Club Sale | It’s done!

[cyberman]

If you are relying on a Daily Star article you need to read more. Ineos/ Ratcfliffe have tickets/ boxes/ debentures for lots of sports and music events. He is not a Chelsea fan

Because he lives in London and presumably is too busy to be commuting to Manchester for matches.

He said: "I am a season ticket holder at Chelsea, have been for years, although I’m a Manchester United fan really.

"Or was!"

Quote from Ratcliffe himself. Don’t believe the propaganda

 

[Fridge chutney]

What a complete and utter tool.

 

[Cee90]

How on Earth anyone gives this fella any air time I’ll never understand, every time someone shares something of his I just see an absolute prat with zero clue about football.
He’s clearly never played the game, never coached the game, had no UEFA badges, and judging by his quality street gag, is about as funny as a fart in an elevator. Do people just enjoy watching utter morons ranting and raving on their own shitty channels?

To be fair, a fart in an elevator is pretty funny.

 

[Gordon Godot]

As you say, the debt is the clubs. However, the banks have given the debt on the back of the owners. The banks feel they are "good" for the money they have lent. The banks wouldn't necessarily feel the same about the new owners.

And like others have mentioned, I would HIGHLY doubt any new investor will up take the current debt, especially as there is so much current backlash from the fans about it.

Plus, with the new investments required, stadium, etc, it's not out of the realms of possibility that new debt will be required for all the work needed.

Most of the debt is in bonds that mature in 2027 and held by a large number of investment funds. The club would need to actively look to redeem them (pay them off). They are not impacted by a change in ownership so likely no change there. Question what the club choose to do when we get nearer maturity, refinance by issuing new bonds or do the owners put in the funds to ensure the club doesnt need to issue new debt. There is some bank debt which may have a clause around change in ownership but assuming a well resourced buyer I dont think the banks would be worried.

 

[yumtum]

Would they? Not necessarily, right? The debt is the club's, not the Glazers'?

Suppose how the loan is structured I guess? Can imagine if it's a complicated ordeal many onvestors would be put off though.

 

[Rightnr]

Would they? Not necessarily, right? The debt is the club's, not the Glazers'?

These deals are usually on an Enterprise value basis which includes debt. The underlying assumption is that the money from the new buyer will be used to cover the old debt.

 

[Plant0x84]

He’s a Chelsea fan!

Hes in London due to business. He’s not a Chelsea fan, they are just the most convenient club for where he is living now, when he’s in the UK. If he was a genuine chelsea fan I suspect his bid for them would have been a bit more serious - especially as they would cost him a good chunk less than United might!

 

[wolvored]

Gave up going to United for a Chelsea season ticket?

He said when he moved to London he started watching Chelsea as was easier.

 

[mu4c_20le]

He said when he moved to London he started watching Chelsea as was easier.

True fan right there.

 

[wolvored]

True fan right there.

Fair weather supporter

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Why not? Glazers literally have take millions dollars from the club every year since they took over and now sell 10 times price.

But the sums they bought the club for are nothing compared to what the next owners will be buying it for, and the loan they took out and put into the club would be small fish compared to any loan the next owner would need to take out.

A Glazer-type takeover would be a non-starter now. The next time the club is sold, the buyers are going to have to front up a shit-load of money and be looking at waiting decades before seeing that return.

Just really don't see much benefit for a buyer at these prices with this much remodelling needed, unless it's someone with a huge love for football/United, or a state-backed bid to use United to promote themselves.

 

[Tarrou]

new owners are under no obligation to pay off the debt.. it’s their choice what to do with it

it heavily impacts the valuation of the club though, needless to say

 

[Amarsdd]

That's surely satire? Taking the piss out of Piers who did the same.

No clue, I’m just reposting what someone posted in the match thread. And just checking that livestream, he doesn’t seem to appear again on it.

 

[duymnsd]

But the sums they bought the club for are nothing compared to what the next owners will be buying it for, and the loan they took out and put into the club would be small fish compared to any loan the next owner would need to take out.

A Glazer-type takeover would be a non-starter now. The next time the club is sold, the buyers are going to have to front up a shit-load of money and be looking at waiting decades before seeing that return.

Just really don't see much benefit for a buyer at these prices with this much remodelling needed, unless it's someone with a huge love for football/United, or a state-backed bid to use United to promote themselves.

PR alone is the reason that some crazy rich countries could spend a tons of money on us. Hosting a WC cost Qatar 200B dollars for just PR and marketing their country, if u could buy a great brand like Man United for just 10B totally, it’s shocking cheap

 

[ATXRedDevil]

Would they? Not necessarily, right? The debt is the club's, not the Glazers'?

Like most debt docs, there's acceleration upon a change of control. All outstanding interest and principal is due at closing. In many cases, this is done by refinancing (i.e. new debt would replace it), but one way or another the current lenders are getting paid when the transaction closes.

 

[glazed]

PR alone is the reason that some crazy rich countries could spend a tons of money on us. Hosting a WC cost Qatar 200B dollars for just PR and marketing their country, if u could buy a great brand like Man United for just 10B totally, it’s shocking cheap

I'm begining to think the most likely scenario is that a credible shell buyer (maybe linked to Dubai) will buy us through a holding company which will then itself get bought by the real purchasers, Saudi Arabia, once they've dumped Newcastle. Needless to say this is incredibly corrupt practice but politically it stacks up.

 

[Sushi Kagawa]

Debt will be settled with the sale price so not worried about that at all

 

[Tarrou]

Debt will be settled with the sale price so not worried about that at all

is this based on something concrete?

it could be settled, kept on or re-negotiated

 

[phelans shorts]

Hes in London due to business. He’s not a Chelsea fan, they are just the most convenient club for where he is living now, when he’s in the UK. If he was a genuine chelsea fan I suspect his bid for them would have been a bit more serious - especially as they would cost him a good chunk less than United might!

It’s absolutely incredible how many people think a season ticket at a club close to their home is some gotcha. It means he likes to watch football so… goes to football matches.

That’s before that it’s almost certainly a corporate box which clients who probably wouldn’t be pleased to have to travel up the country for a game will be taken to regularly, it’s not like he’s going to be in the Shed End with the average joes. It’s so totally irrelevant to everything.

 

[Messier1994]

I'm begining to think the most likely scenario is that a credible shell buyer (maybe linked to Dubai) will buy us through a holding company which will then itself get bought by the real purchasers, Saudi Arabia, once they've dumped Newcastle. Needless to say this is incredibly corrupt practice but politically it stacks up.

1. The “real” acquisition of Manchester United will take place buy someone agreeing with the Glazers’ to buy their shares. However, the “formal” acquisition must be made through one of a couple alternatives set out in the Cayman Island companies act (Manchester United plc is a caymanian company).

2. Most likely, the “formal” acquisition of Manchester United plc will be made by a merger between a so called SPV (special purpose vehicle, which will be a newly incorporated company registered in the Cayman) merging with Manchester United plc where the old owners of Manchester United plc get cash as merger consideration and the owner of the SPV get 100% of the shares in the SPV.

3. There have been some talk about the Glazer’s settling the debt before selling.

Normally, the debt is baked into the purchase price. You always negotiate what a company will be worth — on a net debt and cash basis. Like remember, the buyer has no clue how much debt and cash will be in the company (club) the same day they acquire the control of it. It’s mostly irrelevant. So you negotiate a value for the company/club, say 6bn, on a net debt and cash basis. Then when the transaction is closed, you basically take 6bn and deduct the debt, say 1bn, and add the cash in the company/club say 250mn, and pay 5.25bn as a result.

4. All credit agreements always includes a Change of Control clause, resulting that the debt falls due immediately when the merger is effectuated. Hence, all debt of a target company is always refinanced.

5. For me, whether there is debt or not in the company/club is more or less irrelevant. Often debt is good for tax reasons.

 

[glazed]

5. For me, whether there is debt or not in the company/club is more or less irrelevant. Often debt is good for tax reasons.

I think the whole mechanism is slighty beside the point. The real issue is that there is no business who would pay what the Glazers want. There are very few countries who would - possibly only one. Certainly we know who would pay the most. So a way will be found to circumvent the rules so that this particular country can buy the club.

 

[devilish]

I agree that any investor would have to be crazy to act simply as a lender to the club, with no controls in place. That is presumably why the Saudis walked away from the mooted £700m deal for 30% of United in 2019. The Glazers would have to sacrifice some voting rights (or provide a clear path to full control & ownership of the club in future for the investor) - they evidently weren't willing to do this with the Saudis, but perhaps their appetite has been whetted somewhat, now that the scale of the expenditure required to refurbish Old Trafford & Carrington has become clear.



Whether it ends up being a full or partial sale, the buyer won't be expecting any short term financial return on their investment. They will be hoping that the value of these clubs hasn't yet peaked and that they can flog their shares in United for a handsome return five or ten years down the road (probably once European Super League mkii has taken off).

