Thursday, 1 July 2010

Sky Sports prices go down (and up)



No organisation has contributed more to the enrichment of English football in the last two decades than BSkyB, which has used its ownership of Premier League football rights to establish its dominant position in UK pay TV. At News Corp's AGM in 1996, Rupert Murdoch famously explained:

""Sport absolutely overpowers film and everything else in the entertainment genre… we plan to use sports as a 'battering ram' and a lead offering in all our pay television operations."

The recent decision by OFCOM to regulate the wholesale prices BSkyB can charge for Sky Sports 1 and 2 has raised question marks about the use of the "battering ram" in the future and hence the ongoing value of UK sports right. Today we saw the first effects of the ruling (which both BT and BSkyB are appealing against) for consumers.



BT have announced a new BT Vision offering that significantly undercuts Sky's pricing with SS1, SS2 and ESPN on offer (with a broadband package) for £29.98 per months vs. Sky's £52.50 and Virgin Media's £59.00 (see BT's comparison here).

This is a very aggressive move by BT and more radical than most analysts had expected. To quote Credit Suisse's Telecom team:

"Our overall take is that it looks more aggressive than it needs to be. We had expected aggressive pricing with BT potentially even willing to price at a loss on Sky Sports but the pricing is generally lower than we have anticipated. Strategically the right move by BT but perhaps at the wrong price."

You might imagine that BSkyB's response to this would be to cut consumer prices in response, but in fact they are taking the opposite approach, and will tomorrow announce that retail prices are actually going up. OFCOM's ruling on wholesale rates uses a formula that deducts a fixed margin from Sky's retail prices to determine what they can charge wholesale customers. By raising retail prices, BSkyB can thus raise wholesale prices too and squeeze the likes of BT and Virgin Media.


Sky claim their price rise reflects the additional Premier League matches they will show for the next three seasons (having won five of the six packages available vs. four out of six for the last three year deal). No doubt there is some truth in this, but the move looks more like an attempt to make BT's strategy untenable almost before it has begun.

For now, Premier League clubs can look on as this scrap progresses without being impacted themselves. The interesting point will come in around eighteen months when the bidding for the next three year deal begins. The outcome of BT and BSkyB's appeals against the original OFCOM decision, the new government's stance (the Tories had been quite anti-OFCOM before the election) and the extent of any market share moves as BT and Sky's retail prices diverge so radically will all have a major impact on how much BSkyB will be prepared to pay for Premier League football next time around.

Regulated prices, a saturated market and more competition probably means the answer is "less than before".... In March, long time friend of this blog Richard "don't blame us for England being shit" Scudamore warned:

"The effect [of the OFCOM ruling] will be to subsidise companies that have shown little appetite for investing in our content and fundamentally damage the investment models that have helped sport become a successful part of the UK economy and made sport so attractive to UK consumers."

Today's pricing announcements are just early skirmishes, this is going to be long war.....


LUHG

222 comments:

1 – 200 of 222   Newer›   Newest»
Phil said...

Good article. I appreciate that greater competition will squeeze profits if they engage in a price-war (not what we've seen just yet), but is there the possibility of BT bidding for a package themselves in the future?

Greater competition on the bidding front would surely push the price of the total TV package up, though I can't see BT being a big player like Sky any time soon.

tier 2 red said...

Interesting post as ever.
Though I do have to take issue with one sentence
"No organisation has contributed more to the enrichment of English football in the last two decades than BSkyB"

Yeah the stadiums are better but im not to sure football has become more enriched in the last two decades. If English football had not engaged rampant commercialism and the laisse faire free market approach that Sky stimulated I very much doubt we would have the Glazers.

andersred said...

Phil,

I can't see BT bidding for a package to be honest.

Unlike Setanta and ESPN, BT is a "platform" seeking content and winning one (or even two) package(s) wouldn't be enough to drive people onto the platform. If you want Premier League football on the TV, why settle for 1/6 or 2/6 of what is available (and the "less glamorous" games at that)? Buying in and reselling Sky Sports does make it a more compelling option....

Sky's counterattack is clever and might see off BT, but I suspect the net result will be a reduction in the value of sports rights in Sky's eyes and that probably means the growth in domestic deals is over.

tier 2 red,

I didn't mean "enrichment" in any sense other than "more cash flowing into the game". You're absolutely right that other than shiny stadiums and foreign stars (to the detriment of the national side), our national game hasn't been "enriched" by whoring itself around.

anders

The Red Devil said...

Just watch Sky put all the "marquee" matches on Sky Sports 3 next season!

Anonymous said...

I think the last Sky deal for domestic Tv rights was only a 5% increase on the previous deal? Which is actually a drop in real terms after taking inflation into consideration?

I'm not an expert but my gut feel is that domestic TV money has now peaked, even before taking into consideration any pressure from the OFCOM ruling.

andersred said...

Anonymous,

4.5% to be precise (from £1.706bn to £1.782bn). Setanta obviously folded shortly after the latest deal was signed with ESPN apparently paying "slightly less" than Setanta's £159m for Package "D" (the league got compensated by seizing Setanta's £40m advance).

People have called the peak on domestic rights again and again but I agree with you that the deal about to start is probably it...

anders

Anonymous said...

Funny that about the pricing.
I rang sky today,
and cancelled the sports pack for the foreseable future.

they offered to reduce my monthy package by 48% for the next three months, and then review it.

If i dont pay sky the best part of 45 euro a month , i am then also not putting any money in the Glazer's pockets.

Anyway back to the point,

If more United fans did this for this season would it help in an indirect in the battle for Old Trafford.

Obviously the MUST would then get no coverage from Sky Sports News....

As a side issue i thought the coverage by SKY Sports News over the World Cup was so warped, biased, twisted and so lacking in any substance ...it has to go.

Will renew my subs to two of the big 3 fanzines, but with a heavy heart have decided that i wont travel to Old Trafford for the 2010-2011, have been to at least 4 home games a year since 1984.

March 17th, MUFC 4-0 Arsenal.

It was the Saturday before the famous European night against Maradona and Barcelona...

Quetzalcoatl said...

Sky? BT?

Sod em. Perfectly watchable streams on sopcast for nowt and barely a pang of guilt.

Big Rear said...

If Sky raise their prices that will be the end for me. Anyone who attend Old Trafford knows that the standard of the EPL has gradually dropped off over the last couple of seasons and Englands lamentable performance in the World Cup have shown up just how ridiculous Skys overblown hype for the EPL is. After boycotting my season ticket after 41 years of continuous attendance at Old Trafford I at least had the solace of watching the games at home on TV. Now I think I'll go the whole way and just watch non-league. Well done to Sky and particularly the Glazers on alienating a fan of over 40 years. I never thought I'd see the day this would happen.
Well done Andersred, keep up the fight!!

Anonymous said...

Followed Anonymous's advice to ring Sky up - and if you ask to trim some of your packages and mention you are thinking of downgrading or completely cancelling the subscription, they offer a 20% discount on everything over the next 6 months. Bingo! Just saved £81.

andersred said...

Nice work Anonymous(es)....

This is the blog that keeps on giving, now with added money saving tips!

Quetzalcoatl,

"the andersred blog does not condone...." ;-)

anders

Anonymous said...

Time to come clean Mr. Anders! Vested interests are a grave way to support a club.

Tony Nuttall said...

I hope anyone who won't be going to Old Trafford next season will get along to watch FC. And support the work to get FC to the new ground at Newton Heath.

Anonymous said...

because of all the sponsorship deals united now have i dont know what i should buy or not buy because it might fund the glazers debts.

so i have not renewed my season ticket and am now living in a cave in the middle of nowhere.

have i done the right thing?

Anonymous's Brother said...

Anonymous said: "so i have not renewed my season ticket and am now living in a cave in the middle of nowhere. have i done the right thing?".

Yes.

And look on the bright side Anonymous, you seem to still have a wireless internet connection so you can use sopcast to watch the footy.

Anonymous said...

I call it my "Dongle in the Jungle". I still need to be able to get on here to keep up with what is happening with the world. I'm not THAT stupid!

Patrick said...

Can i Just say fairplay to Andy for taking time to research the Whole truth about the Glazer Family.However i would be interested if you could take the time and give us your view as to why the Red Knights walked away from buying Our Club
And as For the Red Devil can i praise him for giving the views of a majority/Minority of fans who think the Glazers have been a good thing

Patrick said...

I look forward to your next blog post on the Glazers and i hope its the same excellent standard as your previous work

Anonymous said...

Patrick,
I think the reason the RKs are hanging back is the ludicrous overvaluation the Glazers have indicated.

Patrick said...

I cannot understand why you think the Glazers are overvaluing Our club.Perhaps look at the cadbury takeover in recent months and follow that valuation upwards.Cadburys is a brand name,but cadburys is not on the same level as OUR CLUB.If anything its the Red Knights who are undervaluing our club with offers below 1billion

Anonymous said...

Patrick, football is not a business like chocolate. For one thing Mergers & Acquisitions are not allowed. And the aim of any business is to achieve a natural monopoly, which is anathema to competitive sport. And if you talk of M&As between totally different sports such as American football and football, 'synergies' gains etc. have there been with the Bucs and United?

Patrick said...

No what i am trying to say yes our club is a high profile football club But it is also a world wide brand that generates millions of pounds every year.But the thing is the Red Knights may have bid less than a billion for a club/brand that is easily worth 1.5billion plus.Yes the Glazers businesses in USA are in trouble but did they not turn a profit in very difficult times

Patrick said...

Yes the Glazers businesses in USA are in trouble but did they not turn a profit in very difficult times?
when we are talking of our clubs value being in terms of £1 billion or £2 billion,Our club Manchester United is massively under-valued, and the Glazers Know that You know that you do not sell an asset like Manchester United unless needs must,Yes there other businesses have been in trouble but with such an asset like our club where you can take Millions from it without causing major issues then why would you sell it.As for All the Talk of the Glazers not giving media interviews sure the No one from the red knights came out and gave any kind of information of what there plans where.Also the whole MUST media campaign has collapsed in the face of a counter campaign by the Glazer camp.However i find that most of the Topics that anders has covered have been truthful and benifical for the fans

Anonymous said...

Patrick, I think one of the problems re valuations is the huge difference between sports in US and Europe. In US, there is no relegation, draft systems, no local competition, salary caps etc. In US, owing a club is a licence to print money with little risk attached. In Europe, none of the above apply, there are risks in relegation and associated loss of revenues, salaries on an ever upward spiral, ditto transfer fees (no value in market is a nonsense) etc etc. Hence the likes of Gillette and Hicks being unable to sell Liverpool at their own unrealistic valuation.
You can do all the brand equity, P/E, future pie in the sky online content valuations you like, an asset is only worth what someone is prepared to pay.

Patrick said...

And your views on the complete failure of the red knights???Like it or not Football is more know than Kicking a ball round a field on a sunday.Its all money money !!! There is a silent majority of fans who could careless who the owners are while there are others like myself who do not believe all this doom and gloom stuff that surrounds our club.This does not make me pro Glazer or anything like that its just at times the figures about the Glazers difficulties dont add up.Yes there businesses have suffered but so has many others.All this talk of how bad our debts are there are business men in Ireland who are in bigger trouble and still continue to operate.Example being the quinn Group.However we have never heard from the red knights as to what there plans where before there bid collapsed in the face of a successful Glazer PR effort

andersred said...

Patrick,

You keep telling us that the "bid collapsed" after some sort of Glazer/Gill PR campaign. Not true.

The RKs are still in the background, we'll see what will happen.

anders

Patrick said...

Anders perhaps you will agree that there are businessmen in Ireland(Sean Quinn,Liam Carroll)ect ect are in worse shape than the glazers and continue to operate.All we seen for weeks was MUST statements and people like yourself giving media interviews and then came David Gill interviews and various statements from the Glazers and then nothing has been heard from them since

Anonymous said...

It is amazing how all the people who defend the glazers all claim not to be pro-Glazer and also that they someone have done a poll to deduce what the majority think.
The RK bid has not collapsed, it has never been made because it takes two to tango.

Anonymous said...

Patrick, who gives a damn about the state of some Irish businessmen! In what way does that affect Manchester United?

As for your valuation for United, can you explain how you've worked it out. Forbes value United at £1.1b, so can you explain to us thickos how you've determined that United are worth far far more than that.

Patrick said...

As for why i use the examples of Irish business people is that i am from Ireland and there huge problems are well documented.With Mr Sean Quinn oweing banks over 2.5billion and still controls a group with profits of 400million a year.The point is these business people owe alot more than the Glazers and they are still in business.As for my views on OUR clubs valuation i would like to think that we are valued alot more than 1billion.As the Glazers are business people why would they sell at a price they dont agree with?If they are going to sell then i think it will be for a massive price and it wont be bought by any group of bankers or whatnot more than likely OUR club will be bought by a very rich arab or whoever but the chances of the new owners being from england and any sort of fan representation are very very sli,

Anonymous said...

@ Patrick
You're from Ireland so you've probably bought a house, which has been impacted by the property crash.

A potential buyer comes in and says he'll buy it off ya for e500k. You say you bought for a e1m so go away.

Does that mean he won't come back 2 months later and offer you e700k which you take??

Same with Glazers. Unwilling to sell at moment but hand may be forced at a later date.

Patrick said...

Maybe so but if you dont need to sell then why would you and judging by what the Glazers have done over the years they will only sell if they are going to make a large profit.Example being there sale of the Home in Florida already mentioned below.Yes there other business interests are in trouble but if you had such an asset like OUR club with the cash it generates our club will be used as a way of obtaining funds for any business of theres that may be in trouble

Anonymous said...

@Patrick
Exactly. They treat club as cash cow.

