Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brownie85 said:
But given the tumbling price of the shares, how can the Glazers justify the £6B+ that they want?
Click to expand...

Because it's United. That, and the game's earning potential is becoming more lucrative. Furthermore, they know one of the bidders have the money after they boasted about it in an attempt to woo the fanbase.

Antony can easily be suspended and advertisers are going nowhere.

Either are the supporters.
 
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
 
Brownie85 said:
But given the tumbling price of the shares, how can the Glazers justify the £6B+ that they want. I fully understand it's their asset and they can value it as they see fit, but the state of the stadium, the current performance levels, the previous and current player issues possibly impacting sponsorhip, the ever increasing debt...

The "exclusive" the other day says the Glazers are pinning their hopes on EtH winning it all over the next couple of seasons hopefully pushing the price of the club higher and higher... based on how things are going, the value is going to plummet, not raise, so it's just making them look stupid at the moment, as when they next come to sell, the lower (speculated) value, and the way the Glazers have treated the bidders this time around, will lead to quite a mute response i'd bet!
Click to expand...
I get where you are coming from. It is worth keeping in mind that the NYSE share price was around $13 when they made the announcement in November 2022, implying a market cap of around $2.1B USD. Adding debt to that still falls way, way short of the over £5B that has allegedly been offered.

Standalone and under the current structure, the Class A share price will always understate the "true" value of the club's equity, because holders have 10 times fewer voting rights than Class B holders. Outside of a takeover, there is very little appeal to be a Class A shareholder due to the voting structure, but a Class A share still gives someone the same amount of equity in the plc as a Class B share.
 
Pexbo said:
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

There's some smart feckers on this forum.
 
Pexbo said:
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

Theoretically they could secure funding against their equity in the form of a loan through their beliefs of increased future revenue in the form of sponsorships, TV increases and the Club world cup,no?
 
AngeloHenriquez said:
Theoretically they could secure funding against their equity in the form of a loan through their beliefs of increased future revenue in the form of sponsorships, TV increases and the Club world cup,no?
Click to expand...

At the current price of borrowing, the repayments would have a BIG impact on us if they borrow any more against the club.
 
Pexbo said:
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

Yeah you maybe right but doesn't like it will be happening in November like Custis stupidly tried to convince people
 
Maybe they are planning on following the Barca model of selling future revenues? Not sure what else they're planning - an economic turn with more bidders a few years down the line?
 
Pexbo said:
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...
About sustainability: If they're considering an alternative of selling only 2-3 years from now, does the unsustainability of what you're describing necessarily matter to them? I get that a decade from now it'd be dramatically worse, but if they push the sale to 2025 as one article suggested, then would it only be on slightly worse terms rather than significantly worse, and a substantially higher sale price could compensate for it anyway?

Disclaimer: I don't actually understand the mechanics of this but trying to get a grasp of the logic of what's sustainable.
 
Pexbo said:
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...
I am quite confident they already tried the minority investment route before the public announcement last year, so I agree they are more committed to an eventual sale than they are letting on. The problem for the club and the fans is they can, have, and will continue to drag this on.

No firm in their right mind will even pay $19 per share in an equity financing for a debt-loaded husk of a company that was trading at $13 before the pump after the Nov 2022 announcement, not to mention the lack of substantial voting rights or dividends. The Glazers would have to drastically change the share structure and probably even give board membership for a partial sale. I am guessing they already explored a private credit deal similar to what Atalanta in Serie A did last year with Carlyle, only to find unfavourable terms.
 
strandty said:
At the current price of borrowing, the repayments would have a BIG impact on us if they borrow any more against the club.
Click to expand...
Cantona in disguise said:
That's one hell of a gamble on future things happening though surely?
Click to expand...

To be clear, I'm playing devil's advocate, I don't believe it a sensible choice but nor do I believe the Glazers are sensible business men, from what I know their Dad was and they were simply inheriting.

The media briefing does lead them to believe in the high potential future growth, now they either do genuinely believe in that to such a degree that they are willing to risk their asset or it was their political stance to encourage larger bids.
 
jadaba said:
About sustainability: If they're considering an alternative of selling only 2-3 years from now, does the unsustainability of what you're describing necessarily matter to them? I get that a decade from now it'd be dramatically worse, but if they push the sale to 2025 as one article suggested, then would it only be on slightly worse terms rather than significantly worse, and a substantially higher sale price could compensate for it anyway?

Disclaimer: I don't actually understand the mechanics of this but trying to get a grasp of the logic of what's sustainable.
Click to expand...

That's because if they genuinely decide not to sell, they can't sell legally for another 2 years otherwise it's stock market manipulation but agreed there is a large risk involved at the rate they are damaging the brand and perceived value.
 
As others have said, the Glazers seem to have dug themselves a hole.

They can't withdrawn without placing a notice with the exchange/making a public statement.

If they withdrawn then the share will plummet to under 10 dollars.

The class A investor groups will then hold the boards feet to the fire.

The Glazers were trying to be too clever for their own good. Selling shares like confetti and then treating the buyers like idiots.

Now it turns out that these buyers/investor groups are not to be messed with.
 
croadyman said:
Yeah you maybe right but doesn't like it will be happening in November like Custis stupidly tried to convince people
Click to expand...

If I had to guess what is currently happening:

In simple terms, it’s an auction right? Auctions usually finish when one of the buying parties decides they cannot meet the terms of the other party and therefore pull out leaving a winner.

This auction in simple terms has not finished yet. It’s reached a bit of an impasse where both offers are similar monetary value but structured differently so hard to compare. One offer satisfies some of the selling parties, the other offer satisfies the rest so there is an added layer of complication.


Right now the Glazers don’t have to accept either offer. So time is on their side and you can forget the wishes of us fans and our priorities, they’re different. Time is on their side and they are going to use it. So we are waiting for one of two things to happens - either one of the buying parties has enough and calls and end to their bid leaving the Glazers with only one option and less leverage. Or one buying party increases their offer to one the other buying party cannot match, again leaving one winner.

At that point is when the Glazers have to make a decision. Right now they’re in a lovely position where two bidders are still active and they’re waiting to see who has the twitchiest trigger finger.
 
I don't see the Glazers having any room for maneuver in the long term but short term, we all know the rats.
 
AngeloHenriquez said:
That's because if they genuinely decide not to sell, they can't sell legally for another 2 years otherwise it's stock market manipulation but agreed there is a large risk involved at the rate they are damaging the brand and perceived value.
Click to expand...
Okay that's somewhat reassuring to hear actually, it's good to know that some market and legal mechanisms are not in their favour too.
 
If the Saudi league becomes the alternative to a European Super League (where instead of the biggest teams form a league, the best players go to the Saudi clubs for mega money), then they’re screwed.

It’d be an insane bet from their side to still bank on an ESL resurrection. I personally think the ESL falling through was the beginning of the end for them. Their point man Woodward left the club and they appointed his best mate Arnold to replace him, and now they’re looking reverse out because they know the goose isn’t getting any more gold. They have no contacts in football and they never bothered too. It was all Woodward and Arnold. Joel and Avram are just money men.
 
Traub said:
Maybe they are planning on following the Barca model of selling future revenues? Not sure what else they're planning - an economic turn with more bidders a few years down the line?
Click to expand...
That’s the danger if they don’t sell: the leeches applying the FC Levers Negreira model and mortgaging future earnings. That would be a disaster, it could deliver short term results on a two horse race, but on a league as competitive such as the PL it guarantees nothing.

What we need is a full sale, hope it happens sooner than later.
 
The timing of this release makes little sense to me. Right after the transfer window shuts? Figure if anything they would have wanted this PR out in June to try and make it easier to get business done in the window. Something doesn't smell right
 
jadaba said:
Okay that's somewhat reassuring to hear actually, it's good to know that some market and legal mechanisms are not in their favour too.
Click to expand...

They've never officially announced the club is for sale, only exploring 'options', so they'll just fall back on that in this case.

The grasping shareholders can't do much past veto Ineos because they're not getting more
money, that's only through protracted legal action with no clear outcome.

We need to face facts: the Glazers are holding all the best cards and won't sell until the Qataris up their bid.

colombianmancunian said:
What we need is a full sale, hope it happens sooner than later.
Click to expand...

It depends on who they are selling to. Qatar have fumbled this negotiation badly, whereas their football acumen is their psg void.

We need a permanent solution from mismanagement and Qatar's State Bid is not it.
 
Pes6Monster said:
They've never officially announced the club is for sale, only exploring 'options', so they'll just fall back on that in this case.

The grasping shareholders can't do much past veto Ineos because they're not getting more
money, that's only through protracted legal action with no clear outcome.

We need to face facts: the Glazers are holding all the best cards and won't sell until the Qataris up their bid.



It depends on who they are selling to. Qatar have fumbled this negotiation badly, whereas their football acumen is their psg void.

We need a permanent solution from mismanagement and Qatar's State Bid is not it.
Click to expand...

From the Man United press release:

As part of this process, the Board will consider all strategic alternatives, including new investment into the club, a sale, or other transactions involving the Company.

I’d say announcing that you are considering a sale is as close to putting the club up for sale as you’re going to get.
 
Pes6Monster said:
They've never officially announced the club is for sale, only exploring 'options', so they'll just fall back on that in this case.

The grasping shareholders can't do much past veto Ineos because they're not getting more
money, that's only through protracted legal action with no clear outcome.

We need to face facts: the Glazers are holding all the best cards and won't sell until the Qataris up their bid.



It depends on who they are selling to. Qatar have fumbled this negotiation badly, whereas their football acumen is their psg void.

We need a permanent solution from mismanagement and Qatar's State Bid is not it.
Click to expand...
Anything and anyone is better than the Glazers, both Sir Jim and Jassim will be an upgrade on the leeches. PSG has been more successful than Nice, if we are to compreclubs owned by the bidders, and I think they will do a better job here over Ineos.

I agree with you on one thing: Qatar need to up their offer to seal the deal. Otherwise the money grabber leeches will stay still and do nothing.

How on earth the PL allowed us to be owned by the fecking Glazers, without them putting a single penny from their own money? What a disaster.
 
putzmcgee123 said:
I am quite confident they already tried the minority investment route before the public announcement last year, so I agree they are more committed to an eventual sale than they are letting on. The problem for the club and the fans is they can, have, and will continue to drag this on.

No firm in their right mind will even pay $19 per share in an equity financing for a debt-loaded husk of a company that was trading at $13 before the pump after the Nov 2022 announcement, not to mention the lack of substantial voting rights or dividends. The Glazers would have to drastically change the share structure and probably even give board membership for a partial sale. I am guessing they already explored a private credit deal similar to what Atalanta in Serie A did last year with Carlyle, only to find unfavourable terms.
Click to expand...

Plus doesn't the 1b debt need to be paid by 2025?
 
I have an awful feeling that they’re going to follow the Barca model and start pulling “leavers”.

Selling future TV right etc…

That would condemn us for a generation
 
samlee86 said:
I have an awful feeling that they’re going to follow the Barca model and start pulling “leavers”.

Selling future TV right etc…

That would condemn us for a generation
Click to expand...

The thing is something like that would need board approval. With 4 of the scum wanting to get rid of the club, would they really agree to it? They really do seem to be in a position of limbo.
 
Pexbo said:
The tumbling of the share price is going to hurt their ability to secure minority investment on favourable terms.

If they are staying it’s either loading more debt = unsustainable or it’s carving out a deal for minority investment to cover infrastructure costs which will mean issuing more shares.

They will have to issue a hell of a lot more shares at $19 per share then they would at $24 per share to cover those costs which is going to dilute their position and make it a hell of a lot harder to sell their shares at a premium in the future.


It’s going to be a full sale. Nothing else makes any sense.
Click to expand...

I’d think a low share price (especially if the glazers expect that it will rebound in a year or two,) would make their decision for them. Why sell in a bear market? The minority who do are those who have no choice

Edit- maybe you are saying that the glazers really *are* the ones with no choice
 
NicolaSacco said:
I’d think a low share price (especially if the glazers expect that it will rebound in a year or two,) would make their decision for them. Why sell in a bear market? The minority who do are those who have no choice

Edit- maybe you are saying that the glazers really *are* the ones with no choice
Click to expand...

So they will wait for it to rebound then?
 
I love Ben Jacobs spin as reports - plural.
That’s why I can’t take him seriously
 
Man Utd share price isn't all that relevant to the glazers. They know its going back to ~11 if no sale, and they wont be able to sell equity anywhere near the current share price, as that's still pricing in the possibility (albeit a less of a possibility today compared to last week) of a SJ buyout at 30+
 
We’re into the top 10 of most traded days in the last 12 months…people are anxious about holding their shares
 
Mickeza said:
If I was a betting man I’d bet on the story being leaked to enable shares to be bought up ahead of an upcoming sale…tempted to buy up some shares myself.
Click to expand...

I mean, market manipulation is illegal but :lol: If this is the reaction from ONE news article it’s mental.
 
Pexbo said:
From the Man United press release:

As part of this process, the Board will consider all strategic alternatives, including new investment into the club, a sale, or other transactions involving the Company.

I’d say announcing that you are considering a sale is as close to putting the club up for sale as you’re going to get.
Click to expand...

Aye, but it's not definite is it?

As it's not we are totally for sale 100 hundred percent the pes6 lad is correct and those greedy leeches will counteract any shareholder nonsense with it's not good for us neither so they can slide on.

Grim deadlock.

The Glazers will now feed 'It's On!' through one or two of its leaks you know Custis is 'confident!' eight billions have been agreed and watch the share price rocket only for it to come tumblin' down when Jassim cant convince his daddy's mates to add a few extra bill on his birthday bonanza.

colombianmancunian said:
Anything and anyone is better than the Glazers, both Sir Jim and Jassim will be an upgrade on the leeches. PSG has been more successful than Nice, if we are to compreclubs owned by the bidders, and I think they will do a better job here over Ineos.

I agree with you on one thing: Qatar need to up their offer to seal the deal. Otherwise the money grabber leeches will stay still and do nothing.

How on earth the PL allowed us to be owned by the fecking Glazers, without them putting a single penny from their own money? What a disaster.
Click to expand...

psg have the ability to spend eight hundred thousands times what Own Goal Nice can afford and still have to have air jordan tee shirts as their brand is amazingly miniscule


The glazers acquisition of United was legal at the time but is no longer you know they actually voted to make LBO's illegal or somesuch the crafty gets

grrrrrrr

it boils my chips it really does
 
samlee86 said:
I have an awful feeling that they’re going to follow the Barca model and start pulling “leavers”.

Selling future TV right etc…

That would condemn us for a generation
Click to expand...

Henceforth known as Glevers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.