Manchester United Talk/Gossip/Rumours Thread 11/12

Ashbourne hoop

MoscowFlyer wrote: »

The debt FAR and AWAY outweighs all the other things. United were going to grow and grow no matter who their owners were, any successful business man/people could do the same job as the Glazers. As for not interfering in footballing matters? Again, any owner could do this because they have seen Fergie at work, it's not like they would buy the club and not have a clue what is going on and what is the best way for the club to be ran.

Fact is, they should never have been allowed to buy the club the way they did. Man Utd is a printing money machine that has over £400m worth of debt hanging over it's head. It's a disgrace.

Honestly can't see how anybody could disagree with this. If Utd didn't have the Glazers huge debt hanging over them, they could blow city out of the water (even allowing for City's petrodollars). Yes they've brought in more sponsorhip partners etc but the debt is not going away, I don't thinp the IPO will be as successful as they think it will.

Al Capwned

Ashbourne wrote:

but the debt is not going away, I don't thinp the IPO will be as successful as they think it will.

Care to elaborate on your reasons for thinking this. I am a million miles from knowing enough about the IPO to offer an opinion, and I only know peoples opinions from here and elsewhere.

Mitch Connor

Ashbourne hoop wrote: »

Honestly can't see how anybody could disagree with this. If Utd didn't have the Glazers huge debt hanging over them, they could blow city out of the water (even allowing for City's petrodollars). Yes they've brought in more sponsorhip partners etc but the debt is not going away, I don't thinp the IPO will be as successful as they think it will.

that is just your opinion though. it isn't fact.

the IPO could be a success and wipe out the majority, if not all, of the debt. If it does, United will be in a fantastic position.

We'll know within 88 days anyway.

Pro. F

kryogen wrote: »

Di Matteo did not impress in the league last season so it will be interesting to see how he does this season, if they get off to a bad start then all hell could break loose again. They are not a team I get overly concerned about these days but they have the players to mount a real challenge if things go well for them.

They get on a run and they will consistently grind out results, they have some bad results the wheels will probably come off again

I wasn't really sure what way I would bet on the Di Matteo, Terry, Lampard management triad, but this really sounds like a sensible view of it to me.

Blatter

If there's one area I do trust the Glazers in, it's business. If they're confident that this IPO will be a success, then so am I.

ozzy jr

Mitch Connor wrote: »

the IPO could be a success and wipe out the majority, if not all, of the debt. If it does, United will be in a fantastic position.

I think you'll find it's the Glazers that'll be in the fantastic position.

They don't repay debt, they just restructure it.

Mitch Connor

ozzy jr wrote: »

I think you'll find it's the Glazers that'll be in the fantastic position.

They don't repay debt, they just restructure it.

i think you will find the doc says the proceeds of the ipo would be used to pay off the debt.

Pro. F

I wonder will the proportion of shares sold in this IPO be low enough to be close to, or below, the amount where they can be bought out by the larger shareholder (the Glazers) with a compulsory purchase order.

I'm not sure if the above paragraph makes any sense at all

helimachoptor

Even if the IPO wipes off half the debt, that is a huge boost for the club

wheres me jumpa

Any ideas how much this will raise? Ive seen the 64 million figure mentioned, is this is a mininimum / potential figure?

helimachoptor

wheres me jumpa wrote: »

Any ideas how much this will raise? Ive seen the 64 million figure mentioned, is this is a mininimum / potential figure?

think thats a minimum.

Lets say it raised 50% off the current debt.
Doing some simple maths, all interest repayments are cut by 50%, that is a lot of money available for investment in the team

wheres me jumpa

helimachoptor wrote: »

investment in the team

Here's hoping.

homerjay2005

if there is no dividend or much voting power, why would people invest?

thats the bit i cant understand. if i for example wanted to buy 1k of shares personally, i would do so for 2 reasons -

1 - cos i love the club and want a part of it.
2 - the club is raking in money and high profits, therefore i could take a share in that and possibly resell my shares at a profit if the club turnover increased.

but why incentive is there to buy these shares, is share value the only benifit?

Lord TSC

I do think there'll be a lot of people who want shares simply to say they own part of Man United....I have a feeling you'll see loads of people with little knowldge (and I'm including myself here) buying shares so they can feel like they own a little part of the team.

Mitch Connor

wheres me jumpa wrote: »

Any ideas how much this will raise? Ive seen the 64 million figure mentioned, is this is a mininimum / potential figure?

It says, right at the beginning of the document that the $100million figure is "Estimated solely for the purpose of calculating the registration fee in accordance with Rule 457(o) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended."

It doesn't really mean anything, Unied will be aiming for a lot higher than 100million.

