Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Kylo Ren

Copper_pipe wrote: »

ON THIS DAY In 2006, we signed Michael Carrick for £18.6m

I was going to post this article earlier but with all the financial talk I said I'd leave it.

Link

You don’t get a player who has had as many differing views about him as Michael Carrick. Usually heavily criticized by Manchester United supporters, Sir Alex Ferguson has always been an admirer of his ability and is always full of praise for him.

I believe it’s time to put his doubters to rest, because I have always regarded Michael Carrick as the unsung hero of Manchester United, especially in recent seasons. And there is no doubt that he will be such a key player for Man United this season.

I will present some statistics to show how not only has he improved his game over the last couple of seasons, but how he fares in comparison to his teammate Paul Scholes and how they complement each other as a midfield pairing. In addition, I will also compare Carrick to Gareth Barry, a player in a similar position playing for a rival club (Manchester City) and show how he is on par, or better in certain aspects of his game.

Firstly, we should note that Michael Carrick had more game time in the 2011/2012 season than the 2010/2011 season (2513 minutes vs 1975 minutes).

Secondly, his defensive attributes have improved over the years. His ground 50-50’s win percentage is higher (68% vs 58%), while his aerial 50-50’s win percentage is far superior (73% vs 45%). He made more tackles (90 vs 61) and made more interceptions (76 vs 60) as well.



Carrick’s strongest attribute has always been his passing ability, and from the statistics, we see that his total passes is far superior in 2011/2012 season than the 2010/2011 season (2210 passes vs 1443 passes). What makes it phenomenal is the fact that in spite of the superior number of passes in the 2011/2012 season, his pass completion rate in 2011/2012 season is still higher than the 2010/2011 season (89% vs 86%) is higher. This is the mark of a player who seems to be getting better at a trait he is already naturally gifted in.

Carrick’s attacking instincts have vastly improved as well. He is not really known for his attacking prowess, but there is a huge jump in his number of crosses (13 vs 7), with an increase in crossing accuracy (31% vs 14%). More importantly, he also has goals and assists to add to his game. (2 goals vs 0 goals, 3 assists vs 0 assists).

These key statistics show how Michael Carrick is getting better as he gets older. At 31 years, he is not the youngest, but he is slowly proving to be one of those players that get better with age. Think Giggs.

It goes on to compare his stats with Scholes (A bit pointless imo as Scholes played far less and is a totally different player) and Barry.

IvySlayer

Keno 92 wrote: »

I don't completely get this.



Does this mean after the IPO anyone who bought shares can purchase up to 2,500,000 more? How much will that raise?

I dunno what sense the underwriters are, the bank or investors? All I know that option wasn't in the first IPO offer.

Kylo Ren

IvySlayer wrote: »

I dunno what sense the underwriters are, the bank or investors? All I know that option wasn't in the first IPO offer.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they are the banks.

homerjay2005

i think there has by in large, been a massive over reaction to this. if this works, the club will be in a much better position that what it was 3 months ago and that can only be positive.

people need to chill the f*ck down and think of the overall picture and not jsut look at the ultimate doomsday scenario. i was angry for about 5 mins after i heard this, but soon realised that alot of if is just scare mongering from a few people who have other agendas.

Sgt Pepper 64

How broke would the Glazers be without Utd, I wonder?

Did\has Utd saved them in a way?

Kylo Ren

homerjay2005 wrote: »

i think there has by in large, been a massive over reaction to this. if this works, the club will be in a much better position that what it was 3 months ago and that can only be positive.

people need to chill the f*ck down and think of the overall picture and not jsut look at the ultimate doomsday scenario. i was angry for about 5 mins after i heard this, but soon realised that alot of if is just scare mongering from a few people who have other agendas.

While I agree there has been an over reaction, it is justified. Yes the debt will be reduced but by a marginal amount as to what is was/should be. Imagine if they split it 80/20 in favour of the debt management? Or even 75/25. Taking half of the profits is ridiculous.

Mitch Connor

homerjay2005 wrote: »

i think there has by in large, been a massive over reaction to this. if this works, the club will be in a much better position that what it was 3 months ago and that can only be positive.

people need to chill the f*ck down and think of the overall picture and not jsut look at the ultimate doomsday scenario. i was angry for about 5 mins after i heard this, but soon realised that alot of if is just scare mongering from a few people who have other agendas.

Using the best chance we had to reduce the debt by 50% or more, and only using it to pay off, at most, 20% resulting in a saving per year that will be nullified by the fees in relation to the IPO for the 2 to 3 years, and still leaving the issues of the bonds not having been paid back (due 2017).

I don't think we are in a far greater position to be honest. Unless the Glazers plan to do another IPO for 10% and actually use the proceeds of the second one to pay down the debt, our position is slightly changed in terms of debt owed while the options we have to pay it down have reduced.

IvySlayer

Keno 92 wrote: »

Yeah, I'm pretty sure they are the banks.

Investment banks underwriting an IPO sometimes buy shares to assess value of the shares (or so I'm told by himself).

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Using the best chance we had to reduce the debt by 50% or more, and only using it to pay off, at most, 20% resulting in a saving per year that will be nullified by the fees in relation to the IPO for the 2 to 3 years, and still leaving the issues of the bonds not having been paid back (due 2017).

I don't think we are in a far greater position to be honest. Unless the Glazers plan to do another IPO for 10% and actually use the proceeds of the second one to pay down the debt, our position is slightly changed in terms of debt owed while the options we have to pay it down have reduced.

I was just about to post this

:pac:

chainsawman

Yesterday, I found out that United have 650 million fans worldwide, If we all contribute €1 a fan, We would have contribute €650 million, clears the debt and buy top class midfielers... Sigh, I am ranting silly again..:D

The_Kew_Tour

So far this summer has been worse then last summer.

So far I said.:)

Vic Vinegar

When is the next pre-season game coming up?

Schism

Bombleswizzum wrote: »

When is the next pre-season game coming up?

Sunday, against Vålerenga.

IvySlayer

Bombleswizzum wrote: »

When is the next pre-season game coming up?

Augusy 5th in Norway.

MagicMarker

Bombleswizzum wrote: »

When is the next pre-season game coming up?

Sunday against Valerenga in Norway, then next Wed against Barcelona.

DM_7

The over allotment is the greenshoe option.

basically the bank/underwriter will oversell the stock to their clients at the beginning. They may sell up to 115percent of shares even though they only have 100

If the value of stock goes up when it goes 'live' The extra overallotment shares (the 2.5 mill mentioned) can then be bought by the bank, from the club at a set price - this price would be below the market value for stock on the exchange.

This would raise more funds for the seller but also cover the bank for overselling. If they didn't have the greenshoe option they would have to buy stock on the market at a big price, to fulfill all the stock options (they only had 100 to sell but need 115) that they originally sold to their clients.

if the stock price goes down they buy the shares on the market, this removes the 'supply' of shares people are trying to sell and hopefully protects the share price. In this case they would not use the extra shares.

sorry if thats not clear! Maybe google greenshoe or overallotments.

Vic Vinegar

Cheers guys.

Will Rooney, Nani et al be joining up with the squad for the next games or are they staying at home?

Mr. Guappa

Bombleswizzum wrote: »

Cheers guys.

Will Rooney, Nani et al be joining up with the squad for the next games or are they staying at home?

Neither - Nani is mowing Malcolm Glazers lawn while Rooney is valeting Joel Glazers new Chevrolet.

Corvo

Mr. Guappa wrote: »

Neither - Nani is mowing Malcolm Glazers lawn while Rooney is valeting Joel Glazers new Chevrolet.

Did you not hear? We sold both and the owners have pocketed the lot.

IvySlayer

Awkward when someone you kind of know announce they have signed for Liverpool.

racso1975

Griffin1988 wrote: »

Did you not hear? We sold both and the owners have pocketed the lot.

Along with the ronaldo money:p

Pro. F

Keno 92 wrote: »

I was going to post this article earlier but with all the financial talk I said I'd leave it.

Link


It goes on to compare his stats with Scholes (A bit pointless imo as Scholes played far less and is a totally different player) and Barry.

Two data points does not make a trend. And he doesn't even refer to random variation, never mind try to account for it. And then he tries to prove the theory that Carrick is a good CM by comparing him to one ancient CM and another poor CM. That article is laughable.

Jax Teller

Andy Green interview with Sky this morning .

ScummyMan

Copper_pipe wrote: »

ON THIS DAY In 2006, we signed Michael Carrick for £18.6m

Never mind yesterday, this was the blackest day in the clubs history!

J. Marston

Fenix wrote: »

Need some cheering up in here...



Current USA ladies striker, Alex Morgan.

There's no saving that shirt. Even she can't make it look good.

redzerdrog

Man.UnitedLad wrote: »

Never mind yesterday, this was the blackest day in the clubs history!

disgraceful comment about a player who has played an integral part in any success utd have had since he signed. There has been far worse signings and if anderson did half as much as carrick everyone would be signing his praises

Lord TSC

J. Marston wrote: »

Fenix wrote: »

Need some cheering up in here...



Current USA ladies striker, Alex Morgan.

There's no saving that shirt. Even she can't make it look good.

You are right. She needs to get it off

Vic Vinegar

redzerdrog wrote: »

disgraceful comment about a player who has played an integral part in any success utd have had since he signed. There has been far worse signings and if anderson did half as much as carrick everyone would be signing his praises

I think he's trying to be funny but failing miserably, either that or he's just stupid.

ScummyMan

redzerdrog wrote: »

disgraceful comment about a player who has played an integral part in any success utd have had since he signed. There has been far worse signings and if anderson did half as much as carrick everyone would be signing his praises

Ah I'm only joking mate just trying to lighten the mood in here a bit

In no way do I want to start a Carrick debate again, I can see what he offers to the team so I'm sitting on the fence on this one!

Jame Gumb

Coletrickle88 wrote: »

Andy Green interview with Sky this morning

I know very little about this guy, but he comes across as smug and one sided in his views.

Serious question - Would I be a "bad fan" if I shorted the stock (bet on the share price to fall)?

ScummyMan

Bombleswizzum wrote: »

I think he's trying to be funny but failing miserably, either that or he's just stupid.

Hmmm on second thoughts maybe it wasn't the wisest thing to say in here, apologies!

DM_7

Jame Gumb wrote: »

I know very little about this guy, but he comes across as smug and one sided in his views.

Serious question - Would I be a "bad fan" if I shorted the stock (bet on the share price to fall)?

How do you intend to borrow the shares so you can short sell them?

Imo no you wouldn't be a bad fan, just someone who plays the stock market.

Jame Gumb

DM-ICE wrote: »

Jame Gumb wrote: »

I know very little about this guy, but he comes across as smug and one sided in his views.

Serious question - Would I be a "bad fan" if I shorted the stock (bet on the share price to fall)?

How do you intend to borrow the shares so you can short sell them?

Imo no you wouldn't be a bad fan, just someone who plays the stock market.

Just do a financial spreadbet?

v3ttel

Actually, on the sponorship deal, I read earlier it was £28 million per season. According to Reuters, it is way, way more than that. It seems absolutely monstrous

Reuters wrote:

The deal is worth $60 million to $70 million a year and includes a $100 million activation fee that brings the total value to as much as $600 million

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/31/us-gm-manu-idUSBRE86T1HE20120731

$600 million = £382.5 million. "As much as" => probably less than this in reality.

According to Green in the video above:

Andy Green wrote:

It will reduce the debt from £425 million to around £350 million

This isn't bad news whatever way you slice it or dice it. Net debt reduces, and it also saves on interest. I'm quite happy to ignore the rest of his agenda and take that away.

A record breaking sponsorship deal, and an IPO which will be used to pay off at least some debt. All the news this week means that we will be in a better financial position than in the last few seasons, yet, reading some tripe here, you'd swear we were being liquidated.

Also of interest, a video of Gary Neville:

Gary Neville wrote:

Anyone who writes Manchester United off is well.....uninformed and foolish

Source: http://www.skysports.com/video/inline/0,,12602_7900571,00.html

Despite the meltdown, which seems to be happening on an alarmingly frequent basis, we're not completely ****ed financially (yet, at least), and we're not going to struggle for fourth position.

Try some positivity for a change lads.

Samich

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

I'm laughing so hard at the calls for Fergie to resign. For people to stay they fear United will go under and then claim they think Fergie should step down.....Jesus, there'd be no faster way to tank the club than to force Fergie to step down in a PR nightmare straight after a stock launch!

Sometimes I suspect some people are idiots. Reading back over some posts here, now I know who is an idiot :rolleyes:

Who's the idiot?

I wonder will people praise the Glazers when they clear the debt eventually, or will people just see it as "We cleared the debt!!!".

I'd rather the Glazers than Abrahmovich any day.

DM_7

Jame Gumb wrote: »

Just do a financial spreadbet?

Oh right so you would bet on the shares going down rather than actually borrowing the shares to trade with yourself.

anyway, either way I wouldn't blame you for trying. Not sure I would chance it myself, with the new TV deal, new sponsors on board, recent increased turnover the club should have plenty of good announcements, financial performance to help keep the stock high. Also add in the possibility of the prestige factor with a good number of people possibly wanting to own a piece of the club, making a high demand - the stock may be stable enough.

SlickRic

Samich wrote: »

I'd rather the Glazers than Abrahmovich any day.

like saying I'd rather Stalin than Hitler

Samich

SlickRic wrote: »

like saying I'd rather Stalin than Hitler

Maybe :P The comparisons of Gill and Fergie to Fitzpatrick and Quinn were just crazy.

Mitch Connor

Samich wrote: »

Maybe :P The comparisons of Gill and Fergie to Fitzpatrick and Quinn were just crazy.

The comparison was ment to be the Glazers to those - ie. they are big succesful business men who have made loads of money so whatever they are doing must be the correct course of action for their business and investors.

Samich

Mitch Connor wrote: »

The comparison was ment to be the Glazers to those - ie. they are big succesful business men who have made loads of money so whatever they are doing must be the correct course of action for their business and investors.

