Glazier to take over Man United.

super_furry

Malcolm Glazer has launched a formal takeover bid for Manchester United after buying the 28.7% stake of Irish racing tycoons JP McManus and John Magnier.

Bad, bad news for United fans but once he was willing to pay £3 a share from McManus and Magnier, it was always going to happen.

SteM

super_furry wrote:

Bad, bad news for United fans.

Not according to some of the people who post here.

super_furry

Can't see how anyone could view it as a positive thing to be honest. He's a moneyman, who unlike Abromovich is interested in only what he can take out of the club and not what he can do for it.

Pal

LONDON (AFX) - Malcolm Glazer has purchased the 28.7 pct stake in Manchester
United PLC owned by JP McManus and John Magnier, the Irish horse racing
millionaires through their Cubic Expression vehicle, for 300 pence a share.
The move takes the US sports tycoon's holding in Man Utd to 56.9 pct,
triggering under UK takeover rules a mandatory offer for the Premiership
football club.
The offer will be 300 pence in cash for each share, valuing Man Utd at 790.3
mln stg.
Man Utd's board said last month it will not recommend a Glazer offer.

Guy:Incognito

I'm not up on how the whole shareholding thing works, but seeing as he now has 56% of the shares, why does he need to buy the rest, is that not a controlling shareholding that would allow him to outvote everyone else and do what he likes anyway, without have to spend another few hundred million?

SteM

Stekelly wrote:

I'm not up on how the whole shareholding thing works, but seeing as he now has 56% of the shares, why does he need to buy the rest, is that not a controlling shareholding that would allow him to outvote everyone else and do what he likes anyway, without have to spend another few hundred million?

Regulations it would seem....

As a result of the purchase from Cubic, the Red Football Limited Partnership
group has acquired, in aggregate, 149,886,193 Shares, representing approximately 56.9 per cent. of the issued share capital of Manchester United.

Accordingly, Red is now required to make an offer, in accordance with the
provisions of Rule 9 of the City Code on Takeovers and Mergers, for the issued share capital of Manchester United which is not already owned by Red or any other member of the Red Football Limited Partnership group (the "Offer").

jesus_thats_gre

"not for sale" even though we are a publicly listed company.. funny stuff..

uberwolf

afaik according to Stock rules the amount of share that the Irish lads had was .1% under the absolute max you were allowed have without making a bid for the remainder of the shares.

I've no idea what happens if thats refused. He still controls the club I guess. But there was no point in him moving unless he got the Irish shares first.

yop

Interesting times ahead, cannot be good though.

Guy:Incognito

so does he just have to make an "offer" or does he actually have to buy the other shares? for example if he wrote to the other shareholders and said, "ill give you 10p a share" and they said sod off , does that counts as his offer?

LegacyUser

Great stuff........I hope he gets rid of Fergie, and shakes things up a bit..

elbow316

Manchester United are not for sale!!111!1 lol.........

SteM

Stekelly wrote:

so does he just have to make an "offer" or does he actually have to buy the other shares? for example if he wrote to the other shareholders and said, "ill give you 10p a share" and they said sod off , does that counts as his offer?

I'm sure he has to offer what he paid for the CE doesn't he? I'm fairly sure that he's locked into offering that price under regulations now.

@yop - I agree 100%.

super_furry

Bruachain, how can you say that? He's borrowing against the assests of the club to fund his bid. The club will be up to £200million in debt as soon as he takes over and the club's profits will pay for his repayments.

PHB

well then, hmm, this is gona get interesting.
On the plus side, 20 mill for transfers in the summer!

I actually have total faith in his ability to bring the club back out of debt, but this quite frankly isn't something i'm happy to see

super_furry

I thank God that Liverpool never went down the PLC route because this kind of thing was a timebomb waiting to happen. I honestly can't see how someone putting the club in such massive debt could be considered anything but a disaster. Money made from the club will no longer go back to the club but towards paying off Glazers debt - in essence the club are paying for him to take control of them.

