That’s ten Hag after a trip to turkey
Club ownership | Senior management team talk
- Thread starter golden_blunder
- Start date
That’s ten Hag after a trip to turkey
Thats good news. PSG has been really successful monetising themselves.
Different context though. They were a nothing club and then got financially doped to the point where they became the only winning team in France - naturally the sponsorship money was always going to flow to them over time.
Since the APT rules have now been declared unlawful can we set up a big sponsorship agreement with INEOS to raise much needed funds?
Very doubtful a sponsorship at above-market rates happens under the current minority ownership situation - they'd effectively be giving the Glazers a free ride.
There are plenty of things INEOS can do but why would they as minority shareholders? Why should the Glazers benefit by INEOS putting more money in?
This is the biggest problem United has right now. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is a play by Jim all along. He’s hoping to get United at a discounted price. The club desperately need the Glazers gone as we need someone to put the investment in now.
Agree with the why would ineos pump money in side of things. From a pure business point of view it would make no sense.
If as you say this is Jim's angle I think he may have underestimated the Glazers. Getting rid of them is going to be extremely difficult.
United are at a tipping point. The club is a mess and if neither Jim or the Glazers are willing to pump money in I'm not sure where it ends.
What a clown show.
Hopefully. Daft rules to begin with.
Why would the premier league want to restrict its own revenue.
Excited to see Gyokeres and Osimhen linking up at the Sir Jim Radcliffe Ineos Stadium next season.
We know the Glazers won't put a penny of their own money in. When have they ever? They are the reason we are in this mess. We can bemoan the job losses and cuts and nobody likes to see redundancies and long-serving staff members being shown the door. But what would have happened if Ratcliffe hadn't come on board? I'm not a fan of his but the debt, buying overpriced players on the drip, the massive salaries, and the state of disrepair of the ground is the fault of the Glazers. United have become unsustainable because of them and they could walk away tomorrow, keep their cash, and let the banks pick at the bones of the club. With INEOS on board, that's unlikely to happen. I hope.
Even if the rule was that you could sponsor a related club for what ever you wanted (it won't be)
1. It makes no business sense whatsoever to INEOS
2. it would be stupid for INEOS to even try take on the oil clubs in such a way.
The PL would be ruined as a competition.
I’m already looking forward to us sacking him.
So we bring in a manager that plays a totally different system and probably needs 6-7 new players to make his system work at a time when they know that there is no money? How can anyone say this lot aren’t totally incompetent?
Here's the best part, they don't think they need 6 or 7 players. They think they played a blinder bringing in Zirkzee for 30 million. They think Amorim is going to convert Dalot and Maz into wingbacks. Amorim's reputation will ultimately take the hit if it doesn't work out.
Yeah absolutely. That's why we've signed a young WB and been linked with every WB going.
Good to see they’re willing to jump on a call and not just take it offline, to loop in the staff and give them a helicopter view of the upcoming diversification of the workforce vis-a-vis them not letting the door hit them on the arse on the way out.
Avram Glazer has pocketted up to 15mil on his last three trips to England for Manchester United Cup finals.
Charging the Manchester club over 5mil for each of his trip from Florida, US, to Wembley UK, Avram has made a fortune.
"Even the most expesive private Jet Lines would barely touch 1 million for the flight, and a couple nights of hospitality."
Expert in this industry dully says "Avram has made about 16 million bucks while spending less than 3 million. He knows how to suck the money out of his own club."
Charging the Manchester club over 5mil for each of his trip from Florida, US, to Wembley UK, Avram has made a fortune.
"Even the most expesive private Jet Lines would barely touch 1 million for the flight, and a couple nights of hospitality."
Expert in this industry dully says "Avram has made about 16 million bucks while spending less than 3 million. He knows how to suck the money out of his own club."
Cash profits is revenue less cash expenses. Its a measure of how cash generative a business is at an operational level.
It's also called EBITDA (either pre or post exceptional expenses). Earnings with all the strictly non cash items in the P&L stripped away.
We remain the most cash generative club in the PL and Europe. Hence the term "cash cow".
