Man United Debt Cost to be £100m this year...

leninbenjamin

Hobart wrote:

What? How? I though Roman had ooodles of money?

read it again.

MrPillowTalk

OhNoYouDidn't wrote:

so can I get this straight, for years we have been told that manure's success is based on them being run like a proper business.

now they are whinging because they are being run like a proper business?

boo hoo. this debate is 20 years too late. plc's act like plc's. deal with it or follow fc united.

Its not a plc anymore its sort of the point of the anti glaxer argument you tard, try and know something about a topic before commenting.

leninbenjamin

MrPillowTalk wrote:

Its not a plc anymore its sort of the point of the anti glaxer argument you tard, try and know something about a topic before commenting.

funny enough, but after glazer took over in the most immediate financial reports produced after they were still calling them selves a PLC.

they are a privately limited company i believe, which is pretty much the same thing effectively apart from the distribution of share capital and that. they are still in it for the money anyway.

OhNoYouDidn't

leninbenjamin wrote:

funny enough, but after glazer took over in the most immediate financial reports produced after they were still calling them selves a PLC.

they are a privately limited company i believe, which is pretty much the same thing effectively apart from the distribution of share capital and that. they are still in it for the money anyway.

exactly.

I hope the irony of mrpillowtalk abusing me for not knowing what i was talking about is glaring for all to see.

the point stands. manure fans were happy to swim with the sharks through the glory days of the 90's. its a bit hard to take them giving out about business men 'ruining' their club now.

~Rebel~

OhNoYouDidn't wrote:

exactly.

I hope the irony of mrpillowtalk abusing me for not knowing what i was talking about is glaring for all to see.

the point stands. manure fans were happy to swim with the sharks through the glory days of the 90's. its a bit hard to take them giving out about business men 'ruining' their club now.

you did say plc though, which stands for public limited company, while private limited company is Ltd i think.

I never knew Man United have since referred to themselves as a PLC, which makes no sense to me as they were taken off the stock market and have (i assume) less then the 7 members/shareholders required for a plc. Though benjamin did say it was in the immediate reports after Glazer took over. I know the whole takeover and delisting process keeps going much longer then when the news is actually broken, so id say this process had not been fully completed in time for those financial statements.

Im thinking the main difference between a plc and an ltd is that in a plc, with stable figures you're pretty safe as it takes a majority of shareholders for any drastic actions to be taken, while in the current position Glazer can do what he wants with no backing from anyone. Including immerse them in debt.

leninbenjamin

~Rebel~ wrote:

I never knew Man United have since referred to themselves as a PLC, which makes no sense to me as they were taken off the stock market and have (i assume) less then the 7 members/shareholders required for a plc. Though benjamin did say it was in the immediate reports after Glazer took over. I know the whole takeover and delisting process keeps going much longer then when the news is actually broken, so id say this process had not been fully completed in time for those financial statements.

nah they go as Ltd. now, have a look at the bottom of their website. that was either an error or i just stumbled on a report made before it was de-listed but published after or something... who knows... just thought it was odd and deserved mention, considering i found that report trying to figure out what status they actually had.

still, it's pretty pedantic to have a go at someone for making the error between a PLC and Ltd. imo, the aims are the same.

MrPillowTalk

OhNoYouDidn't wrote:

exactly.

I hope the irony of mrpillowtalk abusing me for not knowing what i was talking about is glaring for all to see.

the point stands. manure fans were happy to swim with the sharks through the glory days of the 90's. its a bit hard to take them giving out about business men 'ruining' their club now.

The company is Ltd, no one had a problem with it being a Plc as ownership was diluted and run by a board of directors with noone having a majority shareholding. Anyone can buy shares in a publicly quoted plc, a privately owned limited company is a completely different legal entiity.

Incidentally, nearly every single club is a limited company run by business men for profit, fans running clubs doesnt work unless you have a situation like Walker at Blackburn and Abramovich at Chelsea where the owner will put tonnes of money in on the understanding that they will never see a return on their investment. How many massively wealthy people do you think are out there who are prepared to spend their fortunes on a football club with the expectation of never making a return? I would hazard a guess that these people are extremely few and far between. Business runs football, thats just the way it is and tbh football is better for it.

And your right you clearly dont know what your talking about and I dont really know why Im getting into it with you as Im sure you wont listen and will just continue spouting nonsense anyway.

leninbenjamin

MrPillowTalk wrote:

The company is Ltd, no one had a problem with it being a Plc as ownership was diluted and run by a board of directors with noone having a majority shareholding. Anyone can buy shares in a publicly quoted plc, a privately owned limited company is a completely different legal entiity.

eh? didn't the fans go a bit nuts when the edwards first listed the company? accusing them of selling out and all that jazz? i'm too young to have paid attention then, but that's what i gathered from reading about it later...

Mitch Connor

The first financial report issued by the Glazers refered to the club as a PLC because at that stage it was. It wasn't tell a good few months after they took over they they forced through the purchase of the remaining shares and became a private company.

And yes, fans were up in arms when the club went public for 2 main reasons.

1. It wasn't really the club that profited from the share issue, it was the Edwards family. The only money made though share sales that was spent on the club was on the extension of one of the stands - the rest was pockets by the people in charge at the time. Ever since then, money has been taken out of the club (dividend pay out) as a result of being a PLC. Shares bought by people like Magner, McManus and Glazer since they have been bought from the initial pot of shares, so the money went to the shareholders, not the club.

2. They saw something like the Glazer take over happening.

Hobart

leninbenjamin wrote:

read it again.

Aye, me bad.....Too quick on the owl' quote thingy.

BTW PHB I agree :eek: