Glazer Family Consider Selling? (Source unverified)

[ForeverRed1]

If they pumped more money into the team and stadium, they would probably fetch 5 billion in 5/6 years time.

if Chelsea is 4.25 billion with Stamford bridge.. we must be worth more than 5mill? Especially if they build new stadium etc

 

[davidmichael]

if Chelsea is 4.25 billion with Stamford bridge.. we must be worth more than 5mill? Especially if they build new stadium etc

Chelsea was £2.5 billion, the other £1.75 billion is guaranteed investment over the next 10 years which due to the type of company they are had to be included so it’s £2.5 billion and NOT £4.25 billion although Chelsea were also reigning Champions League holders too.

 

[ForeverRed1]

Chelsea was £2.5 billion, the other £1.75 billion is guaranteed investment over the next 10 years which due to the type of company they are had to be included so it’s £2.5 billion and NOT £4.25 billion although Chelsea were also reigning Champions League holders too.

ah ok, that makes more sense, although anyone that came in to the club would probably need to put a lot of guaranteed investment in as the glazers aren’t going to.. going to cost a fortune to bring this club up to where it should be.

 

[Slysi17]

Club value will increase if revenue significantly increased. Thats just economics.

How is revenue going to increase if the club isn't successful. Revenue has peaked.

 

[OpenIntrovert]

How is revenue going to increase if the club isn't successful. Revenue has peaked.

The club's commercial success is not only measured by on pitch performance. The club makes a lot of revenue through other means (merchandise sales, initiatives, sponsorships etc). As for revenue through football, TV deals and consistent qualification to Europe also increases the revenue. We did very well in terms of reaching the Europa league final and getting 2nd in the EPL during the 20/21 season where the money for reaching those milestones should have been reflected in last year's financial report as well.

 

[Rightnr]

I cannot see this club being a better/more profitable busines with no success, old stadium (where raising prices is a no-no), no Super League and youth academy that makes no money.

If the Glazers weren't such dumb leeches, they would have bailed by now. I hope it comes back to bite them but in any case (them staying or leaving) fans are in for more pain.

 

[MUFC OK]

They're far from done. Taking out 11m each next week despite the state of the club on and off the field. The cash cow is no way near finished being milked yet. The glazer model is to pillage an organisation until it has no value whatsoever.

 

[Cassidy]

How is revenue going to increase if the club isn't successful. Revenue has peaked.

Read the post next time clearly. I specifially said they would be trying to engineer revenue like what they attempted to do with the Super League.

 

[LordSpud]

Imagine owning something which absolutely no-one wants you to be a part of. Thats how out of touch they are. I was amazed the other year when Leicester beat Chelsea in the FA Cup Final and their owner was on the pitch celebrating with them. Just absolute night and day to what a club means to an owner in football terms compared to just monetary values.

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

The club's commercial success is not only measured by on pitch performance. The club makes a lot of revenue through other means (merchandise sales, initiatives, sponsorships etc). As for revenue through football, TV deals and consistent qualification to Europe also increases the revenue. We did very well in terms of reaching the Europa league final and getting 2nd in the EPL during the 20/21 season where the money for reaching those milestones should have been reflected in last year's financial report as well.

Surely commercial partners will pay less for sponsorships if we are receiving less airtime and exposure as a club?

 

[Murder on Zidanes Floor]

They're far from done. Taking out 11m each next week despite the state of the club on and off the field. The cash cow is no way near finished being milked yet. The glazer model is to pillage an organisation until it has no value whatsoever.

I don't really care, £11m isn't that much and doesn't impact the amount of money we have to spend. If they were taking £110m then perhaps.

 

[ATXRedDevil]

They're far from done. Taking out 11m each next week despite the state of the club on and off the field. The cash cow is no way near finished being milked yet. The glazer model is to pillage an organisation until it has no value whatsoever.

I’m no Glazer fan, but don’t make shit up. They’re not getting “11m each” next week. The dividend is bi annual and totaled no more than £24m in any of the last three years (hasn’t increased this year) and that includes the class a shares.

Also waiting to hear which other organizations they’ve pillaged into oblivion. The bucs just won another super bowl a year ago, though.

 

[davidmichael]

ah ok, that makes more sense, although anyone that came in to the club would probably need to put a lot of guaranteed investment in as the glazers aren’t going to.. going to cost a fortune to bring this club up to where it should be.

The most annoying thing in that regard is that without the debt repayments and constant dividend payments we are the richest non oil/state owned club around and self sufficient so any big transfer fees are easily managed by the club, our club revenue is massive but we’re being financially gutted by those parasite cnuts.

They're far from done. Taking out 11m each next week despite the state of the club on and off the field. The cash cow is no way near finished being milked yet. The glazer model is to pillage an organisation until it has no value whatsoever.

Reality is that those cnuts pay far more attention to us on the stock exchange than they do on us on the pitch and how we’re run over here, £1.3 billion is a third of what our value was it memory serves me right and without success on the pitch our global appeal as a sports brand gets smaller all the time.

 

[Slysi17]

The club's commercial success is not only measured by on pitch performance. The club makes a lot of revenue through other means (merchandise sales, initiatives, sponsorships etc). As for revenue through football, TV deals and consistent qualification to Europe also increases the revenue. We did very well in terms of reaching the Europa league final and getting 2nd in the EPL during the 20/21 season where the money for reaching those milestones should have been reflected in last year's financial report as well.

You know Liverpool and Manchester City have overtaken us. What you stated won't get us back to being more financially valuable than either Liverpool or Manchester City. Let's not forget Newcastle United will be in the picture in the near future too. Also what sponsor would give us more money without success. That's stupid logic. Our sponsorship went through the roof under Fergie because we won countless premier league titles and champions leagues. Sponsors ain't gonna give us more money just by finishing top four and making it to the round of 16 in the champions league.

 

[Blood Mage]

If we end the window with just one or two players I really hope the pressure on these parasites becomes unbearable and they sell up and feck off. They're a joke.

 

[MUFC OK]

I’m no Glazer fan, but don’t make shit up. They’re not getting “11m each” next week. The dividend is bi annual and totaled no more than £24m in any of the last three years (hasn’t increased this year) and that includes the class a shares.

Also waiting to hear which other organizations they’ve pillaged into oblivion. The bucs just won another super bowl a year ago, though.

Considering that pillaging is effectively stealing from an asset for personal gain, they have done so consistently including in business endeavours beyond united. First Allied Corp has over £600m of debt. Interest payments eat away at the money available for investment and the debt only exists so they can legally take out their dividends each year. Btw, the Bucs have gone from the 3rd most valuable to 29th most valuable NFL franchise during the course of their ownership, when does the servicing of debt stop and where does that take us?

 

[Slysi17]

Read the post next time clearly. I specifially said they would be trying to engineer revenue like what they attempted to do with the Super League.

Probably wouldn't put it past them. But it won't be anything to do with the super league. Absolutely failed with that.

 

[wolvored]

The question is what would they get now and what would the cost of improving the team and stadium to get it to a level where it takes the value of the club to 5 billion? And ultimately, is it worth it to them?

Yes the logical thing would be to sell if they are deciding what to do. They would have to shell out a lot of dough, (another billion?) To make another billion. Doesnt make sense to me, but I am not a Glazer.

 

[ilrm]

when Leicester beat Chelsea in the FA Cup Final and their owner was on the pitch celebrating with them.

For Glazers this club is just a franchise. If they could sell United for £5 billion and buy Real Madrid for £1 billion (funded by 80% debt obviously) they would. There is no emotional connection and hence they don't care about fans. They know that their existing "customers" can't go anywhere else, so like any good capitalist they ruthlessly maximize profit (buying marketable assets instead of hidden gems, low investment in infrastructure that takes a few years to benefit, etc). Imagine this: for the privilege of having them as owners, United has paid £500+ million in interest payments but still has debt of over £500 million.

Basically there are 3 types of owners:

1. United/Liverpool/Spurs: The club is just a franchise. All victories equate to Balance Sheet victories. No emotional attachment, no thought of "one day my grandson will own this club". Difference is that Liverpool and (mostly) Spurs have smarter "investors" than United.
2. City/Leicester/Chelsea: Starts off as an investment vehicle (for advertising/gaining UK citizenship or assets/sports-washing/etc.) but the owners eventually fall in love with the club, and almost run it like a non-profit. Contrast the annual letter to fans from City owners and United's CEO. The City owner genuinely sounds emotional/proud while United's sounds like a shareholder presentation.
3. Real Madrid/Barca/Bayern: The "owners" are custodians of something larger than themselves. The "owners" are under pressure to continue a great legacy or they bring shame on their families and their social status will be diminished. A negative scenario would be: Barca's current management are under pressure to buy shiny things, despite poor finances. A positive scenario would be: Madrid's management can prioritize long term infrastructure (stadium/training) because there is no "money" to be made by doing anything else.

 

[clarkydaz]

You have to wonder how long they want to keep it going, considering their age and the family don't give a shit about the club/sport.

Especially with their master plan superleague not coming off, the league is only getting more competitive. They've rinsed the Fergie credit dry

 

[ATXRedDevil]

Considering that pillaging is effectively stealing from an asset for personal gain, they have done so consistently including in business endeavours beyond united. First Allied Corp has over £600m of debt. Interest payments eat away at the money available for investment and the debt only exists so they can legally take out their dividends each year. Btw, the Bucs have gone from the 3rd most valuable to 29th most valuable NFL franchise during the course of their ownership, when does the servicing of debt stop and where does that take us?

You said they “pillage an asset until it has no value,” not simply that they pillage assets. First allied is a private company and isn’t it wholly owned by the glazers?

The bucs were never the third most valuable franchise. A basic understanding of US demographics and geography tells you that. Forbes currently ranks them 21st, not 28th, right behind Atlanta, a far bigger market…

 

[tenpoless]

Erm the stock market has been in a bear market for a while now. I know United owners are incompetent but this drop is to be expected. It's less about the state of the club and more about macroeconomics. If anything, with the appointment of ETH and structural changes, we're in a better position now than 2-3 months ago. Glazers have no intent of selling otherwise they would have sold it after we finished 2nd.

 

[Hammondo]

Share price is irrelevant. We’re a predominantly privately owned company for all intents and purposes who only offered small share offer to help with debt financing.

What matters to the owners is the price of the shares when they sold them. If anything shares being worth less now may increase chance Glazer’s might buy them back to sell on once market increases

The share price is not irrelevant, it shows how the market values the company. If the Glazers went to sell all their shares then the shares would drop in value, if buyers were trying to buyout the Glazers then the shares would gain in value.

 

[stw2022]

The share price is not irrelevant, it shows how the market values the company. If the Glazers went to sell all their shares then the shares would drop in value, if buyers were trying to buyout the Glazers then the shares would gain in value.

it’s completely irrelevant unless they have any intention of selling which we have absolutely no indication that they do

The problem a lot of fans have is starting from the premise of assuming the they are looking to offload the club at any minute and working backwards from that premise and trying to fit every tiny thing that happens into that narrative as has been the case for 15 years whether the share price is up or down we are winning trophies or not or anything in between

“ raining today lads the Yanks probably aren’t used to this weather. This might mean a sale is on the cards”

What ever you can say about them this characterisation that they have been under constant shock and surprise that they own a football club and have been looking to offload it every day for the past 15 years really has to stop as it’s patently untrue

 

[TrueRed79]

Why would they sell. The cnuts are getting their 25M annual payout in a few weeks. A club like Utd as a personal ATM? Sickening, even though i do realise how a PLC works....

 

[Cassidy]

Probably wouldn't put it past them. But it won't be anything to do with the super league. Absolutely failed with that.

That was the driver though, no doubt they will be cooking up something else

 

[DannyCAFC]

Why would they sell. The cnuts are getting their 25M annual payout in a few weeks. A club like Utd as a personal ATM? Sickening, even though i do realise how a PLC works....

£25m annual payout vs £4 billion straight in their pockets? And the majority of that will be profit considering what they paid back in '05.

If the Glazers really are just about money even over pride, in my mind they'd be mad to turn down an offer like that if it arose.

 

[sglowrider]

You have to wonder how long they want to keep it going, considering their age and the family don't give a shit about the club/sport.

Especially with their master plan superleague not coming off, the league is only getting more competitive. They've rinsed the Fergie credit dry

Why would they sell. The cnuts are getting their 25M annual payout in a few weeks. A club like Utd as a personal ATM? Sickening, even though i do realise how a PLC works....

25m is peanuts compared to what the future could hold.

The big opportunity over the horizon will be direct to fans TV broadcasting via Internet TV. Its already possible today. With United having like 500million fans, selling directly United's matches -- say $40/month to 1% of that total base.... or 3% or 5% of 500million United fans..

That will potentially bring in billions direct to United's coffers. Then imagine how much the club would be worth then? Jewel in the crown is MUTV or whatever iteration of it.

So I suspect the cnuts will stay either before that sort of deal is done or right after. Maybe the next 10yrs?

 

[Member 117152]

They're far from done. Taking out 11m each next week despite the state of the club on and off the field. The cash cow is no way near finished being milked yet. The glazer model is to pillage an organisation until it has no value whatsoever.

100% they wouldn’t be trying full scale changes if they were going to sell. Why bother changing all the staff if a new owner was going to come in?

It’s a pipe dream at best selling anytime in at least the next 5 years after the super league fell through.

They know they can use the time to scheme a new plan with the other top clubs and try to break away for larger market share. They already have more leverage now UEFA backed down and changed the CL for us to qualify every season soon.

 

[::sonny::]

 

[big rons sovereign]

Would you sell your magic cash cow? Nah, me either.
These turds won't be flushed any time soon.

 

[Telsim]

The Glazers don't strike me as panic sellers. Stock is undervalued, so they will double down and wait until the market recovers, however long it takes. Which is bad news for us unfortunately as this could take years.

 

[RkkMan]

The Glazers don't strike me as panic sellers. Stock is undervalued, so they will double down and wait until the market recovers, however long it takes. Which is bad news for us unfortunately as this could take years.

Of course they won't sell NOW but if on pitch performances don't improve in the next 3-5 years and no Super League project/an equivalent doesn't happen the "market" won't matter because Utd's stock will seriously tumble to a point where their cheap approach will no longer work to address issues no matter how much they try.
The club is no longer able to solve financial or on pitch issues organically like 3-5 years ago without heavy investment which they won't do. If this Tej Hag project spectacularly fails/stagnates it'll be bleak even for the money men/investors

 

[Godfather]

If they don't want to invest big surely their best bet would be to sell now before the value of our club drops even further? In the long rung a lack of success on the pitch will eventually lead to less and less value.

 

[Rood]

The Glazers don't strike me as panic sellers. Stock is undervalued, so they will double down and wait until the market recovers, however long it takes. Which is bad news for us unfortunately as this could take years.

the stock price has little effect on the actual value of the club to the Glazers and what price they are willing to sell at

Despite the shares tanking in the last 9 months, the price the Glazers will sell has probably actually gone up due to the Chelsea sale which had lots of bidders

 

[MUFC OK]

Would you sell your magic cash cow? Nah, me either.
These turds won't be flushed any time soon.

