MailOnline: Glazers are in exclusive talks to sell a minority stake in Manchester United to American private equity firm Apollo

Infra-red said:
On the plus side, they should wrestle some of the control away from the incompetent Glazer siblings, in favour of people who actually know how to run a business. This sale is also the only way we ever realistically see a redeveloped OT.
Click to expand...
Will they? Not with a minority stake. Whoever has 50,1% of the votes makes the decisions. PE funds know how to make money for themselves, nothing else matters. From that perspective no different to Glazers. If the Glazers sell their own shares there is no money for the club.
 
As many have stated, this is almost worst case scenario as Apollo would be seeking ROI, which can only mean higher dividends.

Hopefully the government would step in but who knows. I'm not even entertaining myself in the Ratcliffe thread as for the Glazers this makes more sense as they retain better (not more nor less) control than by selling a share to Ratcliffe.
 
We need an rvn said:
As many have stated, this is almost worst case scenario as Apollo would be seeking ROI, which can only mean higher dividends.

Hopefully the government would step in but who knows. I'm not even entertaining myself in the Ratcliffe thread as for the Glazers this makes more sense as they retain better (not more nor less) control than by selling a share to Ratcliffe.
Click to expand...
There is zero prospect of govnt stepping in. Glazers can sell shares to whoever they want. Only if a full takeover would there be any regulatory scrutiny. I dont want them but their ROI will be far more about share price going up than dividends
 
Gordon Godot said:
Will they? Not with a minority stake. Whoever has 50,1% of the votes makes the decisions. PE funds know how to make money for themselves, nothing else matters. From that perspective no different to Glazers. If the Glazers sell their own shares there is no money for the club.
Click to expand...

A PE firm would never invest on those terms.
 
I remember Apollo being linked with the company I used to work for. It wasn’t a good thing either.
 
I don't understand why they would invest for the dividends.


They club has peaked on the commercial side.


Unless big money is invested on and off the pitch, and with the fan unrest, surely it's a pointless venture buying a minority stake just to reap dividends?
 
Infra-red said:
A PE firm would never invest on those terms.
Click to expand...

Meaning a minority stake? That's actually not uncommon. The company I work for has a 20% PE ownership stake, and the rest is held by the founders. As long as there is alignment between the goals of the different owners, PE funds can come along for the ride, if they believe there is a good return in it.
 
So things can actually get worse for you guys. Horrible news. Hope you somehow prevent this. But I have my doubts.
 
Gordon Godot said:
They do all the time. That's how corporate governance works. They might want certain assurances, but shareholding is the ultimate factor.
Click to expand...

Of course you need 50.1% for overall control, but for a billion pound investment, a PE firm would certainly want lots of assurances, including controls on the family (however many of them remain). And of course, they would not allow the Glazers to simply pocket the investment and walk away.
 
Mike Smalling said:
Meaning a minority stake? That's actually not uncommon. The company I work for has a 20% PE ownership stake, and the rest is held by the founders. As long as there is alignment between the goals of the different owners, PE funds can come along for the ride, if they believe there is a good return in it.
Click to expand...

They will have no problem with the minority stake. They will not agree to investing with no controls in place, though. I'd hope and expect that the first thing they'd ask for is experienced people to be brought in to actually run the business.
 
Is this reasonable grounds to start lobbying the government? The FA etc already allowed the Glazers to slip through the best with their method for buying the club, with it being made illegal after the fact.

They forced Roman out, surely they can do the same here.
 
Someone may need to educate me on this - my assumption is, because its a minority stake --> can be sold to Apollo even in light of the controversy --> means Glazers have no plans for an outright sale in the medium term, given they could have pursued Ratcliffe for the minority slice if this was the plan.

?
 
KiD MoYeS said:
If the Mail were reporting a transfer as an exclusive we wouldn't believe it.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that's because their sports reporters are absolute shite. This was written by Patrick Tooher, the Mail's business editor (for what it's worth, he's also a United fan).
 
This is the nightmare scenario, really. Glazer ownership is obviously bad, but stakes being spread across PE orgs like Apollo is much, much worse.
 
VP89 said:
Someone may need to educate me on this - my assumption is, because its a minority stake --> can be sold to Apollo even in light of the controversy --> means Glazers have no plans for an outright sale in the medium term, given they could have pursued Ratcliffe for the minority slice if this was the plan.

