You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Rag Debt in today's Times
- Thread starter Ricster
- Start date
law74
Well-Known Member
Quite a lot of sensible discussion about this on the thread already but a few points that havnt been raised so far,
If an investor sees a potential to increase revenue that has not already been sought, then if that aspect has the potential to increase the revenue of the business by more that the levels of debt, then that = a gamble that could reap profit.
If a potential investor sees a business that has underperformed for a long period of time that = a decent prospect of a return.
The rags have been maximising their "global brand worth" since 1992 and it cannot increase anymore without each club being able to negotiate individual TV rights.
About four clubs would benefit from individual TV rights at the minute (with the rags top of the tree), so this is not going to happen.
Therefore no businessman or woman will take on that level of debt unless they are willing and able to lose £1bn on an ego trip.
If an investor sees a potential to increase revenue that has not already been sought, then if that aspect has the potential to increase the revenue of the business by more that the levels of debt, then that = a gamble that could reap profit.
If a potential investor sees a business that has underperformed for a long period of time that = a decent prospect of a return.
The rags have been maximising their "global brand worth" since 1992 and it cannot increase anymore without each club being able to negotiate individual TV rights.
About four clubs would benefit from individual TV rights at the minute (with the rags top of the tree), so this is not going to happen.
Therefore no businessman or woman will take on that level of debt unless they are willing and able to lose £1bn on an ego trip.
pride in battle
Well-Known Member
Yep 'tick tock' is a real piss take on both levels,we have to get this going!!C17Y CJ said:big blueballs said:top idea! can just see it now every man woman and child on there feet chanting it
TICK TOCK TICK TOCK TICK TOCK TICK TOCK!
The irony of us going 'tick tock', while they're nervously lookin at their 33 years banner is lovely!! Works on many levels. Bring it on.
mammutly
Well-Known Member
I can see Tick Tock taking off.....
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zx3sJEAEio&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zx3sJEAEio&feature=related[/youtube]
Bluemoonbaldboy
Well-Known Member
The biggest issue putting off any person investing is the simple fact the Glazers paid over the odds now the debt has risen and they need to refinance and increase the debt. In home owning terms this is negative equity but on a much more massive scale.law74 said:Quite a lot of sensible discussion about this on the thread already but a few points that havnt been raised so far,
If an investor sees a potential to increase revenue that has not already been sought, then if that aspect has the potential to increase the revenue of the business by more that the levels of debt, then that = a gamble that could reap profit.
If a potential investor sees a business that has underperformed for a long period of time that = a decent prospect of a return.
The rags have been maximising their "global brand worth" since 1992 and it cannot increase anymore without each club being able to negotiate individual TV rights.
About four clubs would benefit from individual TV rights at the minute (with the rags top of the tree), so this is not going to happen.
Therefore no businessman or woman will take on that level of debt unless they are willing and able to lose £1bn on an ego trip.
Uber Blues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 17 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 1,110
They are In a bit of a corner at the moment for sure, and things that are not all within the control of the club, and It's owner's (owner) could well prove to create a very difficult future for them. As for the earlier post that mentions the club going broke to clear It's debts, well that Is just naive In the extreme.
If the Glazers default the banks will have every corner marked and part of the board will be made up of the banks people and they will have full control. This will be written Into the loan agreement. Also the banks will take charge/ownership of all solid assets to Include stadium, training grounds, etc. They will also have first call on gate receipts and players moving out of the club. This agreement Is already part of the debt against the club 500 plus million, although the glazers did try to offer the gate receipts as security against the 175 million. Bit of a shame as that card had already been played, and at 14.5 % Interest they will just have to suffer It.
They are at, or almost at the top of their earning potential and still the debt grows and grows. They will need to start hitting at some of the capital In the not to distant future and this Is when things could get Interesting. The health of old man glazer maybe a factor as well. Any skellies In the cupboard maybe? Think of the Maxwell Empire!!
