Thanks again. So it's possible that any penalty for early payment might in effect have been paid already in higher interest rates. Or maybe the terms would only allow early repayment for a whopping add-on fee. We don't know which, I presume.
ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances
- Thread starter sammsky1
- Start date
- Status
Thanks again. So it's possible that any penalty for early payment might in effect have been paid already in higher interest rates. Or maybe the terms would only allow early repayment for a whopping add-on fee. We don't know which, I presume.
Yes. We'll never know whats on the contract.
Not sure I agree with that - United are completely seperate to any of the Glazers' other business interests and since we are completely self sufficient, what happens to the Glazers doesnt really matter to me.
Just when you are on and related to a conversation on another thread what are your views on the Glazer inspired ACS?
It is the worst thing about the Glazer regime - a terrible policy which should be scrapped ASAP.
Now thats a first, was actually hoping you would be defending it , ah well
In fact, Roodboy has criticized Glazers many times. Although, some are way too thick to see it.
In fact, Roodboy has criticized Glazers many times. Although, some are way too thick to see it.
Many times seriously? Roodboy let me humbly apologise for suggesting that you are pro Glazer, I really do not know how I came to that conclusion. By the way the post you were refering to was actually meant to be light hearted so calm your jets a bit there.
I suggest everyone looks at the accounts which you can all see from links on Andersred blog.
the andersred blog
http://andersred.googlegroups.com/w...ND-Zybk4T2gRtFQxd4p4ADd0GRdr3QrylPkw2aRbXD_gF
http://www.mufplc.com/pdf/Q3 2010 Report.pdf
http://av.r.ftdata.co.uk/files/2010/01/Man-Utd-corporate-structure-and-financing.jpg
FT Alphaville Man Utd edition (updated)
the andersred blog
http://andersred.googlegroups.com/w...ND-Zybk4T2gRtFQxd4p4ADd0GRdr3QrylPkw2aRbXD_gF
http://www.mufplc.com/pdf/Q3 2010 Report.pdf
http://av.r.ftdata.co.uk/files/2010/01/Man-Utd-corporate-structure-and-financing.jpg
FT Alphaville Man Utd edition (updated)
Everyone knows that the the successes of the 07-09 period have absolutely nothing to do with the Big Malc's ownership and everything to do with the momentum built up by SAF in the early years of the decade- and to a certain extent during the nineties. Fact is we are now on a negative momentum and the glazers will be at the helm during a steady decline over the next few years- more second place finishes, more top four finishes and maybe the odd league cup to keep you happy. Meanwhile it'll cost you more.
If you are pro-glazer you've picked a loser!
That made no sense at all, seriously.
Momentum built up when? With Jim Pakistan and David Bellion? Even our supporters didn't give us a chance in 2006, with Liverpool winning the Champions League in 2005 and we were having to struggle with a very irritating Ronaldo with no end product and Ruud leaving us. I don't call that momentum at all, we had zero momentum going for us with Rooney Ronaldo clash in the WC as well.
And why are we in a downward swing now? You feckers are awesome I tell ya.
That made no sense at all, seriously.
Momentum built up when? With Jim Pakistan and David Bellion? Even our supporters didn't give us a chance in 2006, with Liverpool winning the Champions League in 2005 and we were having to struggle with a very irritating Ronaldo with no end product and Ruud leaving us. I don't call that momentum at all, we had zero momentum going for us with Rooney Ronaldo clash in the WC as well.
And why are we in a downward swing now? You feckers are awesome I tell ya.
We've not got a single midfielder that would get near the main four of 99.
Momentum built up with the pre-Glazer signings is what he meant - Anderson, Nani and Berbatov haven't particularly added momentum have they?
This is actually a much more interesting and relevant argument in the "might we go bust" debate than all the bollocks about EBITDA etc.
The main reason I don't see us ever getting into real difficulty as a club is that, even if things went really badly wrong with the Glazers' businesss plan* we will always be a tasty prospect for other potential purchasers, and will always remains saleable at way over our NBV. Well before asset stripping or bringing in the administrators, the Glazers could simply sell up and walk away with a tidy profit, if not nearly as much as they are clearly hoping to make).
This is why the "might we go bust" debate is a red-herring for me. The question for me is whether the Glazers' business plan can sustain the levels of spending we need to remain competitive, and can they do that without fecking the fans over.
The answers, IMO are no and no.
The best thing that can happen for the club is that it goes tits up from the Glazers point of view, and they realise they can't cover teh loans and make a killing as they thought, and decide to feck off.
*which I still maintain they could do, but you're not allowed to say that for fear of being mocked if we are still in business in 12 months time
Every decent owner, Glazers or not, is relying on the great SAF. There where no different scenario before 2005. Totally irrelevant comment.
Every owner, with or without dept, must reinvest in the squad when it's necessary if we want to challenge for the big trophy's. That's go without saying.
I think his point is that our recent success can't be positively attributed to the current ownership (though I'm not sure anybody was actually trying to do that anyway - it would be odd), or even held up as proof that the current ownership isn't detrimental, really.
There is a certain lag effect between changes in financial structure and changes in results, and any efffect the take-over may or may not have had has been subject to an unusually long such lag, due to the genius of SAF, the development of a 17 year old into the best player in the world, and the longevity of Giggs and Scholes.
I agree.
IMO the negative aspect's of the take-over is:
a) agressive ticket price policy
b) the ACS who is madness and nearly criminal
c) our high level of depts with rates of 16% for the risky PIK loans
d) bad communication with the fans (arrogans)
The good thing is our commercial success. Improved organsition.
We are fortuned to have SAF and Gill in charge. Without them it would be different.
I do think the effects of this are over-stated a little, and certainly don't begine to offset those 4 negatives.
Firstly, part of the commercial success is from squeezing the cash-cow in places I'd ratehr we didn't, such as hitting the fans in the pocket, which is one of the 4 negatives you listed.
Secondly, while our other commercial activities are certainly bringing in more cash now, this isn't a new trend. The PLC may not have been making as much money as was possible form this, but it had been increasing exponentially for a decade or more, and would presumably have continued to do so.
Rome wasn't built in a day, and it's taken the Glazers another 5 years to get to the stage where they can shout form the roof-tops about the amazing achievements of the London commercial team.
To be fair, the argument that "things were going this way anyway" does also relate, to a degree, to ticket prices. I've never said the PLC were perfect, and I'm not deluded enough to think we'd still be paying 2005 prioces if there'd been no take-over!
I still think ticket prices in some areas of the stadium are fairly reasonable. I wouldn't say all tickets are over-priced.
Dan how much do you think they'd have increased by compared to the Glazers if we'd have remained a PLC?
Dan how much do you think they'd have increased by compared to the Glazers if we'd have remained a PLC?
The main increase was in the year that the Glazers took over.
It has increased steadily since then.
Arguably, you'd be looking at inflation-rate percentages, maybe a bit more.
The ACS wouldn't have kicked in either, which would greatly lower the basic cost of the season ticket commitment.
I find it incredible that supposedly astute businessmen put so many hurdles in the way of people getting to matches. A £36 admin fee on Viagogo for example. What a f'in joke. Could have got a ticket for me and my lad for £66 but they wanted £102 in total. Are you having a laugh, I'll be watching FC!
It has increased steadily since then.
Arguably, you'd be looking at inflation-rate percentages, maybe a bit more.
The ACS wouldn't have kicked in either, which would greatly lower the basic cost of the season ticket commitment.
I find it incredible that supposedly astute businessmen put so many hurdles in the way of people getting to matches. A £36 admin fee on Viagogo for example. What a f'in joke. Could have got a ticket for me and my lad for £66 but they wanted £102 in total. Are you having a laugh, I'll be watching FC!
They aren't ridiculous compared to other clubs but a) the gap between us and other clubs has narrowed significantly and b) football generally as gortesquely over-priced. It's all very well talking about supply and demand, but it is something which was cherished by millions and has been taken away from them.
