United thread 2012/13 (inc merged IPO thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
United thread 2012/13.

bacuzzi said:





«Top News

Exclusive: Manchester United set to kick off IPO
Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:51pm BST

By Stephen Lacey

NEW YORK, July 18 (IFR) - Football powerhouse Manchester United is expected to launch its IPO in New York as early as next week, for pricing in early August, after earlier attempts in Hong Kong, Singapore and the UK.

The time table marks a change from the original schedule to proceed after the U.S. Labor Day holiday September 3, according to multiple sources close to the situation.

In another change, the football club is now looking to raise $300 million (£191.61 million) on the IPO, less than the $500 million (£319.35 million) previously contemplated. The decision on timing and sizing is still fluid and could change, depending on the regulatory review process.

Jefferies is lead-left bookrunner in a syndicate that also includes Credit Suisse, JP Morgan, Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Deutsche Bank.

The banks plan to benchmark the IPO not only against traditional media entities but iconic consumer-goods companies, in an effort to justify a potentially difficult valuation.

Manchester United has yet to provide audited financial results beyond the fiscal year ended June 2011, instead relying on an exemption as an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act.

Updated results will presumably be forthcoming prior to the official launch IPO. The latest filing, on Monday, provides limited additional disclosure, other than the selection of "MANU" as the club's ticker for a New York Stock Exchange listing.

A dual-class structure, a primary motivation in selecting the NYSE as the listing venue, remains in place, giving Class B shareholders 10 votes in matters of corporate governance, while the Class A public shareholders get one vote.

As long as the B shareholders hold at least 10 percent of outstanding shares, they are entitled to 67 percent voting power.

Dual-class structures are commonplace in the United States - there were 14 IPOs in the United States last year that featured dual-class shares, according to Thomson Reuters data - and Manchester United has fully embraced the provision, no doubt to keep firm control in the hands of owner Malcolm Glazer.

The lack of independence of Manchester United's board of directors, an exemption allowed as a "controlled company" under NYSE rules, is further evidence of tight control sought as a public company. The four-member board of directors consists of two of Glazer's sons and two executives of the club.

"There are a number of levers that are available to them, and they are taking advantage of almost all of them," noted one of the sources. "But to be fair, they have been very upfront about everything they are doing, and why."

The Glaser family are well-known in the U.S. as owners of American football team Tampa Bay Buccaneers, as well as privately held First Allied Corp, which owns and leases shopping centres.

In its initial prospectus filed with the SEC, the club included summary financial data for the nine months to March 31 2012, with comparative data for end March 2011, but these are unaudited.

These accounts also create confusion as the end of the football season in May triggers several significant receipts. Hence, it is hard to compare these accounts with other full-year accounts that end in June.

For example, the cash position at March 31 2012 was just 25.6 million pounds, versus more than 150 million pounds held at the end of June in 2009, 2010 and 2011.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

dom said:
The Flash said:
Ancient Citizen said:
He's got a face that looks like he's moaning before he opens his mouth.

He's got a face like a pan of boiling piss.


I've never seen a pan of boiling piss !!!

Never seen a pan of boiling piss?? Born with a silver spoon in one's mouth were we?

Well, a pan of boiling piss looks like:

images
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

The Flash said:
Ancient Citizen said:
shadan1 said:
Hes been moaning about not playing reguarly, sure he moans about that all the time.

He's got a face that looks like he's moaning before he opens his mouth.

He's got a face like a pan of boiling piss.

He's got a face like an abandoned walnut.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

No6 said:
dom said:
The Flash said:
He's got a face like a pan of boiling piss.


I've never seen a pan of boiling piss !!!

Never seen a pan of boiling piss?? Born with a silver spoon in one's mouth were we?

Well, a pan of boiling piss looks like:

images

It's all become clear, now

I was a teacher's son . brought up in South Wales and after N Yorkshire, and hadn't even heard of pans of boiling piss 'till we moved north......

There were whispers around our new small market town that piss was being boiled in pans... but my dad said that this was the devil's work and that no good would come of it....

Thank God he kept me away from all that

When I saw those pics of Berbaflop I realised just how destructive that drug is....

Is this why Bacon Face looked the way he did after Sunderland ??..........

FFS this drug is the EPO (Expensive and Pissed Off?) of football

we need a BAN .. NOW !!
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

waspish said:
bacuzzi said:


«Top News

Exclusive: Manchester United set to kick off IPO
Wed Jul 18, 2012 10:51pm BST

By Stephen Lacey

NEW YORK, July 18 (IFR) - Football powerhouse Manchester United is expected to launch its IPO in New York as early as next week, for pricing in early August, after earlier attempts in Hong Kong, Singapore and the UK.

The time table marks a change from the original schedule to proceed after the U.S. Labor Day holiday September 3, according to multiple sources close to the situation.

In another change, the football club is now looking to raise $300 million (£191.61 million) on the IPO, less than the $500 million (£319.35 million) previously contemplated. The decision on timing and sizing is still fluid and could change, depending on the regulatory review process.

Jefferies is lead-left bookrunner in a syndicate that also includes Credit Suisse, JP Morgan, Bank of America Merrill Lynch and Deutsche Bank.

The banks plan to benchmark the IPO not only against traditional media entities but iconic consumer-goods companies, in an effort to justify a potentially difficult valuation.

Manchester United has yet to provide audited financial results beyond the fiscal year ended June 2011, instead relying on an exemption as an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act.

Updated results will presumably be forthcoming prior to the official launch IPO. The latest filing, on Monday, provides limited additional disclosure, other than the selection of "MANU" as the club's ticker for a New York Stock Exchange listing.

A dual-class structure, a primary motivation in selecting the NYSE as the listing venue, remains in place, giving Class B shareholders 10 votes in matters of corporate governance, while the Class A public shareholders get one vote.

As long as the B shareholders hold at least 10 percent of outstanding shares, they are entitled to 67 percent voting power.

Dual-class structures are commonplace in the United States - there were 14 IPOs in the United States last year that featured dual-class shares, according to Thomson Reuters data - and Manchester United has fully embraced the provision, no doubt to keep firm control in the hands of owner Malcolm Glazer.

The lack of independence of Manchester United's board of directors, an exemption allowed as a "controlled company" under NYSE rules, is further evidence of tight control sought as a public company. The four-member board of directors consists of two of Glazer's sons and two executives of the club.

"There are a number of levers that are available to them, and they are taking advantage of almost all of them," noted one of the sources. "But to be fair, they have been very upfront about everything they are doing, and why."

The Glaser family are well-known in the U.S. as owners of American football team Tampa Bay Buccaneers, as well as privately held First Allied Corp, which owns and leases shopping centres.

In its initial prospectus filed with the SEC, the club included summary financial data for the nine months to March 31 2012, with comparative data for end March 2011, but these are unaudited.

These accounts also create confusion as the end of the football season in May triggers several significant receipts. Hence, it is hard to compare these accounts with other full-year accounts that end in June.

For example, the cash position at March 31 2012 was just 25.6 million pounds, versus more than 150 million pounds held at the end of June in 2009, 2010 and 2011.

The success of the IPO hinges on the ability of the banks (underwriters) to realistically pitch the MUFC brand alongside iconic consumer goods companies.
So the target figure of $300 million (widely predicted by analysts) is now in the open. I still think they are hoping to have the IPO over subscribed because £190 million repays less than half the debt. Consider that in tandem with the 'Cash at bank' figure of 25.6 million and you are still looking at a £200 million plus debt. If United don't have success this season we'll see a full collapse.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

The Glazers are a bunch of lying bastards. Knowing they went out of the CL much earlier than normal and their revenue in Q4 will be significantly down on the previous year do they tell anyone in the prospectus? Do they fuck!

...our share of the revenue under the Champions League broadcasting rights contract amounted to €38.3 million, €45.8 million and €53.8 million for the 2008/09, 2009/10, and 2010/11 seasons, respectively.
Nothing about 2012.

A bit later on they hint at the damage but not so you'd notice:
As a result of our failure to qualify for the knockout stages of the Champions League in the 2011/12 season, we entered the Europa League. As a result, this increase in Broadcasting revenue was partially offset by lower participation fees for the knockout stages of the Europa League when compared with the knockout stages of the Champions League.

So they're trying to kid people they actually did better by going into the EL & that that was "partially offset" (by about £40m at least) by lower participation payments. Reading that, if you didn't know, you'd assume they'd actually increased revenue rather than losing a shedload.

I hope people sue the arse off them when they find out the truth.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

I can't stop laughing.

*sigh*

Hopeless. They might as well admit they are looking for a few good suckers. I enjoyed their previous flops, but this has epic written all over it.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

bacuzzi said:
Not sure how much the plot has thickened given that the initial offer document mentioned no intended dates for proceeding, or even made any reference to wishing to raise a particular amount (be that $300m or $500m). This appears to be just more speculation on what the gimps, sorry Glazers, intentions are but I'm sure all will be revealed in the fullness of time.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

JM Mcr said:
bacuzzi said:
Not sure how much the plot has thickened given that the initial offer document mentioned no intended dates for proceeding, or even made any reference to wishing to raise a particular amount (be that $300m or $500m). This appears to be just more speculation on what the gimps, sorry Glazers, intentions are but I'm sure all will be revealed in the fullness of time.
The $300m appears to be an indicative amount that they will be pitching to investors but it won't pay off their current indebtedness of around $670m. Funnily enough, it is probably close to the amount the Glazers borrowed to repay the PIK notes.

So I reckon they'll make a show of paying off part of the bonds then, when they're hidden behind the restricted disclosure requirements of Cayman Islands & JOBS Act, will take that $300m out of the rags in some way, leaving them personally debt free. They must be desperate to get that money out before Baconface retires and it all (hopefully) goes down the pan.
 
Re: United thread 2012/13.

Prestwich_Blue said:
JM Mcr said:
bacuzzi said:
Not sure how much the plot has thickened given that the initial offer document mentioned no intended dates for proceeding, or even made any reference to wishing to raise a particular amount (be that $300m or $500m). This appears to be just more speculation on what the gimps, sorry Glazers, intentions are but I'm sure all will be revealed in the fullness of time.
The $300m appears to be an indicative amount that they will be pitching to investors but it won't pay off their current indebtedness of around $670m. Funnily enough, it is probably close to the amount the Glazers borrowed to repay the PIK notes.

So I reckon they'll make a show of paying off part of the bonds then, when they're hidden behind the restricted disclosure requirements of Cayman Islands & JOBS Act, will take that $300m out of the rags in some way, leaving them personally debt free. They must be desperate to get that money out before Baconface retires and it all (hopefully) goes down the pan.

PB can you break this down in to are the rags really in trouble or will this work?
 
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.