Club Sale | It’s done!

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Glazers didn't buy the whole club at once. They bought shares over time.

Ratcliffe may think that buying a significant amount of the club now puts himself in the box seat for obtaining a controlling stake.

You would think though that him buying 25% would make it far more difficult for Qatar not to buy 100%.

Seems like a stratigic move. Im sure Jim wants the controlling stake now (or even last year) but it is just not happening thanks to the Glazers greed and/or indecisiveness.

I really don't understand the Ratcliffe hate. The objective is to get control off The Glazers and have some competency in control of this club. You don't need to buy 100% of the club to do this.
 
Anyone thinking they’d use the money to reinvest is insane

Even more insane than thinking Sir Jim is going to give them £1.5 billion to share amgonst themselves, and then leave himself with no say of what they do with the club going forward?
 
But they have outbid Sir Jim? Not even outbid but better than that. simply been the only legal option as a takeover.
The class A shares aren’t allowing Jim’s Glazers only offer to continue, Qatar have already done it, they’ve fecked both Jim and the Glazers plan. In 2026 he has the same problem in a takeover, he has to have a better offer than Qatar for the Class A shares and that’s not something he can agree to with Glazers alone.
Not in terms of valuation, no. And that was not the point. The point is to meet Glazers valuation, not just beat Sir Jims offer.
And this class A shares people here seem to make a big deal out of, I don't see it being much of an issue at all. Something which won't block the sale but will be settled afterwards.
 
The problem is getting the Glazers to sell, Qatar haven’t been able to do that. People are so desperate for Qatar to win they can’t see past it. Whoever appeases the Glazers will win, that’s the first and biggest hurdle. They’ll be ways around a lot of the other issues.

A lot of the speculation is already that this bid is still part of wanting control and not a minority shareholding because it doesn’t make sense otherwise.
But they’re only bidding because it’s up for sale. And if it doesn’t work now then they’ll make sure they’re the best bid for when it comes up again. This isn’t a hostile takeover
 
Not in terms of valuation, no. And that was not the point. The point is to meet Glazers valuation, not just beat Sir Jims offer.
And this class A shares people here seem to make a big deal out of, I don't see it being much of an issue at all. Something which won't block the sale but will be settled afterwards.
It’s such an issue that Sir Jim had to fall back to minority shareholder.
 
This is the thing with these reports, they offer no context so we really don't know what the reasoning is behind their change in tactics.

Do they know that Qatar have upped their bid and they can't match is so this is their last chance at securing small stake now leading to a takeover in the future?
Have the Glazers told them this is something they'd accept and they're considering it, going against their past "promises" to not do anything that would leave the Glazers with any say?
Have they just grown frustrated with the process and want to drop out, but don't want to do so in a way that will make them look stupid?

We really don't know because there has been total silence pretty much. All we know is they're "restructuring" but we don't know the reason behind why they're doing that.
 
So if this is something that the Glazers would accept, why are they only considering it?
Why haven't they done it? It seems to me like this something they're doing to try persuade the Glazers to choose them. Obviously none of us have any idea of whats actually going on, but none of this makes any sense at all.

Yeah, this is partly wishful thinking my side, however it's not that unrealistic at all.
 
From Reddit:

Why would SJR consider dumping £1.5B for the club when it just buys him a minority stake? Well, let us consider:

If he buys up approximately 28.7% of the voting rights, he can effectively block the Glazers from selling to ANYONE ELSE other than him. This is due to the 2/3rd's majority requirement found in the SEC filings to pass a special resolution.

Because of their increased voting rights, the holders of our Class B shares will be able to exert control over us and our significant corporate decisions.
Trusts and other entities controlled by six lineal descendants of Mr. Malcolm Glazer collectively own 4.37% of our issued and outstanding Class A ordinary shares and all of our issued and outstanding Class B ordinary shares, representing 95.62% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock. See “Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions – A. Major Shareholders.” Each Class A ordinary share is entitled to one vote per share and is not convertible into any other class of shares. Each Class B ordinary share is entitled to 10 votes per share and is convertible into one Class A ordinary share at any time. In addition, our Class B ordinary shares will automatically convert into Class A ordinary shares upon certain transfers and other events, including upon the date when holders of all Class B ordinary shares cease to hold Class B ordinary shares representing at least 10% of the total number of Class A and Class B ordinary shares outstanding. For special resolutions, which require the vote of two-thirds of the votes cast, at any time that Class B ordinary shares remain outstanding, the voting power permitted to be exercised by the holders of the Class B ordinary shares will be weighted such that the Class B ordinary shares shall represent, in the aggregate, 67% of the voting power of all shareholders. As a result, the holders of our Class B shares will be able to exert a significant degree of influence or actual control over our management and affairs and control all matters submitted to our shareholders for approval, including the election and removal of directors and any merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. The interests of the holders of our Class B shares might not coincide with the interests of the other shareholders. This concentration of voting power in our Class B shares may harm the value of our Class A ordinary shares, among other things:
  1. Class B shares automatically convert to Class A shares unless you're transferring to someone other than another Class B share holder.
  2. Special resolutions (required for a full sale or to transfer Class B shares to someone that would otherwise be ineligible) require 2/3rd majority of the votes cask.
Presuming SJR can convince two of the siblings to sell, such as say Darcie and Kevin (both who are pretty well known for wanting out), he can get around 31.92% of the voting rights. Of course this means that the other siblings will have to approve of the transaction (or at least 2 of them will have to, Joel and Bryan's shares are enough to tip over the 67% mark along with Kevin and Darcie's).