Mitch Connor

homerjay2005 wrote: »

if there is no dividend or much voting power, why would people invest?

thats the bit i cant understand. if i for example wanted to buy 1k of shares personally, i would do so for 2 reasons -

1 - cos i love the club and want a part of it.
2 - the club is raking in money and high profits, therefore i could take a share in that and possibly resell my shares at a profit if the club turnover increased.

but why incentive is there to buy these shares, is share value the only benifit?

I don't undestand it myself either, but the reality is this structure is not uncomon in America, so there is an appetite for it there and Google'd float was done on exactly the same terms.

wheres me jumpa

homerjay2005 wrote: »

1 - cos i love the club and want a part of it.

At the very least a small percentage of fans across the globe will do so for this.

Ashbourne hoop

alproctor wrote: »

Care to elaborate on your reasons for thinking this. I am a million miles from knowing enough about the IPO to offer an opinion, and I only know peoples opinions from here and elsewhere.

Mitch Connor wrote: »

that is just your opinion though. it isn't fact.

the IPO could be a success and wipe out the majority, if not all, of the debt. If it does, United will be in a fantastic position.

We'll know within 88 days anyway.

Yes of course it's only my opinion, I'd need a crystal ball for it to be a fact. I just wonder about the desire for people to buy shares during a period of global recession, that will not have a dividend or voting rights. As you say we'll know in 88 days anyway. also wouldn't hold my breath on it meaning more transfer money being available.

Pro. F

Blatter wrote: »

If there's one area I do trust the Glazers in, it's business. If they're confident that this IPO will be a success, then so am I.

Just on this. I agree of course that the Glazers and their ilk know a shìt load about how to make money grow and how to dance around the finances to suit themselves. The moves they pull are gass crack and often very impressive.

But on the general point of successful big business people knowing what they are doing, there's something to note. The usual course of action is taking huge gambles while risking other people's money. Highly informed gambles, but still extremely risky gambles. So the cream at the top don't necessarily know more than all their competitors. It's often the case that they have just had their gambles come in. And even when their gambles fail, they can just role the dice again because it wasn't their money they risked in the first place.

I don't think it would surprise anybody if this IPO performed well and I doubt it would be the end of the world if it performed badly. But equally I don't think we should over look the high risk strategies of big business which underlie the entire plan that the Glazers have set in place.

There was an excellent Malcolm Gladwell article on this aspect of big business, but I can't link it now because I'm on my phone.

DM_7

The Packers sold over a quarter of a million 'shares' recently to expand their stadium. They were raising over 130 million dollars.

Catch was, the shares have no dividend, are not on the stock exchange, I don't think they could even be sold - only transferred to family members. Basically for 250 dollars you get a certificate and entry to the stockholders meeting.

So there is a market for the kind of thing United are offering. At least the United stock can go up in vlue and be sold on.

Sgt Pepper 64

kryogen wrote: »

As you have given up, can you answer me now, what source do you have for us offering Hazard more money then you?

What does it say about how much you paid the agent, contrasting it with how much United/City were willing to pay him?

Do you understand the contradiction in your claim that the debt ties our hands so much when we were apparently able to out do you with a wage offer?

I am expecting a pretty good source here!

Here you go!

http://www.insidefutbol.com/2012/07/01/chelseas-plan-to-dump-boring-football-at-heart-of-eden-hazards-decision-to-join-blues/64740/

I'm not going to win any argument, because there isnt one.

And yes I do understand the contradiction, but do you understand the contradiction of trying to raise 100 million, whilst spending 50 million as you stated last summer and will probably spend close to that again?!

And yes it is a good article regardless of the headline, beacuse it basically says what you have been saying. It wont affect transfers and will help reduce the debt repayments

have a nice day

DM_7

Sgt Pepper 64 wrote: »

And yes I do understand the contradiction, but do you understand the contradiction of trying to raise 100 million, whilst spending 50 million as you stated last summer and will probably spend close to that again?!

I hope you don't run a business.

First off the idea is not to only raise 100 million, its only an initial figure.

Now consider what happens if the Glazers used only the clubs money to pay the debt - basically the club would not function. The club would not compete off the field for players and staff meaning they could not compete on the field. This would lead to financial losses from less prize money and less commercial revenue. They wouldn't raise enough money this way to actually pay all the bills.

the IPO doesn't take money out of the club but raises additional funds specifically to pay off the debt. This allows the money the club is making to be used to strenghten the clubs operations.

Simply put, taking money out of the club to pay debt damages the club (the Glazers asset). Raising new funds allows the club a chance to continue investing in itself by buying new players, improving facilities etc using the money it has on hand.

Sgt Pepper 64

DM-ICE wrote: »

I hope you don't run a business.

First off the idea is not to only raise 100 million, its only an initial figure.

Now consider what happens if the Glazers used only the clubs money to pay the debt - basically the club would not function. The club would not compete off the field for players and staff meaning they could not compete on the field. This would lead to financial losses from less prize money and less commercial revenue. They wouldn't raise enough money this way to actually pay all the bills.

the IPO doesn't take money out of the club but raises additional funds specifically to pay off the debt. This allows the money the club is making to be used to strenghten the clubs operations.

Simply put, taking money out of the club to pay debt damages the club (the Glazers asset). Raising new funds allows the club a chance to continue investing in itself by buying new players, improving facilities etc using the money it has on hand.

So using this idea then, where does the money from transfers out go?

(Example - Ronaldo)

Does that put safely away in a big future transfers\ improve facilities pot or does that get used to pay off debt?

And is all this transparent? How can you be that money that should be used for the good of the club isnt being used in some other non football way?

I must admit, I'm fascinated by all this now and why havent other clubs like Portsmouth, been able to do the same sort of things? (keep renewing debt whilst buying players) Obviously they dont have the pulling power of Utd

kryogen

Whoever asked about the total cost thus far to the club (I believe it is around 1billion or so), they did save a **** load on corporate tax etc and Im on the phone now so can't link but try read some of Andy Green's (andersred) blog, he is quite informative when it comes to the financial side of things.

@ Sgt Pepper, quick answer for you re Portsmouth, they couldnt pay their debts, United can. Even now United can, it costs just under 40million a year. Well within United capabilities, the info is all out there with your helpful friend google

Paul Tergat

kryogen wrote: »

Whoever asked about the total cost thus far to the club (I believe it is around 1billion or so), they did save a **** load on corporate tax etc and Im on the phone now so can't link but try read some of Andy Green's (andersred) blog, he is quite informative when it comes to the financial side of things.

@ Sgt Pepper, quick answer for you re Portsmouth, they couldnt pay their debts, United can. Even now United can, it costs just under 40million a year. Well within United capabilities, the info is all out there with your helpful friend google

Yeah mate it was me but i delete it as i found out from Andersred blog - £500m he says so far

DM_7

Portsmouth were losing money, costs were greater than income. Uniteds annual income is more than costs. Simple as that.

United paper value due to the income, turnover etc is massive, that puts a value on the stock. Pompey wouldn't have raised much as they were not turning over enough money.

re the Ronaldo money question, thats not relevant to the ipo, in theory the glazers could do what they wanted with that transfer money. In the IPO it states the money raised is to be used to pay off debts so that is where it has to go.

Mikeyt086

Lots of talk on the tweeter-twatter that Baines will be wrapped up tomorrow for £9m. Now, I know we have discussed his pros and cons at depth but I think for that price it is a good piece of business. He either starts for us or he forces Evra to pull the finger out to keep his place, worth it for £9m.

If we did that then signed (muppet hat on) say Joao Moutinho, I would just walk up and hug every United fan I see.

Mr.Crinklewood

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

Lots of talk on the tweeter-twatter that Baines will be wrapped up tomorrow for £9m. Now, I know we have discussed his pros and cons at depth but I think for that price it is a good piece of business. He either starts for us or he forces Evra to pull the finger out to keep his place, worth it for £9m.

If we did that then signed (muppet hat on) say Joao Moutinho, I would just walk up and hug every United fan I see.

Would we have to travel to Bray for the hug?

Giggsy11

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

Lots of talk on the tweeter-twatter that Baines will be wrapped up tomorrow for £9m. Now, I know we have discussed his pros and cons at depth but I think for that price it is a good piece of business. He either starts for us or he forces Evra to pull the finger out to keep his place, worth it for £9m.

If we did that then signed (muppet hat on) say Joao Moutinho, I would just walk up and hug every United fan I see.

For 9 Million, it will be a very good signing. Hopefully it's not just twitter rumors.

Mitch Connor

Baines for 9million.... I'd be happy with that. Baines would be a good squad player for us and 9million is a good price for him.

Felexicon

Mr.Crinklewood wrote: »

Would we have to travel to Bray for the hug?

I wouldn't go to Bray for anything less than a reach around

MagicMarker

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

Lots of talk on the tweeter-twatter that Baines will be wrapped up tomorrow for £9m.

Where are you seeing this?

homerjay2005

if we get him for 9million the i am happy with that. the money being talked about last week was 15million, which is a huge huge difference.

that means then, one signing left and it better be a f*cking midfielder!

Kagawa + Powell + Baines + CM = our best summer since 2007.

lets wait and see what happens though.

Kylo Ren

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

Lots of talk on the tweeter-twatter that Baines will be wrapped up tomorrow for £9m. Now, I know we have discussed his pros and cons at depth but I think for that price it is a good piece of business. He either starts for us or he forces Evra to pull the finger out to keep his place, worth it for £9m.

