS&feedName=GCA-GoogleNewsUK

bsc,
The club isn't in financial trouble; from the club's perspective, the IPO would be good news but it's not essential. Truth is: We don't know why the Glazers are so determined to IPO at a time when market conditions are pushing hard against the proposal. A look at the club's financials doesn't suggest an immediate need for debt reduction.

A peek at the “Use of funds” chart should below indicate why the IPO can be beneficial for the club. It has the potential to significantly reduce the sizeable portion of the club’s surplus cash currently being consumed by the non-growth LBO debt. Reducing the amount of debt outstanding reduces the annual interest bill, and should make subsequent refinancing of any remaining debt both easier and cheaper. In theory, the amount of cash available for reinvestment (in players, stadium and business acquisition) should increase. Corporation tax will consume a slice; but the Glazers have declared zero dividends for the "foreseeable future".

For balance, here is the “use of funds” chart for the PLC covering that period of time for which net spend data is available.

Basically, LBOs don't come cheap; they consume a lot of hard cash. Hard cash that in other circumstances could be placed (reinvested) in the business to generate more revenue. For the club, the percentage of cash profits (financing and debt interest versus corp. tax and dividends) has doubled and the percentage retained and reinvested (players, stadium, etc.) has halved.

Of course, the pies aren't the same size: The Glazer pie is extra-large to the PLC's medium. Because cash profits have increased, 18% of cash profits spend on players (net spend!) under the Glazers (over 7 years) is equivalent to 37% of cash profits under the PLC (over 8 years)- about 16m pa in each case.

 

[GCHQ]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

 

[finneh]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

Care to show the Commercial growth of the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona, Bayern Munich and Liverpool (similar clubs historically in stature) in the last 6-7 years to show just how much better the Glazer's have been with their inspired growth?

 

[didsbury1982]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

GCHQ at his patronising best there.

 

[Sir A1ex]

GCHQ at his patronising best there.

If there's one sign of somebody utterly scraping the barrel of an argument they long since lost on an internet forum, it's the whole "I'm more intelligent than you, and only the other intelligent people can see how right I am" gambit. Otherwise last heard in the playground around the age of 8.

 

[Cold_Boy]

This is literally one of the worst times for an IPO.

Look at Facebook.

However, debt finance is not as doomy as it seems to everyone.

If you can manage the debt payments and ensure efficient performance of the company, debt finance in not bad.

However, to anyone who has deep knowledge of finance, can someone tell me what when all the long term-debt is paid?

Won't United be massively profitable?

 

[711]

If there's one sign of somebody utterly scraping the barrel of an argument they long since lost on an internet forum, it's the whole "I'm more intelligent than you, and only the other intelligent people can see how right I am" gambit. Otherwise last heard in the playground around the age of 8.

He's been proved wrong on all the provable arguments, the only thing left now is the unprovable 'how much better' one. It must be hard work (literally) finding something to pad that out with.

 

[Lastwolf]

Facebook was massively overvalued, they don't make enough money to be 'worth' that much.

Plus the way the internet works, they could disappear from sight tomorrow, if something better comes along, look at myspace and bebo, facebook's precursors.

 

[Stretch]

This is literally one of the worst times for an IPO.

Look at Facebook.

However, debt finance is not as doomy as it seems to everyone.

If you can manage the debt payments and ensure efficient performance of the company, debt finance in not bad.

However, to anyone who has deep knowledge of finance, can someone tell me what when all the long term-debt is paid?

Won't United be massively profitable?

To me that's the key to potential investors buying shares. I don't buy this whole talk of people won't invest because 'it's just a nice share to have and you have no voting power'. The share structure of little to no voting rights is not uncommon practice in the US. Add to that United is being punted as a media company with revenues still increasing steadily. Take out 40m in debt pa payments and add the new TV deal incomes and the business will be more profitable, which should lead to the shares being valued higher. There's growth potential, which is what an investor will be looking at. At least that's how I see it anyways, I'm no finance boffin in any event so maybe I'm spouting bollocks.

 

[Cold_Boy]

To me that's the key to potential investors buying shares. I don't buy this whole talk of people won't invest because 'it's just a nice share to have and you have no voting power'. The share structure of little to no voting rights is not uncommon practice in the US. Add to that United is being punted as a media company with revenues still increasing steadily. Take out 40m in debt pa payments and add the new TV deal incomes and the business will be more profitable, which should lead to the shares being valued higher. There's growth potential, which is what an investor will be looking at. At least that's how I see it anyways, I'm no finance boffin in any event so maybe I'm spouting bollocks.

I agree with this.

Also the performance of United under the Glazers since they took over has been good which can convince the buyers, that the club (company) is well managed.

 

[FreakyJim]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

We would've achieved similar growth without the Glazers and their precious debt that you love so much.

New shirt deal, stadium expansion, ticket price increase, SAF being a genius, that all would've happened regardless.
Let's say commercial revenue wouldn't have increased as much, so fecking what? I'd rather that than interest payments.

Jesus fecking christ.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

We would've achieved similar growth without the Glazers and their precious debt that you love some much.

New shirt deal, stadium expansion, ticket price increase, SAF being a genius, that all would've happened regardless.
Let's say commercial revenue wouldn't have increased as much, so fecking what? I'd rather that than interest payments.

Jesus fecking christ.

Indeed. All you need to do is look at every other club of similar stature and the increase in revenues they've all managed over the same period of time.

Nothing remotely special about what the Glazers have achieved in terms of bringing money in to the club but we're definitely one of a kind when it comes to owners taking money out of the club.