Their only concern is whether they can extract their dividends. They can still do that so the sacrifices will be made elsewhere - less to spend on players, no funds to improve the stadium etc. On top of that, United are a >£3bn asset against which they can use to leverage their other business interests and investments. Remember, the Glazers don't buy anything with their own cash.

Anyone who thinks they wont run us into the ground is, in my opinion, deluded. How much of the clubs value is leveraged elsewhere? We dont know, but the reality of a sale for them might not actually pocket them as much as you would think.

 

[Keefy18]

Their only concern is whether they can extract their dividends. They can still do that so the sacrifices will be made elsewhere - less to spend on players, no funds to improve the stadium etc. On top of that, United are a >£3bn asset against which they can use to leverage their other business interests and investments. Remember, the Glazers don't buy anything with their own cash.

Anyone who thinks they wont run us into the ground is, in my opinion, deluded. How much of the clubs value is leveraged elsewhere? We dont know, but the reality of a sale for them might not actually pocket them as much as you would think.

I don't particularly like them myself, reality is though you are posting nonsense.

You posted above stating they'll get 11M dividends *each*. They won't. The dividends for the year is approx 24-26m for *all shareholders*.

We've players earning more than the owners.

We've spent more money on transfers bar two or 3 clubs in Europe in the last decade. Four of the top 10 most expensive transfers in the Premier league are United signings and all completed within that 10 year time frame.

Spending money was and never has been an issue with the Glazers, its how the money has been spent.

 

[big rons sovereign]

Their only concern is whether they can extract their dividends. They can still do that so the sacrifices will be made elsewhere - less to spend on players, no funds to improve the stadium etc. On top of that, United are a >£3bn asset against which they can use to leverage their other business interests and investments. Remember, the Glazers don't buy anything with their own cash.

Anyone who thinks they wont run us into the ground is, in my opinion, deluded. How much of the clubs value is leveraged elsewhere? We dont know, but the reality of a sale for them might not actually pocket them as much as you would think.

Absolute parasites.

 

[groovyalbert]

Their only concern is whether they can extract their dividends. They can still do that so the sacrifices will be made elsewhere - less to spend on players, no funds to improve the stadium etc. On top of that, United are a >£3bn asset against which they can use to leverage their other business interests and investments. Remember, the Glazers don't buy anything with their own cash.

Anyone who thinks they wont run us into the ground is, in my opinion, deluded. How much of the clubs value is leveraged elsewhere? We dont know, but the reality of a sale for them might not actually pocket them as much as you would think.

The fact that there seems to be stipulations being put in place to avoid these types of ownerships of football clubs is damning (see Chelsea takeover). We are seriously fecked with these owners, and - at best - it's hard to see how we don't just stagnate into an upper-midtable club who occasionally gets top 4 for the foreseeable. It's getting to the point where it's hard to muster the required anger - just banging the same drum we've all done time and time again.

Remember, no other club pays dividends to their owners. Not one.

 

[MUFC OK]

The fact that there seems to be stipulations being put in place to avoid these types of ownerships of football clubs is damning (see Chelsea takeover). We are seriously fecked with these owners, and - at best - it's hard to see how we don't just stagnate into an upper-midtable club who occasionally gets top 4 for the foreseeable. It's getting to the point where it's hard to muster the required anger - just banging the same drum we've all done time and time again.

Remember, no other club pays dividends to their owners. Not one.

I'm afraid the only solution is to be united as a fanbase in trying to force them out. Make voices louder than ever and show our discontent. The sad reality is this club will never be of too little value for the glazers not to want to hold on to it. The liabilities are only going up as they service debt with more debt, and that actually only makes a sale less likely - their take home figure being smaller.

We certainly won't win a title whilst they are here, and in fact I only see us slipping further and further behind. I see us in the bracket of what Everton have been for the majority of the past 20 years, expected top 8, pushing for top 4 in a great season.