United thread 2012/13 (inc merged IPO thread)

[mrcunny]

Re: United thread 2011/12

 

[VOOMER]

Re: United thread 2011/12

One thing that does occur to me is that they must be desperate to pay off the bonds before Baconface retires and everything now points to this being his last season. If he goes and they're still in debt then it really is tick-tock as he is half their strength, given his ability to keep a relatively weak squad in the top four. To attract anyone decent they'll need to be able to spend decent money and the debt stops them doing that. Let's hope this whole thing fails.

The other interesting thing is that the PIK notes seem to have been a debt on the UK holding company, as that's where they were repaid from. Money seems to have been introduced (via the sale of shares) but the Glazer's contention that the PIK debt was a private one isn't borne out by this document.

The beauty of these offer documents is that you can see just how much financial havoc has been wrought by the Glazers. Without Baconface they'd have been screwed by now probably. I'd like to wish them a happy July 4th, god bless 'em.

PB why would anyone buy shares, without some sort of guaranteed return and no influence on club policy?

Because they stand to gain if the shares increase in value. It's quite a common model in the USA apparently, which is why that's the only place they could do this. But football and football clubs are a notoriously risky business although a debt free MUFC would probably be an attractive proposition.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

PB, correct if I'm wrong, or wildly of the mark. This is well dodgy. Its almost like a ponzi scheme. All it would take is a dodgy assessment at some point of the value of the club and all the poor suckers, (well maybe no the first set of people who buy the shares), will be left with no voting rights, no dividend and a share that is worth nowhere near what they paid for it? So who in their right mind would even look at this? Wouldn't it make more sense to buy a lower lever premiership club , or promising championship club, as there may present a better chance of return in the future?

 

[laserblue]

Re: United thread 2011/12

Mr Conn's taking the news badly

Glazers' plans to float Manchester United make the heart sink
The US owners hope to entice investors willing to buy Manchester United shares with reduced voting rights and no dividend, then register the company in the Cayman Islands

David Conn
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 July 2012 14.10 BST


Manchester United's owners hope to reduce the club's huge debt with a share issue. Photograph: Richard Heathcote/Getty Images
After so many months of testing the flotation waters in Singapore, then New York, we can now see the scheme that Manchester United's owners, the US-based Glazer family, have been paying an army of bankers to orchestrate. United's debt, loaded on in 2005 for nothing more constructive than the Glazers' takeover itself, remains a sorry £423m burden, even after the club has paid out more than £500m interest, bankers' fees and charges, to service it. Now the Glazers have hit on their preferred solution: find other people prepared to pay some of it off, while the family remains in complete control.

One wider point should be considered, among many. This is the most momentous event at an English club since the England team tumbled out of the European Championship. Roy Hodgson's team of triers was accompanied by the age-old call for a revolution in how we think about football, for Premier League clubs, the Football Association and the whole game to the grass roots, to pull together for the common good. Days later, English football's greatest name is being re-routed to the New York Stock Exchange via the Cayman Islands, to pay debts a US family was allowed to load on, to buy one of our great clubs in the first place. That hocking of clubs in the global marketplace has always seemed at odds with a coherent approach to building a great sport, a waste of the great opportunities the modern era is providing

shame that's not how platini sees it.

 

[Blue Haze]

Re: United thread 2011/12

The shares will have greatly reduced value due to them being "B" shares.

Voting rights are important to a share's value. If Glazer's "A" shares have 10x the votes per share, the B shares could be worth less than half of normal voting rights shares.

They are well fucked. The American IPO market is abysmal right now after the Facebook disaster. A heavily indebted football club is a very risky prospect right now, not very attractive at all. It wouldn't surprise me if they backed off this, unless of course they are desperate and willing to push a bad IPO at all costs.

 

[moomba]

Re: United thread 2011/12

The way I see it, theres only two ways the value of a share will rise. 1 if there is a dividend, 2 if someone else needs to buy the shares (ie to takeover the club). With the voting power of the shares negligible, and no prospect of dividends I can't see any value in them at all.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: United thread 2011/12

PB why would anyone buy shares, without some sort of guaranteed return and no influence on club policy?

Because they stand to gain if the shares increase in value. It's quite a common model in the USA apparently, which is why that's the only place they could do this. But football and football clubs are a notoriously risky business although a debt free MUFC would probably be an attractive proposition.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

PB, correct if I'm wrong, or wildly of the mark. This is well dodgy. Its almost like a ponzi scheme. All it would take is a dodgy assessment at some point of the value of the club and all the poor suckers, (well maybe no the first set of people who buy the shares), will be left with no voting rights, no dividend and a share that is worth nowhere near what they paid for it? So who in their right mind would even look at this? Wouldn't it make more sense to buy a lower lever premiership club , or promising championship club, as there may present a better chance of return in the future?

It's nothing like a Ponzi scheme as the risks are, as you have correctly pointed out, quite apparent. No one is promising investors anything but they have given them the information they need to make a decision.

Why anyone would do this, given the history of quoted football clubs, is a very good question. But that's a risk any shareholder takes.

