ALL issues relating to the bond issue and club finances

Status
Not open for further replies.
roodboy said:
Yes but Fred you are just making up hypothetical scaremongering scenarios that havent happened and even Andersred says he was not trying to prove that!
Click to expand...

What you call hypothetical scaremongering, other would see as prudent worst-case-scenario awareness.

I know there is a line where one crosses into the other, but if, for example, somebody at Portsmouth had clocked what was going on a couple of years back and started warnign that it could all lead to financial ruin, are you saying that he would have been wrong to do so? Would he have had to be 100% sure that was what would happen to justify sounding the alarm?

You may be OK working purely on what has already happened, but a lot of us like to try and see where things could be going, and oppose those moves which we think carry potential risk.

In the case of this specific point, I'd go along with the idea that the sort of transfer of funds Fred is talking about isn't an immediate threat, and like AndersRed, I'm more concerned about the PIKs.
But the very fact that the Glazers have built in so many avenues by which to syphon out funds if necessary is enough in itself to make me wary of where things could potentially go in the future.
 
A1Dan said:
Fair enough.

That's all I know, I'm afraid. Sounds like playground / handbags stuff to me, but Ciderman and a few others clearly see it as some sort of massive P.R. disaster for MUST and are spreading talk of it wherever they can.

Personally I'm not going to worry too much if a member of MUST's heriarchy is in personal dispute over dodgy claims made by some bloke on the internet.
I'm certainly not going to stop supporting the MUST cause because of it. That would be like changing which party you vote for because of the actions of one MP - it's the policies that count.

I'm not sure anybody at MUST has even done much wrong other than try and stop clearly libelous claims which undermine their entire existence from being spread, though it's possible this may have been done a little clumsily.
Only Niall can confirm if there's anything to it really, and you've got more chance of communicating with you dead relatives via Derek Acorah than with communicating with Niall via the internet.
Click to expand...

It's not that difficult to communicate with Niall. As Niall told me personally, MUST threatened the site with legal action if he did not do as they instructed.
 
fredthered said:
This is taken directly from Andersreds' blogs and gives the precise details of what they are permitted to withdraw from Uniteds accounts.

Now please pay particular notice of the underlined bits.

1.Pay an immediate dividend to Red Football Joint Venture Ltd of £70m (page 130 note 13).
2.Pay an additional dividend to Red Football Joint Venture Ltd of £25m whenever they wish (page 130 note 14).
3.Transfer Carrington (for free) to another Glazer company, sell it and let the new owners lease it back to the club (page 78 and onto 79 "Real Property").
4.Pay £6m a year to the Glazers in management fees (page 100).
5.Pay £3m a year in "general corporate expenses" to Glazer companies (page 129 note 10b).
6.If EBITDA is at least twice the interest bill, pay 50% of the net cash profits of the club to parent companies in dividends (page 127 note c(i)).

You will see that only TWO of the above 6 cases are specific where the money can go to.

The rest are quite clear. The funds can go to the Glazers themselves, or to OTHER parts of his business. Parent companies, sister companies, whatever he likes.

Now lets look at another case scenario. Supposing they decide to transfer Carrington to First Allied. First Allied would then own Carrington (the prospectus makes it quite clear he's permitted to do it ).

First Allied would then rent carrington to Manchester United.

The money is then going directly from MUFC to First Allied, and its 100% legal, 100% legitimate, and 100% allowable.

Now you tell me thats not moving money between the two sides of his business.
Click to expand...

Heres another case scenario. Supposing Glazers sells the Bucs for £1.1 billion and clears all their debts?

What'll we talk about then?
 
Dublin Red said:
Thats disgraceful if true.

I have exchanged Pm's with Niall quite recently with no difficulty.
Click to expand...

There was a 25page thread about it yesterday in the general, which unfortunately got deleted as the MUSTites got too heated in their defence. The facts are that - i posted something that MUST didn't like - MUST then threatened to take Niall, redcafe and myself to court and sue us - Reluctantly Niall had to bow to their will and remove all my posts or else we'd have been sued by MUST.
 
Dublin Red said:
Heres another case scenario. Supposing Glazers sells the Bucs for £1.1 billion and clears all their debts?

What'll we talk about then?
Click to expand...

During the close-season? The weather mostly I guess.

