they didn’t buy it for nothing
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
they didn’t buy it for nothing
The Glazers will take the offer that makes the most financial sense for them.
If Qatar's intention is to make United an oil money play toy, that offer will certainly come from Qatar.
Posturing by all parties while the stock purchase agreements are being negotiated in parallel should not surprise anyone.
If Qatar's intention is to make United an oil money play toy, that offer will certainly come from Qatar.
Posturing by all parties while the stock purchase agreements are being negotiated in parallel should not surprise anyone.
Next to nothing of their personal money then
And he's been dead for half the time they've owned it, he may have bought it but Joel and Avram have been in charge for most of it
Surely glazers know that the team and stadium needs big investment which they don’t have…
And no serious buyer will give them 1-2bn for a minority stake ….
They either sell now for a good money or they sell after 2 years for less money as we surely won’t be competitive on field in absence of decent cash injection….
And no serious buyer will give them 1-2bn for a minority stake ….
They either sell now for a good money or they sell after 2 years for less money as we surely won’t be competitive on field in absence of decent cash injection….
I think we can be totally relaxed about any negotiations, they are 100 percent leaving, its the end game for the Glazer ownership, historical times for a great club.
No idea about his sources, but Wayne Barton is suggesting that Elliot think they are getting a portion and the Glazers are keeping the rest (30%). The plan being asset strip and then sell later. Fun.
Worst case scenario.
Who's Wayne Barton?
Who is Wayne Barton? And did he explain how this minority stake would work?
So, how does one asset strip the club and sell more for later on?
Of course they do but they don’t care. As long as the clubs solvent and they can reap their £22m dividend or whatever it’s worth to them, they’re quite happy to hide away in Florida for most of the year.
They bought it for $1.5 bil. And by inflation alone, it's worth $2.3 bil approximately today:
But they are asking for $6 bil with two groups bidding $5 bil each already. Indeed. They win big. And it wasn't even their own money, they took debt which means their initial investment was actually smaller (less risk up front). That is without counting dividends that go into their pockets each year and the publicity/negotiation power they're getting.
Them making the club go public was also a good idea (for them) because market cap affects the price of a company. Believe it or not the stock price has gone up from $14 in 2012 to $21 today despite of the club being a total shit show between those years, you would think it should have been less because at the time of IPO $14 was quite expensive already, it was near the end of Fergie era. Imagine if between those years we got lucky and fluked a PL or a CL? the price could have been higher than $21 easily.
They struck gold with this club, it's a very good investment regardless of their incompetence and mismanagement. Low risk high gain kind of investment. In fact aside from them providing funds for transfers which come from the club's pocket anyway, what have they done? they're hands-off and yet the club's value went up. If the club was a company, it wouldn't be as forgiving as this and they'd be a total failure of businessmen. On top of that we've heard about how the current debts the club has will have to be paid off by the next owner and not them. Greedy bastards. Greedy and lucky.
Last edited:
It's equally as absurd. The club is worth more than Feckin Chelsea..
Hard to see how spending 3.5 billion would be a worthwhile investment for Elliot in that scenario or why the Glazers would want to stay on and receive a small portion of any dividends and see their shareholding value nosedive. Joel would make nearly a billion if club is sold for 5 billion, so I’d imagine it would have to be a much better deal for him to stay on.
These rumours of the Glazers staying are really concerning now, I haven’t been to OT since the club was sold and refuse to, after following United home and away for 44 years. I feel that these disgusting fecking parasites are going to stay on the back of the new found success because of ETH and in spite of their stewardship. my fear is that they think they can drain a few more years out the club and then sell when ETH leaves (and I dont think he will stay that long under these vultures). we can though starve them out, strangle any money coming into the club and do NOT purchase season tickets. Drive non stop negativity to hurt any prospective sponsors, they may own the deeds tm OUR club but we the fans own the club and can decide what happens if we all come together. Sorry for the long rant but I love my club and I’ve had to sacrifice it for so many years because of these vile disgusting leeching pricks!!!!
Bohely massively overpaid for Chelsea, you shouldn't be comparing valuations. United's fair market price is around £3b. Anything over that is overpaying and not good value for the buyer.
I sympathise with your rant, but who do you think they would sell to if they stayed? The market is small now and if they annoy these two bidders now, who realistically will bid if this mythical value increase takes place over the next few years.
The value increase is far fetched too, they are running the club into the ground and the debts are mounting. There is no way the money they would make from the club increases if they stay and take minority investment, unless the investor is an idiot who puts a bucket load of money into the club for nothing.
The Glazers must surely have financial advisers who tell them this. It is a massive gamble when they can make far more, basically guaranteed, money by taking their filthy $1bn each and investing it elsewhere. If they are being advised anything different by outfits like Elliot then they are utter idiots, they will lose the lot.
Greed and ego tends to blind most people. The glazers aren't any different.
They bought it for $1.5 bil. And by inflation alone, it's worth $2.3 bil approximately today:
But they are asking for $6 bil with two groups bidding $5 bil each already. Indeed. They win big. And it wasn't even their own money, they took debt which means their initial investment was actually smaller (less risk up front). That is without counting dividends that go into their pockets each year and the publicity/negotiation power they're getting.