If the Glazers want financial help then they will have to accept a scenario were they would lose control over the club. That might be bad news for them as the new major shareholder might not be interesting in increasing the club shares prices the way they do (ex he might be more interesting in winning trophies instead).

 

[Messier1994]

If the Glazers want financial help then they will have to accept a scenario were they would lose control over the club. That might be bad news for them as the new major shareholder might not be interesting in increasing the club shares prices the way they do (ex he might be more interesting in winning trophies instead).

Maybe, I mean, from one POV, what is 10bn? It’s not like it buys you an extreme amount of property in attractive locations. Transactions including a 10bn asset isn’t rare. A ton of people could easily afford to buy United. It’s what DocuSign is worth.

But at the same time, financing 100% is very hard to come by right now. There are business opportunities, but every lender has burning items on their balance sheet and they pick the raisins out of the cake.

Meanwhile, there are always business thriving in any climate. For some, higher energy prices is pure profits.

 

[Messier1994]

Tomorrow 9.15 PM we are at least getting some news when the Q1 for July-September is released.

I covered this about a week ago. It’s definitely noteworthy that the Q1 report is announced as late as 8 December. Mid November is the norm. For US companies listed on the NYSE, the limit is 45 days IIRC.

I can only see three reasons for why it’s this late. (1) The administrative personnel at Man Utd HQ is swamped with work from a due diligence report for the benefit of a buyer. (2) There is uncertainty over an Item in the report or precautionary measures involving independent review is taken to ensure the reports content. Or (3) it’s planned to be announced tomorrow because it’s deemed to fit the vendor auction process

None really makes that much sense. I would say that (2) by far is the most common reason for a delay like this, often after a dispute with the auditors. Given that all hell has broken loose in Juventus — it could definitely draw attention from the auditors. Events like that really scares everyone. But I would say that it’s really unlikely. As far as I can tell, the club is run in an exemplary manner with help from the best advisors and there really have been zero incentives for anyone to engage in fishy dealings.

But it will be interesting to review it when it’s announced. With a potential merger — nothing is really that surprising. But under normal conditions, a report would never be released 68 days after the end of a quarter. It’s something extraordinary.

 

[red thru&thru]

As far as I can tell, the club is run in an exemplary manner with help from the best advisors and there really have been zero incentives for anyone to engage in fishy dealings.

This paragraph is the reason I also don't believe it's point 2. Whatever else has ever gone on in the past 17 years, not being above board isn't one of them.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the first time the accounts have ever been so late from United?

 

[MegadrivePerson]

But it will be interesting to review it when it’s announced. With a potential merger — nothing is really that surprising. But under normal conditions, a report would never be released 68 days after the end of a quarter. It’s something extraordinary.

That suggests that it's likely to be bad news. Releasing it on the same day as two world cup quarter finals knowing full well that it won't get the full coverage it deserves!

It's the same thing politicians do when they sit on a bad news story and then release as soon as theirs a much bigger more devastating news story dominating the headlines!

 

[devilish]

Maybe, I mean, from one POV, what is 10bn? It’s not like it buys you an extreme amount of property in attractive locations. Transactions including a 10bn asset isn’t rare. A ton of people could easily afford to buy United. It’s what DocuSign is worth.

But at the same time, financing 100% is very hard to come by right now. There are business opportunities, but every lender has burning items on their balance sheet and they pick the raisins out of the cake.

Meanwhile, there are always business thriving in any climate. For some, higher energy prices is pure profits.

It's evident that you're pretty business minded something that I am not. However I do know one or two about what make these people tick. Throughout their reign, the Glazers has kept the club under there direct thumb even when it made more sense to change policy. For example a top football CEO such as Marotta or at least a decent DOF would had spared the club millions and made the club look less silly. Yet the Glazers stuck to Woodward for years and when Woodward did leave they made sure that they appoint his fixer as DOF, knowing that Arnold had no interest in dabbling into football matters. I can't see such owners would accept a minority stake within the club unless there is a commitment from such owners to buy their minority stake in the near future for a price the Glazers are comfortable with.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

It’s absolutely incredible how many people think a season ticket at a club close to their home is some gotcha. It means he likes to watch football so… goes to football matches.

That’s before that it’s almost certainly a corporate box which clients who probably wouldn’t be pleased to have to travel up the country for a game will be taken to regularly, it’s not like he’s going to be in the Shed End with the average joes. It’s so totally irrelevant to everything.

If anything, it reinforces the idea that he's a football guy and probably passionate about the sport. I've lived in Madrid for a few years and was a socio of Atletico Madrid, even though I have very shallow affection for the team, I just found going to games there more fun than the Bernabeu.

