United thread 2012/13 (inc merged IPO thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Glazers of course have clever lawyers and accountants in their employ advising them all the best ducking and diving tactics to milk the cash cow for all it's worth. Not too much all at once and milk the bastard dry too quickly but slowly and effectively keeping a watching brief making sure the cow has some life left in it confident that thousands will still turn up at O.T. in their green and yellow.
 
Re: It's Going up, It's Going Down, It's erm.... Flatlining

At the risk of sounding thick by talking about something I know nothing about... do we really want United to be worth only £600 million?

Is that not more affordable to interested parties should the day ever come when Uncle Malc decides to cash in? If it is worth only that much and and not the original valuation, will United drop in value for the Glazer family and will they be more likely to sell at a slightly inflated price as opposed to the ridiculous value he had on it before?

Manchester United 'worth $2.2bn less than Glazers believe'

Manchester United's shares are worth just $5, well below the $14 they floated at on Friday, according to a US reseach team.
The shares closed up 1.1pc at $14.15 on Monday after listing in New York well below initial estimates of a range of $16 to $20.

PrivCo, the Private Company Financial Data Authority, says Manchester United is suffering from the “Facebook effect”, as investors fear that buying into consumer-led businesses could leave them with heavy losses.

Shares in Facebook have dropped from the $38 IPO price to close at $21.60 on Monday in what has been hailed as the most disastrous start to trading of any major flotation in the past decade.

“The ‘Facebook effect’ causes consumers to grow wary after suffering repeated losses on retail-investor targeted IPOs with unrealistic valuations," PrivCo said.

“Manchester IPO’s overpricing by some 280pc had no reasonable economic basis, as companies and bankers counting on a ‘retail investor put’ in light of the team’s large fanbase to place a floor under the stock’s price failed to materialise."

The firm said a fair value for the shares is $4.97, valuing the company at $800m (£510m), far below the $3bn that the Glazer family, who own the club, were hoping for.

Manchester United shares were flat on their first day of trading.

The club initially planned to float in the Far East but then focused on the US after the uncertain economic environment hindered a listing last year.

The initial public offering has raised $233m (£149m) through the sale of 16.7m shares. Half of the proceeds will go to the football club to pay down debt, and half to the Glazer family.

Despite the lower-then-expected pricing, the float still established Manchester United as the world’s most valuable football club.

Manchester United’s co-chairmen Avram and Joel Glazer and chief executive David Gill rang the bell at the New York Stock Exchange as trading in the football club began on Friday.

However, the float has created further anger among fans of the club, who are unhappy at the way the Glazer family are running it.

Duncan Drasdo, chief executive of the Manchester United Supporters Trust (MUST), a group set up in opposition to the Glazers, said: “It would seem all the analysis of the true valuation was correct; the Glazers and their advisers were being far too ambitious - or perhaps greedy - and the true value of the shares should be around $10 rather than the $20 the Glazers were seeking.

“It means less money coming into the club to pay down the Glazers’ debt and, more annoyingly, the Glazers still take further money out of the club for their own personal means.”

The Glazers hired heavyweight banks, including JP Morgan Chase, Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank, to pitch the shares to investors.

Andrew Caldwell, a partner in valuation and accountacy group BDO, said: “The Manchester United IPO mimics Facebook in trying to capture value from market sentiment, but it doesn’t have the same room for income growth potential that Facebook, allegedly, has. It has a much smaller worldwide people franchise.

"The majority of the company’s income, approximately two thirds, is generated from broadcasting rights and matchday income. These are relatively fixed, so growth must be increased substantially over the remaining third.

"Interestingly enough , attempts to float on the stockmarkets in the areas in which that growth is supposed to be derived, were resoundingly unsuccessful. If the worry was that that there wasn’t enough interest to buy the share, what’s the likelihood of them buying the shirt?

"Football club valuations are notoriously dependent on factors other than financial ratios, particularly fan support and success on the field. When these start falling away, so does the value.

"It is quite clear that for clubs to be successful in the Premier league, substantial new investment in the club itself is required. This isn’t happening here, and how long before this has an impact on the success and support, is anyone’s guess."
 
Don't understand the comments about underwriters propping up the price.

Did the underwriters end up buying the stock? I haven't heard that.

And even if they did, they can only hold it up temporarily and that will just increase their own exposure. I think a lot of rubbish is being written
 
Marvin said:
Don't understand the comments about underwriters propping up the price.

Did the underwriters end up buying the stock? I haven't heard that.

And even if they did, they can only hold it up temporarily and that will just increase their own exposure. I think a lot of rubbish is being written
They did end up supporting the stock. It's in their contract. According to people in the know, there were a lot of attempts to short the stock (in expectation of a significant fall) and Jefferies had to keep buying to resist that. The story is that the selling pressure has abated for the moment but that the underwriters are left with a lot of stock.

As you say, that can only work for a short period and they'll have to slowly let that stock dribble out onto the market over time. It will be a couple of weeks or so before we see how the price really is and the 2012 results will probably impact it negatively.
 
Am I correct in thinking that even if shares are eventually traded at $5 this will not affect the Glazer's control?
All that will happen is less funds will be available to clear some of the debt and the Glazers will just have to take less that their expectation for their other activities, so they'll just be a bit more "jiggery pokery"
 
The Pink Panther said:
Am I correct in thinking that even if shares are eventually traded at $5 this will not affect the Glazer's control?
All that will happen is less funds will be available to clear some of the debt and the Glazers will just have to take less that their expectation for their other activities, so they'll just be a bit more "jiggery pokery"



Means that they wont be able to generate the money ( they where expecting) to fund and service the debt which will quickly spiral out of control and Could possibly lead them to cash and bail out or do something extremely drastic. but atm its not looking good atm for them as a invest able product (lasting damage )
 
As far as I can see, the price of the shares won't effect anything. They've got their money, so it doesn't matter a whole lot to them financially if the shares fall to 1 cent.

One impact will be raising money through the share market or loans again. If the shares stink, surely they won't be able to get away with conning the market a second time. And if they are in negative equity, who will loan them money to pay off debts (or pocket money to Uncle Malc's boys)?
 
Does anyone know when the employee share options are being awarded?

Can the recipitents sell immeadiatley? Do the shares carry a garunteed price or do they have to accept market rate?

Could it all add up to employees dumping millions(?) of shares on the same day crippling the share price?
 
moomba said:
As far as I can see, the price of the shares won't effect anything. They've got their money, so it doesn't matter a whole lot to them financially if the shares fall to 1 cent.

One impact will be raising money through the share market or loans again. If the shares stink, surely they won't be able to get away with conning the market a second time. And if they are in negative equity, who will loan them money to pay off debts (or pocket money to Uncle Malc's boys)?

I totally understand that and the impact it could have on the Glazer's control
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.