Unfortunately, the Glazers have shown no indiciations of going in that direction, such as refinancing with new conditions to allow such a move.:(
 
ciderman9000000 said:
It's not that difficult to communicate with Niall. As Niall told me personally, MUST threatened the site with legal action if he did not do as they instructed.
Click to expand...

ciderman9000000 said:
There was a 25page thread about it yesterday in the general, which unfortunately got deleted as the MUSTites got too heated in their defence. The facts are that - i posted something that MUST didn't like - MUST then threatened to take Niall, redcafe and myself to court and sue us - Reluctantly Niall had to bow to their will and remove all my posts or else we'd have been sued by MUST.
Click to expand...

What did you post? :nervous: :D
 
ciderman9000000 said:
There was a 25page thread about it yesterday in the general, which unfortunately got deleted as the MUSTites got too heated in their defence. The facts are that - i posted something that MUST didn't like - MUST then threatened to take Niall, redcafe and myself to court and sue us - Reluctantly Niall had to bow to their will and remove all my posts or else we'd have been sued by MUST.
Click to expand...

Ah ok that explains why my thread got deleted.

That's a disgrace. It was on twitter today, strettyender were tweeting about it.
 
Dublin Red said:
What did you post? :nervous: :D
Click to expand...

Nothing extreme. Nobody can really remember what it was exactly, including me. It may or may not have been libelous, either way it was borderline, that was all anyone could decide. MUST took extreme measures though threatened to sue redcafe.
 
Dublin Red said:
What did you post? :nervous: :D
Click to expand...

He's got a conspiracy theory that Duncan Drasdo (and maybe other peole in MUST, I'm not sure) were supporting the Red Knights because they had some secret deal to personally benefit financially if the Red Knighs bid succeeded.

To be fair, given the stakes involved in teh RK bid at the time, I'd have been pretty pissed off with people starting rumours like that if I were them, and would certainly have asked that the posts were removed.

Quite how they went about this only Niall knows, though judging by the poor, quivering wreck it's left Ciderman as, it must have been pretty heavy handed! I'm thinking of starting a fund to pay for post-traumatic-stress treatment for the poor wretch.
 
It's a lot more complicated and MUST are not as draconian as made out to be by some.

There are fault lines on all sides.
 
wr8_utd said:
Ah ok that explains why my thread got deleted.

That's a disgrace. It was on twitter today, strettyender were tweeting about it.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's pretty shameful, but what can you do? It seems we're not allowed to talk about it for fear of further upsetting MUST.
 
ciderman9000000 said:
Yeah it's pretty shameful, but what can you do? It seems we're not allowed to talk about it for fear of further upsetting MUST.
Click to expand...

Of course we're not Ciderman, it's a police state isn't it? Damn, MUST are evil!

Hang on... aren't we... talking about it now?

Wait a minute, somebody's knocking at the door...If you never hear form me again, you know why.:nervous:
 
A1Dan said:
God knows.

But there's a difference between speculating about anything and everything and speculating about scenarios for which the ground-work is already being carreid out.
Click to expand...

How do you know the groundworks not been carried out on the Bucs sale?

I think we understand each other but we're hair splitting now. I think it's best to stick to what has actually happened rather than what might.
 
A1Dan said:
He's got a conspiracy theory that Duncan Drasdo (and maybe other peole in MUST, I'm not sure) were supporting the Red Knights because they had some secret deal to personally benefit financially if the Red Knighs bid succeeded.

To be fair, given the stakes involved in teh RK bid at the time, I'd have been pretty pissed off with people starting rumours like that if I were them, and would certainly have asked that the posts were removed.

Quite how they went about this only Niall knows, though judging by the poor, quivering wreck it's left Ciderman as, it must have been pretty heavy handed! I'm thinking of starting a fund to pay for post-traumatic-stress treatment for the poor wretch.
Click to expand...

Quivering wreck? I laughed it off at the time. It never once suprised me that MUST would act in this manner, and though they had no case against me, i was censored as a precaution as per their demands.
 
MUST should never have got involved.

The complaitant should have just PM'd one of the admins and the matter would have been dealt with in house.

Moles and mountains.
 
A1Dan said:
He's got a conspiracy theory that Duncan Drasdo (and maybe other peole in MUST, I'm not sure) were supporting the Red Knights because they had some secret deal to personally benefit financially if the Red Knighs bid succeeded.

To be fair, given the stakes involved in teh RK bid at the time, I'd have been pretty pissed off with people starting rumours like that if I were them, and would certainly have asked that the posts were removed.

Quite how they went about this only Niall knows, though judging by the poor, quivering wreck it's left Ciderman as, it must have been pretty heavy handed! I'm thinking of starting a fund to pay for post-traumatic-stress treatment for the poor wretch.
Click to expand...

If what we have been told is true it sounds like there was was some over reaction , surely a request to remove the offending remarks would have sufficed.


IMO threatening legal action reflects badly on MUST unless there is more to it. Hopefully the Caf's statement will clariify things.
.
 
A1Dan said:
Of course we're not Ciderman, it's a police state isn't it? Damn, MUST are evil!

Hang on... aren't we... talking about it now?

Wait a minute, somebody's knocking at the door...If you never hear form me again, you know why.:nervous:
Click to expand...

The leaders of MUST are a disgrace to the name, they care only for their own petty private agendas and think nothing of threatening legal action against any United supporter who speaks out against their methods. The Manchester United Supporter's Trust cannot be trusted by United supporters.
 
Dublin Red said:
Heres another case scenario. Supposing Glazers sells the Bucs for £1.1 billion and clears all their debts?

What'll we talk about then?
Click to expand...

That would be amazing if they could get that much for it. That's hundreds of millions more than it's worth. Why would they do that when they can milk United dry instead, boost Buccs coffers again and have two cash cows?
 
Dublin Red said:
How do you know the groundworks not been carried out on the Bucs sale?

I think we understand each other but we're hair splitting now. I think it's best to stick to what has actually happened rather than what might.
Click to expand...

We are splitting hairs a bit yes, but I think there is an important piont in there which is that is worth talking about what might happen, as once it has happened it is too late - No point crying over spilt milk etc.

As I said to somebody else, if someone had foreseen what happened at Portsmouth would they have been right to kick up a fuss? Of course they would.

However, there is no point wildly speculating, but ratehr trying to infer what the future may hold from facts we already know.

To takeyour example, we don't know the groundworks not been carried out on the Bucs sale, but that's the whoel point. If we did know that, it would immediately become a very interesting point of speculation, but we don't. And we can't speculate based on what we don't know!

Anyway, this is in danger of turning into the Rumsfeld "known unknowns" speach so I'll leave it there!
 
ciderman9000000 said:
any United supporter who speaks out against their methods.
Click to expand...

:boring:

We already know that's not what you spoke out about at all. Fortunately we don't all share your memory loss.

If, as may be the case, they over-reacted, it's not hard to understand why with a manipulative little prat like you around twisting the facts and posting whatever made-up garbage comes into his head.
 
Dublin Red said:
Heres another case scenario. Supposing Glazers sells the Bucs for £1.1 billion and clears all their debts?

What'll we talk about then?
Click to expand...

We will talk about how the feck they managed to get £1.1 billion for a company that only has a market value of about £400 million...
 
MikeUpNorth said:
Fred, I seem to remember the Bond prospectus detailed that Carrington could only move inter-group, i.e. stay within Red Football. Is this not the case? Can someone clarify this?
Click to expand...

That is the case..

So inter group means any company owned by the Glazers.

You have to remember that all the companies, MUFC, RFJV, First Allied, The bucs, all are subsidiaries of the main Glazer holding company.
 
So they could sell the ground to the Buccs holding company for a nominal fee and channel rent to the Buccs to get the level of debt down in there?

Mind you, fred, does Andersred know if there is anything to stop them creating another company, selling the ground and Carrington to that company then selling that company off?
 
A1Dan said:
:boring:

We already know that's not what you spoke out about at all. Fortunately we don't all share your memory loss.

If, as may be the case, they over-reacted, it's not hard to understand why with a manipulative little prat like you around twisting the facts and posting whatever made-up garbage comes into his head.
Click to expand...

:lol: How ironic; MUST, the almightly manipulators, are worried that fans are being manipulated?

Sorry for bringing this up in your thread, RB, but the thread where it was under discussion has gone :(
 
fredthered said:
That is the case..

So inter group means any company owned by the Glazers.

You have to remember that all the companies, MUFC, RFJV, First Allied, The bucs, all are subsidiaries of the main Glazer holding company.
Click to expand...

What company is 'the main Glazer holding company'?

I'm not sure 'inter-group' does mean any company owned by the Glazers, that would be odd as it's not a legal group is it?
 
fredthered said:
That is the case..

So inter group means any company owned by the Glazers.

You have to remember that all the companies, MUFC, RFJV, First Allied, The bucs, all are subsidiaries of the main Glazer holding company.
Click to expand...

You've just made that up. Actually pulled it out of thin air. You are an anus with fingers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.