Once they can pay for interest they are happy.

This is why they rip off fans by increasing season ticket prices ... to get in cash to pay interest.

Also why they sell Ronaldo and if offer comes in Rooney.

Patrick said...

Yes and until there own debts are cleared we will not see them making any move to sell on OUR club

The Red Devil said...

@Anonymous - "It is amazing how all the people who defend the glazers all claim not to be pro-Glazer"

I think it is just because there is no alternative.

The Glazers own the club and damaging the Glazers with nothing in place as an alternative is damaging the club unneccesarily.

If something else was available it might be possible to be pro-that-instead but at the moment there appear to be an awful lot of people who are simply "pro-nothing".

It's going to take a bit more than that to win some people over, I'm afraid.

The Red Devil said...

@anonymous - "Same with Glazers. Unwilling to sell at moment but hand may be forced at a later date."

Is this after the buyer has sent around people to stand outside his house for six months screaming obscenities?

The Red Devil said...

@anonymous - "This is why they rip off fans by increasing season ticket prices ... to get in cash to pay interest.

Also why they sell Ronaldo and if offer comes in Rooney."

Pure crap, that, I'm afraid. All of it.

Patrick said...

To anonymous
Whatever happened to MUST i have sent them numerous e mails asking for information as to who the red knights where?what was discussed at there meeting with them and never got a reply.Perhaps you or anders will be kind enough to discuss who these Red Knights were.They are more secreative than the glazers are they not

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil
"Pure crap, that, I'm afraid. All of it."

Are you saying the season tickets prices haven't increased? Proves it.

Are you saying Ronaldo wasn't sold? Proves it.

Are you saying you don't pay interest with cash? Proves it.

Patrick said...

Any answer to my points

The Red Devil said...

@anonymous - you're clearly retarded.

Patrick said...

perhaps red devil you might add your views on the Red Knights disapperance

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil
Answer the questions. Yes or No will be enough.

Or maybe the only way you can attempt to win an argument is by calling people names like "retarded".

The Red Devil said...

@anonymous - No, the only way you can win arguments is by saying completely mental things like "The sun will come up tomorrow because the giant bunny in the sky tells it to."

And then when someone says, "bollocks".

You say, "Prove the sun won't come up then!"

You're not even worth debating with.

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil
Fair enough, all the facts mentioned are pure crap as per you because you say they are.

There is no debate here - you have no answer to the facts so you resort to name-calling.

The Red Devil said...

@Patrick - My only views on the Red Knights are that there is no need for all the secrecy. What harm could it do to come out and say who they are and what plans they have?

Behaving like this only leads to speculation as to their identities, their motives, their plans and their credibility.

They haven't disappeared, really. They were never there.

Patrick said...

Would agree with the Point that they never really existed.If they loved the club as much as they claimed and had enough money then they would have made at least a face saving bid not alas that never happened

The Red Devil said...

@Patrick - I'm not saying they never existed. I'm sure there were a group of people with a degree of personal wealth who, combined, could cobble something together remotely close to £800m in liquid assets.

There did seem to be some disagreements between them about one or two of the minor details (such as, should we make a bid or not?) which doesn't really bode well for how they would have got along had they actually taken charge of Manchester United.

In that respect, they were never really "there", if you know what I mean. Not as a credible entity at any rate.

Patrick said...

Yes i agree if they couldnt agree on a takeover plan then imagine if they were dealing with major calls such as the debt repayments or player transfers.It would never had worked and i look forward to when anders goes into the same detail with the red knights as he has had with the glazers

The Red Devil said...

@anonymous - OK. If you insist.

"This is why they rip off fans by increasing season ticket prices ... to get in cash to pay interest."

Rip off fans? Have you ever actually looked at what other Premier League sides charge for tickets? I think you will find our ticket prices are well within range.

Personally, I think the cost to watch football is too much across the board but this is not because of the Glazers.

But, assuming that you are reasonable enough to understand that you get what you pay for then what more could you have expected for your money than you have received for the last five years?

If you felt ripped off then why the hell buy the ticket in the first place? What more did you want? Half-time lap-dancers?


"Also why they sell Ronaldo and if offer comes in Rooney."

If you are seriously trying to say that Ronaldo was sold purely for the money then you ARE retarded.

Ronnie wanted to go. He would have gone the season before but Fergie talked him round.

In the end, it was time to let him go and the offer was good. Win-win all round.

Until Rooney is sold, you cannot prove that. Personally, I don't think Rooney will be sold even if a £80million bid was tabled but until such a time as it does, we are engaging in a pointless debate.

Patrick said...

Think our ticket prices are reasonable considering we are paying to watch the biggest club in the world.
Whats anonymous views on the red knights collapse and failure

simpson said...

ronaldo sold b'coz of money he want's to stay if they offer him 150,000 pound a week .but they stick to the wage structure.
no one getting more 125,000 pound week at Manchester united. last time it was ronaldo . and now there is Rio
receiving aroung 115,000 pound a week.still they have 2 offer rooney new contract .he hasn't sign a contract yet he was our best player last season. he deserve more than 150,000 pound a week.but i don't think they will break wage structure for him.they will offer maximum 125,000 pound a week and some bonus if he score or assist in game. even they will introduce new clause in his contract that will be if receive a ban .then they will fine 2 week salary .

u r looking to much childish to me

The Red Devil.

hope u learn something from this.
get well soon.

Anonymous said...

Sure thats the right thing to do.Why break our wage cap on any player.Yes have a set salary and then oay out based on games played goals scored that kind of thing.Enough of players bleeding the club dry.There at the same thing the Glazers are at

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil
"Have you ever actually looked at what other Premier League sides charge for tickets? I think you will find our ticket prices are well within range."

Totally irrelevant - why would I look at other club's prices.
What difference is it to me what
City charge,Bolton, Blackburn etc.

I only want to see United play.

"If you felt ripped off then why the hell buy the ticket in the first place?"

Well that's exactly what has happened.

Since the Glazers have arrived I have been priced out of the club and don't have a season ticket. And I'm not the only one.

@ Patrick
It is alright for the likes of you who can afford both a season ticket and to fly over from Ireland every second week - others can't do that.

Patrick said...

Well not every week but maybe 10 times a season.
Just wondering if anyone has ever seen the Glazers Business plan from there takeover to today

Anonymous said...

Patrick
Wow, you go 10 times a year and still think the season ticket prices are reasonable.

I suppose you can sell the remainder on Viagogo and give them there nice fee.

Patrick said...

Any one see a business plan for the glazers and is it on track?

andersred said...

You can see their 2006 business plan here:

http://tinyurl.com/32orrbu

Looking at EBITDA for last year (2008/9) you can see it is pretty much on track (target £93m vs. actual £91m) but they got there by exceeding revenue targets by £44m (better on-pitch performance and better TV deals) but missing on costs by £46m....

anders

Patrick said...

So there business plan is on track???And what would your views on it be?

Patrick said...

Who is in charge of the Glazer Empire.I mean who calls the shots now as there father is sick and old age,Which one of the brothers are making a move to take over from there father.Perhaps get some factfile on them.Whos on the boards of what companies?How many companies/businesses do they own?How bad are things with these companies compared to companies in the same feild

Patricia said...

what is google what is wikipedia what is acting on own initiative

Patrick said...

As for myself doing any research on what the Glazers own or in what state there businesses maybe in i am not an accountant and would not be qualified to pass any judgement on what i might find whereas Andy or someone in his field would be.As for the Glazers it is common knowledge that they own the Tampa Bay Buccaneers since 1995,OUR club Manchester United since 2005 and the well documented First Allied Corporation.Perhaps it would be interesting to chat to someone who has worked under them in any of the businesses they own.Which of the Brothers Calls the shots?Are they good people to work for?What is the Familys organisational structure?And compared to other companies in there field how has the Glazers companies performed?

fattmatt said...

Is MUFC stopping the average waged person from watching them live?
When a club is paying their best players upto 6.5 million a year in wages (plus the extras in shirt fees etc), then they need to raise the revenues from somewhere. The arguement over what a reasonable ticket price to watch a match in a 76000 capacity stadium comes into question. To watch Rooney per match is going to cost £1.64 per seat ( good value in my opinion). Added to that the rest of the 10 players, lets say £10.52 (80,000 per week each). Thats £12.16 per seat. To pay for the whole squad works out each game is £29.60 (@£65,000 per player per week as a mean average). On top of that is the wages of everyone in the the backroom. God knows how much it costs the club when no revenue is generated from match days.
Most businesses would be advised of the need to charge at least double the price of their main costs (wages) to cover their other overheads, so paying over £60 ticket seems about right
These very basic figures give an indication of what as a business football relies on, i.e. TV and sponsorship has to make a profit.
Is there a yet a golden set of rules for the business of football to make it pay?
(I'm quite interested to find out if Ken Bates was happy for Leeds to get promoted or does the extra costs put him in the red)

The Red Devil said...

@fattmatt - I'm sure Anders will put me straight if these figures are wrong but I believe that Matchday income is around £110million whilst wages are around £130million.

I am also not 100% sure what is meant by "matchday income" - is that solely ticket sales or do programmes, cups of tea and pies etc make up that amount too?

Anonymous said...

Anders seriously are you just trying to incite. How often does any business perform completely in line with future forecasts? Is it not the objective of a business to ensure close proximity to its objectives knowing full well fluctuations inputs will happen? And to stay within proximity esp through the midst of a financial phenomena is even harder? Did your firm grow leaps and bounds these last 3 years? Sometimes Anders, talking non-spreadsheet related business logic is necessary!

Anonymous said...

Patrick what happened with the RK is simple. They didn't see value in the asking price of the Glazer's (assuming there even was an asking price). Secondly, the RK required MU supporters to chip in, and this was of course never going to happen. Then the original objective to bid for MU changed into some other objective.
My only thoughts on the RK is they are a bunch of Investment Bankers. And if you recall the reputation Investment Banks/Bankers have created for themselves these last few years, then you like me will realise where the roots of dare-devil risk taking emanates.

As I say the Investment Bankers required fan outlay to enable their bid to take place. Sounds like a pre-takeover bailout!

Patrick said...

Love that description of a pre takeover bailout.Spot on

David said...

All this talk and name calling is getting boring, all points are probably valid in some peoples minds, but, come on.
Manchester United are massively in DEBT, we are not talking about Irish businessmen, we are talking about our beloved football club.

How anyone can defend the Glazers and their methods is beyond me, Ladies and Gentlemen, we are not the club we were 5 years ago, we are not the club we were 3 years ago, can we compete with Real Madrid, Barcelona, Chelsea, City or Inter in the transfer market? NO!!

Why? because any profit goes to paying the interest on the massive loans that the Glazers have saddled Manchester United with, then the Glazers take their dividends/fees and the "business makes a loss". Investment in the team is paramount to success, all top teams buy "a big player" to improve their squad,

Mr Gill tells us that "the money is there if Sir Alex wants it", Alex states that there is no value in the market at the moment, thats a big change from paying record fees for the likes of Ferdinand, Veron and Berbatov, and frankly, just like match tickets and merchandise, I'm not buying it.

RobC said...

Sadly, that about sums it up in a nutshell David. Good post.

Just waiting now to ignore the avalanche of "yes, but....." replies from the usual suspects.

monsta666 said...

I think Manchester United's success in the last few years has masked the damage that the Glazers have done. This is making it difficult for some fans to believe the Glazers are harming United. But when the trophies stop coming and more important still, Manchester United can no longer mount a decent title challenge then people will be more easily swayed. The performance on the pitch has a much bigger impact than a balance sheet. As they say: a picture is worth a 1000 words.

Another factor that will contribute to further unrest is Manchester United's transfer activity this summer. If Manchester United do not sign a Sneijder or similarly classed player, and they really do need one, then fans will grow more restless. Besides nothing sells season tickets than the prospect of see a new star player.

In any case it should become more obvious when Manchester United reveal their future accounts which WILL show their cash reserves have been depleted proving David Gill has been lying about United having money available for spending. At the same time it would also prove that the pik debt is United's problem. It was obvious this was the case when the debt was refinanced the first time and a lot of pik debt was replaced by bank debt that was secured against the club. In any case why is the pik debt placed in United's parent company if it wasn't their problem?

If the Glazers are ever bought out you must surely sack David Gill. His lies have stopped a lot of the MUST/IMUSA momentum and most likely a boycott which is what is really needed for drastic change to occur. At the end of the day these lies will ultimately harm Manchester United as it will take longer for fans to discover the complete truth at which point it maybe too late to save United from serious damage.

Anonymous said...

RobC, David and Monsta you guys are perfectly right. We need to compete in the transfer market. So who should we sign? Next year I think they should just disband the PL, CL and cups and hand the trophies over to the team that performs the best in the transfer market, and not the one who performs the best on the field.

Anonymous said...

Thats it!!! Man Utd, Premier League and CL you have to listen! The three Musketeers have spoken, and you better listen to them. Disband everything right now, and give the trophies to Chelsea, Real and City. MU deserve nothing since we have Glazers as owners, a sick business, do not compete in the transfer market, have a manager who keeps insisting there is no value (and doesn't know the phuck he is talking about), etc. In such a case I have to say, why does MU even bother remaining as a going concern. All the Nobel Laureates we have as fans should have the opportunity to say "I told you so". Why deny them such satisfaction Sir Alex??? Shame on you Sir Alex for not getting MU relegated. What you playing at to ensure MU remain successful just so that the Glazer's agenda remains alive? You are a fraud Sir Alex.

Now back to normal programming. The remaining 5 fans who support MU through this ownership should be prepared for a highly contagious smile this coming season.

Anonymous said...

