the 5bn offered by Qatar is an offer for the club (which includes the debt)
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
the 5bn offered by Qatar is an offer for the club (which includes the debt)
Yes, if they pay $5000m, Glazers will have to use the 1st $700m or so to pay off debt, and then the remaining $4300 is what's available to the stakeholders.
This feels a bit like a do-er upper house sale where one part is trying to sell it based on what it could be worth and the other party is trying to buy it based on what it is worth and the time and money they will have to put in to realise that value. If the Glazers want £6bn they are essentially valuing it at around 8 because whoever buys it will need to stick a few billion more in to sort out the issues. Is that good value for a buyer? Probably not. Will they get it? Maybe.
why would the glazers have to pay off the club debt?
What are you doubting exactly? That fans gave up their season ticket due to the Glazers?
Some certainly did - a few thousand perhaps. A % of these later returned when it became clear that a boycott would not work and the Glazers were here to stay.
Interesting to compare similar opposition to a Qatari bid with some claiming they won't support anymore if it happens (which I don't agree with but can understand some of the logic) plus a few dangerous extremists going as far to think it's better that the club goes bankrupt rather than a Qatari take over - thankfully it's a small minority with this kind of crazy view with little logic behind it. Makes even less sense to me now than it did with the Glazers back then.
Depends on whether the bid is $5000m + debt (the existing stakeholders including Glazers don't have to pay it off in this case) or just $5000 (stakeholders get net of debt). When a bid happens, it's usually for the enterprise value and not just the stakeholder portion.
it doesn't depend on anything
the debt is the clubs, and will remain the clubs (unless the new owner decides to pay it off)
the Glazers don't have to pay it, and won't
This is how it works, any conversation of paying off the debt will be up to the new owners, they are never going to give the Glazers extra to pay it off, that's not how business works.
This why the post about “owners” defining the clubs history and identity isn’t really true for United. It is for City, but for United no one speaks about the Edwards era, or the PLC era with xyz institutions owning us, our identity is defined by our history. Just like if Liverpool got bought by mega wealth.
No mention of this?
- Red Knights fan group was originally funded by Sheik Jassim.
I was told it was all a cheap PR stunt that hes actually a united fan???
That’s the anti Qatar angle that it’s a PR stunt. On the one hand United is the biggest club in the world but then when that doesn’t suit the narrative someone from a foreign country can’t be a legitimate United fan.”he started supporting United in 92 when he was 10 & studying in England, he must have been psychic” look how something logical is spun into a cynical can’t be true statement.
Anyone who has been abroad will know that the passion people have for their team be it United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton, Real etc is very intense.
Andy Mitten had Jim O'Neill on the UWS Podcast from the Red Knights and he alluded to the fact that he had discussions with Qatar back then but didn't actually mention that it was Sheikh Jassim. Interesting to know it was him!
No, it’s all spin. This is probably a paid article and he doesn’t know what a football even is.
Clearly buttering up the Utd fans with that brief... or he's actually showing he's serious and has wanted to do it for years.
The more this drags on the more certain I feel that Qatar is the right way forward.
No matter what they do, a certain subset of fans will always call it PR. Personally I do believe this guy is genuine, United has a massive reach. I can believe he’s been a long time fan.
Yes I'm doubting exactly that. Unless the argument was that fans were desperately angry that we had stopped being a PLC with a legal obligation to priorities profits for shareholders above anything else, or suddenly decided that 2006 was the time they noticed increased commercialisation of the game. Both reasons are either disingenuous or facetious.
Imagine if every one of the 92 clubs in the football league had fans feck off because they didn't like their owners. There would be about six clubs left.
We were discussing that here last week. No one seemed to mind when the red knights were making bids, even if it was backed by Qatar.
This story was originally reported during the first take over:
https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2010/mar/07/manchester-united-glazer-red-knights
https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2010/mar/07/manchester-united-glazer-red-knights
Which part?
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. Not just business any asset you buy or sell comes with debt included in valuation. Say for eg if you have a house valued at 1mn and you owe a bank 300k for that. If I buy that house from you, you get 700k be it just 700k and I takeover the mortgage or you pay off the 300k and pocket the other 700k. In no calculation do you get 1mn.
Who are the Athletic anyway? They're a bunch of amateurs from some no-name rag. I'll believe the facts given to me by The Mirror and UnitedTopRed12223222 on Reddit, thanks.
The article doesn’t say they were in discussions with him, but instead that he was in the meetings as he’d got the role at the QIB then. Basically he was in the meeting but not leading it etc.
Of course he wasn't leading it back then. He was 27? Would have been a more senior person or maybe even his dad.
Nice find
this is well worth a listen Re. Qatar involvement with the Red Knights and the current takeover more generally
A lot of arguments here about who has to pay the debt. It’s a nothing argument, just a matter of perspective.
Sales like this are usually completed on a “debt free cash free” basis. This means that on the closing date, the buyer deducts the debt and adds the cash balance at that date to the price to be paid. This reconciliation / closing statement is agreed by both parties at closing.
The parties know this will take place when they agree the price, so it is taken into account when the deal is struck.
Sales like this are usually completed on a “debt free cash free” basis. This means that on the closing date, the buyer deducts the debt and adds the cash balance at that date to the price to be paid. This reconciliation / closing statement is agreed by both parties at closing.
The parties know this will take place when they agree the price, so it is taken into account when the deal is struck.
I can't believe someone is questioning the comparison of era's of when we were a PLC, to the Glazers owning us! 
Is it the one that played for Newcastle in the 90's?
I listened to it when it first came out. Something that struck me what his comment about Ratcliffe @ 13.45m onwards -- his business model and his ability to fund the deal.
Thats Warren
Is that the suggestion that equity could be sold to fans in order to clear the Goldman Sachs debt?
Its a fascinating idea and would make the Ineos bid infinitely more appealing but sadly I have never even heard Ratcliffe even hint he is considering such a model
To be honest if he was born in 82 or thereabouts then it's pretty much the perfect time to grow up a United fan.
We were still very known around the world and when we won the FA Cup in 1990 he would have been around 9 or 10, With Cantona soon to appear as well as all the success Fergie delivered I see no reason why he wouldn't have been a huge fan.
The Athletic are a sports publication. The way people go on about them, you'd think they write Pulitzer-winning articles for breakfast and have no agenda.
But please keep pushing their elitist propaganda.
Pretty much how I became a fan. Born in 85. Remember watching "Tipslørdag" (Premier League every Saturday on Danish tv) with my dad in 93. Saw United and fell in love.
- Status