?
Click to expand...
Well yes, this is the fear. The one positive if they do this is that they are openly showing their hand to the fans when they have always stated, certainly in recent years, that they want what's best for the club and to make Utd a success (regardless of how thinly veiled that was!) . This is the complete opposite of the things they spoke about when committing to a percentage of fan ownership.

Maybe coming out and twirling their moustaches as the true villains we know they are will finally get all the various fan forums and orgs to act as one.
 
The fans are the rightful owner of the club. We should stop Glazers ruining the club further.

These leeches never change and not even for a second think of the fans.
 
Watching the stock this morning and some massive volume just hit it. 200k shares purchased in the last 5 minutes.

For perspective the stock usually gets less than 2m in volume a week.
 
Zen86 said:
This is the nightmare scenario, really. Glazer ownership is obviously bad, but stakes being spread across PE orgs like Apollo is much, much worse.
Click to expand...

There's reason to hope that this is a move to increase the value of the club prior to a sale. The Glazers will drag this out as long as necessary until every last potential penny has been squeezed while the reward vs risk is in their favour. The investment could actually go into the club to secure the signings needed to ward off the disasterous season this is already threatening to be which would certainly damage the value of the club.

This move to secure investment has probably been long planned as an option prior to the endgame which is to sell the club. Like them or loathe them, they are incredibly good at what they do (acquire wealth).
 
This would be really bad news.
If you think the Glazers are bad owners, it will be nothing compared to a private equity firm. They will only invest with one purpose and that is to maximize the return on invetment in as short a time as possible.
 
the hea said:
This would be really bad news.
If you think the Glazers are bad owners, it will be nothing compared to a private equity firm. They will only invest with one purpose and that is to maximize the return on invetment in as short a time as possible.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they would rip your club into pieces and sell the parts. It really doesn’t get much worse in terms of ownership.
 
Talks about the super league might be dead and buried in the UK but things are pretty different in the continent. There are many clubs who are struggling to make ends meet. Most of these clubs see the Super league as the only way forward not only to survive but also for them to be able to compete with the EPL. People like Galliani had even suggested of not allowing British clubs to enter the super league because of Brexit and their betrayal towards the project. In my opinion its only a matter of time before the super league is resurrected although not in its original format (it would allow fairer access to smaller clubs).

If that had to happen then the EPL club would be sucked into it as there's no chance in hell that they would stay into isolation. That means that the shares will go up which in turn would make the Glazers incredibly rich.

Which is why the PE offer is a far better option for them then the Ratcliffe one (with ties attached). The Glazers would deal with an uninterested party who are happy to suck money out of the club and would probably sell the moment the shares go to the roof. The only way that the Glazers would choose the former over the latter is for us fans to make it impossible for them to manage the club. That would scare sponsors and probably the PE as well. Now that we know that there's a viable buyer we should push to great lengths to have the Glazers out of Manchester United.
 
the hea said:
This would be really bad news.
If you think the Glazers are bad owners, it will be nothing compared to a private equity firm. They will only invest with one purpose and that is to maximize the return on invetment in as short a time as possible.
Click to expand...
That’s not true, it depends how long they decide to hold the asset for.

Equity firms can hold an asset for over 20 years if they feel there’s more potential growth. They’d probably charge a management fee but it would be within their best interests to grow it, not sweat the asset into the ground.
 
Flexdegea said:
I don't understand why they would invest for the dividends.


They club has peaked on the commercial side.


Unless big money is invested on and off the pitch, and with the fan unrest, surely it's a pointless venture buying a minority stake just to reap dividends?
Click to expand...

You think billionaires will just write off the Super League that quickly? Americans don't see aynthing wrong with the concept.
 
Lynty said:
You think billionaires will just write off the Super League that quickly? Americans don't see aynthing wrong with the concept.
Click to expand...

Normally I be thinking the same.


But the super League in that format they thought up don't think will happen again, since Liverpool yesterday agreed a legal document with a fans trust, that they can't agree to join anything competition without their ok.


I'd guess it have to be packaged up as a new improved champs league with more money kicking back to them
 
VP89 said:
Someone may need to educate me on this - my assumption is, because its a minority stake --> can be sold to Apollo even in light of the controversy --> means Glazers have no plans for an outright sale in the medium term, given they could have pursued Ratcliffe for the minority slice if this was the plan.

?
Click to expand...

Its difficult to say what the Glazers' strategy is for sure. Also because when we're talking about 'the Glazers' we're not talking about a unified group with a settled set of objectives. Joel and Avram have a very different approach to ownership than their siblings. Reportedly Darcie has wanted out for years.

It could be that we have to take this at face value: They have no intention of surrendering the business but they recognise it needs a cash injection so they're diluting their equity.

It could also be, however, that the Glazers are engaging in a bit of price discovery. If Apollo acquires a certain per cent of the shares at X price then the Glazers can extrapolate from whatever per cent that is to say 100 per cent would be worth = Y. In this scenario, posing as unwilling sellers, the Glazers can then say to any interested party we will only sell at a premium on top of what Apollo's purchase shows its worth. This may suit Apollo because, in the event that someone came forward wanting to buy the lot, they could also sell their shares at a profit.
 
M Bison said:
are any other sports clubs owned/part-owned by a PE fund?
Click to expand...
  • AC Milan owned by Elliott Management Corp
  • Atletico Madrid sold a 34% stake to P.E. Club Brugge sold a 23% stake,
  • Bordeaux were sold to American Capital Partners in 2018 who then sold it to another hedge fund. Club went into administration, but getting rescued
  • Genoa is owned by 777 Partners (who also own a stake in Sevilla)
  • Oaktree Capital own a stake in Inter Milan. An article from last year said that 6 of Serie A’s 20 teams, plus two other clubs in the second-division Serie B, will now be controlled by American investors or investment groups, all eight of them taking control within the last three and a half years.
  • RedBird Capital Partners has bought a stake in Fenway Sports Group for about $735m (£533m)
  • Burnley are owned by a P.E. fund
  • Michael Dell's investment firm has also financed the takeover of Burnley and provided loans to Derby and Southampton
  • Private equity has also been making moves in the NHL and NBA (following changes to the ownership rules)
 
If this is true it just shows the utter contempt the Glazers have for the United fans. They really don't give a s##t as long as there is an earner in it for them
 
#07 said:
Its difficult to say what the Glazers' strategy is for sure. Also because when we're talking about 'the Glazers' we're not talking about a unified group with a settled set of objectives. Joel and Avram have a very different approach to ownership than their siblings. Reportedly Darcie has wanted out for years.

It could be that we have to take this at face value: They have no intention of surrendering the business but they recognise it needs a cash injection so they're diluting their equity.

It could also be, however, that the Glazers are engaging in a bit of price discovery. If Apollo acquires a certain per cent of the shares at X price then the Glazers can extrapolate from whatever per cent that is to say 100 per cent would be worth = Y. In this scenario, posing as unwilling sellers, the Glazers can then say to any interested party we will only sell at a premium on top of what Apollo's purchase shows its worth. This may suit Apollo because, in the event that someone came forward wanting to buy the lot, they could also sell their shares at a profit.
Click to expand...
We need to see what a deal is. If the Glazers sell their shares its just money to them. I think 90% the outcome. Only if they sell new shares is there money to club, which for a listed company is a more complex thing to do.
 
DavidDeSchmikes said:
  • AC Milan owned by Elliott Management Corp
  • Atletico Madrid sold a 34% stake to P.E. Club Brugge sold a 23% stake,
  • Bordeaux were sold to American Capital Partners in 2018 who then sold it to another hedge fund. Club went into administration, but getting rescued
  • Genoa is owned by 777 Partners (who also own a stake in Sevilla)
  • Oaktree Capital own a stake in Inter Milan. An article from last year said that 6 of Serie A’s 20 teams, plus two other clubs in the second-division Serie B, will now be controlled by American investors or investment groups, all eight of them taking control within the last three and a half years.
  • RedBird Capital Partners has bought a stake in Fenway Sports Group for about $735m (£533m)
  • Burnley are owned by a P.E. fund
  • Michael Dell's investment firm has also financed the takeover of Burnley and provided loans to Derby and Southampton
  • Private equity has also been making moves in the NHL and NBA (following changes to the ownership rules)
Click to expand...

Interesting. Theres pros and cons with PE, it’s not all negative, although cash/interest/dividends is clearly a factor.
 
M Bison said:
Interesting. Theres pros and cons with PE, it’s not all negative, although cash/interest/dividends is clearly a factor.
Click to expand...
There are really very few positives. They are not against investment but it typcially funded by debt and ultimately all they care about is making money. Trophies would irrelevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.