United thread 2012/13 (inc merged IPO thread)

[Football guy]

United fans consider themselves to be so great that they think they could sell the naming rights of their training ground for £100m , sell individual stand rights for £50m and also someone will sponsor their car park for £50m

 

[Blue Haze]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

From that GCHQ person at Redcaf, defending Uncle Malc. Must be a City fan on a wind up

 

[JM Mcr]

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

Spoken like a true armchair, gloryhunting "fan".

Personally I'm left thinking how much I miss going to the match since being priced out to help pay off someone else's debt, what a tragedy it is that my children are unlikely to ever be able to afford to watch my club on a regular basis (if indeed the club is still around when they're old enough to go to matches), how awful it is that despite "the most successful period in it's history" the club has never been so far removed from the community and fanbase it originally grew out of...

Ah well, guess it's all about priorities and individual opinions..

 

[JM Mcr]

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings,

As far as tax avoidance schemes go, saddling your once profitable company with crippling, potentially fatal, debt seems a tad extreme to me.

Actually I take his point about the true cost of servicing the debt (nett of dividend & tax payments that would have applied as a plc) but respected bloggers such as andersred and the swiss rambler estimate the "net" figure is still well north of £300m, which GCHQ conveniently forgets to mention in his Glazer eulogy.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.

And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

From that GCHQ person at Redcaf, defending Uncle Malc. Must be a City fan on a wind up

Or one of the Glazers. Shinawatra used to pay PR people to come on here and big him up.

GCHQ has a point mind you. The point of a Leveraged Buy Out is to increase revenue and reduce costs in order to service and repay the debt. The fallacy in the argument is that they can't reduce costs or even hold them steady (as Rooney proved). So they can only increase revenue, which they have done very successfully to be fair.

The downside is that they've had to do this just to be able to service their debts rather than repay it. They've not really been able to do even that however and have been eating into their cash reserves, which were built up to about £150m when they sold Ronaldo. The last couple of years they've relied on player sales and juggling debt to keep themselves afloat but haven't been able to do that in the financial year to June 2012 to the point that even after 9 months their cash reserves are hugely down. Add to that the fact they won't be getting anything like as much as they got in the final quarter of 2011 (when they got to the CL final) and it's a fair bet that the full 2012 accounts will lay bare the sheer scale of the financial damage they've inflicted on the rags.

 

[Salford_Blue]

PB,

will they have to publish them, seeing as they now "reside" in Delaware or The Caymans?

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

PB,

will they have to publish them, seeing as they now "reside" in Delaware or The Caymans?

They have to publish accounts for the companies registered in the UK, of which there are a few, including the main trading company. So we'll get to see the main figures including profit and loss accounts and cashflow statements. But we've never been able to see the companies higher up the chain which are registered in Delaware, where they're presumably holding the debt they took on to repay the PIK notes among other things.

 

[laserblue]

From that GCHQ person at Redcaf, defending Uncle Malc. Must be a City fan on a wind up

he's a poorly disguised corporate plant. gchq=glazer corporation headquarters.

 

[Burnage Burnsy]

They really are desperate for season ticket sales - look at this poster campaign they have started..

<a class="postlink" href="http://twitter.com/Etihad_Stadium/status/228906602340691969/photo/1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://twitter.com/Etihad_Stadium/statu ... 69/photo/1</a>

 

[hutton who blue]

And why have those cash profits increased by so much at the same time that our wage bill has increased in real terms by more than every other PL club with the exception of City in the last seven years?

I'm feeling in a generous mood so I'll go ahead and answer that one for you. It's because during that period the club has benefited from hundreds of millions of pounds of highly profitable cumulative revenue growth which can be directly attributed to decisions made by the Glazer family. I like to refer to it as ''Glazer inspired revenue increases''.

Examples? The DHL deal, the 15 separate telecommunications deals in 44 countries, the rolling out of Manchester United branded credit cards around the world. This unrivalled success was made possible thanks to the significant investment in the commercial team by the Glazers shortly after they bought the club, replacing the frankly laughable one man and his dog show in one of the club's East Stand offices.

The reality is that the Glazers have performed significantly better than the previous PLC management team. That is the key to a successful LBO. And much as it clearly pains a lot of people to admit to, this has been a very successful LBO.

Whilst the sheep and the simpletons will point to the ''£500m that has left the club'', the more pragmatic and frankly the more capable observer will note the dividends and corporation tax savings, they'll note the club's phenomenal commercial success and they'll note that on the pitch the club has enjoyed the most successful period in its history.And do you know what they'll be left thinking when the final conclusions are made about the Glazers ownership of Manchester United? They'll be thinking: ''What on earth was all the bloody fuss about''.

From that GCHQ person at Redcaf, defending Uncle Malc. Must be a City fan on a wind up

I wish the rags all the best in continuing this on the pitch success. They're not in this years' charity shield though, are they?