 

[FreakyJim]

Tbf to GCHQ I kind of know where he's coming from, Glazers happened and we can't do anything about it, might as well deal with the reality of it, be hopeful and take every positive thing that happens. But my god, he's defending every single thing about them, the boot licking is way over the top and people can't help it but respond and argue with him, me included.
If you go back reading this thread, it's all been said and repeated thousands of times. Arguing the semantics whilst the important things are clear as day. And we can't move on.

 

[didsbury1982]

Indeed. All you need to do is look at every other club of similar stature and the increase in revenues they've all managed over the same period of time.

Nothing remotely special about what the Glazers have achieved in terms of bringing money in to the club but we're definitely one of a kind when it comes to owners taking money out of the club.

Exactly, don't let GCHQ have you believe that United would have been left behind in terms of commercial revenue. United were regularly top of the deloitte football money league under the PLC. For some reason he thinks that United wouldn't continue to significantly increase revenues like other clubs have.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deloitte_Football_Money_League

We are now trailing Barcelona and Real Madrid by quite a distance. Although I'm sure some of that is down to their large TV deals though.

 

[Steven Seagull]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

fecking hell. You giant weapon

 

[londonredmaniac]

Indeed. All you need to do is look at every other club of similar stature and the increase in revenues they've all managed over the same period of time.

Nothing remotely special about what the Glazers have achieved in terms of bringing money in to the club but we're definitely one of a kind when it comes to owners taking money out of the club.

Indeed.

 

[Commadus]

GCHQ -

Before IPO - debt is good. debt motivates
During IPO - goes silent
IPO Postponed - debt is good. debt motivates

GCHQ is nothing more than a shill.

 

[londonredmaniac]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

You really are a cretin for the highest order.

It's rare I could ever completely despise someones views on something like the internet.

You have to be related to the leeching cnuts. You just have to be.

 

[Ole's_toe_poke]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

You are such a giant cock sucking buffoon.

You make it seem as though United were in some sort of marketing dark age before the Glazers came in. We were still the best marketed team in the world at them time. And there is nothing to suggest that we wouldn't have made these deals if the Glazers weren't there.

Indeed the growth and interest in sponsorship has probably to do more with the success of the team (Fergie) and the continued growth in popularity of the Premier League than the Glazers.

The idea that the Glazers are some sort of sponsorship attaining master jedis without whom we'd be screwed is hilarious.

 

[Sir A1ex]

Indeed. All you need to do is look at every other club of similar stature and the increase in revenues they've all managed over the same period of time.

Never mind that, look at the incredible leaps forward on the commercial side which did, demonstrably happen in the 14 years in which the PLC was in charge.

In 1991, prior to going public, our turnover was £20m.
By 2004, this was £169m (Source).

That is in increase of 750% in 14 years.

Our turnover is now what, £280m (Source)?

That is an increase of 65% in 7 years. Compound that and after a comparable 14 year period we could be looking at nearly 175%.

I'm just not seeing the miracle.

 

[De Selby]

GCHQ's whole argument in support of the Glazers is based on a presupposition. He knows it, I know it, and anyone else who's read what he's said in the past knows it.

 

[Sir A1ex]

GCHQ is such an annoying little runt he makes me want to devote my life to science and find a way to view other parallel universes. I would then search endlessly until I find the one that is identical to ours except the Glazers didn't buy United, and find out how much money we are making under the PLC...

 

[DevilRed]

Worrying if true.

Not really. It would be more worrying if we went ahead with it actually.

The whole point of the exercise is to get the highest valuation possible. You definately aren't going to achieve that with the volatility coming from Europe right now.

 

[Deleted 20801]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

You are awesome GCHQ.

 

[Zarlak]

GCHQ is such an annoying little runt he makes me want to devote my life to science and find a way to view other parallel universes. I would then search endlessly until I find the one that is identical to ours except the Glazers didn't buy United, and find out how much money we are making under the PLC...

I'm sure you can appreciate the opposite, with those that annoyingly cling to what the PLC would have done, when they've got just as much idea about what they would have done, as otehrs have about what they wouldn't have done.

 

[Sir A1ex]

I'm sure you can appreciate the opposite, with those that annoyingly cling to what the PLC would have done, when they've got just as much idea about what they would have done, as otehrs have about what they wouldn't have done.

I would if I saw any evidence of it. But I can't recall a single person initiating any claims about what the PLC may have done - other than GCHQ, of course.

 

[finneh]

The Glazer's must be commercial geniuses... They managed to get a shirt sponsorship deal that pays the exact same as... Liverpool... Who weren't even in the Europa League at the time.

 

[Antisocial]

The Glazer's must be commercial geniuses... They managed to get a shirt sponsorship deal that pays the exact same as... Liverpool... Who weren't even in the Europa League at the time.

I'd love to hear some details of our new deal with Chevrolet compared to the one announced by Liverpool this week - I think that would provide an interesting study of how effective is our commercial team: same company, same type of deal, except of course we're so far above Liverpool that anything less than a massively superior deal in our favour would be a disappointment.

 

[Sir A1ex]

I thought the Liverpool deal was only a partial one - AFAIK, Chevrolet are only their official hubcap provider.

 

[Commadus]

I'd love to hear some details of our new deal with Chevrolet compared to the one announced by Liverpool this week - I think that would provide an interesting study of how effective is our commercial team: same company, same type of deal, except of course we're so far above Liverpool that anything less than a massively superior deal in our favour would be a disappointment.

But you have to counter that with exclusivity. The more deals United signs the more we start looking like an F1 team.

Sponsors will start to think with all the other competiing logos / sponsors do we stand out.