Hard to say really - I can't be arsed getting into the details of the figures again, as that went on for stupidly long just a few weeks ago, but if we say they've gone up by 40-50% in the last 5 years, I'd guess maybe it would have been something more like 25-30%, and no ACS.
Well, up until the point at which we stop selling out, it makes perfect sense on that puirely business level. And we've only recently started getting to that point - hence the price freeze.
Remember, they don't give a shit if a ticket doesn't sell on Viagogo, they get their money anyway.
I don't know what Viagogo's deal with teh club is (ie set fee, or per ticket resold etc), but I suppose they could probably do a bit better with lower fees.
I guess their ideal model would be to have much lower fees for the little matches, and then they may actually shift a few. But the problem for them is that they try and pretend most of the money is to cover their admin costs, so it would look very fishy if they slashed the fee for certain matches!
Surely that has got nothing to do with Glazer at all?
It absolutely has got to do with Glazers 'no-spending on players because we have to pay interest' policy, - more commonly referred to as sell before you buy at clubs with financial difficulties.
I think what he means is Anderson, Nani and Berbatov all represent spending on players. Quite substantial spending truth be told.
The degree to which they have or have not succeeded is not due to the Glazers, unless of course the bastards are getting involved in training.
I don't feel Anderson, Nani and Berbatov have been the quality signings that we have expected. Partly, yes, down to Ferguson's lack of judgement. But my main point was that Rooney and Ronaldo were bought pre-Glazer and matured under SAF's tuition. Anderson must show something this season for us to maintain faith in him and Nani and Berba still commit too many errors for every good thing they do.
A declaration of "no value in the market" was bizarre - we certainly got value in the market with £80m for Ronaldo. I'm surprised that there was nobody that Fergie wanted in exchange
A declaration of "no value in the market" was bizarre - we certainly got value in the market with £80m for Ronaldo. I'm surprised that there was nobody that Fergie wanted in exchange
Anderson and Nani are virtually identical signings to Ronaldo and Rooney. Very talented youngsters, coveted by alot of top clubs, snapped up by United. It's just Rooney and Ronaldo worked out better (though Nani is staking his claim for greatness now).
Berbatov when signed, was in keeping with United signings previously. A very talented Premier League player signed for a big fee. He just hasn't worked out. Again though, at the time everyone thought he was the missing piece in the jig-saw and the perfect addition.
You can't just re-write history because the signings haven't worked out as you wanted, and claim that this is evidence of Glazer fecking up our signings.
So you figure the team is complete and we haven't any weaknesses therefore there is no need to spend?
No. The squad is certainly good enough to compete, but stand still in football and you go backwards.
We definitely need to freshen up this summer.
Previous summers though, I've been more than happy with our business - except that summer we sold Ruud and only signed Carrick, but I was made to look a fool.
I think one signing would do it with a creative midfielder topping my list as we did at times last season seem overly reliant on Giggs and Scholes to provide that creativity although Valencia and Nani (last three months) certainly played their part in that respect.
We do have a number of young players on the fringes of the first team and you would hope that we'll see some significant contributions from some of those players next season.
I agree one summer signing could do the trick.
By freshening up I'm including the lads already signed like Smalling and Hernandez.
But we're skint! We have to sell Rooney before we can sign another player!
Don't know what makes you think that, Ciderman. You are a funny old thing at times...
Ciderman you forgot about the Credit Facility, we can borrow even more
Big Malc might sell Rooney but don't you know that there is no value out there- so no-one will be coming in! Why waste the money when you can use it somewhere else? Like interest payments maybe.
How much exactly are we reported to have signed these 2 for?
Im seeing headline figures of around £7m for Smalling and £10m for Hernandez (more than I expected tbh).
1 more player seems likely - I suppose there wont be much transfer activity until after the WC now anyway
_____________________
Confirms all fears about the Glazers, scary stuff, no doubt the Glazer machine will soon be on here with all sorts of counter claim. That article sums it for me, the Glazers and Manchester United by association have not 2p to rub together and the situation is bordering on dangerous
What fears have you got exactly?
You should be happy if the Glazers are struggling elsewhere as it means they are more likely to sell if they get a good offer
- Status