Anything that is wrong at the club now can be blamed on the Glazers.If we dont win the PL or CL blame the Glazers never mind the teams performances or the managements mistakes,blame the glazers.If the pies arent hot enough at HT blame the glazers.Blame them for everything.You people are doing more harm to OUR club than them.Use make me sick narrow minded easily lead weakminded sheep

Anonymous said...

Ohh Anonymous, how dare you call these Nobel Laureates sick narrow minded easily lead sheep? You IQ is disgraceful. Now please roll out the red carpet for them as your apology.

Patrick said...

What with all the Anonymous Names.Whos talking to who or about who.Looking forward to Andys next post.Hopefully it is as informative but not as one sided as some of his others

David said...

I have been called somethings in life, but never "narrow minded, easily led, "weak minded sheep", wow!! that takes some digesting (I guess that's the bueaty of a debate and the sharing of opinion).

Obviously, Sir Alex has to trot out the company mantra, but I wouldnt mind betting that his stomach is doing somersalts inside, he's a winner and he wants the best for United. In 40 years of watching United, I have shared in the glory and the despair, the beating of Benfica (I was only 11 and it was on a black & white TV, but can still see it now, brilliant) the playing of the extra time comentary record in 68/69 season, the sad slip into the 2nd division, but the abosolute storm back up the next year, In Albert Sq listening to Tommy's promise to go back to Wembley next year and bring back the cup (thanks Tommy).

The horribly long trip back from Bournemouth, the beating of Barcelona (thanks Ron, best atmosphere at Old Trafford, ever!), the constant despair of the scousers success, but watching some fantastic football, the signing of Alex and his visions, the wait, the signing of Eric, the beating of Norwich (bloody hell, how daft does that sound now?), the elation, the end of the long wait, the premeirship, the belief in 99, the treble, Moscow!! not turning up against Barcelona (thanks for all that Alex)

That is football, that is Manchester United, that is my love and that is why it's my love.

Do you think any of the above will be repeated under the Glazers? don't think about it too long boy's and girls, the debt will kill us.

And before the "Anonymous" brigade (not all of them I admit) start again with the insults, remember, less than 10 years ago, Leeds United were in the Champions league semi final.

LUHG

Anonymous said...

Leeds also had a clown called Ken Bates in charge. Remember his posh office, aquarium, etc. David if you use Leeds as an example, then a complete comparison is a must. To pick and choose which elements to compare simply to support a theory is wrong and misleading. I understand lots of you are upset, but to turn that into misleading information is immoral.

fattmatt said...

I would quite like the RK to buy the club, but I believe they will face the same problems the Glazers have faced i.e what is the profitable outcome of MUFC
I have been involved with banks this last 6 months over arranging loans and currently the need to see what profit the business will generate works on the last finacial year. If you make a break even rather than a profit (they seem to ignore the fact that they have caused a finacial downturn since 2008) the major banks will turn you down and suggest raising money from a finacial company that will offer you the finance but at a lot higher interest rate. How a football business will be able to forcast what their profit will be taking into account what they will be paying their players for the next 3 years will put them in a high interest position.
Can someone explain how the RK will overcome the same issue that owning a football club is a profitable business and will be willing to loan the money at a lower interest rate.

David said...

Old Ken wasn't in charge of Leeds then, it was Peter Risdale and the comparison is about money, or lack of it (although now I think about it, Malcolm/Ken, there are some similarities).

I dont see how anything I have stated can be called immoral, it's my opinion and what I forsee, if you have other views, thats fine, time will tell, it's just I feel that the time is running out.

I cannot for the life of me see how the Glazers, and the mountain of debt they have piled on the club can be a benefit in the foreseeable future, it is my belief that the business end will drag the team down.

For the record, I am, and always will always be a United fan (of the team) but I will not be lining the Glazers pockets anymore.

monsta666 said...

posted by Anonymous

RobC, David and Monsta you guys are perfectly right. We need to compete in the transfer market. So who should we sign?
-----------------------

I don't know but they need to sign an established midfielder this summer and preferably it should be a player of the same standard of Sneijder. At this moment of time the midfield is stale and lacks a creative spark. You need to spend sooner rather than later because many of your older players cannot play for much longer (Giggs, Scholes).

To be honest this time next year Manchester United will need to rebuild their team as I expect Van Der Saar, Neville, Scholes and Giggs to retire at the end of the season. To make things easier you need to spend now. And don't expect the youngsters to pick up the slack; a successful team needs a balance of experience and youth and expecting them to step in so suddenly is asking a lot. Your young players are not as good as the class of 92. And besides with the threat of Manchester City and Chelsea Manchester United need to be stronger than ever to maintain their dominance that Glazer's so desperately need to keep on top of their interest payments.

But spending shouldn't be an issue as Gill has quite clearly stated that there is £90 million in the bank. So why should Manchester United be so reluctant to spend? It's almost like this money needs to go somewhere else...

At the end of the day football is very money driven and if a club fails to invest sufficient amounts of money on players then they will fall behind their rivals. Just look at the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, the Glazers failed to invest adequately and the Bucs now find themselves lounging at the bottom of the table. The same will happen to United which considering their financial circumstances, could prove catastrophic.
_________________________




posted by Anonymous

Next year I think they should just disband the PL, CL and cups and hand the trophies over to the team that performs the best in the transfer market, and not the one who performs the best on the field.

-----------

Nah if that were the case then it would always go to Arsenal. ;)

The Red Devil said...

I seriously have to wonder which planet some people are on at times.

What do the following players have in common?

Nani
Berbatov
Anderson
Fabio
Rafael
Obertan
Hernandez
Valencia
Evra
Vidic
Hargreaves
Park
Carrick

(This list is not exhaustive, there are others I could add).

They were all bought since the Glazers took over.

What's all this crap about the no "squad investment"?

If you care to actually look at the reality of the situation, it is markedly different.

Oh, and David, "Real Madrid, Barcelona, Chelsea, City or Inter in the transfer market? NO!!"

Hmm... Real Madrid appear to exist in a fantasy world when it comes to transfers, Barcelona have just had to take out a 150million loan to pay players wages, I think you will find Chelsea are now being a lot more sensible with transfers (they do have a billionaire sugar daddy should they need him though), City are just on a completely different planet financially and Inter are also owned by an oil tycoon.

Personally, I would rather United stand on its own two feet and keeps within sensible budgets. By all accounts, this is what the Financial Fair Play regulations seek to ensure over the coming years too.

Anonymous said...

Interesting blog this with lots of different viewpoints.However,the bottom line to all this is that Utd have had massive debts put onto it by people who are supposedly billionaires,astute businessman etc.Looking else where,the same "BILLIONAIRES"have a record of using LBOs...

Anonymous said...

I have been a supporter of Manchester United since the mid-1970s and I remember watching the 1977 FA Cup final.My own feelings on what has happened are:-The redeeming aspect of the Bond prospectus was that it revealed what has been happening to the clubs finances and has opened the door to transparancy (to an extent)on club expenditure -There is now starting to be a realisation by some supporters about the possible consequences of the debt -Disquiet at the spending by City on quality players such as Silva,Toure and Boateng and a perception of a lack of transfer activity by United because of the debt situation.Claims of a 29 million pound bid being made for Sneijder (who was available for half the price last season and who had earlier rejected going to United as part of a cash and player deal by RM for Ronaldo)is seen by some as giving the impression of money being available while knowing very well that the bid would be rejected -The recent emphasis on youth mirrors that policy of the Tampa Bay Bucaneers.Joel Glazer claimed that they were not cheap owners but had a policy of developing youth as opposed to signing stars.Incidentally,Tampa Bay Online(T.B.O)sports section features on the Bucs is revealing at times.Comments by disgruntled fans include suspicions/accusations that the lack of spending on the Bucs is because money has been spent on United ...

Anonymous said...

The "brand" Man Utd can only be successful as long as on the field success-winning trophies-continues.- Although there is intense rivalry between City and United,and the disquiet about the recent quality signings by City caused by both jealousy about their wealth and a concern about Uniteds own debt situation,it is interesting to note that the owner of Manchester City is a supporter of United...And regarding the Glazers,their case is best summarized in a letter by Richard Caborn,minister of sport,who noted in his letter dated 28 August,2005 during the furore at the time of their takeover.."It is too early to rush to conclusions about the true intentions he (MALCOLM GLAZER)and his family have for the club... There is still a great deal of work for the Glazers to do in terms of proving to the fans that they have the best interests of the club at heart."-For me,loading the massive debt onto a debt-free club and then using its own cash to reduce part, if not all ,of the debt with a possibility of trying to sell the club off to someone else at a profit, even if it is legal, shows that the owners certainly do not have the best interests of the club at heart.

UTID said...

@ David
"In 40 years of watching United, I have shared in the glory and the despair"

Thank JC there is someone out there with the same passion about the club.

It's a pity there are the likes of Red Devil and Patrick out there who are only too happy to let mediocrity prevail.

They will never know how to love the club. To them it's all about the Glazers doing nothing - since when was not interfering the greatest thing you could ever do??

Do they even know what it's been like to be a season ticket holder of the club they supposedly love?

Nevermind the increases in ticket prices, do they even stop to think of the impact of the ACS on the ordinary fan?

And then they claim it's OUR club.

Hypocrites.

Then they they claim it is actually the fans who are harming the club and not the Glazers.

Really amazing stuff.

I still haven't actually seen any financial analysis from Red Devil supporting his wonderful Glazers - just some random ramblings about how it could be worse, we could be Leeds.

Patrick said...

We could be a leeds.Never going to happen.Hate to use the saying but OUR club is too powerful to ever sink.Leeds never had the kind of sustained period of success that we have had.All they did was throw money into transfers(something you people want)In the hope of getting European football.They failed to get CL football forced to sell players to hold off the bankers.Leeds had only 200 million of debts when they went bust and we are something like 700 million and no sign of any banks moving in.They didnt and never will have the same Global Following as us

Patrick said...

Some of use are full of so much hatred for the Glazers that your use are missing a number of key facts
1.There has been continued investment in the Playing Squad since they took over as noted by the poster above
2.On the field we have won the PL 3 times in a row in recent times and have done Fairly well in CL
3.There quaterly reports show that overall debts are being reduced
4.The club continues to enjoy the support of major sponsors with Figures of 200million in deals closed over the past few years
5.Continued growth in other areas be that
Matchday or whatever
6.They have kept there word and have supported Sir Alex in transfer market
7.We have never heard from the Red Knights on what there Plans are/where for tackling OUR debts.How would they pay them off.It wouldnt be a blank cheque anywhy.It will take years of money coming out of the club to repay any of the debt regardless of who the owners are.
What was /is the Red Knights Plan for OUR CLUB.Who where they,Yes we know keith harris(involved with the Icelandic takeover of west ham(seen what nearly happened them if not for Gold and sullivan) and city by a criminal from thailand) along with O Neil but who else??? What management structure would be in place.Who would make the tough calls when needed or is back to Our PLC days withall the in fighting and shareholders fighting over a race horse and demanding review of everything Left right and centre.How would they tackle our debts.
Where have all the Protests been since the Takeover.Why did it take 5years for MUST to arrive on the scene in a public way.
Yes there are many different sides to this.There are the fans like andy who have dug deep to try and uncover the truth,Then there are the Fashion Icon Fans who spend £100 in the Megastore and then buy a fashion thing(green and gold scarf)and then there is the vast majority of fans who could careless about sums and figures and the only thing that matters is what we have won come the end of may and what players we have signed up and do we play that special way that we do .
Yes the Glazers have taken money out of the club and will continue to do so.As the owners of they can do what they want and to think the Red Knights or whever wont take a slice from the club aswell then use arent in the real world
Use must learn to respect the views of others rightly or wrongly and stop resorting to the stupid name calling and questioning whos more red them whom

Anonymous said...

@UTID

So I am guessing only people like you qualify as supporters. Make yourself useful, call the RK's and tell them you'll donate to their takeover fund.

Ummm to be honest, and you're contribution in terms of financial analysis is what, or you one of the sheep blindly following the pied piper?

Darren said...

Patrick..

1. Net spend on the playing squad has been less than £5m per season under the Glazers. Pre-Glazer it was over £20m per season. Investment in the team has dropped. There is little or no cash leftover after servicing the debt to invest in players.

2. The Glazers can't take any credit for the success of the team.

3. The debts have increased by over £200m

4. Nothing new. And guess what, all clubs are enjoying increased revenues from sponsorships, increased Tv revenues, etc too.

5. Yep, they've raped the supporters, pricing out many, disenfranchising many more. I'm not going to thank them for that.

6. I'll turn that around and ask when have the Glazers ever released plans for the club, how they intend to pay down the debt, how they're going to find investment for the team etc. In 5 years of ownership they have never, not once, communicated with the supporters. All we've had is five years of "no comment". They've treated the support with complete and utter contempt, a commodity to be exploited to the limit and beyond. And in the 2 years pre-takeover when they were building up their shareholding and making bids for the club they never communicated what their plans were either.

The details of the RK plans will be revealed in time. What we do know is:

(1) they are United supporters
(2) they are against United carrying such collosal debts
(3) the debts would be cut, though not completely cleared immediately, if they were to buy the club
(4) it's a philanthropic exercise and they will be looking for little or no return on their investment
(5) they want the club to be at least partly supporter owned, with the target being 100% supporter ownership one day
(6) they have been working with MUST and IMUSA which shows their desire to involve supporters

Where have the protests been? They've always been there, they have simply moved onto another level because of the revelations in the bond prospectus. MUST have been working day in day out for many years. People devoting their own time for free to running the trust and keeping the issue of the Glazer mis-ownership on the agenda. Where have YOU been?

Anonymous said...

@ Darren,
Let the RK's put in a bid and then you can discuss what "YOU DO KNOW". Everything until then is stuff you've picked up from the media and are regurgitating. Call them and tell them you'll contribute to their takeover plans. They need your bailout today!

Darren said...

Why do I need to wait until a bid is actually made to form an opinion? From what the likes O'Neill and Marshall have said regarding the need to reduce the crippling debts and their vision of supporter ownership, and from the way that the RKs have been working with the supporter trusts & associations, I can give the opinion that I think the takeover if it were to happen would be absolutely fantastic for the football club. It's exactly what we need. Maybe you want a sugar daddy? Sorry, that isn't going to happen and it's not something I would want anyway.

Nobody is under any illusion, it's not going to be easy to get the Glazers out and it will take years to repair the damage they've done. There is no quick fix. But the RK bid would allow us, the supporters with the help of the RKs, to rebuild the club. It excites me. It should excite any United supporter. We built this football club, and given the oppotunity we can rebuild it.

As for the Glazers, anybody with any intelligence knew how it would pan out before they took over. Again I could form an opinion by how they had conducted business in the past. I knew that they would load huge debts on the club. I knew that they would ramp up ticket prices to eyewatering levels in order to service those debts. I knew that investment in the team would drop. I knew that they would treat supporters with contempt. It's what they're about. It's how they do business.

Anonymous said...

Missed the point again.Answer the question will the Rks(barron Knights) clear the debts straight away?Or is it over a period of time?Will they too take monies from the clubs coffers to look after themselves?Where is there plan set out?They much like the Glazers live in the shadows and have never gave any interview to anybody.Perhaps someone will get a list of who these people are and what they have been involved in.we know the boy harris was involved with the crows that wrecked west ham and
Put a fraudester in charge of city,so not a very good deal maker by all accounts.And why if they Had all these people in place would they seek cash from the ordinary fans.Find that shocking and very stupid.Money should have been in place plans drawn up long before speaking to the media or the fans and shows a lack of FORWARD thinking on there behalf and NOW they have disappeared off the face of the earth.Perhaps it was just a PR thing for some very rich bankers to get away from the borrowing and stressful day job
But the debate rages on just because Fans like red devil patrick and others question the information presented to them.That can only be a good thing and will only help create a greater understanding of the FACTS.We all love our club respect its history and those who have come before,Now perhaps show some repect for All our Felllow fans and cut the crap that someone is not one of us because they have a different viewpoint on the Glazers

Anonymous said...

The Red Knights are as secreative as the Glazers.Are you saying that these rich businessmen/fans arent going to take money from the club and what would there stucture would be will it like when we where aPLC with irish businessmen demanding reviews of how we do business and generally wasting peoples time.Yes there are problems at our club revolving around debts but its not all doom and gloom and this boycott crap people talk of will cause more harm to the club we love than them glazer boys ever done

Anonymous said...

@ Darren and the lot of you,

A leading Red Knight (who is not crying poverty and for who alternate opportunities would pour from the sky) was required to choose between his involvement with the MU takeover fiasco and his position with the Investment Bank. He who is described as an avid MU fan. He who says the Glazer's have taken on too much debt. He who everyone was sure would sacrifice himself for the sake of their beloved MU. He who was the shining knight in their pack. He who was acting in a personal capacity.

He choose the Investment Bank over MU.

Can the spin doctors please sell me a spinning story on this.

The Red Devil said...

@UTID - Sorry that you think the last five years have been medoicre.

You're yet another who is letting the doom & gloom could your judgement on what has actually been one of the best periods of success in United's history.

Anonymous said...

Ok fair enough, you have to understand that the reason I am so against these protests is because I find their justification to be severely, deceptively and unnecessarily trumped-up by Drasdo and his ilk. Ie just feel that there are parties in existence who're attempting to manipulate the fans through a propagandistic slur-campaign against our current owners, the merit of which causes us to distrust its leading proponents. What i see is a group of opportunistic businessmen, with close links to the MUST organisation through Drasdo's Reds In Business group, attempting to wrestle control of a football club through aggressive manipulation of its fanbase; a football club which they otherwise would have absolutely no chance of acquiring, and one which they all stand a huge chance of being able to make vast fortunes from if the acquisition is successful. If i see reason for not trusting those leading the protests, then how can we be reasonably be expected to believe that the protests are justified?

Anonymous said...

Can somebody please explain why on earth do we need protests again next season?What purpose is it going to serve?The owners have made it dead clear that they aint going anywhere,the red-knights have all but accepted that its impossible for them to get anywhere near the club.So what purpose is it going to serve??

McManus i blame said...

DO YOU THINK THE GREEN & GOLD CAMPAIGN IS WEARING A BIT THIN NOW OR DO YOU THINK ITS GOING TO CONTINUE INTO NEXT SEASON?

i personaly have never been into the G&G campaign and dont understand how people can be sat there in there man utd shirts on a matchday with there matchday programme and coffee and a bag from the megastore wearing a green and gold scarf it just contradicts everything about the protest plus i have noticed a lot of fans on TR who all had newton heath colours as there profiles pictures have now got different pictures now.

IS THIS PROTEST RUNNING OUT OF STEAM?

David said...

Planet earth calling:
The way I understand the Glazers takeover, is that they borrowed money to buy the club and then set up a company called Red Football, Red Football then took on the debt and the Glazers got their original money (which they had bought the club with)back. Red Football was then left to pay back (most of)the debt back (lets leave the recent refinancing bit alone for now).

If you agree that the above is a fair statement, then how can you claim the the Glazers have invested any money in United? they have already got their money back, and some. They then continue to take other (vast) sums of money out of Red Football as "dividends"

By my understanding, Red Football is "self financing" by way of income, sponsorship etc, again, if that is so, then where is the Glazers investment? they are bloody clever, I'll give em that.

Red Devil,
If you agree with the above, then surely you must see that "Red Foolball" are the ones buying the players, not the Glazers, so, again, where is the Glazers investment? Also, how can United stand on their own 2 feet when they are in so much debt, and, as you say, the Football Financial Fair Play regulations are designed to stop exactly what has happened at United, except, United will be unable to comply because of the debt!!!

Patrick, your comment about us "not doing a Leed" Leeds are where they are because they owed £200 million, Red Football owe nearly 5 times that much. Tell me, what is to stop the Glazers just walking away when it gets a bit hot, Andy has already shown that they do it in America when their malls start to become unstable and arent worth the mortgage.

On a last note, I try to respect everyone's views, I may not agree with them but I respect them, all I ask is that you share the same sentiment to others, that my friends is something that cannot be said about the Glazers, they only repect the $ and the £

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately though if you are NOT a RK supporter you are deemed by the hardcore MUST/G&G fanatics as a Glazer supporter.

According to some of the MUST/G&G/RK's supporters..........


If you renew your season ticket you are PRO Glazer

If you buy a shirt you are PRO Glazer

If you buy a programme you are PRO Glazer

If you buy a meat 'n tattie pie you are PRO Glazer.... (Mind you if you did buy a pie you don't deserve to be PRO anything) Except a PRO-lapsed bowel


If you don't twirl your G&G scarf you are PRO Glazer

If you don't sing "We want Glazers out" you are PRO Glazer

No I am not PRO Glazer I am PRO my club that I have supported since the '70s................. Long before most of the MUST/G&G were even born....

Anonymous said...

@ Annonymous 13:26

You know what would have happened if we were still a PLC? These big money men would have shorted our company into oblivion, and then would have bought it on the cheap. The same way they have taken over so many large companies today.

@ all the others
You paid for their bonuses with your forced bailouts. Now they want you to pay for the club and bail them out again. Looks like you are just getting double shafted here. Just maybe this is your kink.

I Blame everybody but me said...

MUST never told anyone to boycott season tickets. They simple asked for suggestions off people and this was a suggestion off someone.

The problem I have is the g&g cmpaign got too big.

Too many people were buying scarves and then spending hundreds of pounds in the megastore (defeating the point of the campaign). However what it did was create a hell of a lot of publicity. For a while every newspaper in the country had a story on it. It also created a better atmosphere at OT. To say that effected the team badly is also rubbish. We dropped fewer points than before the g&g started. conicdence maybe but certainly showing that in terms of the teams they were not effected badly

Too also say that g&g has split the fanbase is not true.

Our fanbase has been split since 2005.

There is the:

Not giving the Glazers a penny The only money I will give to the club is tickets. The "lets wait and see". I could not give a sh** who owns the club as long as we play well. A lot of the "lets wait and see" began to switch to the first two groups after the first two major increasees and the introduction of the cup scheme. A lot of people from Manchester gave up simply because of the prices. People were having to choose between going on a family holiday or getting a season ticket for themselves. The higher ammounts of unemployment in Manchester has also cause people to give up . Again this has nothing to do with not liking the Glazers this is more to do with people having to pay the bills and not having money left for season tickets.

Owners of football clubs are very different to an owner of of an other kind of business. If you like a particular kind of bread and they begin to charge more for it, you will simply buy another kind of bread. If your favourite band produces an album you don't like you'll buy the album of another band. When owning football club, the owners fans will pay pretty much anything and sell half the team and keep the money for themselves but people will still go as they love the club despite the fact the prices are too high.

Anonymous said...

When the wall eventually falls the Red Knights MUST G&G sorry.... neighbour will say "I told you so"

If, as it would appear that the RK's non bid is dead in the water surely now those protesters that profess to LOVE the club should now get back to supporting it by buying their season tickets and other forms of spending. If we all took the same attitude and boycotted the club so that the RK's can pick it up 'on the cheap'it would ,in my opinion be a sad day for United.

What if the RK's fail due to lack of funds... do we then boycott them until yet another buyer could pick it up cheap...?

Get behind the club NOW

Anonymous said...

Where are the SPIN doctors?????

A leading Red Knight (who is not crying poverty and for who alternate opportunities would pour from the sky) was required to choose between his involvement with the MU takeover fiasco and his position with the Investment Bank. He who is described as an avid MU fan. He who says the Glazer's have taken on too much debt. He who everyone was sure would sacrifice himself for the sake of their beloved MU. He who was the shining knight in their pack. He who was acting in a personal capacity.
He choose the Investment Bank over MU.


You paid for their bonuses with your forced bailouts. Now they want you to pay for the club and bail them out again. Looks like you are just getting double shafted here. Just maybe this is your kink.

Irish Red said...

So I for one will stand up and be counted and say that the first game of the season we should proudly show our true colours .

When the boys walk out of the tunnel on the first day of the season let them see red and white around the stadium;

Let them hear 70,000 as one voice calling out Ferguson's red and white army.

The only green I want to see is the turf

The only gold I want to see are medals around our players necks.

As fans we have a job to do for 90 mins....

The money men have their job to do...

Let us do our job and let them do their job......

As fans we have done all we can.... Now it is up to others ................

United we stand ..... divided we argue........

Patrick said...

Unfortunately though if you are NOT a RK supporter you are deemed by the hardcore MUST/G&G fanatics as a Glazer supporter.

According to some of the MUST/G&G/RK's supporters..........


If you renew your season ticket you are PRO Glazer

If you buy a shirt you are PRO Glazer

If you buy a programme you are PRO Glazer

If you buy a meat 'n tattie pie you are PRO Glazer.... (Mind you if you did buy a pie you don't deserve to be PRO anything) Except a PRO-lapsed bowel


If you don't twirl your G&G scarf you are PRO Glazer

If you don't sing "We want Glazers out" you are PRO Glazer


So I for one will stand up and be counted and say that the first game of the season we should proudly show our true colours .

When the boys walk out of the tunnel on the first day of the season let them see red and white around the stadium;

Let them hear 70,000 as one voice calling out Ferguson's red and white army.

The only green I want to see is the turf

The only gold I want to see are medals around our players necks.

As fans we have a job to do for 90 mins....

The money men have their job to do...

Let us do our job and let them do their job......

As fans we have done all we can.... Now it is up to others ................


No I am not PRO Glazer I am PRO my club that I have supported since the '70s................. Long before most of the MUST/G&G were even born....


Need i say anymore
Respect

Anonymous said...

To have good intentions is one thing and implementing is another.

The RK said all the nice things about their bid i.e reduce debt, return club to fans, we are life long fans etc etc , that is all fine but then every other bidder in the world would say the same, patronising fans. But deep down their hearts they know they are in it for the money. Businessmen are all the same.


As someone said above their bid was more speculation than real. I would have loved it if they has raised 800m and bid that money to show that they were serious after all. Now they are saying the Glazer valuation was too high and above market value but they never presented any bid and only a few days ago they were saying they are finalising their bid. These people were taking some fans for a ride.

We just hope someone with money who loves the club will come along with a serious bid that the Glazers will not refuse. For now lets support our team as we fight to win back the EPL.

MUST lost said...

Bear in mind that there are only around 1,000 people in the world with this sort of money and even then only 5/10 % of them may be interested in owning a football club.

So cast your votes fellow reds....

1.. Stay with the G's

2.. Switch the debt and still be in debt to the unknown RK's..

3..Go with the mega rich and hope he doesn't interfer too much

MUST lost said...

If you had the choice who would you pick?

1.. Stick with the Glazers. Hope that the debt can be repaid through cash flow and with no further borrowings.If the commercial team keep bringing in new sponsors the long term future should be secured. The best thing about the Glazers is that they DO NOT interfere with football matters unlike some owners of other clubs.

2. Go with the RK's... Let us be honest we know very little about them or their proposals or just how much 'cash they can bring to the table'

Until they release their business plan and future cash flow predictions and how they intend to structure the club with 40/50 owners it would be difficult and foolish to say that the RK's would be better than the Glazers. The most worrying aspect of the RK's was when their spokesman Keith Harris urged fans to boycott games .....

3. Hope for a mega rich owner who can buy 100% of the club with out any need for borrowing and the purchase price is either written off or shifted out of the accounts into another company for future repayment as per Chelsea.... Read the following....

It is true that the loans from the holding company to Chelsea FC plc were fully converted to shares last year. However Abramovich's loan to Chelsea Limited, the holding company which owns Chelsea FC plc, was not. That loan remains owing; in fact it increased from £701m, because Abramovich loaned another £25m in a year when Chelsea's extravagant spending, and the dismissal of Luiz Felipe Scolari and his coaching team, produced losses of £47m.

The accounts of Chelsea Limited (whose name was changed during the year to Fordstam Limited), show that loan still outstanding: £726m, owed to Abramovich.

A spokesman for the club confirmed that yesterday: "Recapitalisation of loans happened at the level of Chelsea FC plc, not the holding company (Fordstam), therefore making the football club debt free."

That is true. But Fordstam owns the football club company, and owes Abramovich £726m. The loan is interest free, but it is repayable if Abramovich gives 18 months' notice. The Russian could still demand the money back some day, either if the club is making a profit, or if he were to sell it. He has not, in fact, written off the huge loans he has made on his Chelsea adventure.



If we went this route we would be left with a new owner who would in all probability interfere with the day to day running of the club.

Bear in mind that there are only around 1,000 people in the world with this sort of money and even then only 5/10 % of them may be interested in owning a football club.

So cast your votes fellow reds....

1.. Stay with the G's

2.. Switch the debt and still be in debt to the unknown RK's..

3..Go with the mega rich and hope he doesn't interfer too much.

MUST lost said...

If you had the choice who would you pick?

1.. Stick with the Glazers. Hope that the debt can be repaid through cash flow and with no further borrowings.If the commercial team keep bringing in new sponsors the long term future should be secured. The best thing about the Glazers is that they DO NOT interfere with football matters unlike some owners of other clubs.

2. Go with the RK's... Let us be honest we know very little about them or their proposals or just how much 'cash they can bring to the table'

Until they release their business plan and future cash flow predictions and how they intend to structure the club with 40/50 owners it would be difficult and foolish to say that the RK's would be better than the Glazers. The most worrying aspect of the RK's was when their spokesman Keith Harris urged fans to boycott games .....

3. Hope for a mega rich owner who can buy 100% of the club with out any need for borrowing and the purchase price is either written off or shifted out of the accounts into another company for future repayment as per Chelsea.... Read the following....

It is true that the loans from the holding company to Chelsea FC plc were fully converted to shares last year. However Abramovich's loan to Chelsea Limited, the holding company which owns Chelsea FC plc, was not. That loan remains owing; in fact it increased from £701m, because Abramovich loaned another £25m in a year when Chelsea's extravagant spending, and the dismissal of Luiz Felipe Scolari and his coaching team, produced losses of £47m.

The accounts of Chelsea Limited (whose name was changed during the year to Fordstam Limited), show that loan still outstanding: £726m, owed to Abramovich.

A spokesman for the club confirmed that yesterday: "Recapitalisation of loans happened at the level of Chelsea FC plc, not the holding company (Fordstam), therefore making the football club debt free."

That is true. But Fordstam owns the football club company, and owes Abramovich £726m. The loan is interest free, but it is repayable if Abramovich gives 18 months' notice. The Russian could still demand the money back some day, either if the club is making a profit, or if he were to sell it. He has not, in fact, written off the huge loans he has made on his Chelsea adventure.



If we went this route we would be left with a new owner who would in all probability interfere with the day to day running of the club.

Bear in mind that there are only around 1,000 people in the world with this sort of money and even then only 5/10 % of them may be interested in owning a football club.

So cast your votes fellow reds....

1.. Stay with the G's

2.. Switch the debt and still be in debt to the unknown RK's..

3..Go with the mega rich and hope he doesn't interfer too much.

Darren said...

Wow, all these anonymouses, who am I talking to, GCHQs alter-egos, Bettyboy, the 606 creche?

The anti-RK brigade are a peculiar bunch. They claim that the RKs have been too secretive yet claim to know who the RKs are and what their intentions are. They claim that the RKs need to lay all the plans on the table in the minutist of detail, yet also say that they should just shut up and just put a bid in. They claim that the RKs are publicity seekers, yet they can't name who the RKs are.

The most laughable thing is about not wanting the club to be part-owned by 'financiers' or 'bankers'. At the moment the club is owned by the worst type of speculators who are funded by hedge funds and banks. We've paid hundreds of millions of pounds over the last 5 years in bank fees and interest payments. We had one of the worst casulaties of the banking collapse as shirt sponsors, and now have another financial institution on the shirts. We are currently, essentially, just a vehicle for enriching banks and the predatorial Glazers. Yet you're opposed to the RKs because some of them might have worked, or continue to work, in the financial sector. You really couldn't make it up.

They also claim that somehow the protests are MUST-led, when they are not, they have been led by the rank and file supporters. MUST and IMUSA and FFU and all the other groups have backed the protests. They claim that MUST have called for boycotts, when they haven't.

It's getting very tiresome. It's very simple as far as I'm concerned with any RK bid, if it happens, you either buy into the concept of supporter ownership and RKs giving that process a leg-up, or you don't. You either believe the likes of Andy when he tells us that the RK bid is the real deal, or you don't. There's no point in arguing about it.

What I think the problem a lot of you have is that you are desperate for a sugar daddy to come along and bail us out of this mess. Why can't you just come out and say that? Instead of rubbishing MUST, IMUSA, the RKs, and the supporters, why don't you just admit that you want us to go down the City/Chelsea 'project' route.

Lay your cards on the table, don't hide behind childish insults, innuendo and speculation.

Red One said...

First things first.... The problem with the hard core MUST/G&G/ANTIGLAZER/RK's supporters is that the fans who don't buy into THEIR propagandga are then labelled as PRO GLAZERS.. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Just because some of the more intelligent fans have grasped the fact that the RK's are NOT the way forward ( For a number of reasons ) it does not mean we support the Glazers.

Sponsership of OT ... If a company wanted to pay £100m for a ten year deal... I for one wouldn't turn it down...Do you think any less for Arsenal because the ground is call The Emirates....or any of the other sponsered grounds?... In this day and age money is money

If the RK's buy the club for say £1.2 billion will you please explain to me how we will then not be £1.2 billion in debt... But to the RK's not the Glazers...

Are you seriously telling me that the 20 or 30 RK's are going to write of their investment because they 'love' the club


IF we Stop supporting our club then we will have EVEN LESS MONEY....

Anonymous said...

We don't want a sugar daddy spin spin Darren.

Are you willing to bail out the RK's bid simple yes or no will do?

Owned by the worst type of speculators, really? I guess then you have been living in a cave. You really don't know what the worst kind of speculation is and who engages in it.

Anyhows keep regurgitating what you read in the media. Bankers do grease palms very well.

Patrick said...

Maybe Andy Could make an apperance and address the questions certain posters seem to have in regards to the Red Knights.Serious Questions raised which require serious Answers.
Maybe explain the whole what happens to Our debts thing if the Glazers sell to the RKS or whoever.Do the debst disappear overnight or is it over years or months.We need to understand more of about these Red Knights before welcoming them with open armd
Find that chelsea thing interesting so are they owe 726 to there owner.Shocking yet there are no protests in london

Anonymous said...

most of the G&G followers seem blind to the fact that the club has an estimated worth of 1.7billion, this means you will need 1.7 billion to buy it, then it would be up to the Glazier family to settle the debt, some think that the debt can be held over the current owners head to drive down the buyout price but it simply doesn't work that way, whether the Glaziers get the whole 1.7 and then pay their loans or take 1.2 with the new owner assumming the the debt or paying it off the club will still have a 1.7 billion price tag. Now there is only a select few in our world who can dish out 1.7 billion without taking some sort of loan or loans. The RK's can't even come up with 2/3rd's of the estimated worth of the club but yet somehow they'll be better owners with an unlimited transfer money-tree fund? So they've resorted to causing as much unrest within the club and it's fan base to try and force the Glaziers out and force the buyout price down at the sametime. This isn't the way that someone who has the clubs interests at the forefront of their mind would act, it is more like a typical corporate slug who wants their piece of the pie and will do whatever it takes to get it acts. This has been said also, why is it that most of you believe everything negative that the media, Must muppet brigade, and the Rk's say but disbelieve everything that SAF, Gill, and the current owners say? and please donot rehash the Ronaldo sale, Ronnie wanted to leave and we did what was best for the club by selling him while we could and not letting him leave on a free transfer(Look at what happened Gosling t Everton)

Anonymous said...

Regarding Keith Harris

Believed to be the founder of the Red Knights, Dr Harris is a lifelong Manchester United fan and one of the most powerful brokers in British football as well as one of the biggest beasts in the City .

As executive chairman of the stockbroker Seymour Pierce, he ushered in Roman Abramovich to Stamford Bridge, advised on Thaksin Shinawatra's purchase of Manchester City and the takeover of West Ham by Eggert Magnusson.

Currently a director of Wembley Stadium, he also used to be handy on the pitch himself, and played semi-professional football with Bradford Park Avenue as an economics student at Bradford University.

Dr Harris also chaired the Football League for two years from 2000. Wrangling with ITV over its attempts to back out of a £315 million broadcasting deal with the league led to a failure to recover £130 million via the courts, which prompted his resignation. Football clubs were pushed to the brink of bankruptcy after losing out on the lucrative deal and Dr Harris was slated in the press as being "incapable of running a kebab shop".


An article published in Times Online, and that can be found here
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/article7046386.ece
(Bold emphasis are mine)

Anonymous said...

But the RK's have the money, so why do the fans need to chip in???

Keith Harris once again

...
"They have to be prepared to take the pain of not watching their club in order to achieve a long-term gain. Supporters have to be galvanised to say, 'We will not come. We will not buy programmes and merchandise'.

"It's a big ask, it's a risk, but that is what must happen. The Glazers are thick-skinned and seem impervious to protest. They will not be impervious to enormous drops in their revenue.

"I would not talk about this if I didn't have full confidence in our ability to raise the money to do this. I never talk publicly unless I have confidence. Getting the money together is the easy bit.


"But we can't make an offer until the Glazers are placed in a position where they are forced to consider it."

Article can be found here http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_5973492,00.html
(Bold emphasis mine)

Darren said...

Patrick, it's all been discussed many times.

My understanding of the RK bid is that it would be something like this:

If they bought the club for a value of say £1.2b, then they would do that with £700m of their own cash and the £500m bond debt would initially remain. The PIK debt would be wiped out. The lower the price that the RKs could buy the club for the less debt will remain at takeover, and the shorter the time it will take to get United debt-free again.

Then, over the years, the bond debt could be worked on through supporter share options and/or through prudent refinancing. The shares that the RKs own would, over time, be diluted through supporter share options or maybe even through general share options.

What returns will the RKs expect? From what Andy has said about the details that he has seen they will not be wanting an annual return, a dividend, on their shares. It really is philanthropic. As Andy says, think of it as 40 or 50 mini-Abramovichs. All they'll be wanting is their money back when their shares are bought by supporters.

"It is time Manchester United's global community came together to create a structure of common debt-free ownership." Paul Marshall

As I've said, you either buy into this idea of supporter ownership, or you don't. If you beleive that it's not possible and that football clubs must be owned by people like the Glazers who give nothing but take everything then that's up to you.

Darren said...

Anonymous (#16 I think), I think we're all aware of Keith Harris, what's your point? He's brokered lots of deals for football clubs, most of those ownerships have been a success, some haven't? AIs that your point? As far as I'm aware he's not been involved in the running of any of those football clubs. As far as I'm aware he hasn't brokered any deals that have loaded debts onto a football club. At the end of the day he's just a broker, quite a succesful one. He's not leading the RK bid is he? Will he even be personally investing in the RK bid? Will he be involved at all?

You can look into any businessmans record and find succeses and failures. Do you want me to get started on the Glazers track record?

Anonymous said...

@Darren,
My point is you are not aware of who Keith Harris is (based on your three questions). I doubt you know much at all about the RK's too in this case.

Will you bail out the RK's? They need your lbs!!!

Anonymous said...

@ Darren

"He's brokered lots of deals for football clubs, most of those ownerships have been a success, some haven't" >>> Well if you consider 1 of 3 successful then so be it. Why have Man City and West Ham changed owners again after his highly successful brokerage there? And then you go ahead and state some haven't. So would you be content if MU fell in this category of his unsuccessful deals?

Dr Harris also chaired the Football League for two years from 2000. Wrangling with ITV over its attempts to back out of a £315 million broadcasting deal with the league led to a failure to recover £130 million via the courts, which prompted his resignation. Football clubs were pushed to the brink of bankruptcy after losing out on the lucrative deal and Dr Harris was slated in the press as being "incapable of running a kebab shop". >>> Keith Harris almost single handedly brought football clubs to the point of bankruptcy. If you call this successful management skills so be it.

He's not leading the RK bid is he? get your facts straight
Will he even be personally investing in the RK bid? If he isn't then whats he in it for, charity or to feed on the scraps of others investments?
Will he be involved at all? Get your facts straight

Anonymous said...

