Manchester United on the US stock market

You know what is same old. Different season? When I see cheets has posted in a man utd thread and I know it's nothing actually constructive before even entering
 
Loki said:
In my opinion the IPO is dangerous because without re finanincing again, what will the $100m do. This time next year we will still have to pay the interest on the debt plus an amount of any profit to the shareholders. $100m is a very short term fix (in my humble opninion)
Click to expand...

some reports are suggesting that NO profits will be paid out on these shares.

Remember of course that the $100m is just a marker - I believe the Glazers can release as much as 33% of the club onto the NYSE and therefore still retain voting control (without even considering the 10/1 ratio between the different types of shares)

So even at the most conservative thats upto £400m potentially being released.

While its taken an absolute age (well 7 -8 years) to get the debt down from £700m or so (I certainly remember a figure of £693m being widely circulated after the purchase) to around the £420m it is now , with the marketing department generating £100m /year , a new kit deal imminent in the next 2 years or so (nike to offer another £300+m or so for 15 year deal?), plus new TV deals imminent - while these huge sums will never be paid in bulk, imo the hard work /lean years to get it down to 1/2 way is done. It should be a lot easier from now on to completely clear the debt in much less time (than the 7 years already taken up to get this far).

the interest payments (with relatively little actual debt being paid off in comparison) has killed the growth on the pitch - from now the interest owed will be getting a lot less the more is paid off each year.

Of course it still depends on SAF continueing his levels of success, along with whoever his successor is in a few years time - but a lot has been blown out of all proportion as though its new information (when in fact its 7 + years old).

Of course Utd have been paying a huge amount of money to repay debts - everyone even mildly interested in the club (or in the City for that matter) knew this
 
Manchester United is understood to have postponed its $300m (£193m) stock market flotation in the US amid market volatility.

The club, owned by the Glazer family, had been expected to kick off its investor road show this week with a view to listing on the New York Stock Exchange early next month.

But it was reported on Wednesday night that the Premier League club has decided to temporarily pause its plans, as anxiety over the eurozone unsettles markets across the Atlantic.

The club and its advisers are considering whether to still meet potential investors later this week as intended, it was reported.

Earlier this month, a number of potential institutional investors raised concerns about the initial public offering and the potential difficulty in making money on the stock.

The Premier League club unveiled plans to become a public company last year, but previous proposals to list in Hong Kong and Singapore were scrapped after the demand for shares did not match expectations.
Click to expand...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...uts-off-US-flotation-amid-market-turmoil.html

I hope this won't affect any potential transfer deals.
 
Talk on twitter is that a lack of interest because of what was being offered and it's price is the real reason why it's been postponed or simply binned.

Andy Green's cynically claimed that this explains Fergies "the Glazers are great speech" and I wonder whether the unusually public bids for RvP and Moura were for similar reasons.
 
That's for the individual to decide. Some of the specifics in that article are nonsensical though, at least if it were to be considered as anything other than a light opinion piece. Being posted in the Sundays Times opinion section shouldn't lend an article additional weight.
 
I thought the tone of the article made it clear that it was a light hearted opinion piece - however with a serious underlying point.
 
I thought it was poor and has been used for scare mongering without basis. People can draw their own conclusions though.

In other news:
IPO set to go ahead imminently?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-30/manchester-united-is-said-to-be-poised-to-begin-ipo.html

New Shirt Sponsor (undisclosed currently but will be for an absolute crapload)

http://www.manutd.com/en/News-And-Features/Club-News/2012/Jul/chevrolet-signs-seven-year-shirt-deal-beginning-in-2014.aspx

I can't remember if people prefer the article quoted or just the links.
 
I'm aware that the article I posted may not be completely reliable and was from MUST, who are doing everything they can to make the Glazers look bad. :p

The Chevrolet deal is for roughly £24m per season, which seems a hefty sum (if various press sources are to be believed).