Hmmmm ok, you said last night that Fergie and Gill were taking the guts of 140 million out of the club.

Lord TSC

Samich wrote: »

Who's the idiot?

As I said, anyone who calls for Fergie to step down....

keane2097

Watch the two boys with their clique!

Samich

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

As I said, anyone who calls for Fergie to step down....

Oh right, thought you were on about one poster in particular.

s_carnage

Samich wrote: »

Oh right, thought you were on about one poster in particular.

Well then who said it to you last night?? You mentioned it was said in this forum that there was posters saying sack Fergie. Went through it this morning and can't recall anyone even mentioning that.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79993915&postcount=7131

Pro. F

Samich wrote: »

Hmmmm ok, you said last night that Fergie and Gill were taking the guts of 140 million out of the club.

Mitch has clarified that he was comparing Fitzpatrick et al to the Glazers, not Fergie and Gill. There have been a lot of things said on this thread since the latest IPO news came through, it's all very complicated and emotions have been running high. Mitch's paragraph comparing people to Fitzpatrick et al was a little unclear, but he has clarified it now. Could you not just for once accept that you misunderstood somebody? Do you have to take the path of dickheaded, purposeful simple mindedness every single time?

lordgoat

s_carnage wrote: »

Well then who said it to you last night?? You mentioned it was said in this forum that there was posters saying sack Fergie. Went through it this morning and can't recall anyone even mentioning that.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79993915&postcount=7131

Typical ****e as normal. (not you s_car).

Red Crow

Sir Alex Ferguson isn't bigger than Manchester United and I think he should fully disclose his financial interests in Manchester United and his takings as a part of this IPO.

If the situation arises where Sir Alex Ferguson has profited from this well then I think he should step down as he is probably the only barrier between a fan backlash against the Glazers which would severely damage the potential value of the IPO and Manchester United. If he is taking the Class B shares as a replacement of direct financial benefits eg. Bonuses' etc. then I don't have a problem. In the likely event that this is untrue then he has abused his position and is only backing the Glazers as he gaining financially from it then he has no option but to step down as he has abused his goodwill with the fans.

For a man who has come out with the line 'No value in the market' time and time again I think it's terribly rich when the likes of himself and David Gill along with the parasites are extracting money from the club that could be used to buy players.

Regardless he has defended the Glazers on numerous occasions and he needs to shut up at this stage.

SlickRic

Samich, you're not dumb. you know what the opposite point of view is. you don't need to keep poking your stick at the issue.

Fergie and Gill aren't taking 140m out of the club, and you know Mitch wasn't saying that. all he's saying is that according to the prospectus, they potentially stand to benefit financially if they are considered senior management etc and get shares.

some of your fellow fans take issue with that.

Adamcp898

I don't feel like trawling through 20/30 pages of posts so if this has been mentioned somewhere sorry, but where does it say Fergie will benefit from this share sale directly, as in he'll get paid?

Samich

s_carnage wrote: »

Well then who said it to you last night?? You mentioned it was said in this forum that there was posters saying sack Fergie. Went through it this morning and can't recall anyone even mentioning that.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79993915&postcount=7131

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79991227&postcount=6948

Gotta improve your searching skills.

Pro. F wrote: »

Mitch has clarified that he was comparing Fitzpatrick et al to the Glazers, not Fergie and Gill. There have been a lot of things said on this thread since the latest IPO news came through, it's all very complicated and emotions have been running high. Mitch's paragraph comparing people to Fitzpatrick et al was a little unclear, but he has clarified it now. Could you not just for once accept that you misunderstood somebody? Do you have to take the path of dickheaded, purposeful simple mindedness every single time?

SlickRic wrote: »

Samich, you're not dumb. you know what the opposite point of view is. you don't need to keep poking your stick at the issue.

Fergie and Gill aren't taking 140m out of the club, and you know Mitch wasn't saying that. all he's saying is that according to the prospectus, they potentially stand to benefit financially if they are considered senior management etc and get shares.

some of your fellow fans take issue with that.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79991624&postcount=6976

Originally posted by Mitch Connor
But Fergie, Gill and the Glazers are sharing the the guts of 140million, so all is well cause they know what they are doing, they are succesful business men. Like Sean Quinn. Like Sean Fitzpatrick. Like Bernie Madof. Like the Enron guys.

Looks to me like he's comparing Gill and Fergie to the bankers here (along with Glazers). If not, should have been made clear.

keane2097

SlickRic wrote: »

Samich, you're not dumb. you know what the opposite point of view is. you don't need to keep poking your stick at the issue.

Fergie and Gill aren't taking 140m out of the club, and you know Mitch wasn't saying that. all he's saying is that according to the prospectus, they potentially stand to benefit financially if they are considered senior management etc and get shares.

some of your fellow fans take issue with that.

When did you stop being a mod?