The bottom line Is the Glazers cant sell unless they find a willing buyer to stump up the debt and the value the glazers see on the club. They aint going to just hand It over for the good of It's future will no return. So when all Is taken Into account,that takes the whole shooting match to plus a billion, and that does'nt Include re building the team, so all In all maybe 1.2 Billion. Even If they win the prem and Champions league for the next 20 years any new owner may still not see a return on the Investment In that time. Oh what joy..what goes around may just come around BIG TIME!!!
If the Glazers default the banks will have every corner marked and part of the board will be made up of the banks people and they will have full control. This will be written Into the loan agreement. Also the banks will take charge/ownership of all solid assets to Include stadium, training grounds, etc. They will also have first call on gate receipts and players moving out of the club. This agreement Is already part of the debt against the club 500 plus million, although the glazers did try to offer the gate receipts as security against the 175 million. Bit of a shame as that card had already been played, and at 14.5 % Interest they will just have to suffer It.
They are at, or almost at the top of their earning potential and still the debt grows and grows. They will need to start hitting at some of the capital In the not to distant future and this Is when things could get Interesting. The health of old man glazer maybe a factor as well. Any skellies In the cupboard maybe? Think of the Maxwell Empire!!
The bottom line Is the Glazers cant sell unless they find a willing buyer to stump up the debt and the value the glazers see on the club. They aint going to just hand It over for the good of It's future will no return. So when all Is taken Into account,that takes the whole shooting match to plus a billion, and that does'nt Include re building the team, so all In all maybe 1.2 Billion. Even If they win the prem and Champions league for the next 20 years any new owner may still not see a return on the Investment In that time. Oh what joy..what goes around may just come around BIG TIME!!!
Freestyler
Well-Known Member
Ricster said:Glazer debt gives United a problem
Contrary to popular belief, Sir Alex Ferguson does have money to spend on players, although if the Glazer family, the Manchester United owners, go on without being able to get their spiralling debt under control, the amount of cash in question may gradually recede.
The Glazers have been struggling to refinance part of the club’s £699 million debt, namely the £175.5 million in Payment In Kind (PIK) notes they are personally responsible for. Rolling up at an annual interest rate of 14.25 per cent, that debt will stand at a staggering £509 million by the time it is due to be repaid in 2017. Ferguson won’t be around by then but pity the manager who is if the Glazers, through whatever means available, haven’t been able to take decisive action to address it before then.
That article means they are seriously in the shit.
awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww, what a shame, get the violins out!
superwatsonwatson
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 662
Bear in mind manu have a huge property portfolio, for example, around trafford park. I seem to remember this being valued at £250m, some time ago. They dont nesscessarily have to "asset strip" the team in order to meet debts. In the case of ronaldo £80m for a player who wanted to go was probably good business, nevertheless, many things could be sold before the squad has to suffer. I think they are very much thinking of life after ferguson and what they can offer a new manager. When he goes so will alot of established players in a short space of time. Maybe the £80m is waiting for the new manager.
Bluemoonbaldboy
Well-Known Member
Bear in mind a few of the squad is nearing the end of their careers they have to replace them it could be when Slur Alchy retires they have very little money to spend on players. That under 26 year old policy is a sign they know they are struggling now never mind in the few years before they have to get a new man in at the helm.superwatsonwatson said:Bear in mind manu have a huge property portfolio, for example, around trafford park. I seem to remember this being valued at £250m, some time ago. They dont nesscessarily have to "asset strip" the team in order to meet debts. In the case of ronaldo £80m for a player who wanted to go was probably good business, nevertheless, many things could be sold before the squad has to suffer. I think they are very much thinking of life after ferguson and what they can offer a new manager. When he goes so will alot of established players in a short space of time. Maybe the £80m is waiting for the new manager.
Prestwich_Blue
Well-Known Member
All those property assets are security for the £525m bank loans.superwatsonwatson said:Bear in mind manu have a huge property portfolio, for example, around trafford park. I seem to remember this being valued at £250m, some time ago. They dont nesscessarily have to "asset strip" the team in order to meet debts.