Again serious questions raised about senior players in the Red Knights group.@yes Harris got the Chelsea takeover spot on but as pointed out above they owe there owner 700 million.West Ham nearly went bust because of harris dealings with Bankers from Iceland and city were taken over by The Guy on the run from Thailand.Hardly any great success there.Yes the Glazers are bad for the club but having anything to do with anything fronted by bankers and keith harris would be disasturous.Look what the Bankers have cost us with North Rock and others around the world with Billions lost in ireland through bankers who already got there bailout and then had the cheek to ask the ordinary fan for help.
The RKs if they were ever serious aboout doing a takeover they would of done it in the boardroom and not through the Media
Face the facts the Glazers made it clear the club aint for sale,the rks dont have the cash to mount a takeover or never did and the whole G+G thing is played out
Lets get back supporting our boys again

The Red Devil said...

Blimey! Even I am confused with this thread now! :)

Someone up there said "lay your cards on the table" though.

Here are my cards.

The Glazers own the club. They bought it fairly and squarely. Whether I like it or not is immaterial.

My only concern is that they do the best for Manchester United that their ownership is able to provide from 2005 onwards.

There appear to be some people who want to have a financial interest in Manchester United but cannot do it without encouraging the supporters to undermine the Glazers' fair ownership.

I feel that that is unethical.

Without "rallying the troops", these people cannot afford to buy Manchester United.

Had the Glazers bought Manchester United and immediately sold Carrington and Old Trafford, I would be against their ownership.

Had they sold all the best players, I would be against their ownership.

Had they not done anything to increase revenue beyond ST increases and the passive increases of TV revenue, I would be against their ownership.

Had they not provided the funds to bring in new players, I would be against their ownership.

Had Manchester United's standing in the PL and the CL plummeted during their ownership, I would now be against their ownership.

I just feel that some people are too bogged down with the debt without taking into account that there is another side to the balance sheet.

I do not pretend that the Glazers are the best thing ever to happen to United but, so far, they have not proved to be the worst thing that ever happened either.

I think it is possible to just get behind the team and be happy that there are enough people within the United hierarchy with the club's best interests at heart.

Unfortunately, some so-called United fans are even trying to undermine those people, too.

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil
You say they have not proved to be the worst thing that ever happened either.

What in your opinion is the worst?

UTID said...

@ Red Devil
"I just feel that some people are too bogged down with the debt without taking into account that there is another side to the balance sheet.”

There is. It's called the asset side.

What big shiny asset have the Glazers brought? Oh yeah that beauty called Goodwill. Nice. Just what we always wanted.

Apart from that, there's not much to speak of.

Anonymous said...

Rooney,Ronaldo, Ferdinand, Giggs, Scholes, Neville, O’Shea, Fletcher.

These players had NOTHING to do with the success over the last 5 years - it is ALL down to the Glazers.

Anonymous said...

@ UTID Besides the manner in which enormous debt("fairly and squarely"...) has been put onto the club and the fact that the clubs own cash is been used to reduce that same debt , we are starting to see some of the policies used at the Tampa Bay Bucaneers -developing youth as opposed to signing stars and the use of el cheapo signings. Read Tampa Bay Online (T.B.O ) sports section on the Bucs which can be revealing at times such as the video blog "Are the Glazers cheap ", various articles include one about signing a free agent to give experience and how cutting training camp sessions open to the public could alienate the fan base the club is trying to rebuild ,annoyance at the appointment of a rookie coach for the team etc. Comments going well back by disgruntled fans accuse/suspect the lack of spending on the Bucs is because money is being spent on United. Also,read elsewhere about the circumstances in which the Glazers '"encouraged "'the constuction of the Raymond James Stadium for the Bucs by local authorities without using any of their own money/resources.(Wikipedia gives a good summary )...The fact is that under the "fair" Glazer ownership of United is that enormous debt was put onto the club and it was the increase of that debt which prompted the bond issue.The bond document revealed the truth about the waste of the clubs own resources. It is claimed that the Glazers own Manchester United.The reality is that the club is owned by the banks/hedge funds and the equity used was debt from elsewhere. On another subject,there is now starting to be disquiet by some United supporters about the lack of transfer activity and an awareness of the debt situation.Perhaps the spending spree by City did a lot of good in this regard . The president of Inter Milan noted that the reported bid for Sneijder by United seemed to be more of an advertisement rather than a geniune bid. And finally,regarding claims that the success of the last 5 years can somehow be attributed to the Glazer ownership ,the product on the field was made and moulded by Sir Alex Ferguson and his coaching staff ,not the Glazers who have shown no inclination to use their supposed billions but instead use our clubs own resources...

fattmatt said...

No information about negotiations by the RK and the Glazers will be known until they have agreed in principle the purchase price and need to confirm the small print in the contract.
The idea that the RK have valued the club at £1.2 billion has left them looking a bit silly if the Glazers have already turned away offers of £1.5b.
The more likely scenario will be the RK discreetly asking the Glazers what ball park figure would they be thinking about before they are willing to talk.
The latest benefit for the RK is the Ofcom decision of regulating wholesale prices. This could devalue the worth of TV coverage, and the lower revenues MUFC will receive will impact on there value. RK might have to wait another 18 months.
This still does not answer the question, that if the Glazers are going to flog the club to the RK, where are the RK going to raise these low interest loans? Owning a football club is a risky business to a financier, as there are many variables that could impact on the profitability of the club (higher wages, not finishing in the top 6, less revenue from TV etc). Did the Glazers go down the PIK route because they could only raise the money needed this way due to the high risk?

Anonymous said...

At least we Know more about the Glazers than the red knights who we Know nothing about them only that they never had money to bid for the club even for a reasonable price and we never got a statement or plan from them.At least the Glazers accounts are now public knowledge and can be looked at every few months.Lets end all the aul chat of boycotts and what not lets get behind the Boys from the start and ignore a campagn that when they are asked serious questions about there motives they just say'Look at the money they have taken out'but dont ask who or what we are.LU

Anonymous said...

I think the claims about a 1.5 b bid by a Middle East or Chinese group being rejected was made up just like the claim about 95 million being available for new signings.

Loyal to the red said...

We dont want to Know whether they or the Glazers opened talks we want to Know who they are 1-25.a list of everyone of them.How they were going to Pay to Buy the Club?how would the structure be organised?What would they seek in return for there investment?What would the debt repayment plan be?Will they be as secreative as they have been shown to be.And most importantly when would toatal fan ownership happen.In terms of Months Or years.


shown to be and most importan

MUST lost said...

And maybe the Red Knights are made up to????Judging by there silence/ disapperance i think so

better the red devil you know said...

the best thing the glazers have done is not interfere with the running of the club.

i also like how we have the glazers to thank for the success of the last 5 years.

we don't need to worry about debt because 2017 is far away and inflation will pay off debt.

buying players does not guarantee success so i am happy we are paying 45m p.a. in interest to save tax.

we should be happy we have the glazers and it is unethical to protest against them

Anonymous said...

the old plc didnt interfere with the running of the club either. also the interest may rise to 70m p.a.because of some penalty .utd winning in last 5 years is cause of older players in team before glazer time .the glazers put big debt on the club and they use clubs money to pay it off.

The Red Devil said...

"We welcome the fact that some money has been made available and no doubt all Manchester United supporters would like to see a lot more to follow. Many feel the squad is in urgent need of strengthening and a cash injection of £100m might be required if we are serious about challenging for the top honours as we have done so successfully during Sir Alex's reign until recently."

Duncan Drasdo, January 2006.

Notice anything familiar about all this?

simpson said...

hey The Red Devil

u post Duncan Drasdo's 2006 quotes.
does he gave this kind of any interview after glazers revelation about taking money away from club.

cheers mate.

hope u work ups and down 2 get your facts right.

LUHG

The Red Devil said...

@simpson - I think you're missing the point. The point is that here we are, four and a half years on and it is just like a quote from yesterday.

Same old, same old.

Anonymous said...

@ SIMPSON - four and a half years on , over 400 million has gone out of the club and City are laughing at us .why dont the glazers use their own money , or sell their nfl team. its because they like american football and use utd as a business-bank.

Anonymous said...

Typical English attitude of complaining non-stop. Guess the sun still hasn't been shining brightly enough in the land of Her Majesty.

Now instead of complaining, here is a little trick you can all perform. Call the Red Knights and ask them to table the bid. That is what they came together for isn't it, to help save you all from the Glazer's? And your guiding Angels will need your pounds so please don't forget that tiny donation of a couple of thousand pounds. They can also use all their greased up journalist friends to stage a hostile takeover.

Until such time as a bid is ready to be lodged, your guiding saviors should stop taking all you sheeple for a blind ride. Or perhaps they should continue as many of you lack any analytical knowledge. Maybe good old Anders can set up a little paypal donation on this site and then pass your donations on. Either way get your bid in or shut the phuck up!

Anonymous said...

Ohh the debt .... baa-baa bleat baa-baa bleat!!!
Ohh the Glazer's .... baa-baa bleat baa-baa bleat!!!
Ohh this is wrong with Man Utd .... baa-baa bleat baa-baa bleat!!!
Ohh the past 4 years .... baa-baa bleat baa-baa bleat!!!
Ohh no transfers .... baa-baa bleat baa-baa bleat!!!

Stop baa-baaing and bleating and get your saviors to table their bid.

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil,

Why do you waste your time with the sheeple??? Let's just support them so this bid can be lodged. Would you know of any good methods to enable the Red Knights collect the sheeple's donations?

Anonymous said...

Hey Anders,

I was just talking to my mates down in Tampa, and was thrown off when they mentioned Panorama talked to their fan club.

So did Panorama manage to leave out the certain viewpoints, esp the ones not condemning the Glazer's???

Ohh my head is beginning to spin with all this spin spin BS.

Anonymous said...

all this baaing and bleating...!!!only 100s of millions of pounds to pay off debt...nothing to complain about of course ,only the 70 mln pound interest in august.... funny thing is all this debt is being paid off with our clubs money...just waiting for the banks to give a price..after all,they really own the club, not the glazers who never used their own money. hey,its in the news now, manchester united bucaneers for sale...yeah,right mate!

Anonymous said...

Interesting article...

Friday, 15 December 2006 00:00

Sir Alex Ferguson says being given the time to build a serious youth system at the club was the key to it's long-term success.

Ferguson recalls in the Manchester United Opus: "The trouble is that a lot of managers aren't given time to build a youth policy.

"It's only the clubs who have a board who trust the manager enough like Arsenal with Arsene Wenger who show that patience. So you need people to understand what you're trying to do.

"I remember saying to the United board on my first day: `Do you know what you're getting? You're looking at my record at Aberdeen, but what I did there, and at St Mirren, was build a football club.

"The underlying message was that it would take time. Bobby Charlton understood and said straightaway: "That's why we want you here."

"Whether he was speaking for the others, I don't know. In fairness to the chairman, Martin Edwards, he supported me as well.

"I got everything I asked for on the youth side, more and more scouts, all needing to be paid expenses. I must say he was a good chairman."

Producing youngsters who could seriously challenge the seniors finally gave Ferguson a motivating tool he'd used in Scotland, particularly, at Aberdeen when they broke the Old Firm domination of Celtic and Rangers north of the border.Image <

"I've always believed in it," Ferguson says. "The worst thing for a footballer is to lose his place to a younger player.

"To have young players challenging is the best form of competition within a football club. I remember when we had an FA Cup replay against Queens Park Rangers in London and I decided to play several of the young ones, it was interesting that Bryan Robson, Norman Whiteside and Gordon Strachan all wanted to come and watch the game with us. <

"I asked my assistant Archie Knox what he thought and he said: "They're obviously a bit worried. They're starting to wonder what's going on. So I decided to take them to Loftus Road. All the injured first-team players travelled and they saw a fantastic performance in a 2-2 draw."

"There is nothing more healthy in a football club than that competitive relationship between the younger and older players."

Taken from: Fergie - Strength is Youth Policy - Fight For United - LUHG - Love United Hate Glazer http://www.loveunitedhateglazer.com/fight-for-united/fergie-strength-is-youth-policy.html#ixzz0tLEcfbqr

simpson said...

breaking news

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/7883424/Manchester-United-bid-resurrected.html

LUHG

MUST lost said...

With due repect simpson did you read the report?No where in that report does it say that there is a renewed bid from the RKS coming any time soon.Yes great headline and attention graping but we will know come the end of Aug what if any decline there has been in tickect sales.Until then its all paper talks But sure the RKs would be great at that!!!

Loyal to the red said...

The Red Knights' consortium would seem to be failing in its bid to launch a takeover of Manchester United, according to a report from The Guardian

The report claims that key players in the group are losing belief that the Glazer family can really be ousted from Old Trafford, with any bid actually made now being little more than a face-saving exercise.

Internal divisions within the Red Knights have appeared over the future of the club after its purchase, with several figures said to be in disagreement about the kind of power which would be handed to supporters.

Any bid for the club made now would apparently be made in the knowledge that the Glazer family would turn it down. The bid would then lie dormant with the group claiming that the Glazers were overpricing the club.

The Red Knights, a group of United supporting businessmen, have tried to put pressure on the Glazers by encouraging season ticket holders not to renew whilst also talking about an offer of £850 million for the club.

However, the campaign seems to have had little real effect and some involved with the group now apparently feel that attacking the Glazers through the media may have been the wrong approach, according to the report.

The Glazer family maintain that United are not for sale. Privately, they have apparently described the Red Knights' campaign as "naive".

Anonymous said...

Manchester United fans will have to live with the Glazers and heavy debts for much longer with news that the Red Knights’ consortium to takeover the club is headed for failure. The Guardian reported that internal division have grown as key men in the group have been unable to agree on several important issues including the amount of control they were willing to cede to supporters.

Clearly, any move for the Old Trafford club would have priority in the personal and business interests of the consortium’s leaders and not that of United fans who have continuously voiced their concern over the way the Glazers have run the club into the ground with rising levels of debt.

Their hopes of the Red Knights changing that situation appears to be going up in smoke as well, with claims that any bid that may now emerge from the group to be nothing more than an exercise in public relations.

The report said that the Red Knights were no longer confident that the Glazers would agree to any sale and with the £1.5 billion valuation set by the Glazers beyond the reach of the consortium, the whole exercise appears to be nothing more than a pipe dream.

The group apparently will continue to use the media to cover up any failed bid by insisting that the Glazers were turning down a properly valued bid without the best interests of the club in mind, in order to turn the focus back on the public disapproval of United’s American owners.

Already, the Red Knights’ efforts to influence United fans by urging them not to renew season tickets to put pressure on the Glazers have seemingly failed. United chief executive David Gill said: “If there’s a threat, then we’ll see but our season ticket sales and renewals for this upcoming season are on track for previous years. Our executive ticket renewals are on track, so we’ll have to see at the start of the season, but we’re envisaging sell-out crowds going forward for Manchester United.”

It would appear that United fans will have to continue paying out of their noses to see a team built entirely on fresh young talent promoted from within the club every season for now, instead of international stars that they were used to in the past

The Red Devil said...

I must admit, I get confused sometimes.

I don't know exactly what fans want from Manchester United.

Just up there, we have an article quoted from 2006 when Fergie is saying how it is all about youth and bringing through young players.

This is how he did things at St Mirren, Aberdeen and Manchester United.

He has occasionally bolstered the squad with a big signing when there was no one coming through the ranks in that position of sufficient quality.

Then, a couple of posts on, we have:-

"It would appear that United fans will have to continue paying out of their noses to see a team built entirely on fresh young talent promoted from within the club every season for now, instead of international stars that they were used to in the past "

I really can't decide if that last comment is being made with tongue-in-cheek.

I'm confused.

MUST lost said...

There are serious questions both about the Red Knights and the Glazers.But at least we know who the Glazers are,we know nothing about the REd knights or what they are about.Looks like there bid has collapsed and looks like everything they do or did was played out through the Media which was totally wrong.It looks like they are becoming desperate

simpson said...

wow

this Glazers supporters become desperate.



LUHG

Love United Hate Glazers

Anonymous said...

Paul Kelso is the guy who wrote this ambiguous article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/7883424/Manchester-United-bid-resurrected.html

His hands are greased

Anonymous said...

@ Red Devil
"I'm confused"

You're just confirming what alot of people have been thinking about you for ages.

Anonymous said...

Again questions asked about who the red knights are and what there plans are and still no one has been able to give any answers or assurances that they will be any better than the Glazers.Better the devil you know than the one you dont until proven otherwise or they become known

Anonymous said...

@ SIMPSON....read the article "Fergie ends transfer talk with focus on youth " on United Rant .Remember when we lost by a point or two in years gone by , we would then sign an experienced player or two to give the team that bit of extra . No surprises for guessing why this time things are different .cue :youth policy at the Tampa Bay Bucaneers - developing youth as opposed to signing stars . little wonder Fergies body language has changed and hes not the comfortable confident person we used to see ...

Anonymous said...

@ SIMPSON...also remember the claim by David Gill about 95 million being made available for transfers ? Instead we got some unknown Mexican and another player Smalling who was on the bench for Fulham. Apparently , Fergie was furious that David Silva slipped away to City .

fattmatt said...

There must be a proportion of RK investors who have asked the question "what will be monetary the return for my investment". We have all watched the Dragons Den and have seen what rich people are thinking when they are considering a investment in a business project (regardless of how it might be pulling the old heart strings).
I believe this (apart from the Glazers valuation of the club of being >£1.5b) must be the sticking point the RK have as they perhaps by now have realised that not all of the RK have the same generosity as the instigators.
I also think that everyone needs to get over the fact that a leverage buyout that puts a business into the hands of a private companty rather than a PLC does mean that when you purchase anything from that company a proportion of the profits will be spent on the loan.
Does anyone fancy contacting Richard Branson because part of their rail/plane ticket is being used to cover his loans?

Anonymous said...

Are the Glazers going to sue the BBC for that Panorama programme ?

Anonymous said...

The Anonymous who wrote this
"@ SIMPSON....read the article "Fergie ends transfer talk with focus on youth " on United Rant"

and this
"@ SIMPSON...also remember the claim by David Gill"

is such a bright fellow you could sell him a penny for the price of a pound.

Anonymous said...

Where is your savior's bid all you haters? Please call your local MUST rep and tell them you will donate to the RK's bailout.

No bid means you've been had but your ego's will continue deceiving you into believing that your savior is still coming.

Anonymous said...

ha! ha! the rags are fighting themselves.! ! your skint and you can only use cheap mexican labour ! blue moon rising !!!

Newspeak said...

what happened to our £25million per year transfer kitty? Plus sales??

Why all this nonsense about not buying players over 27 when we make more revenue than any other football club on earth?

Why have loads of staff from United been made redundant when revenues have rose so dramatically in the last few years?

Why didnt I get a ticket for Wembley when I had to watch the dross that was the league cup, when the only reason I was watching that dross was so I could go to wembley?

Personally I cant wait for the Glazers to go tits up so we can get our club back. For some of us its not really about 'winning' its about Saturday afternoon with your mates at the match. Whether that be Premier league or Div 1.

The Glazers are nothing but financial speculators in a game redolent with spivs and charlatans. To the normal folk on here I would not get to wound up with the pro Glazer brigade nor the astonishingly naive lets wait and see brigade like Red Devil, they will all be at Wastelands in the next couple of years time, whereas we can buzz off last minute winners from Danny Wellbeck in Div 1

Anonymous said...

Newspeak...
Why have loads of staff from United been made redundant when revenues have rose so dramatically in the last few years?

Because:
1. Restructuring
2. Refocus on core areas and phasing out of non-performing areas (where most of the redundancy might have come from)
3. Increased efficiencies

Anything else that could be lead to conspiracy theories within you?

The role of an unoccupied mind is to always believe in or create conspiracy theories! Did you hear the one about Glazer's hiring aliens from Mexico?

Loyal to the red said...

Even andy himself has stopped posting anything of note.Maybe the truth has hit him and his band that they have lost the support of the vast majority of fans and that there case of red knight backed supporter ownership was only a wild dream and was/is never going to happen.And now the posters on here would have been supportive of a RKs takeover when questioned further just turn the whole thing around and thinks everyone must be pro glazer if they dont back the RKs.

Newspeak said...

Cheers anonymous,

I noticed you only picked out the one comment from my list??

Im not sure where you get the conspiracy theory comment from either, if you could so enlighten me!

From what you say about redundancies anyone would think we were a ruthless business, designed to soley make as much money as possible through incresed efficiencies and there was I thinking we we a football club!

andersred said...

I haven't posted anything because it's mid July and there is nothing going on. Simple as that.

As for all the speculation about the RKs, well it's just that, speculation and therefore not worth arguing about.

It's also amusing how so many people seem so convinced about the "right" valuation of the club. On what basis? DCF? EV/EBITDA? EV/Sales? What forecasts are they using? What discount rates? Let it go, it doesn't add anything!

I don't thinj the claim that the "majority of fans" have "lost faith" stacks up either. Anyone who went to OT in the second half of last season knows what the majority of fans think about the Glazers, it isn't positive and it isn't going to change.

Anyway, it's summer. United are hardly troubling the transfer market at the moment, everyone's going on holidays and we'll have to wait and see how all this plays out in the months to come.

I'll see anyone who's going at the Kassam stadium in two weeks. In the meantime, enjoy the summer....

anders

Anonymous said...

Anders perhaps you could publise a list of the Red Knights.Who they are?What they do?Do it in the same detail as you have with the Glazers so the fans can get a fair and balanced view and cut the crap about holidays and what not.Give us your view

MUST lost said...

I find it amusing how when you are pressed on the Red Knights that you post stupid comments like people being on holiday.You have an agenda to discredit anything that the Glazers do while you refuse to deal with facts surrounding the Red Knights who you support.Answer the questions above about your beloved barron knights who promised so much with the media and yet when the s(&!( hit the fan and the time came to get serious they just vanished.Shame on them for abousing the trust of fans.Shame

LUHG said...

Where has them clowns from the Pro Glazer camp gone.red devil you are are a clown along with all dem other 1s.LUHG

Patrick said...

I am not Pro Glazer or anything like that i just disagree with the methods of the Red Knights and must in the way they waged a very public media war against the Glazers and how they say everythink that the club says in terms of the finance side of it is all wrong.

Anonymous said...

Remember the financial crisis, and who instigated it with their wild wild west risk strategies??? Remember Northern Rock??? Remember where your tax bailout pounds went (not to fund public infrastructure improvement projects but to ensure the Investment Bankers retained their bonus schemes)! While you were getting laid off, your tax pounds were funding million pound bonuses of the Investment Bankers. They instigated the financial crisis, and then same bankers convinced you that without their hefty bonus schemes, they would lose the talented people who created the mess!

Part Deux:
Now they are instigating a Man Utd crisis. Now they need your bailout pounds to fund their takeover. It is always about gambling with other people's money with these folks. Why are they worried about employing their own multi-million pound bonuses for this takeover? They are investment bankers, they have the necessary contacts, so why not use these contacts to raise the required funds? Because nobody will lend them the money for free, only you gullible supporters will. You've bailed them out before, and now they need you to bailout them out again.

Please call your MUST and donate your bailout pounds. After all, this is the only way Man Utd can go.

THERE CAN BE ABSOLUTELY NO OTHER WAY CAN THERE TO ENSURE A DEBT FREE MAN UTD? IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE, TARGET THE GULLIBLE, CREATE REACTIONS AND TAKE THEIR POUNDS TO FUND THE PURCHASE OF MAN UTD. SURELY MUST HAS GOT TO BE AWARE OF OTHER POSSIBILITIES??? WHY THE ALIGNMENT WITH INVESTMENT BANKERS???

And Anders states
"I haven't posted anything because it's mid July and there is nothing going on. Simple as that."
Why is this so??? The bid was meant to happen during the last few weeks of the season, and then postponed to when the season ended, and then postponed to the first week of the world cup and now is postponed indefinitely! Why is it that when the RK's keep changing their minds, it is not called speculation!
Why do only the RK's or MUST know the correct valuation for the club??? The same bunch of folks who know so little about the internal running and strategies.

But we are all told that the RK's are fighting for the interests of Man Utd and their supporters, so why would they put personal interests (like going on holiday) ahead of the interest of gathering financing and putting a bid in???

Anonymous said...

Your another clown the red knight bid will come.LUHG

andersred said...

It's pretty well documented who the people leading the RK group are. MUST is bound by confidentiality so there's a limit to what they can say. If people prefer the fevered imaginings of anonymous internet posters to a democratically elected fans' group then that's their choice.

As for this RKs = investment banks crap, I'd suggest an LBO structure like the ones the Glazers have loaded onto United is far closer to the problems of the financial crisis than a plan to reduce the club's debts. After all, who did the Glazers use for most of their First Allied mortgages? Lehman Brothers....

As for holidays, I'm on mine so there you go.

anders

MUST lost said...

Anders what plans are you talking about to reduce the clubs debts.What are they and how.You where great at digging up half truths about the Glazers and yet you cant provide any information about the Red Knights because its suppose to be confidential.Where is the Glazer Familys privacy and confidentiality.Your being very selective in what you say.
Your friends in the rks are made up of bankers who have wrecked our country and has made sure generations will pay for there mistakes.They must never get there hands on our club.Never.Sell Mr Glazer but not to these criminals who have wrecked our country





Y

LUHG said...

Hope you enjoy your break and can we look forward to a post our two come Aug.Very big month ahead.

UTID said...

@Patrick
"I am not Pro Glazer"

Keep deluding yourself dude. You are merely Red Devil's beatch, agreeing with all the rubbish he writes.

"they say everythink that the club says in terms of the finance side of it is all wrong."

I am not aware of what the club has been saying - please enlighten us.

Does the debt no longer exist?
Can we stop making the annual interest payments of £45m?
Have the PIKs suddenly gone away from the books of Red Football Joint Venture?
Has the commercial revenue suddenly become greater than both the matchday and media revenue rather than lagging a distant third?
Do the £41m costs for getting rid of the interest rates swaps no longer have to be paid?
Have we finally spent some of the Ronaldo fee by buying the much needed replacements for Van der Sar, Giggs and Scholes?

If you can answer Yes to these questions, then brilliant. Otherwise, your points are mute.

andersred said...

Look "MUST lost", you don't know what you are talking about. Any purchase of the club would eliminate the PIKs. You couldn't do an LBO of United at a 7x EBITDA leverage ratio today.

Let me reiterate the point, the financial crisis was caused by excessive borrowing - like that used to buy United...

What "half truths about the Glazers" are you talking about? Like I always say, point our factual errors and I'll correct them. Keep making baseless accusations and I'll start deleting your stuff.

Take care,

anders

MUST lost said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

@ ANONYMOUS at 15:16 ..who put Manchester United in debt ? whatever may have been faults of PLC we didnt have this debt which was put on it by a family that used borrowed monet when they are supposedly billionaires. They should use their own money.

Patrick said...

I wouldnt go as far to call Andy a clown ,maybe slightly one sided in his reports but find his version of fact and figures interesting at times.I look forward to his post when the next results are publised
Listen to David Gills interview after the bond issue.Its on the bbc web
Have we not spent cash this summer already with hernadez ?

Anonymous said...

Isn't funny how both Patrick and MUST lost misuse the word "there" on a regular basis.

You'd almost think they were the same person.

Patrick said...

I would also ask people to respect people viewpoints regardless of what side of the debate we are on.

Anonymous said...

