I objected to the way they were allowed to buy the club in the first place
I think a lot of us who did not want them in the first place did. I believe that method of purchase was outlawed subsequently?
I objected to the way they were allowed to buy the club in the first place
The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
The squad is shit (missing CL will be big again),The idea has always been to sell. The question is should Ratcliffe make a 5bn offer do they think the asset will likely be worth more or less than that in 5 years. Is that the peak value? DAZN could offer billions for EPL rights in 2 years time which would make all EPL team values increase. On the other hand the club is in a right state at the minute with competition only growing - so it could decrease.
They've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
we'd have been relegated from the Super League by now - even though that was technically impossibleThey've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
with Steve Bruce getting the call to be manager? and when he turns it down, Mark Hughes-Bryan Robson "dream" teamHe'll probably give Fletcher another promotion.
Exactly. Just cause Jim isn't a Glazer doesn't mean he is a better owner. At the end of the day if the investment isn't made into the club we are back to square one. Its the whole Mctominay situation in midfield. Just cause a player is better than Mct doesn't mean we need him cause that benchmark is so slow. And yes I prefer if a bunch of billionaires join together to get us rather than one person.
The only way that i ever see United competing at the top level again. So the main question is can Jim fix it?
A 5bn asset they didn't pay forNot really, they're a shocking return for a $5bn asset
Can you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?It's scandalous that it was allowed and the rules and regs that have been put it in place since to stop it happening to anyone else makes it even more infuriating
A 5bn asset they didn't pay for
I like it. Its how City's rise started.with Steve Bruce getting the call to be manager? and when he turns it down, Mark Hughes-Bryan Robson "dream" team
Honestly, that is fine as long as they ensure that it is run properly on the field (and do put money aside for stadium and training ground improvements). The issue with the Glazer's isn't what they've allowed us to spend, it's the fact that the people they put in charge of running the club proved absolutely incompetent but stayed in their roles for a decade or so. There are also rumours that one or two of the Glazer's insist on having their own say on things like transfers which is also a huge issue if true.
The perfect owner for me would be one that did treat us as a business, but did so in a competent way. Take a small dividend out each year but otherwise all the money that the club makes stays with the club to spend. Headhunt the best-in-class for different positions throughout the club, ensuring that money is spent correctly. Stay out of the decision-making themselves, allowing those employees to run the business that they are hired to do. Doing it this way just ensures the long-term health of the club, rather than having to rely on a suger-daddy owner treating us as a plaything.
Other than maybe needing the owner to dip into their own pockets to help with something big like Old Trafford renovation (replacement?), I actively don't want an owner who puts their own money into the club. We are financially strong enough to not need it, and all it would do is cheapen any success we got afterwards in my eyes. Of course I don't want them taking out too much either (either directly into their own pockets or indirectly to handle debt). A small dividend each year, and then just enjoy the worth of the club increasing.
I have no idea if Ratcliffe would do it this way, but he does seem more likely than some others.
Can you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?
They’ve wanted to sell since they bought the club. That’s always been the plan. It’s all about timing. I’m fairly sure when this has been discussed in previous years and the glazers valued the club at 2bn, then 3bn, then 4bn everyone said they’d never get that much. Yet here we are with Bloomberg saying if it were to be sold 5bn is the price and at least one very viable buyer.They've wanted to sell since the Super League fiasco, that's for sure. No matter what happens with league rights and whatever else, Man Utd's market value is probably the highest it will be for the foreseeable future.
Can you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?
The Glazers clearly aren't going to sell their entire holding. We have to hope that someone comes in, buys a big enough chunk to have a say in how things are done with the potential and desire to buy more and convince the vampires to sell up further down the line.
I know little about Ratcliffe, how he does things, what sort of owner he'd be. He can't be richer than City's owenrs or Newcastle's but hopefully he or someone else is rich enough - and actually wants the club to succeed again while not behaving like an utter cnut.
Not sure how much of a supporter of the club he really is but he does seem to know how to run a business. Not sure either that I agree with what I've read about him being shy and liking to stay out o the headlines...
Yeah they took out a massive loan to payfor it and then lumped that debt onto the club, so they've essentially took out hundreds of millions for nothing as they've never been liable to pay it backCan you remind me how did they buy it, borrowed money to buy the club, then put their own debt onto the club?
They’ve wanted to sell since they bought the club. That’s always been the plan. It’s all about timing. I’m fairly sure when this has been discussed in previous years and the glazers valued the club at 2bn, then 3bn, then 4bn everyone said they’d never get that much. Yet here we are with Bloomberg saying if it were to be sold 5bn is the price and at least one very viable buyer.
Have a look at that Twitter thread posted here. I don't pretend to know ANYTHING about money (which is why I don't have a pot to piss in), but it was a real eye-opener and they've taken more than you'd think.
It's like earning 20k, but I understand your point.Earning 20m on a 5bn asset is like us celebrating 20 quid interest on 5m in the bank..
The club is dangerously close to becoming a liability for them due to our recent performance, they sell now whilst it's still an asset or they lose out altogether.
No, i assume it would be the same as chelsea's ownership? Boehly fronts it but it's A capital group as well who are extremely wealthy
United are capable of spending on players themselves, they've done it for 17 years without owner input
At our size, anyone who can afford to buy us will either be like the Glazers (milking it for the business it is), or worse (a cnut), or some dystopian shitty state.
Situation is hopeless.
You just know a "not for sale" statement from the Glaziers is imminent. They just want a bit of cash, not to give up the cash cow.
So Barca sells parts of itself to buy players, while United sells parts of itself to feed the Glazers. I have seen enough, I am calling it, buy us Jim.This is exactly my point though, they only make serious cash with United by selling (parts of) it
As someone who has the rare combination of being a Nice and Manchester United fan I would say Radcliffe's stint as owner of Nice has been solid if unspectacular.
You can't just pour in money and he clearly doesn't intend to. Nice don't have huge annual revenues ...typical gate is a little under 20k...and there are other clubs with bigger support (Lyon, Marseille).
But he's brought back the previously successful management team and clearly the club is less worried about cashflow. They aren't so pressed to sell players.
The aim is to be competing regularly in Europe at one level or another, hopefully sometimes CL, and look reasonably set to achieve that.
Anyway it would be miles better than what we've got...he's clearly serious about sports and football if still on a bit of a learning curve...
Yeh, insane cost of living crisis, stagnant wages, massive inflation, chronic housing shortage, rampant inequality. It's a mystery why people are getting pissed off with obscene and unnecessary levels of wealth.People won't be happy unless they own the club themselves. The internet hates rich people.
Yup. From a business perspective what they’ve done will be in textbooks of what to do. They bought the club with 200m of their own money, got the club to pay off 550m debt with its own revenue and increased the value of the club by 7 times - all while paying themselves dividends, consultancy fees and then selling lesser shares when we went public. They still control 70% of the club yet have already made what they put in 6 times over. And when they sell they’ll get at least 4bn on top.They were always speculating to accumulate. The oldest business model.
The other point to mention is that if we're bought by INEOS we have a couple of feeder clubs in Nice and FC Lausanne-Sport.
That doesn't really stack-up though....it's quite complex but I don't believe the Glazers have actually made that much from United (yet) have they?
I know people bang-on about the dividends and I don't have the exact figures to-hand (Google suggests about £80m) but I am sure they haven't actually taken much, especially when you consider what they could have made investing elsewhere. Not a great return is it that...£80m over 17 years between 6 major shareholders.
Likewise, £1.5BN has been drained out of the club, however, that's been paid to the financial institutions which lent them the money, it hasn't gone into their pockets.
Basically, I am sure they have made some money but when you consider their wealth and what else they could have bought/invested in...seems a poor return.
I think the plan was always to continue to grow the brand/business, have a (somewhat) successful team on the pitch and the perfect 'instagrammable' product off the pitch.
The problem is, growth has stalled, new avenues for revenue generation seem to have dried-up, fan/sponsor confidence is at rock-bottom and none of them have a clue how to run a football club. As it turns out, the clubs performance on the pitch does have a material impact on their ability to generate revenue/profit!
At this point, with the recent knock-back of the ESL proposal, I think the Glazers have realised that the club requires major investment to make it profitable again...and they don't have the cash, the appetite to do it or the expertise. A sale is now the best option for them to see a return...and it would be a very handsome return, given they never actually used a penny of their own money to buy the club!
Earning 20m on a 5bn asset is like us celebrating 20 quid interest on 5m in the bank..
The club is dangerously close to becoming a liability for them due to our recent performance, they sell now whilst it's still an asset or they lose out altogether.
From what some respected journalists say, Fletcher is actually quite intelligent and seen to be a good part of the new look of the club.He'll probably give Fletcher another promotion.