It also absolutely makes sense for him to go as a corporate thing too. It's weird how people are clinging onto this as if it's something big.

 

[cyberman]

It’s absolutely incredible how many people think a season ticket at a club close to their home is some gotcha. It means he likes to watch football so… goes to football matches.

That’s before that it’s almost certainly a corporate box which clients who probably wouldn’t be pleased to have to travel up the country for a game will be taken to regularly, it’s not like he’s going to be in the Shed End with the average joes. It’s so totally irrelevant to everything.

You’re literally just speculating on points on to back up your point. He says he’s a season ticket holder at Chelsea and wasn’t a fan of United anymore. That’s ok.
A billionaire doesn’t have a long commute to OT and it doesn’t say he goes to Chelsea to entertain clients, I’m sure the people he employs does that. Hell my sister is paid to do that and she doesn’t own a multi million pound company.
It’s weird to make excuses like this but whatever people want to lie to themselves about then fair enough. Turn a blind eye to pretend a so called real Man Utd fan is in charge is understandable.

 

[Rooney in Paris]

You’re literally just speculating on points on to back up your point. He says he’s a season ticket holder at Chelsea and wasn’t a fan of United anymore. That’s ok.
A billionaire doesn’t have a long commute to OT and it doesn’t say he goes to Chelsea to entertain clients, I’m sure the people he employs does that. Hell my sister is paid to do that and she doesn’t own a multi million pound company.
It’s weird to make excuses like this but whatever people want to lie to themselves about then fair enough. Turn a blind eye to pretend a so called real Man Utd fan is in charge is understandable.

Ah, the "real Man Utd fan" card!

 

[phelans shorts]

You’re literally just speculating on points on to back up your point. He says he’s a season ticket holder at Chelsea and wasn’t a fan of United anymore. That’s ok.
A billionaire doesn’t have a long commute to OT and it doesn’t say he goes to Chelsea to entertain clients, I’m sure the people he employs does that. Hell my sister is paid to do that and she doesn’t own a multi million pound company.
It’s weird to make excuses like this but whatever people want to lie to themselves about then fair enough. Turn a blind eye to pretend a so called real Man Utd fan is in charge is understandable.

Give me the quotes big boy

 

[cyberman]

Ah, the "real Man Utd fan" card!

That’s what Ratcliffe fans (fans?are they fans) keep pushing?!

 

[Andersonson]

I wonder how much the jacuzzis will affect the price. In how bad shape are they? Leaks?

Hopefully we will know more

 

[Rooney in Paris]

That’s what Ratcliffe fans (fans?are they fans) keep pushing?!

Saying that he's a local who supports the club is not quite that, no.

 

[cyberman]

Saying that he's a local who supports the club is not quite that, no.

Used to support the club going by his own words?
I’m seeing all the excuses about commutes and being close to SB and all this shit. Apparently he lived 2 and a half hours away from SB! It’s not even that easy for him to get to.
People can just give up on clubs. I dont respect them as fans but it does happen. I can see why this romantic notion is easy to hold onto but that’s all it is. A notion.

 

[phelans shorts]

Used to support the club going by his own words?
I’m seeing all the excuses about commutes and being close to SB and all this shit. Apparently he lived 2 and a half hours away from SB! It’s not even that easy for him to get to.
People can just give up on clubs. I dont respect them as fans but it does happen. I can see why this romantic notion is easy to hold onto but that’s all it is. A notion.

Are you going to provide these quotes are some point fella?

I asked about two hours ago and I’m still waiting to check them out for myself

 

[Bluelion7]

Hes in London due to business. He’s not a Chelsea fan, they are just the most convenient club for where he is living now, when he’s in the UK. If he was a genuine chelsea fan I suspect his bid for them would have been a bit more serious - especially as they would cost him a good chunk less than United might!

If we are talking Radcliffe, the way he approached things when Chelsea was for sale lead me to doubt the seriousness of any of his intentions. He seems to be fishing for his name being in the news, or hoping a group like Apple or other investors will see his “general interest” and ask him to be a part of something (like a 30% stake, etc).

He didnt technically have a Chelsea bid I don’t think. Saying to the press. You’d be willing to buy something or “pay x amount” for something is meaningless.

Thrre was a timeframe for purchase proposals to be submitted to the Raine group, and the proposals had to be detailed and include very specific plans and information. He did none of that to my knowledge.

Now, he may indeed want Manchester United. But if he does, he will need to be WAY more serious in his intent.

On he Saudi front….The US just released a notorious butcher and arms dealer in exchange for Britney Griner. Saudi Arabia was the one who brought the deal to us and help broker the situation with Putin. For all the kids who haven’t seen the godfather… the one who comes to you with the deal is the traitor. I still find it amusing the UK chased off a semi-retired rich guy, and are gladly allowing Putins ACTUAL, current Allies to purchase teams… while those allies are aiding Russia to move funds, hide funds, control energy prices, and even backfill munitions. Irony is fun.

 

[ATXRedDevil]

Tomorrow 9.15 PM we are at least getting some news when the Q1 for July-September is released.

I covered this about a week ago. It’s definitely noteworthy that the Q1 report is announced as late as 8 December. Mid November is the norm. For US companies listed on the NYSE, the limit is 45 days IIRC.

I can only see three reasons for why it’s this late. (1) The administrative personnel at Man Utd HQ is swamped with work from a due diligence report for the benefit of a buyer. (2) There is uncertainty over an Item in the report or precautionary measures involving independent review is taken to ensure the reports content. Or (3) it’s planned to be announced tomorrow because it’s deemed to fit the vendor auction process

None really makes that much sense. I would say that (2) by far is the most common reason for a delay like this, often after a dispute with the auditors. Given that all hell has broken loose in Juventus — it could definitely draw attention from the auditors. Events like that really scares everyone. But I would say that it’s really unlikely. As far as I can tell, the club is run in an exemplary manner with help from the best advisors and there really have been zero incentives for anyone to engage in fishy dealings.

But it will be interesting to review it when it’s announced. With a potential merger — nothing is really that surprising. But under normal conditions, a report would never be released 68 days after the end of a quarter. It’s something extraordinary.

The company is an FPI so they’re technically not required to file quarterly interim financials, just a 6 month interim period for the first and second quarter.

 

[arthurka]

If we are talking Radcliffe, the way he approached things when Chelsea was for sale lead me to doubt the seriousness of any of his intentions. He seems to be fishing for his name being in the news, or hoping a group like Apple or other investors will see his “general interest” and ask him to be a part of something (like a 30% stake, etc).

He didnt technically have a Chelsea bid I don’t think. Saying to the press. You’d be willing to buy something or “pay x amount” for something is meaningless.

Thrre was a timeframe for purchase proposals to be submitted to the Raine group, and the proposals had to be detailed and include very specific plans and information. He did none of that to my knowledge.

Now, he may indeed want Manchester United. But if he does, he will need to be WAY more serious in his intent.

On he Saudi front….The US just released a notorious butcher and arms dealer in exchange for Britney Griner. Saudi Arabia was the one who brought the deal to us and help broker the situation with Putin. For all the kids who haven’t seen the godfather… the one who comes to you with the deal is the traitor. I still find it amusing the UK chased off a semi-retired rich guy, and are gladly allowing Putins ACTUAL, current Allies to purchase teams… while those allies are aiding Russia to move funds, hide funds, control energy prices, and even backfill munitions. Irony is fun.

No one wants to know this, a lot of money and new fancy stuff is all that counts.

 

[phelans shorts]

If we are talking Radcliffe, the way he approached things when Chelsea was for sale lead me to doubt the seriousness of any of his intentions. He seems to be fishing for his name being in the news, or hoping a group like Apple or other investors will see his “general interest” and ask him to be a part of something (like a 30% stake, etc).

He didnt technically have a Chelsea bid I don’t think. Saying to the press. You’d be willing to buy something or “pay x amount” for something is meaningless.

Thrre was a timeframe for purchase proposals to be submitted to the Raine group, and the proposals had to be detailed and include very specific plans and information. He did none of that to my knowledge.

Now, he may indeed want Manchester United. But if he does, he will need to be WAY more serious in his intent.

On he Saudi front….The US just released a notorious butcher and arms dealer in exchange for Britney Griner. Saudi Arabia was the one who brought the deal to us and help broker the situation with Putin. For all the kids who haven’t seen the godfather… the one who comes to you with the deal is the traitor. I still find it amusing the UK chased off a semi-retired rich guy, and are gladly allowing Putins ACTUAL, current Allies to purchase teams… while those allies are aiding Russia to move funds, hide funds, control energy prices, and even backfill munitions. Irony is fun.

I mean, the majority are against the relationship with Saudi Arabia so I’m not really sure what you’re getting at here. You seem to be deliberately downplaying Abramovich though, what with him literally being name 1 on the Navalny 35.