 

[VOOMER]

Re: United thread 2011/12

Because they stand to gain if the shares increase in value. It's quite a common model in the USA apparently, which is why that's the only place they could do this. But football and football clubs are a notoriously risky business although a debt free MUFC would probably be an attractive proposition.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2

PB, correct if I'm wrong, or wildly of the mark. This is well dodgy. Its almost like a ponzi scheme. All it would take is a dodgy assessment at some point of the value of the club and all the poor suckers, (well maybe no the first set of people who buy the shares), will be left with no voting rights, no dividend and a share that is worth nowhere near what they paid for it? So who in their right mind would even look at this? Wouldn't it make more sense to buy a lower lever premiership club , or promising championship club, as there may present a better chance of return in the future?

It's nothing like a Ponzi scheme as the risks are, as you have correctly pointed out, quite apparent. No one is promising investors anything but they have given them the information they need to make a decision.

Why anyone would do this, given the history of quoted football clubs, is a very good question. But that's a risk any shareholder takes.

They have whore'd this around and I appreciate that they are testing the water, to some extent, but is the reason that they went everywhere else first, because they wanted to avoid exposure in the USA to any legal repercussions?Are they simply running out of cash reserves and getting desperate? Also surely no fund manager, or whoever would deal with the sale, would want to risk their reputation by advising anyone to buy? Who the hell want to get involved with this? If I had a few thousand , or more spare I would be looking into the shale gas exploration in the North West and Irish sea!

 

[bluemanc]

Re: United thread 2011/12

In 1990utd became a public company & were floated on the Stock Exchange,this was the opportunity for fans to own the shares,they didn't,utd thus ceased to be a football club&became a huge cash cow that took them onto untold success.
IT'S NOW TIME TO SWALLOW

 

[The Pink Panther]

Re: United thread 2011/12

Mr Conn's taking the news badly

Glazers' plans to float Manchester United make the heart sink
The US owners hope to entice investors willing to buy Manchester United shares with reduced voting rights and no dividend, then register the company in the Cayman Islands

David Conn
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 July 2012 14.10 BST


Manchester United's owners hope to reduce the club's huge debt with a share issue. Photograph: Richard Heathcote/Getty Images
After so many months of testing the flotation waters in Singapore, then New York, we can now see the scheme that Manchester United's owners, the US-based Glazer family, have been paying an army of bankers to orchestrate. United's debt, loaded on in 2005 for nothing more constructive than the Glazers' takeover itself, remains a sorry £423m burden, even after the club has paid out more than £500m interest, bankers' fees and charges, to service it. Now the Glazers have hit on their preferred solution: find other people prepared to pay some of it off, while the family remains in complete control.

One wider point should be considered, among many. This is the most momentous event at an English club since the England team tumbled out of the European Championship. Roy Hodgson's team of triers was accompanied by the age-old call for a revolution in how we think about football, for Premier League clubs, the Football Association and the whole game to the grass roots, to pull together for the common good. Days later, English football's greatest name is being re-routed to the New York Stock Exchange via the Cayman Islands, to pay debts a US family was allowed to load on, to buy one of our great clubs in the first place. That hocking of clubs in the global marketplace has always seemed at odds with a coherent approach to building a great sport, a waste of the great opportunities the modern era is providing

David Conn was also on 5 Live this morning and offered no insight at all into what was going on and it's the same for this article

 

[VOOMER]

Re: United thread 2011/12

Mr Conn's taking the news badly

Glazers' plans to float Manchester United make the heart sink
The US owners hope to entice investors willing to buy Manchester United shares with reduced voting rights and no dividend, then register the company in the Cayman Islands

David Conn
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 4 July 2012 14.10 BST


Manchester United's owners hope to reduce the club's huge debt with a share issue. Photograph: Richard Heathcote/Getty Images
After so many months of testing the flotation waters in Singapore, then New York, we can now see the scheme that Manchester United's owners, the US-based Glazer family, have been paying an army of bankers to orchestrate. United's debt, loaded on in 2005 for nothing more constructive than the Glazers' takeover itself, remains a sorry £423m burden, even after the club has paid out more than £500m interest, bankers' fees and charges, to service it. Now the Glazers have hit on their preferred solution: find other people prepared to pay some of it off, while the family remains in complete control.

One wider point should be considered, among many. This is the most momentous event at an English club since the England team tumbled out of the European Championship. Roy Hodgson's team of triers was accompanied by the age-old call for a revolution in how we think about football, for Premier League clubs, the Football Association and the whole game to the grass roots, to pull together for the common good. Days later, English football's greatest name is being re-routed to the New York Stock Exchange via the Cayman Islands, to pay debts a US family was allowed to load on, to buy one of our great clubs in the first place. That hocking of clubs in the global marketplace has always seemed at odds with a coherent approach to building a great sport, a waste of the great opportunities the modern era is providing

David Conn was also on 5 Live this morning and offered no insight at all into what was going on and it's the same for this article

Same as his book on City.