Would you cut your nose to spite the face?
Would you accept relegation to feck the Glazers off?
- Thread starter Red Flag Flying
- Start date
to answer a point previously made about relagation getting rid of the glory hunters, I dont think that there is anything wrong with them. They are what makes us be able to splash out 50M in a summer etc. They fill OT when we charge £50 a ticket, and added to that, if we were relagated and then came back up and rose from the dead, they would all return, as is their nature. So all in all Glory Hunter day trippin fans = good.
Then I applaud your effort to effect change by getting the Glazer's attention. Do you feel you've been successful?
Yes, true. That is a problem of the society, created by the Internet. Thank you for pointing that out
Only good while we're successful. See how many of them want to turn up if the club slipped out of the top 4 and I'm sure that the return of those who are boycotting would be more than enough to cover for the 'gloryhunters'
I understand your point of view. Stating that it would be a big big mistake from the Glazers to do that. Manchester United is (business speaking) all about a brand name. Its the fact that we have an enormous base of supporters, spread at the four corners of the world that we are famous and the club is rich. Such network needs success and good players to thrive. Once you start dismantling the team and selling its most priced assets, the club will not be attractive anymore and the brand name will be fecked. The shares will go down, the vultures will start circling around the club offering the Glazers to buy the club at a pittance and at that point there will be nothing that the Glazers could do to keep them from selling.
I mean such thing is equivailant to someone buying a Rolls Royce, and sell it as spare parts to cover the interest rates.
In my opinion (Im no financial advisor mind but I know a thing or two about businesses) Glazer's plan is simple. He saw football as a gold mine which has yet to be exploited and had bought the most successful club in a bid to reach its full potential. Once he does that, he will sell.
Success will bring profit. Profit will bring investor.
it's always like that, Glazer can feck off, but there will always be investor comming in, there are investor for a club like Fulham, there will always be someone for United.
If we get relegated, Glazers feck off, United will and most likely drop its value, and who knows now that United's gone cheaper, which looney will come and invest in United. So, the all same story all over again.
it's always like that, Glazer can feck off, but there will always be investor comming in, there are investor for a club like Fulham, there will always be someone for United.
If we get relegated, Glazers feck off, United will and most likely drop its value, and who knows now that United's gone cheaper, which looney will come and invest in United. So, the all same story all over again.
Yes in a way.
Its certainly set United fans apart from the likes of Citeh, Chelski. the dippers and Villa.
Whilst the support to get Glazer out hasnt been as forthcoming as it could and should have been, we've made the right noises and we've shown that United fans wont sit idly by and take it without at least putting up some fight.
Yes I agree, but if the shit hits the fan sooner rather than later, he will sell up asap.
greedy he is. Foolish I suspect he isnt..
So then why do you think he'll start selling players first
Because he will try and get out of the shit first, if that fails then he'll sell.
If he sells his 10% and suddenly things go right, then hes just given away 10% of the club and as I've said, players are depreciating assets, and they drop in value, so its common sense he will sell the players to try get out of the shit, if that fails, then he'll just sell up before the bank take everything..
If he sells his stake first and it still goes wrong, the banks will still walk in, still take OT, still take the players and he'll still lose the club..
And you still havent answered me, despite me asking several times, who is going to buy into a club that has to commit to paying £70 million every season, and if the club hasnt earnt it, they have to pay it out their pockets ?
After the Glazers feck off then what? The club will just be bought by someone else.
Yes I did. You never came back on my last point!!
I've said before Fred that the debt makes zero difference to Manchester United Football club as a company!
Of course, but under what conditions.
Whos to say any new owner will land United with a feck off great debt. They may actually have a better way of doing business.
Just because someone else will buy United it doesnt mean they all will put the club in debt...
It probably will. No one would put their own assets on the line when they could just put the club assets on the line.
OK, so United are making £80 million a season profits.
Someone comes in and buys United with little or no debt for £1 billion.
Every bit of that profit becomes theres as opposed to Glazer, who's literally giving the money to the banks..
Glazer hasnt made a penny out of United so far, in fact hes lost money.
So why would anyone suppose a new owner would try and emulate Glazer, especially as we're talking about what would happen if his plan fails..
If Glazer fails, no ones going to be stupid enough to try and do things the very same way...
Yep. The people that suggest the Glazer plan isn't sound business sense are being too personal about it.
Putting up a couple of hundred mill of your own cash, so that you end up with a billion pound company in 15 years, is about as shrewd as you can get.
So you actually think there is a billionaire out there who would put all his money into United and be willing to wait 10 plus years just to break even, in the meanwhile all his cash and business is tied up in this one venture. So if United fall out of the top 4 or go through a dry patch all hismoney is fecked?
Amen. You may hate him (and rightly so) for using our club to make money out of it (it had been going on like that since the old PLC times). But he wont push the self destruction button on the team. He is too smart to do that.
But selling the players would weaken the club and therefore weaken the brand on which Manchester United (business wise of course) rely. Its like selling the roof support of a luxury house to pay the interest laid over that house. Its stupid and risky because
a) you will risk that the roof will fall over you, ruining your investment
b) no one would want to buy an endangered house.
Glazer will sell the club once its on top. He has nothing to prove (and not enough funds to try to do so) and no love towards the club.
Every bit of that profit goes to the new Fred not the club!
It's the exact same think except that the Glazers are using the money they take from the club to finance the debts to pay for the club.
Nothing will ever change the owners are entitled to 100% of ALL profits made by the club.
United is no way worth £1.3 million.. FACT
I know what you are saying about Uniteds value, but the debt will have an influence on what people are prepared to pay to get shares off Glazer.
If United had no liabilities to Red football and were returning profits of £42 million a year for the owners then people will happily pay top whack
Whilst United has a huge liability to Red Football which all but takes up the profits, then people will not invest in the club because simply theres nothing for them to make money from.
The only way anyone will look seriously at United is if Glazer sells up 100% and clears the debt off. Then whoever comes in will pay the full whack because they get a profitable club turning over enough to return them a profit with none of it going out unnecessarily.
Whilst United are frittering away money to banks no one would look twice at them.
No Fred that's an opinion not a fact.
I agree that valuing a company is more an art than science but one of the most generally accepted ways is to use the Price/Earning Ratio.
At the moment the FTSE is trading on a prospective P/E of 15.
S&P500 is currently trading at 18.35
Even Birmingham City are currently trading at 18!
So I don't think it is unrealistic to value United at 15.
15 X £90m (expected profits this year)= £1,350m = £1.35billion
It will make no difference to the new investors if United are currently returning all their profit Red Football!
Red Football gets 100% of the profits because it owns 100% of the shares.
Simple as that.
If the Glazers sell 10% then 10% of the profits goes to the new owner.
I don't see why the new owners would care what the Glazers does with the other 90% of the profits as it is THEIR money.
They could buy could buy a big new house, spend it on a nice holiday, smoke it in a pipe or give it away, it's got bugger all to do with the new owners. They have their money so to hell with the Glazers and THEIR debt.
The new owners would be getting 10% of a very profitable club. The fact that the Glazers holding companies are making loses is absolutely no concern to them. As the debts are now secured on 90% of United Shares.
I dont know where you get this £90 million profits from, because seriously, for any company to more than double its profits after 3 years of decline is almost unheard of.
Wheres the extra £50 million coming from, given United have spent out more on players this season and the wage bill has increased dramatically. Even David Gill himself admitted over 50% of all the extra revenue coming in will go on additional wages...
I'd be absolutely gobsmacked if United made anywhere close to £90 million this season... In fact I think Glazer would too
I understand that, but if that 90% stake goes tits up what is the other investor left with ?
Would you buy 10% of a house from someone whom you knew was in arrears with his mortgage, was having cashflow difficulties and is very likely to have the banks turning up at any time ?
If Glazer has gone tits up ( which is the situation we're talking about ) then the share value will have fallen. Thats what would send him tits up..
You are talking as if Glazer was selling now. I am talking about the point at which the clubs going tits up anyway... Because lets face it, if hes making money, he wont be selling anything anyway..
I'm sure you are aware of this thread Fred
https://www.redcafe.net/showthread.php?p=3698239#post3698239
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/0909_man_united_debt.shtml
Wasn't this information from MUST?
Just some rough caluclations
Extra TV deal +£25m
Matchday Revenue last season was £87m
Tickers prices higher means an extra £12m
Tickets +£12m
AIG +£5m
Total £42m
If the club goes tits up the banks will claim the assets secured on the loans.
THE 90% of the United Shares owned by Red Football.
They will then sell these shares to another investor and recover as much as they can from them.
If it doesn't cover the debts then that's the banks tough luck their is nothing else they can do.
The football club is pretty much unaffected by the turmoil we just have a new owner.
OK Now add this up
Hargreaves wages estimated @ £70k per week = £3.5 million per annum
Nani wages estimated @ £50k per week = £2.5 million
Anderson wages estimated @ £34k per week = £1.7 million
Ronaldo wage increase estimated @ £50k per week = £2.5 million
Rooney wage increase estimated @ £50k per week = £2.5 million
Carrick wages @ £50k per week = £2.5 million ( these are increases as they were not included in the last set of accounts.
Transfer fee for Hargreaves = £10 million paid up front
Tranfer fee for Nani = £7 million
Transfer fee for Anderson = £7 million
Transfer fee for Kuzscak = £4 million
Add all that lot up and see what you come up with ?
Obviously you have to offset things like fees received for Smith, Rossi etc and their wages, but being generous we'll call that £20 million.
So they have increased the outgoings this season by £43 million whilst bringing in say £20 million. ( if you compare them against the last set of accounts ) Thats £23 million extra they have committed themselves to.
So from your £42 million they've committed themselves to £23 million of it.
Add £19 million to the £42 million they took in profits last season, and what do you have ? £61 million.. £29 million short of the £90 million you claim United will make...
Yes income has risen, but so have the outgoings.. And that doesnt include things like bonus payments due to Everton for Rooneys success and for Spurs for the trophy Carrick won...
Success brings in money.. But it also means you have a fecking damn sight more to pay out as well in bonuses and extra wages.
Right, so lets get this correct. as you said
"They will then sell these shares to another investor and recover as much as they can from them."
Right, so the banks are owed £660 million for United, and they need to get their money back.. They come in and they reposess United. Currently that means as long as they get that £660 million back then they are happy. ie They can afford to sell United at £660 million. Anything over that is GLazers.
WHos going to buy 10% of United for £100 million knowing that the banks are going to be giving away 10% of United for £66 million if they dont invest their money ?
Buying that 10% stake could actually cost them 34% more than they need to.
Any clever businessman would tell Glazer to get fecked and wait till the banks have reposessed the club, then they'd come in and offer as much as is needed to keep the banks happy, and they get United for far less than they'd have to pay Glazer for it.. And they'd still end up with 10% of a club actually valued at £1 billion...
Heres an example. I used to know a bloke who owned a Hotel company. The owner of another hotel wanted to sell up. The bloke walked up and said "I'll give you £2 million for it". THe owner laughed and told him to feck off, replying that it was worth £4 million..
My mate told him that he was a mug, and that he'd still get the hotel off him for £2 million in the end.
A year later the owner went bankrupt. My mate went up to the bank who who possessed the hotel and offered them £2 million for it. They snapped his hand off because all they were owed was £1.8 million so they got their money back..
My mate still got the hotel for £2 million even though it was worth £4 million. THe banks were happy. The only person to lose out was the fool who tried to be greedy.
So it will be with Glazer. No one will actually invest in United, because they know that in a few years, Glazer will go tits up and then they can get United for a damn sight less than what GLazer wants for it now..
Boring............
Well it would be for you...
Its like me trying to read a debate on Nuclear fission...
I'd be way out of my depth...
You haven't included the wages saved with players leaving/retiring Fred. Or the extra TV and ticket money for that matter.
No, it makes sense mate it's just boring hearing you drone on and on and on (and on and on and on and on), like Celine Dion......
Where did you steal your latest top-secret information from, I'd love to know.
The only current threat is the global finance squeeze which will prevent Glazer from refinancing the more expensive debt for some time. How crucial that will be is impossible for any of us to know because we don't know the full financial structure or the financial plan that the Glazers have.
Erm, He has already covered the TV and ticket deals in his projected increase in income.
As for wages, I have done that already by allowing £20 million..
feck off then if you don't want to read about it.
current threat, I'd agree with you 100%, but there are far more worrying concerns ie the TV deal collapses or other clubs suddenly start dropping prices like some have started to do already.
The bubble could burst at any time, and football could lose its appeal. Then clubs like ourselves, Arsenal, Liverpool etc could be in deep shit.
I am not for one second saying United will be the only club in trouble, but given our debts are far higher than everyone elses, we've got the most to lose.
Can I just say, of all your posts, which actually I tend to enjoy reading, that one is the best yet..
Couldnt have put it better myself.
Can I just say, of all your posts, which actually I tend to enjoy reading, that one is the best yet..
Couldnt have put it better myself.
Aww shucks
can you give me the time back out of my life I wasted reading it? No, so I will comment on your rant then
Yes it is and yes I will. Thank you for caring.