Patrick, you are very naive to bring up David Gill as a credible individual.

Here is an exact quote from manutd.com

"We have been looking at the proposals the Glazer family made, analysing them with our advisors, and the key aspect of that proposal was the level of debt they were going to use in order to make their offer. We felt as a Board that that level of debt, coupled with their business plan, meant it was an unattractive proposal. We’ve seen many examples of debt in football over the years and the difficulties it causes. We know what that means and we think that is inappropriate for this business. We need to have a sensible structure for the Board to take the club forward"

http://www.manutd.com/default.sps?pagegid=%7BB4CEE8FA-9A47-47BC-B069-3F7A2F35DB70%7D&newsid=119193&page=1

andersred said...

Like I said "MUST lost" substantiate your accusations or get deleted....

anders

Herbie Shuff said...

Great link that, Anonymous.

Particularly liked David Gill's final answer:

Q:It’s a pertinent point that the football pitch reflects what happens in all of this…

A:"Very much so. Our capital structure, for example, meant that we could move quickly on transfer deadline day to acquire Wayne Rooney. Throughout the 1990s we have used the operating cash flow of the business (i.e. profits each year) to reinvest back in the business, whether that be the physical assets - the training ground or the stadium; or the playing side of it – acquiring players and player contracts. That model is probably envied throughout the football world and is appropriate for us going forward."

Anonymous said...

@ Herbie
David Gill has ZERO credibility.

Pity his salary isn't as small.

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 19:29

Look at what I've written in CAPS. I have my viewpoint on the debt level and it is not positive either. BUT I DON'T WANT THE RED KNIGHTS IN ANY WAY TAKING OVER. NO INVESTMENT BANKERS IN CHARGE OF MAN UTD, NEVER PERIOD.

There are other opportunities, and I hope the fans realise this. We have to explore other possibilities, BUT NOT THE INVESTMENT BANKERS possibility.

THESE INVESTMENT BANKERS DEVISED ALL THOSE DUBIOUS LENDING PRACTICES. ALL THESE INNOVATIONS IN DEBT HAVE ORIGINATED WITH THE INVESTMENT BANKERS. THEY LENT THE MONEY TO THE GLAZERS. MY PROBLEM IS NOT THE GLAZERS AS INDIVIDUALS, IT IS THEIR MANNER OF RUNNING THE FINANCES. THIS IS NOT A PERSONALISED BATTLE, BUT A PROFESSIONAL BATTLE. THESE INVESTMENT BANKERS PROBABLY DEVISED THE WORST POSSIBLE LOAN HOPING THE GLAZER'S WOULD DEFAULT AND THEY CAN TAKE OVER UNDER THE EXISTING COVENANTS. I DON'T WANT ANYBODY FROM INVESTMENT BANKING BECOMING OWNERS OF MY CLUB. WE HAVE WEALTHY SUPPORTERS AND WE HAVE MILLIONS OF FINANCIALLY OK SUPPORTERS. WE HAVE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM USING OUR SUPPORTERS. BUT I CAN TELL YOU ONE THING, THE MORE DAMAGE WE DO NOW, THE WORSE OFF WE WILL BE THEN. SURELY A MORE INTELLIGENT STRATEGY CAN BE DEVISED!!!

Anonymous said...

@ ANONYMOUS 21:20 ...Using borrowed money is a standard practice of the Glazers.They even bought their Tampa Bay Bucs team by using some borrowed money.No bank of any kind told/forced the Glazers to buy Manchester .United . The Glazers record of ownership elsewhere speaks for itself. They knew what they were doing . To use borrowed money is a standard practice of the Glazers.

Anonymous said...

@ Anonymous 21:20
Can you shout a little louder please?

Don't YOU get it?

The Glazers were advised by Investment Bankers and used an Investment Bankers' device called a Leverage Buy Out.

They ALREADY run the show.

Hence the bond issue, another classic Investment Banker technique.

Ultimately if the Glazers default on the PIKs, hedge funds will own the club.

Is it possible these hedge funds could be owned by ... Investment Bankers??

Anonymous said...

I feel sorry for the Glazers . they always use investment bankers to make LBOs. Hold on , arent the Glazers property speculators ?

Anonymous said...

It is all not doom and gloom around our club.Lets leave all this finance and money chat to the guys in suits and get back supporting our boys

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Patrick said...

Okay
Even when you are talking in terms of £1 billion or £2 billion, Manchester United is massively under-valued, and the Glazers are no fools. They know that you do not sell an asset like Manchester United unless needs must.
United are the Disney of the sporting world because of the sheer power and value of their brand. They are Coca-Cola, Microsoft, IBM. When you have such a prized asset, you simply do not sell it
The takeover of Cadbury by Kraft earlier this year was done at a figure of around £11 billion and, although you would not compare Cadbury and United like for like, the reality is that United's brand name is equally powerful and the Glazers have no reason to sell.
The Red Knights appear to be astonishingly naive in this regard. The whole approach smells typically of stirred-up egos over good sense
There is no question that the Glazers have run up too much debt at United. The club is very highly geared and they must deal with that. One route could be to offload a percentage of their stake to a wealthy investor, but at the same time retaining their majority shareholding.

"But under their ownership, United have enjoyed tremendous success on the pitch. Off it, their commercial revenues have rocketed
Unfortunately, many football fans do not live in the real world. Football is a business and the romantic scenario of supporter-owned clubs is simply not workable.

"The fact that the United fans are prepared to even consider a group of City bankers running their club, no matter how unpopular the current owners might be, highlights how muddled fans can become
somebody attempting to buy any other business called for a boycott of the product, then their reputation would be shot to pieces.

"Those tactics might work at clubs in the lower divisions, but they will never succeed at clubs like United that have such a huge, global following. Such ideas only confirm my view that the Red Knights do not have a snowball in Hell's chance of success.

"If they need to recruit 40-60 backers to raise the funds required to mount a bid, it suggests they are relying on small-scale figures.

"The reality is that, if and when the Glazers do come to sell – and at a huge profit – they will find a buyer in the Middle East or Far East who can do it all on his own."

Patrick said...

The Red Knights? Manchester United would be better off being run by the Barron Knights. At least there were only five of them.

There were 40 Red Knights at the last count, or maybe it was 60. The list seems to be growing all the time, because fantasies do. They start small - a seat on the board to represent the supporters, perhaps, and end big - 'Hey, let's buy the whole damn club!'

The idea is to assemble a collection of investors willing to put in between £10million and £15m each to oust the Glazers from Manchester United. We are still at the stage in the relationship where the perfect happy ending is possible, but this is a marriage of inconvenience.

The more Knights, the more potential for conflict if the dream is realised: people with different goals, different expectations, different concepts of how the club should operate, different personal circumstances, different hopes of a return.
The counter-argument is that Manchester United had 35,000 owners when the club was a plc and still enjoyed many successful years. This is not entirely true. The success was there - but then United have been successful under the Glazers, too - although the harmony was a myth.

As a plc, United had about 34,995 investors who Leaguewere under the impression they were running a football club and five who really mattered, and by the end it was a bloodbath.

Cubic Expression, an investment company owned by John Magnier and JP McManus, controlled 28.9 per cent and ended up at war with the manager, Sir Alex Ferguson, and the board.

Remember those 99 questions? The club fell into the hands of the Glazer family as a result of the conflict. Now times that by 30 and enter the world of the Red Knights. The idea that 60 investors, who are out of pocket by more than �10m each, will sit idly by while Keith Harris and pals call the shots is preposterously optimistic.

Harris, an investment banker with Seymour Pierce, has been looking to get his hands on United for years. One problem: he hasn't got the money. None of the Red Knights has.
Jim O'Neill, chief economist at Goldman Sachs, was actually on the United board. He advised against the Glazer sale but was powerless to stop it. Sir Roy Gardner, a former chairman of United, is also believed to be involved. The same goes for him.

If these people need 60 allies even to get close and, if everybody is equally committed financially, who gets to play the big boss?

Patrick said...

Sorry to be a killjoy. The green and gold protest is admirable and if there is a rock solid Manchester United fanatic out there with £1.2billion to spare, he should get to work immediately. If there is a guy who can walk in, write a cheque, tell the Glazers to clear their desks and begin running a debt-free club that afternoon, oh happy day
The Red Knights - and how presumptuous is that name, considering the status of the manager - are nothing like that. There is no guarantee that within months, this unwieldy collective will not have descended into a squabbling circus, as egos and personal pressures come to the fore.
What about their Red Ladies, for instance? The 60 wives - or partners - of the Knights, who might have an opinion about £15m going up the wall on a football club when the west wing of the estate needs doing.

What happens if a Lady asks her Knight what sort of return he is going to get on such a substantial investment, only to be told he cannot say for certain and, anyway, he is not part of the decision making process. Might there not be a little tension in Camelot?

Patrick said...

This is a genuine sentence from a well-sourced report on the Red Knights proposal. One imagines this information comes straight from the top.

'If they (the Red Knights) succeed, they will also need to create a means of catering for the different requirements of investors, some of whom will want a return, while others are happy to hand over their money in exchange for seeing their name carved on a Knights honours board at Old Trafford
You've got to love the optimism in that 'some'. Some of the Knights will want a return. Only some, mind you. The others? They're just the sort of guys who sling £15m at a project and don't care if they see tuppence of it again.

Even if they knew somebody else was making a fantastic living off their investment, and being paid a huge salary, someone like - ooh, name at random, Keith Harris - they wouldn't ask for a penny back. They would just tip their hat, say 'Glad to be of assistance, sir' and trip happily on their way.
Get real. You put your name on a board if you want next go on the pool table, not if you are about to hand over £15m. These people are businessmen. They might talk an idealistic game now, but pretty soon that primal Wall Street instinct is going to kick in and they will be playing hard-ball on returns and dividends. That is if they can get the plan past the wife.
My husband, the director of Manchester United, has a certain ring to it. My husband, the name on a frigging board, not so much. By the time all 60 start claiming proprietary rights you won't be able to get a ticket on match days. They'll have to make the Stretford End the Directors' Guests Suite.

Already, there is trouble in paradise. Sources within the self-aggrandising Red Knights have contrived to alienate a very real Red Knight, Ferguson, by claiming he supports the bid and is willing to invest money in it. Ferguson's angry denial now puts them at odds with the most important man at the club.

Also, the very rich do not haggle if they want a deal done, yet the Red Knights are already adjusting valuations of United, claiming it is worth no more than £800m, a bit of a drop from the £1.2bn, even £1.5bn, that was being quoted at the start of last week. Nobody has had to commit one penny and already the hand seems overplayed.

Now the fantasy is in danger of becoming reality, Manchester United's value would appear to be dropping £100m a day. Give it a week and, at this rate, maybe the Barron Knights really will get to have a go.

Jesper Olsen on the wing.... said...

The sock puppetry on this tread is amazing. Good work Mr Gill and all concerned.

My two penneth:

I have come to realize that ultimately the only power any of us have in this life is how we spend our time and money.

I objected to being treated as a cash cow by the new owners in '05 and have refused to give them any of my coin since.

Winning although the ultimate objective for a football team is not the only thing this supporter valued. The history of the club, the support, the atmosphere, the sense of belonging, being a band apart all mattered as much to me as winning and these had diminished even before the new owners. Strikes me from the outside that these have diminished further and faster since the new owners arrived. OT sounds like a library on the TV now not the seething ball of noise I remember.

I wonder after Ryan et al finally move on if the owners will have invested enough of your money in the franchise for us to avoid mediocrity and missing out on that CL place. If that happens the wheels could really come of the bus.

If I were a RK I'd be waiting for some 'value in the market' after we fail to qualify for CL. Maybe the owners might be forced to sell with such a large drop in revenue but with payments still to be made.

Maybe the Man U franchise will have to be damaged further before it can be rebuilt (hopefully as a football club again). A season in the championship for me would be no bad thing, get the hard core together again and fight fight fight for Utd once more.

Anonymous said...

@ Jesper Olsen .Your right 100%. The lack of any proper spending to re-seed the team after 2009 is showing itself . We are also selling players (Foster and Tosic) and using talk about a players resale value (um , er ... remeber the 25 million for transfers ? ) And the sob story by Anonymous at 21:20 about investment bankers advising the poor unsuspecting Glazers to buy United so they (the dirty bankers ) could get their own hands on our club. As Anonymous at 22:34 said , the Glazers are property speculators . And the talk/hope about a rich Middle/Far East buyer to bale us out as the Glazers make a huge sale profit ( property speculators ) after using the clubs own cash for the debt. Really. The debt climbs and you can be at a point of no return .Finally we all have different opinions on this subject and that is fine .But I wonder why a few people here seem to be so concerned that the Glazers should be entitled to make a huge profit (sell at a fair price! ) and talk about "ethics " after what that family has done to our clubs finances.

andersred said...

Patrick,

Get a grip man. Don't post up old Martin Samuel articles from March, they added nothing then and less now.

You compare the takeover of Cadbury by Kraft to the value of United but I'm afraid the fact they are both "brands" tells us nothing.

Let me show you what United would be worth using three measures of valuation, assuming the same multiples as Cadbury:

EV/Sales (Cadbury acquired at 2x) = United valuation of £560m

EV/EBITDA (Cadbury acquired at 12x) = United valuation of £1.2bn

P/E (Cadbury acquired at 18x) = United valuation of £500m (ex-gw amortisation and assuming normalised £25m profit on player sales)

So we end up with a range of £500m to £1.2bn if we use the same valuation Cadbury was acquired on....

Cadbury is a far, far bigger business than United (sales 20x greater).

anders

was acquired for

Patrick said...

Respect as always anders

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 222   Newer› Newest»