If we did that then signed (muppet hat on) say Joao Moutinho, I would just walk up and hug every United fan I see.

I've been against the signing of him but for 9m it would be very good business.

Mitch Connor

Not seeing anything about Baines from any of the people or places I would expect to if there was truth to it.

homerjay2005

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Not seeing anything about Baines from any of the people or places I would expect to if there was truth to it.

ya, as usual, looks like it came from new ITK account.

the deal probably depends on evertons valuation matching that of Uniteds...

Giggsy11

New faces primed for tour

The Reds' new faces will get a proper taste of life at Manchester United during the DHL tour this summer.

Close-season acquisitions Shinji Kagawa and Nick Powell will integrate with their new team-mates and several promising youngsters will also form part of the squad as fans in South Africa, China and Scandinavia get the opportunity to demonstrate the worldwide appeal of the 19-times champions.

Sir Alex Ferguson has suggested he is close to finalising his plans for the squad in preparation for the new campaign with Durban the first stop on the global tour. Of course, when the official party is announced, ManUtd.com will break the news.

"It’ll be important for Shinji Kagawa, who will be coming on his first tour with us," the boss told MUTV. "He’ll get to know players like Paul Scholes, Michael Carrick and Rio Ferdinand – the experienced players in the camp. It’ll be important for the boy to get settled in.

"The issue is getting to know the players and getting to mix them. They’ll eat together for nearly two weeks and it’s an important time. Shinji doesn’t speak English so he’ll have his interpreter with him and hopefully,by the time he comes back, he’ll speak good Scottish!

"Of course, we have Nick Powell as well who is 18 so it’ll be a great step up for the boy. We’ll take a few of the young players too - potentially including the likes of Tyler Blackett, Larnell Cole, Jesse Lingard and Michael Keane.

"[Michael Keane's brother] Will has, of course, got a bad injury and will be out for almost a year which is a blow for the boy

"But we’ll take a good collection of the young players who are emerging through the ranks."

Blackett signed a professional contract this week after becoming a permanent fixture in the Academy side last season, playing either at left-back or the centre of defence. Cole and Lingard were key performers for Warren Joyce's successful Reserves side in wide midfield roles and were both shortlisted for the Player of the Year prize at that level.

Michael Keane is currently with the England Under-19 squad in Estonia, competing in the European Championship, but could be available later in the month. The centre-back has made startling progress at the club and made his first-team debut at Aldershot in last year's Carling Cup tie..

http://www.manutd.com/en/Tour2012Teaser/Tour2012News/2012/Jul/manchester-united-could-include-blackett-keane-lingard-cole-in-tour-squad.aspx#



Will be good to see Blackett, Cole, Lingard, Keane with first team.

DM_7

How did Blackett get on last season. It was half way through last season that I realsied how young he actually is.

homerjay2005

does anybody have the list of players who went out on loan last season and whose spells are finished now?

DM_7

homerjay2005 wrote: »

does anybody have the list of players who went out on loan last season and whose spells are finished now?

I assume this is everyone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011%E2%80%9312_Manchester_United_F.C._season#Loan_out

It does mention Gladstony

kryogen

If Baines was coming at 9million it would be good, can't see it though, and not seeing it anywhere credible online either

Gamb!t

kryogen wrote: »

City paid 25million for him

I need to brush up on my transfer skills, I thought he went on a free:cool:

Delboy5

Probably nothing in it but Norman Whiteside just tweeted that he was looking forward to see what tomorrow brings...

MagicMarker

Can we please just ban all random talk from twitter?

Patsy fyre

Not sure what to make of this but massimo taibi just tweeted that it should be an interesting few weeks...

kryogen

Patsy fyre wrote: »

Not sure what to make of this but massimo taibi just tweeted that it should be an interesting few weeks...

Not sure what you would make of that anyway

Who cares like ?

Jimmy Iovine

Is Fryers going to Spurs? I know everyone hates Twitter these days but one of the guys I follow, @foreverunitedRI, who seems to know everything about the younger players has gone off on a rant tonight about Fryers and has aimed his rant at one agent who represents Tom Lawrence.

He likes his rants (I've been on the end of a few) but he seems to be talking a bit of sense here. The agent compared the young lad to Cantona, and the Forever United guy has gone a spiel saying that this is what is wrong with the game. He linked in the Fryers situation as well, saying that he's chasing the money by going to Spurs and not staying with United.

homerjay2005

MagicMarker wrote: »

Can we please just ban all random talk from twitter?

Only mentioning reputable sources is the way to go...im all for banning twitter rumours though that are not from a solid source.

markc1184

Is there such thing as a solid source these days?

Paul Tergat

We wont get Baines for a measly 9m