The £20million for players is nothing but a sop towards supporters and I can't believe anyone would fall for it - what did United spend on players in the last two seasons? I have an intense dislike for Man Yoo, but even I wouldn't wish this on them.

SteM

super_furry wrote:

The £20million for players is nothing but a sop towards supporters and I can't believe anyone would fall for it - what did United spend on players in the last two seasons?

Exactly, £20m in today's market is nothing to shout about.

PHB

20 mill a year for 10 years is what he has promised for transfers in his business plan
Either way, if Fergie sticks to 4-3-3, he is going to sell both Saha and Smith, or even Van Nist since theres no point in having 4 players for one position.


Does anyone know what happens if he doesnt get the 75% needed?
Could that possibily happen?

elbow316

You can try and kid yourself but anyone who knows what they are talking about knows that this is very, very bad news for United. Of course all the stuff being said about this making them the new Leeds etc, is exagerated but its going to screw the club up long-term.

The Rooster

super_furry wrote:

Bruachain, how can you say that? He's borrowing against the assests of the club to fund his bid. The club will be up to £200million in debt as soon as he takes over and the club's profits will pay for his repayments.

But the only way he can get money, is if the club makes big profits. And presumably the more successful the club is the more profits it will make, so surely Glazer will strive to make the club as succesful as possible?

As for the bid for the rest of the club - he will have to offer the remaining shareholders the same as he paid Cubic, i.e. £3 per share I understand.

From my understanding of these type of transactions, it would be unusual if most of the remaining shareholders did not accept the offer, as there is a risk that the value of the remaining shares will decrease as they now represent a "minority interest". Of course this should not bother the fans who are shareholders. However if Glazer gets control of 75% then the £3 offer becomes unconditional, which means that the remaining shareholders are forced to sell their shares, even if they are "not for sale"!

So I guess the next challenge for the Shareholders Group will be to try and get 25%, so they can remain a minority shareholder going forward. They might not have any real power, but they could cause massive headaches for Glazer if things werent going well. Does anyone know what % they have or claim to have?

PHB

So once he gets to 75%, he can force a bid,m and then will own it 100%?
I was wondering how he could possibily transfer debt but now it makes sense.
Once he owns 100%, can he make the club privatly owned again?

I'm to an extent with Rooster, I figure the only way he can pay off the debt is by either
A. Selling the club at a huge loss since it will owe 200mill
B. Paying off the debt by profits.

This guy is in it for the long haul, since thats the only way his business plan can work.
He will have to make huge profits which is totally linked to the success on the football pitch, thus I can't see the football being that bad.

LegacyUser

It's the biggest club in the world.

I'm a Utd fan, and the sooner all these sentimentalists get over the fact that most of the bigger clubs are already PLC's, and that soccer is a business, and that the only sport that happens is the 90 minutes on a Saturday afternoon, the the less póxy protests there will be.

Sure there are some of the greatest ever players playing at the moment, and when 22 men are on the pitch all the money they are paid and the financial clout of the clubs goes out the window, but othersie its business time.

I admire Liverpool, the history around Anfield, even Stamford Bridge etc. but the reality is that unless these clubs embrace the business end of things, they will fall behind. Thats why the Champions League is so important, ££££. Thats why Arsenal are moving stadiums, because a well-run stadium can make you money.

Thats the reality...

Big Nelly

Wasnt he going to get the loan and pay it back against the ticket sales for the next few years and with plans of bringing the ground up to 70,000(cant remember how many) he should have it paided off in no time....full house most weeks and then for European games......still will have advertising money and so on to use for the club which as everyone know is huge.....also wont have to pay a big lump sum to the shareholders each year......maybe I am way off but thats how I see it...maybe I am way off the mark!!

I wish he would tkae over at Sheffield Wednesday....hopefully we win tonite and get back into Championship!!!

Take it

This is bad news for tge PL not just united

BolBill

Ah be gorra a leprachuan taking over at Man U, waaaaahhhh ha ha

MrJoeSoap

Take it wrote:

This is bad news for tge PL not just united

Feel free to expand

The Rooster

If Glazer takes 100% ownership, then United stop being a quoted PLC. It will automatically become private, though in theory at any time he could put them on the stock market again.