Them making the club go public was also a good idea (for them) because market cap affects the price of a company. Believe it or not the stock price has gone up from $14 in 2012 to $21 today despite of the club being a total shit show between those years, you would think it should have been less because at the time of IPO $14 was quite expensive already, it was near the end of Fergie era. Imagine if between those years we got lucky and fluked a PL or a CL? the price could have been higher than $21 easily.
They struck gold with this club, it's a very good investment regardless of their incompetence and mismanagement. Low risk high gain kind of investment. In fact aside from them providing funds for transfers which come from the club's pocket anyway, what have they done? they're hands-off and yet the club's value went up. If the club was a company, it wouldn't be as forgiving as this and they'd be a total failure of businessmen. On top of that we've heard about how the current debts the club has will have to be paid off by the next owner and not them. Greedy bastards. Greedy and lucky.
They purchased the club for £790 million or $1.5 billion in 2006 out of which debt portion was £660 million or $1.25 billion. Their investment was $250m. They are now selling the club for $5000m. After deducting $700m of debt, they will pocket $4300m, earning them a cool 17.1% compounded yoy return on investment. During this period, they've been pocketing 20-30m of dividend payments per year as well, which I haven't included in the return calculation. Not sure how people call them useless businessmen!
And this is why they might hang on, United has proved itself to be an appreciating asset even during lean times on the pitch. They finally look like they might have sorted their biggest issues with EtH, Arnold and Murtough all in place. Yes there's the investment needed in the stadium and other infratructure, but even without that the price is likely to continue to go up.
Let's not miss the obvious here. When the Glazers announced a possible sale the share price rose. When they intimated they might stay, it dropped showing the confidence business has in them. I doubt any 'investor' would put money into the club without having a controlling interest. Would you? On that basis I doubt the Glazers would wish to stay. Full sale is still favourite.
they put in more like $500m of their own money
if they sell the club at a $5bn valuation, of which they own 69%, they'll get ~3.5bn
also, you don't deduct the debt from their profit
They own 69% because they already sold and pocketed the 31%. Also the debt will have to reduced as the new owner will deduct the debt from what the business is worth.
You make it sounds like the Glazers run things sensibly. If they do, we as a club wouldn't be in this current situation.
what does this mean?
Everyone forgets, the $250m that they put in, they recouped back when restructuring the debt and then paid it off fromt the club, by using the clubs money.
They have no cash of their own in the club. Any money made will be ALL profits, ontop of all the dividends and management fees that they have taken from the club, let alone using the club as collateral for their other ventures.
They have no cash of their own in the club. Any money made will be ALL profits, ontop of all the dividends and management fees that they have taken from the club, let alone using the club as collateral for their other ventures.
The glazers don't run the club.
There is a difference between owning it and operating it. Woodward is the culprit. The Glazers as owners have different objectives and they tend to be financial. Woodwards the operational guy.
Just like when Gill and Fergie were in-charged under the Glazer ownership. They were successful (from a fan's perspective) then.
Nothing in that clip suggests that. In fact nothing in it says anything new and just regurgitates the things we already know.
It may have been fed to SSN to reinforce the initial message.
The Glazers are the Board and if the CEO is inept, then it is the squarely the Board's responsibility. They may be financial minded but surely they also must be aware that success on the field will automatically translate to success off the pitch, especially for a club of United's stature.
More likely just rehashing the same news to get viewership.
If either buyer pays them 5bn. The expectation will be 700 of it will go towards debt so glazers can't pocket the 700mn. If debt stays on the books or if the buyer pays it he will deduct that 700mn from that 5bn before making the payment.
everything you wrote there is wrong
I get not liking the Glazers but I don't understand why 15 years of being a PLC was fine but being bought out was apparently the catalyst behind allegedly not supporting the club or ever buying a ticket ever again. Always thought that seemed fairly disingenuous and whenever I read people saying that this is their experience I honestly doubt if its actually true.
Of course they have. You cannot run a football business ignoring the football side so "football aside" doesn't work. They have just happened to be owners of one of the biggest sports brands in the world at a time when money was pouring into the sport, especially the premier league.
Football prize money and success on the pitch 100% reflects on the business side of things. As a result of the poor performance on the pitch we have overpaid for players and taken much less prize money than we should. As a result of no plan off the pitch we have gone through managers and players like water and spent £1bn to have a squad that still needs massive investment to compete. They haven't paid down the debt of the club and have neglected facilities for nearly 2 decades.
Literally the only thing they have remotely done quite well in is selling the clubs historic name in sponsorship deals....which started to dry up because of our irrelevance on the pitch.
If you take over a business in a sector that booms and you are the market leader and 20 years down the line you are no longer market leader, you still have masses of debt and other clubs have overtaken you in your core product you are not a success. If United had been well run for the past 20 years we would be worth over 10bn right now I have little to no doubt. We would still be a European powerhouse, we would have another 4-5 PL titles and probably a few more CL titles. Oh and we wouldn't have spent anywhere near as much as we have on shit transfers.
The Glazers have not run United effectively in any way, shape or form. You cannot neglect the football side of a football club. That is what they are selling when it comes down to it. You can trade on reputation for a while but eventually you can't. Thats not good business. I would suggest its quite the opposite. I would consider that running a business into the ground.
- Status