We encash the spectacle we produce better than anyone, even if that spectacle is rubbish. EBITDA is also a key metric used for forecasting, projecting, budgeting, comparisons, valuation, debt coverage, debt covenants etc.
In the last 5 years to 2024 ("the covid period") we generated 610m of cash profits from operations. In the P&L account that meets costs of:
Net player trading position of 661m (766m Amortization less profits on player trading of 105m)
Depreciation of 78M
Net finance costs of 157m
Exceptional costs of 72m
Leaving total pre tax losses of 358m in the 5 years to 2024. Obviously bad news, but most clubs make losses. That's football.
So is the problem our capacity to generate cash or how we use it? No other club in world football has that EBITDA base (even when they have bigger revenues) yet some do report profits. what gives?
Obviously debt costs are a problem (and increasingly so) but by far the biggest culprit is poor recruitment choices, buying expensive rubbish which impacts both amortization and profits on player trading. Our net player trading position is, I reckon the worst in the PL. Other big clubs that spend big and consequently have high Amortization charges compensate by generating strong profits from player sales.
Now the above costs are not all cash items, so the cash flow statement provides the cash equivalent spend for all of the above (aside from exceptional costs).
For net finance costs we have interest paid of around 131m (net finance costs have a volatile non cash component), for depreciation we have cash expenditure of 69m on infrastructure (no reason for these to agree as one is determined by formula while the other is just cash paid in the period), for net player trading we have a net spend of 647m (821m out against 173m in sales). The net player trading position should be congruent with net spend when looked over a long period (as is the case here) because timing differences become less relevant. For a player bought and sold within the 5 year period, the net trading position for that player would exactly match the net spend for that player provided all payments had been made.
All told we spend, in cash, 847m on those items. And another 68m on dividends. Again our net expenditure on players alone exceeded cash profits for the period. The extra cash to cover the overall deficit came from cash-in- hand (310m five years ago) and a combination of RCF and the INEOS injection of £158m.
So to return to the distinction between losing cash and spending too much cash, the point is that we generate more than enough cash to be viable, more than other clubs. Some clubs (like Chelsea and PSG) actually generate negative cash profits. Our recruitment choices have hurt us, we have spend too much on players (especially over the last 5 years), but we can also change the way we go about player recruitment. We do not need to sign expensive players. We can confine our player expenditure to what we make in player sales. We can promote from within. We can eke our more EBITDA from operational cost cutting to increase cash flow for additional net spending. We can even continue to use the RCFS to steal from future earnings if push comes to shove. We have choices. And there are more options available to the owners. Sobering stuff maybe, but not fatal.
I am getting well sick of this dooming and glooming. It's uninformed and It's coming from both sides, both supporters and detractors of INEOS.
You have 5 minutes to clear your desks before I call for cops and have you charged with trespassing, and release the hounds
JR didn't want a full sale. The Glazers were open to either a full sale or a minority investment from the outset.
The Glazers didn't pocket the full proceeds from the original deal. Other A shareholders got around 1/3 of the loot.
The Qatari guy was real and treated as such in the bidding process despite not offering "customary financing commitment letters".
All of this stuff is publicly available. No need for conjecture.
Quotes from the solicitation, recommendation statements filed with the SEC. Qatari guy is Bidder, Offeror is JR.
On or prior to February 17, 2023, ten potential counterparties, including Offeror and Bidder A, submitted initial indications of interest. Bidder A’s proposal contemplated the acquisition of all Ordinary Shares at a price of $25.00 per Ordinary Share and the proposal did not include customary financing commitment letters. Offeror’s proposal contemplated purchasing a controlling stake of Manchester United via an acquisition of Class B Shares only at a price of $22.00 per Class B Share, which would result in the Class A Shares remaining outstanding.
During the week of February 20, 2023, representatives of Raine and Manchester United held virtual meetings with Bidder A and Offeror to discuss the proposals received
From February 20, 2023 through the end of March, the potential counterparties, including Bidder A and Offeror, continued to conduct additional due diligence on Manchester United.
Between March 22, 2023 and March 24, 2023, nine potential counterparties, including Bidder A and Offeror, submitted revised proposals regarding potential strategic alternatives. Bidder A’s proposal contemplated the acquisition of all the outstanding Ordinary Shares at a price of $28.00 per Ordinary Share.
On April 7, 2023, Raine distributed third round process letters to Bidder A and Offeror, with final bids due on April 28, 2023. Latham prepared a draft auction merger agreement contemplating the sale of all of the outstanding Ordinary Shares and on April 10, 2023, the draft merger agreement was posted to the virtual data room. Offeror and Bidder A were instructed to submit a merger agreement markup for the acquisition of all of the Ordinary Shares by April 19, 2023.
On April 28, 2023, the Board of Directors received revised proposals from Bidder A and Offeror. Bidder A’s proposal contemplated the acquisition of all of the Ordinary Shares at a price of $28.54 per Ordinary Share
On May 2, 2023, the board representatives held a meeting with representatives of Bidder A to discuss Bidder A’s most recent proposal. At that meeting, the board representatives advised Bidder A that its most recent proposal did not provide the shareholders of Manchester United with sufficient value and encouraged Bidder A to improve its proposal.
On May 16, 2023, the Board of Directors received a revised proposal from Bidder A that contemplated the acquisition of all of the outstanding Ordinary Shares at a price of $30.01 per Ordinary Share.
On May 22, 2023, at the direction of the board representatives, representatives of Manchester United and Raine informed Bidder A that its proposal to acquire all of the Ordinary Shares at a price of $30.01 per Ordinary Share did not have sufficient support to proceed and, in response to a request of Bidder A for guidance, indicated that a price of $35.25 per Ordinary Share would be considered.
On June 1, 2023, Bidder A submitted a revised offer for the acquisition of all of the Ordinary Shares and specified consideration of $34.00 per Class B Share and $24.81 per Class A Share ($5.20 less than the per Class A Share consideration in the May 16, 2023, offer from Bidder A). Again, this revised offer did not provide customary financing commitment letters. Also, as noted above, the board representatives, directly and indirectly through its legal and financial advisors, held discussions regarding the terms of Bidder A’s proposal with members of the Board of Directors throughout the Strategic Alternatives Review Process. Specifically, following the submission of Bidder A’s proposal on June 1, as part of such outreach members of the Board of Directors noted that they would not be prepared to support a potential transaction unless the holders of Class A Shares received the same per-share consideration as to be received by the holders of the Class B Shares.
Between June 2023 and August of 2023, representatives of Bidder A and representatives of Manchester United conducted due diligence sessions, exchanged drafts of the merger agreements and had multiple telephone conversations and videoconferences to discuss outstanding issues and potential transaction structures, including the requirement of the Board of Directors that Bidder A provide a proposal with the same per share consideration for the Class A Shares and Class B Shares and for Bidder A to provide customary financing commitment letters.
From August 2023 to October 6, 2023, representatives of Manchester United, Bidder A and their respective advisors held several telephonic meetings to negotiate and discuss the terms of Bidder A’s proposal, communications about Bidder A’s proposal and exchanged drafts of a merger agreement, including communications from Bidder A in late September 2023 where representatives of Bidder A conveyed to Raine that Bidder A was still preparing to submit a revised proposal.
On October 15, 2023, Bidder A notified advisors of Manchester United that Bidder A was formally withdrawing from the Strategic Alternatives Review Process.
Last edited:
That was the old rules, not the amenments made last year.
I never even considered I'd see the day when we had to sell players to get new ones in: presumably our best ones; getting £10.50 for others won't help much.
I can't tell you how much I hate the owners
I can't tell you how much I hate the owners
"You're not getting made redundant, you know" Brent style
I wonder if Chelsea fans regret not having local lad as their owner
So it's true then, obviously
Honestly if he truly loves united then he would push for a sale so we get owners that can be arsed investing into the club
That's what the likes of moratti and Berlusconi did when their pockets couldn't match the ambitions of their respective clubs
They need to stop treating fans like shit aswell.
https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...s-at-the-same-time?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
This explains our financial situation well
This explains our financial situation well
Absolute shit show
I think SJR needs to rethink his sporting team everything they touch turns to shit
I think SJR needs to rethink his sporting team everything they touch turns to shit
Our biggest issue is debt and interest charges. If you stripped those out of the club then we would be making relatively small losses with positive cashflows. Having to manage 700m in debt and 60m in interest payments each year is hampering the club despite squandering a billion on shit players.
If we could issue some share capital and clear some debt it would clear the decks for the next 10 years. I'm not sure why this isn't an option. Surely a club like us can raise 500m on the stock market.
The debt is manageable if player recruitment and everything with it (contracts etc) wasn't such an abomination. Having a £100m+ net spend every season is unsustainable.
The situation is recoverable but is going to take long time until the big contracts are weeded out. It's a ridiculous situation that most of our biggest earners offer next to nothing on the pitch.
I don't see us being a top 6 club for a couple of years. I think net spend will be minimal this summer, they'll need to break the chain somewhere.
The situation is recoverable but is going to take long time until the big contracts are weeded out. It's a ridiculous situation that most of our biggest earners offer next to nothing on the pitch.
I don't see us being a top 6 club for a couple of years. I think net spend will be minimal this summer, they'll need to break the chain somewhere.
I don’t care if we only sign 2 players this Summer. If they turn out to be good signings who have the potential to be good enough for a title winning team, it’s an improvement on every single other Summer. Crazy people are moaning we won’t have £300m to spunk which would likely be on shite / players who are only good enough for top 4 teams / short term older players. When you have that kind of spending power it’s always looking for a quick fix and we have much deeper issues.
This is how we’re going to get back to the top, if you make good buys over 4-5 windows then things only go in one direction. It could be a blessing in disguise that we have financial restrictions.
The last great United side did have world class talent we spent a fortune on (Rooney, Ferdinand, Ronaldo) but a lot was built on cheap smart buys over 3-4 windows. Park, VDS in 2005; Vidic, Evra in Jan 2006 and Carrick in Summer 06.
If we can do this incremental, considered approach again then we may be in a position in 3-4 years where we can spend big knowing exactly what our weakness is that elevates us to the next level, similar to Pool spending whatever necessary to get VVD and Alisson in 2018.
For now I want to see some team building, buying players who fit our new managers system over anything else alongside blooding younger players. I don’t care if this means we miss out on top 4 for another 3 years. As I say, having a tight budget could be a blessing given how ludicrously reckless we’ve been when we’ve had a big budget to play with.
This is how we’re going to get back to the top, if you make good buys over 4-5 windows then things only go in one direction. It could be a blessing in disguise that we have financial restrictions.
The last great United side did have world class talent we spent a fortune on (Rooney, Ferdinand, Ronaldo) but a lot was built on cheap smart buys over 3-4 windows. Park, VDS in 2005; Vidic, Evra in Jan 2006 and Carrick in Summer 06.
If we can do this incremental, considered approach again then we may be in a position in 3-4 years where we can spend big knowing exactly what our weakness is that elevates us to the next level, similar to Pool spending whatever necessary to get VVD and Alisson in 2018.
For now I want to see some team building, buying players who fit our new managers system over anything else alongside blooding younger players. I don’t care if this means we miss out on top 4 for another 3 years. As I say, having a tight budget could be a blessing given how ludicrously reckless we’ve been when we’ve had a big budget to play with.
If he truly loved United he would never have got into bed with the parasites.
If he would have held his nerve and maintained that it was a full sale or nothing they would likely have cracked under this current financial pressure and sold the club to him.
True
SJR has put as much money as he’s allowed into the playing side so far.
Structure wise he can put in as much as he likes but why would he unless he’s getting more shares from the glazers? Otherwise he’s just paying their stuff off
Glazers gotta go, it’s their debt around the neck of the club that’s the root of the issues
Allegedly one of the brothers is under so much personal debt that he will not agree to sell the golden cow. Another brother feels beholden to him so will back him. Whilst the other 4 are ready to sell