Even if he only owns 70%, I think its very likely that the shares will be de-listed (in fact I'd say there will be no choice in the matter because each individual share Glazer holds would be more valuable that every other individual share)- so it will be a similar situation to Liverpool with a major shareholder and lots of small shareholders. By the way Liverpool are a PLC, just not a quoted PLC.

jesus_thats_gre

When he owns 75% and 1 share he can delist them from the stock exchange and transfer his debt onto the club. When he owns 90% and 1 share he can make a compulsory purchase of all remaining shares..

He currently only owns 57%.

SteM

PHB wrote:

20 mill a year for 10 years is what he has promised for transfers in his business plan

Where did you read this? Anything I've read has only mentioned this summer, nothing to do a 10 year plan.

The Rooster

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

When he owns 75% and 1 share he can delist them from the stock exchange and transfer his debt onto the club.

what do you mean by this?

If you are saying that the debt becomes the debt of Man Utd, and that ManU become responsible for the repayments, and that if things go bad and they can't repay it that the banks can take possession of ManU assets such as Old Trafford instead - then my understanding is that you are most certainly wrong.

What can happen is the MUFC can fund Glazer's loan repayments - but only out of profits made by MUFC (and that's regardless of what his ownership is).

LizardKing

SteM wrote:

Exactly, £20m in today's market is nothing to shout about.

Yeah and in Ten years you'll barely get 1 decent player for £20 million ...

Keano_sli

Well the odds were always that it would happen, I'm certainly not happy about it in a "Better the devil you know" kind of way. But it seems inevitable now that he has the CE shares that he will gain full control.
Just heard on the radio he has got the Harry Dobson shares bringing him up to around 62%.
Well as Sir Alex would say its certainly Squeaky bum time now, let us United fans just hope that United will rise to the situation as it has done in the past when things were bad, and to put it in perspective the Munich air chrash was a much worse blow for United and see how we overcame that.

Long live the Republic of Mancunia!

SteM

LizardKing wrote:

Yeah and in Ten years you'll barely get 1 decent player for £20 million ...

We might end up buying Forlan back for £20m in 10 years time

jesus_thats_gre

The Rooster wrote:

what do you mean by this?

If you are saying that the debt becomes the debt of Man Utd, and that ManU become responsible for the repayments, and that if things go bad and they can't repay it that the banks can take possession of ManU assets such as Old Trafford instead - then my understanding is that you are most certainly wrong.

What can happen is the MUFC can fund Glazer's loan repayments - but only out of profits made by MUFC (and that's regardless of what his ownership is).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4540939.stm

"If he gets 75% plus one share, United could be delisted from the stock exchange and Mr Glazer could transfer his debt onto the club."

Draupnir

The Rooster wrote:

what do you mean by this?

If you are saying that the debt becomes the debt of Man Utd, and that ManU become responsible for the repayments, and that if things go bad and they can't repay it that the banks can take possession of ManU assets such as Old Trafford instead - then my understanding is that you are most certainly wrong.

hes spot on actually. once Glazer owns the 75% +1 then his debt is transferred to Man U. Thats how business and shares work. So yes, if he failed to repay the loans and other stuff, Man U would be repossessible by the money lenders.

However, I thnk we have to realise, the man is obviously buying the club to make money, not just to piss off fans. I reckon he will do it too. Man United is the biggest brand in the world of sport behind maybe the World Cup and Olympics.

He most certainly must have an idea that he can make a lot of money from it and its definitely not going to be his intention to screw the club into debt.

Im not sure its such a bad thing. An Abramovich type might be worse in fact. Abramovich doesnt own Chelsea to make money, he uses it to avoid tax payments in his native Russia, similar to the Norwegian owners of Hartlepool United. Should that type of owner decide to walk out, they leave behind massive wages which couldnt be supported by a normal set of shareholders.

At least Glazer will have a financial responsibility to himself to make money and thus, make United money.

However, the problem for fans such as the shareholders united boys, is that to do it, he will most likely raise ticket prices and merchandise prices. That I think is the crux of their argument. A fair one as it may be, it doesnt logically make sense to expect any owner to keep prices of goods low to suit the customer. Once he is competitive he will be fine.

jesus_thats_gre

Statement of the day has to go to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_utd/4541093.stm

Nick Towle, chairman of fans' pressure group, Shareholders United, claimed he has ripped up his season ticket.

Massive sacrifice there Nick..

BKtje

Massive sacrifice there Nick..

Yer rofl. ALl those games left to be played at OT this season.

Im not sure how i feel about Glazier taking over. I dont think think im happy about it but im not going to cry just yet. Lets see what he does and then cry.

SteM

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Statement of the day has to go to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_utd/4541093.stm




Massive sacrifice there Nick..

It's all well and good being smug about it JTG but obviously he's not renewing next season just in case you didn't realise.

I think it's a big deal to give up a season ticket for a United fan as they are so hard to come by - some are passed down through family members. He must feel strongly about the issue.

Badabing

Anybody know if Dermot Desmond sold his shares?

SteM

There are rumors flying that Harry Dobson has sold his 6.5% block of shares too.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Keano_sli

SteM wrote:

There are rumors flying that Harry Dobson has sold his 6.5% block of shares too.

Not rumor mate, confirmed fact now I'm afraid.

yop

Dobson sell his shares, now owns 63%

http://skysports.planetfootball.com/Article.asp?id=276250

MrJoeSoap

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Massive sacrifice there Nick..

Oh man that had me in stitches! Keep 'em coming!

Ronan

upset ? well I am in 2 minds really. I am certainly not thinking like the doom and gloom merchants who think Utd will go the Leeds route, but I am worried that he has basically borrowed every cent he could to buy the club and therefore will have to make his money back otherways (welcome to Vodafone Stadium ). I suppose on the plus side, he is in it to make money, so therefor it is in his interests that the club perform, so I am sure he isn't going to just bleed the club dry.

Also, sadly I think this will be it for Fergie, would be suprised if he is in charge next year now.

jank

Cant believe people are gald that he is after taking over. I hope this type of thing will never happen to Arsenal

LoneGunM@n

IMO, this is an awful thing for MUFC ... if the rumours are true, then he's going to sell Old Trafford on a lease back agreement and sell the name of the stadium to the highest bidder [as said by Ronan - welcome to Vodafone Stadium]!!

He's a yank & has no understanding of the importance of Old Trafford [the property & the name to the history of MUFC]!

Of course he's a business man, but he doesn't need to rely on MUFC doing well to still generate income ... the real fans will still fill the stadium no matter how well they are doing [maybe if they're doing badly the real fans will be able to access the matches live - no more prawn sandwich fans] and merchandise will still be bought, so by increasing ticket prices and merchandise and charging for parking at the grounds, he'll still generate massive income like he has done at Tampa Bay Bucaneers

LoneGunM@n

Looks like Shareholders United are trying to buy shares to block the takeover bid

from breakingnews.ie
Oliver Houston of Shareholders United told the ITV News Channel: “This is by no means over. Our message to Malcolm Glazer and to people daft enough to lend him all this money is that not only will you not be able to increase your profits but you are going to see a very sharp fall in profits.

“Manchester United is going to become an extremely tainted brand. People will feel that this is no longer their club.”

Supporters own an estimated 18% of Manchester United and have tried to secure finance from Japanese bank Nomura to swallow a further 7% stake to block any moves to de-list the company from the stock exchange and take it private.

Mark Longden, of the Independent Manchester United Supporters’ Association, said he was staggered by the decision of the Irish duo to sell their stakes.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

SteM

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Not enough yet it would seem. Someone on the Rednews forum posted that supporters held 18% of shares but I don't know whether that's an exaggeration or not. 25% is the magic number.

PHB

He has put everything he owns into this club now, so you figure he's gotta be dedicated to winning and success

--

BBC just suggested that perhaps Fergie might call it a day? That would be what some people want, might even win over some of the fans