Why would he want this? Because he will have put himself in the position where he will either benefit greatly from a large sale (e.g. that $10B figure) OR he can basically veto any Qatar deal (the remaining siblings will not have enough votes to meet the 2/3rd standard) and keep the other siblings at the negotiating table for a lot longer until they agree to sell to him.

He would not have to fund the entire purchase in one go, he can stretch it out over a few years which could benefit him if he ends up buying a large share of the stocks in a better lending market (higher interest rates, cost of capital is more, buying it all now costs more).

Ultimately, it would be the similar to how Malcom Glazer originally bought the club. He bought it in spurts, not all in one go (courtesy of /u/sauce_murica in his excellent Green and Gold series). This is probably the most likely way he could buy the club at closer to what the Glazers value it at.

March 2003 - Glazer buys 2.9% stake in club
March 2004 - Glazer says he has "no current intention" of making a bid
June 2004 - Glazer's stake in club nears 20%
October 2004 - United confirms bid approach from Glazer, as his stake nears 30%
November 2004 - Glazer ousts three directors from United's board
December 2004 -Glazer makes revised bid
February 2005 - Glazer makes new bid approach, valuing United at £800m, the club later opens its books to the tycoon
14 April 2005 - Glazer moots £800m bid for club
28 April 2005 - Takeover Panel sets 17 May deadline for Glazer to announce whether he intends to buy United
12 May 2005 - Glazer launches formal takeover bid for United after upping his stake in the club to almost 57%
I don't say this to say I'm optimistic of any transaction, just merely trying to explain why SJR might do this.
 
How do we know they want to sell a smaller percentage at a lesser price? We have no proof that this is something that the Glazers have suggested? We have no idea whats going on. This could very well be INEOS trying one last time to persuade the Glazers to sell to them? We don't know whats going on with the Qatar bid, all we can safely say is the Qatari's aren't people who would likely want to be seen as being rejected by the Glazers, they'd pull out long before and pin the blame on them

You posted this could be a reaction to a bigger bid which makes no sense unless it’s something the Glazers want and if it was a complete waste of time INEOS wouldn’t bother.
 
This is the thing with these reports, they offer no context so we really don't know what the reasoning is behind their change in tactics.

Do they know that Qatar have upped their bid and they can't match is so this is their last chance at securing small stake now leading to a takeover in the future?
Have the Glazers told them this is something they'd accept and they're considering it, going against their past "promises" to not do anything that would leave the Glazers with any say?
Have they just grown frustrated with the process and want to drop out, but don't want to do so in a way that will make them look stupid?

We really don't know because there has been total silence pretty much. All we know is they're "restructuring" but we don't know the reason behind why they're doing that.
Careful, you might burst the bubbles of those who have taken any halfway "credible" report for the past 10 months as gospel.
 
If he comes into the club then I am done after 55 years the towel will be thrown in. This isn’t the best for the future of this club. But it’s something i could actually see the owners doing it just to upset the fan base even more If this is true.
 
James Rhodes, who has got a lot of his information from the INEOS side has posted this.

https://x.com/Muppetiers/status/1708901747043815749?s=20

He has never been negative about INEOS or the 92 Foundation ( he just wants the Galzers out). But this is the first time he has said something bad about their involvement in this process.

Rhodes is possibly thinking along the lines of yourself here?

Agree, the United stand who I very rarely watch because they are so wide of the mark on the financials are saying SJR would only buy 12.5% from the Glazers and 12.5% from the minority, which shows how Ill informed they are, why on Earth would the Glazers take £750m now or £125m each and then the big hedge funds agree to 65% of the enterprise value that SJ offered them so their 75% of The 50 million, 37 million class A shares at $20-21 per share, there is so much misinformation.

They would still go to court to sue the Glazers and INEOS , to me and I sincerely hope I’m right this is a final throw at the dice from a beaten man who may have heard indirectly that Qatar may have an agreement of £5.7-6 billion for the Glazers 69% stake and it’s in the final stages.

Remember SJ/92 foundation have apparently offered $36-38 per share to all minority class A shareholders and they will demand that windfall, that’s why SJ doesn’t really need to do too much right now.
 
You posted this could be a reaction to a bigger bid which makes no sense unless it’s something the Glazers want and if it was a complete waste of time INEOS wouldn’t bother.
Why wouldn't they? If Qatar have offered closer to what the Glazers want, then Jim could be putting an offer like this to them in a last ditch attempt to keep his bid alive. Basically saying he's £1.5b now, you stay in charge for a while and i'll but you out properly at a later date. It's something the Glazers would want, but it wouldn't satisfy all of them would it? Those that want out would want the full takeover whilst Joel and Avi want to stay. It's just a mess
 
Imagine writing that the Glazers would take the money and invest it on the stadium :lol:

It’s such awful journalism, how do they expect anyone to believe the Glazers will sell shares and receive nothing in return completely change their business model.
 
Everyone keeps saying that but why haven't they yet. Its not like the bidding process started a week ago, its been going on for more than a year. I'm starting to think people are just saying that in hope rather than with any belief.
Why would they need to spend £10bn on the club if they don’t have to? All they need is to be the biggest offer, it could be by £1m for all they care or £1.

While this might be frustrating for us fans, they’re businessmen. While we might think of Qatari wealth as Monopoly money where an additional zero is meaningless but that’s not reality. They have a precedent to set, overpay by all means but don’t let people make a mockery out of you.
 
From Reddit:
Flip reverse it. Why would the Glazers limit their potential sellers down to… one.

The club has the offers it has because it’s an auction with multiple bidders. It loses a lot of that value if only INEOS can buy the club and basically ends up at its enterprise value rather than vanity value.
 
Flip reverse it. Why would the Glazers limit their potential sellers down to… one.

The club has the offers it has because it’s an auction with multiple bidders. It loses a lot of that value if only INEOS can buy the club and basically ends up at its enterprise value rather than vanity value.
True
 
Strike, strike, strike, strike, strike. The only way we'll ever chase EVERY parasitic cretin out of our club is to strike it for an extended period. Pick a month. Don't buy ANYTHING. Don't go to or watch ANY games. If that doesn't work, make it TWO months. The ONLY way they ever leave is when they lose money.
 
They care not one iota for the club, nor are they interested in handing it over to better custodians out of respect for the club, it's always always been about self enrichment and to the detriment of this institution of what was a football club, no wonder leveraged buyouts have been made illegal, this should have been absolutely blocked back in 2005 but here we are witnessing these shocking owners trying to get more out of the carcass of a once great club, absolutely sickening.
 
Then your as naive as your post if you believe that bs. Ratcliffe can't buy the club outright so he is doing everything he can just to get some sort of control, no matter the consequences to utd.

Why would he do that?

Like I said several times, Ineos can invest their money into several other things and United is a huge risk anyways. They have a shitload of money and endless investment opportunities that can make them a lot of money, be that in sports or other stuff. Them being hellbent on taking over United is a really good sign...if you look at their other sports ventures, they burn money on them for fun. It's just that Qatar made you believe that no one else will want United for the sporting success but them.
 
So basically reading that, it seems like he's got absolutely no encouragement from the Glazers and this is his own thought process as he's making no progress with his current offer. Either this is him knowing his bid is pretty much dead so he's looking for alternate solutions, or this is him knowing that Qatar have made headway and he's trying his best to persuade the Glazers to accept his offer by offering them a route to staying a little bit longer. In all honesty, with no real context, everything is pure speculation
 
The media plays United fans like fiddles.

"Leaving the Glazers in control" - Because they know this infuriates the fans.

rather than:

"Minority stake with a view to full ownership" - Less bait.
 
The media plays United fans like fiddles.

"Leaving the Glazers in control" - Because they know this infuriates the fans.

rather than:

"Minority stake with a view to full ownership" - Less bait.
Nowhere is it reported it’s with a view for full ownership. That’s you making that up
 
The media plays United fans like fiddles.

"Leaving the Glazers in control" - Because they know this infuriates the fans.

rather than:

"Minority stake with a view to full ownership" - Less bait.

'With the view' doesn't make it a guarantee. The former is accurate
 
The media plays United fans like fiddles.

"Leaving the Glazers in control" - Because they know this infuriates the fans.

rather than:

"Minority stake with a view to full ownership" - Less bait.

Its very easy for the media to wind up United fans right now. United fans are also desperate and stupid enough to eat up any kind of news whether it's actual news or made-up bullshit.
 
this also makes no sense for the glazers, as it would kill their deluded dreams that someone in a year or two is coming in with this massive bid. Ineos or whatever would just block that sale.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.