Hopefully that Bloomberg article is accurate too, then things are looking up. :)
 
Robbo said:
The Chevrolet deal is for roughly £24m per season, which seems a hefty sum (if various press sources are to be believed).
Click to expand...
The current AON deal is for about £20m a season? Just checked Wikipedia and it says a 4 year deal worth about 80m. So we're talking roughly, perhaps, possibly, maybe an extra £4m a year?

What do we reckon about the Chevrolet logo? Personally I think, unless they re-work it for the shirts, that the logo would look rubbish. I'd prefer to see the text 'Chevrolet' rather than the logo. Does Chevrolet have any sub-brands that it could market? Like Sega and Dreamcast with Arsenal?

Seen this first impression pic of our new kit sponsors? :p

http://i.imgur.com/virS6.png
 
Robbo said:
Hopefully that Bloomberg article is accurate too, then things are looking up. :)
Click to expand...

Things will start looking up when we have the league back!

I still cannot fathom how the Glazers were allowed to buy United and then push some of the debt from the sale onto the club.

At least the debt levels seem to be dropping now eh.
 
I'd be surprised if we signed a 7 year deal for only 4mill/annum uplift to be honest. That's pure conjecture on my part though.

The director who agreed the deal on Chevrolet's side has been sacked apparently, I'm taking that to be a good sign from the United perspective ;)

Also, the chevrolet logo is probably going to look pretty awful but if they pay us a bucketload I couldn't really give two hoots. You're never going to look super good in a football shirt.
 
(Reuters) - General Motors Co signed a sponsorship deal with Manchester United valued at as much as nearly $600 million (382 million pounds) one day after the U.S. automaker's global marketing chief was ousted in connection with a deal with the popular English soccer club.

Under the seven-year deal, which makes Chevrolet the jersey sponsor starting in the 2014-2015 season, GM will pay $60 million to $70 million a year -- at least double the current fee paid by insurance broker Aon, said a person with knowledge of the contract who asked not to be identified. GM also will pay the club a $100 million activation fee, the person said.

GM and Manchester United officials declined to reveal terms of the deal, which is separate from another sponsorship agreement announced in May with Manchester United. Terms of that five-year deal were not disclosed, but analysts said it is likely worth at least tens of millions of dollars.

GM also declined to discuss why global marketing chief Joel Ewanick was pushed out on Sunday. A GM spokesman previously said Ewanick, who has declined to comment on why he left, "failed to meet the expectations that the company has for its employees.

A source told Reuters that Ewanick failed to properly report financial details about a recent sponsorship deal with the soccer club. It was unclear which deal that refers to as GM on May 31 said it would take over as Manchester United's automotive sponsor, replacing Volkswagen's Audi brand.

Manchester United's current jersey sponsorship deal is with Aon, which pays $30 million a year for the right to put its name on the front of jerseys worn by players during games. That practice is quite lucrative for soccer clubs around the world, but is not allowed by most U.S. sports leagues.

(Reporting by Ben Klayman; Editing by Gary Hill)
Click to expand...

that's another perspective on the value of the deal but that does admittedly seem high.

Mind you, we got £10million a year for our training kit so god knows.
 
DanH84 said:
I thought it was poor and has been used for scare mongering without basis. People can draw their own conclusions though.
Click to expand...

It's certainly overly dramatic but it appears as if that sort of tone is needed before some fans realise what's going on. You only have to read this thread to see that a large section of your fan base still doesn't really understand the full extent of the costs that the Glazers have made them (them being the fans) pay.
 
not sure which per season amount is more believable but either way its not good being this closely associated to the firing because of this deal ( even if Man Utd haven't done anything wrong)

The other thing to note is the time scale before this deal starts ( two seasons), I
wonder if that means the new long term Nike deal is relatively imminent?
 
BaZ87 said:
It's certainly overly dramatic but it appears as if that sort of tone is needed before some fans realise what's going on. You only have to read this thread to see that a large section of your fan base still doesn't really understand the full extent of the costs that the Glazers have made them (them being the fans) pay.
Click to expand...

I think a more reasoned approach focusing on key issues and utilising true fan engagement may have had a more positive effect than this article and the dozens like it we've been sent by MUST over the last 7 years. We don't know how the effective other approaches may be because they've never been attempted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom