We still have £400 million of debt. I thought it was about half of that.
It's not bad, really. I think it is projected to be gone by 2016/17 ish.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
It's not bad, really. I think it is projected to be gone by 2016/17 ish.
Yeah, not too bad if we are turning up profits of nearly 150 million, and the profits are only going to increase in the next few years. But still would explain why we are still a bit more careful with our money unlike the other big clubs.
Aye.
If the the Financial Fair Play would really kick in and we'd be debt free around '16, then we would be in a very strong position!
I think it was less than that the last time reports came out. ~325-350 mils?We still have £400 million of debt. I thought it was about half of that.
Also only requires us to finish third in the league.... Regardless of the quarter finals of each cup competition, the prize money is not the issue its the additional £1-2m/ home game profit.
Maybe has something to do with the gross and net debt. They subtract the money the club has in the bank from one of them to get to a lower figure. Maybe that was one of them.
Jaysus still close to 400m in debt. I'm guessing we're not getting that down to sub 100m anytime soon.
But the club is in a very healthy financial situation
But the club is in a very healthy financial situation
Well that's gross debt isn't it? Set off against the fact that we have about 90 million of cash in the bank and that before most of the season ticket money (i'm not precise sure of timing), it looks pretty good.We still have £400 million of debt. I thought it was about half of that.
I wish we didn't have principles. We could afford Messi and his wages with ease
Damn Economics!!
Then that has to be the net debt - according to the what was published today it was 436,9 (gross I assume) last year.
Edit: It says gross debt in the accountancy released today.
IIRC the last account showed a gross debt of around £360m, with £30m in cash in the bank (net debt: £330m), now we're down to £295m net. Next season the new TV deal will be taken into account, so I guess the net debt will decrease a lot quicker, especially with the Chevrolet deal starting in 2014 as well.
According to the BBC link, the gross debt was 359.7M last year. So I am assuming that was after deducting whatever extra amount that they do.
Isn't that the premium to settle some of the bond early? I guess you could call it Glazer debt but it isn't something paid to Glazer as far as I know. Along expected lines.
That and I think we signed a new deal with Nike as well?
Wow. The Glazers have suddenly turned it around. Almost.
As long as they don't sell us off to someone who plunges us in debt again we'll be golden, financially at least.
I think the gross debt figures fluctuate with the exchange rate, maybe that's why it looks like the gross debt has risen.
But we have a lot more money in the bank than last year and massive profits increase so it looks quite healthy overall.
But we have a lot more money in the bank than last year and massive profits increase so it looks quite healthy overall.
Servicing the debt every year is only £49 million (prior to our refinancing one-off costs) which knocks off another £10m/year.
So £39m/year ish, just to maintain our debt at its current level.
Also great to see our reliance on broadcasting income is reducing 32.5% (2012) - 28% (2013) of total revenue - Commercial revenue is much more sustainable/reliable in the long-term (36.7% - 42%).
So £39m/year ish, just to maintain our debt at its current level.
Also great to see our reliance on broadcasting income is reducing 32.5% (2012) - 28% (2013) of total revenue - Commercial revenue is much more sustainable/reliable in the long-term (36.7% - 42%).
When do you reckon could we see double digits in debt, so below £100m? Or to be more exact, at which point does the debt stops to matter? Is 2016/17 realistic?
The wage increase over the last five years is frightening IMHO. £180,5m
Is it correct to subtract the tax credit from the debt as this was created by the interest payments on the debt?
These were not for 2011/2012 accounts. This was for the first 1/4 of this years results that we're seeing now. So that number was always going to flux throughout the year.
Need to look at the 2011/2012 full year accounts against these ones for a comparison.
Which you can find here. http://ir.manutd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=133303&p=irol-historicalinfo
Hmmm. From that link, the net debt for the year ending June 2012 was 366M. So I am not way off the mark. So we are all looking at a similar amount for debt this year as well, which I think is a great job considering United were somewhere around 800M just a couple of years back.
If we want - we can easily finish off the debt once the new deal with Nike (or someone else) is settled - IF we want.
That 800m included some 250m worth of PIK loans which were mysteriously paid off. Nobody knows what happened to them.
What does that even mean? IF?
Of course the club owners and the officials would want that after such a big hue and cry was raised because of that.Ahh, yes. There was no communication whatsoever from them regarding those bonds at all.
Spend twice as much on debt service as players, brilliant football strategy.
Including wages they are spending hundreds of millions on players.
From the filing to issue more shares, looks like they are planning on getting rid of that debt... or milk us.
good thing those players would work for free then
They have no financial need to get rid of all the debt. Just maybe reduce it a bit more to keep it more under control.
No financial need no, and there is a tax advantage to having the interest payments. I suspect that you're right and that they will reduce, but not remove the debt, and keep the other proceeds.
By the way, can anyone explain the deferred tax positions in the UK / US to me as they are some serious numbers in the accounts. Circa 120m if I remember correctly. It's been a while since I had to do anything tax related so I would be very keen to understand how we may, or may not benefit. From what I read it appears to indicate that our tax paid in the UK could be used as a taxable expense in the US and therefore add to the deferred tax that we could be due?
Can't the Glazers just bank that money? It's theirs to do with as they wish right? If so, I doubt they'll use it to pay off the debt. I know they paid some of the debt off last time, but presumably they only guaranteed that in order to sell the shares and reduce worries about the debt burden. Then again, I'm no financial whizz and I could be talking nonsense.
Even is they knocked £100ml off the debt they would still pocket a huge sum of money, more that their initial investment in one go.
The EBITDA is £130M apparently? That's insane if true. I'm not even sure if Real or Barcelona reach that figure. Their revenue is much larger than United's, but they have much higher expenses as well.
Apparently, the club bought Sky's remaining MUTV share. Anyone know how much they paid for that?
Apparently, the club bought Sky's remaining MUTV share. Anyone know how much they paid for that?
Or a bit of both. But remember they own the club so when they sell the shares the money is truly theirs, much like when you sell something you own.
- Status