After spending the past few days with “green and gold”, “Red Knights” and “Glazers out” making the headlines, then seeing MUST’s campaign to get the supporters’ backing for the RKs, I got in touch with Duncan Drasdo to ask him what was going on.
I showed him the Are You United? article on RoM and pointed out some of the more pressing questions and criticisms. Communication with the fans is vital and nobody wants to feel like we are being left in the dark where the future of our club is concerned. Like many other reds, I am very much in support of MUST and what they are trying to do, but that doesn’t mean we should go in to any situation blindly.
This is Duncan’s reply:
There is naturally uncertainty about the Red Knights but no supporter is being asked to make any decision at this stage about support or involvement and that applies to MUST too.
MUST is working very closely with the Red Knights and a relationship of trust and mutual respect has been established. However MUST will only support a proposal which we believe is good for Manchester United Football Club and good for the supporters.
There is a flexible structure under consideration (it has to be as there are crucial unknowns in terms of price and supporter involvement) so nothing is set in stone and all options remain under consideration.
This isn’t about supporters helping the Red Knights to buy the club. It is actually the other way around with the Red Knights providing the essential financial cornerstone that gives supporters the opportunity to share in ownership of the club if they choose to do so. They have to actively make that choice though.
The larger the supporter participation the smaller that cornerstone needs to be.
Currently there is a tremendous opportunity for supporters to shape the thinking and future structure. If they want to be part of that process they first have to join the campaign at Join Must and then they can have a voice and influence the outcome.
If they choose not to then they can hardly complain afterwards.
The intention is to provide the option to every United supporter to own a part of their club. Whether we choose to take that option is up to us as individuals but the first stage is building a huge Red Network to allow us to communicate.
If the millions of supporters around the world choose to participate they could hold a significant stake – even a majority is possible. If they choose not to we all may regret this for many years to come.
Join MUST – it is free and no obligation and gives you the chance to shape the future of MUFC.
Man Utd News 24/7
still doesnt shed too much lights on è red knight & more detail of what proposal is being consider.
Totally agree and we absolutely must (no pun intended) heed this call.
Remember 1991. I do. I bought shares and only sold them when forced to by the Glazers but not enough Reds put cash in and we really have lived to regret it for nearly 20 years now. When given the opportunity, even in hard times, every spare penny needs to go into ensuring that the fans have as big a stake in the club as possible.
Remember this when the time comes to spend or boycott. Both will probably be needed at the appropriate time.
@united rant
id my shares aswell still have my useless ones with the pic of cantona at the bottom
united should have sold up to sky
Just heard Owen is out for the rest of the season
http://www.football365.com/story/0,17033,8652_6003842,00.html
United Rant – Yeh same here. I had the shares and then sold them when we had to and thought at the time I wish I had bought more. I wish that we had all bought more.
Bad news: Owen was out for the rest of this season due to hamstring…
Probably a good news: another Owen set for return…
hargreaves for stockport
has owen enough caps to win a premier league medel
he must
@GHTT
Indeed he does.
Looks Sincere enough to me…..
The current leverage is too high ( which I have already reasoned a hundred times earlier)….. If the Red Knights can come up with a transparent solution which involves reducing the overall leverage then I would definitely go with them hands down….
Some of us here are of the opinion ‘better the devil you know’….I believe why not take a chance if their is the hope of a better future……
You can accept poverty as a known devil…..or play the poker in trying to strike it rich! I prefer to take a calculated gamble …. upto the rest to choose theirs… To each his own
Good news lads, hargo to return on thursday, ghtt you called this one yesterday.
Owen out for the season?. That leaves is very threadbare upfront with rooney picking up a few knocks here and there at the wrong time and Berbatov playing through the pain barrier.Rooney will have to play every game from now on whether he is fully fit or not.
Its good that hargreaves will play for the reserves but i doubt he will play any first team games this season. 4-5 reserve games will help him to gain full fitness and some vital match practice
JUST AS GOOD NEWS AS HARGO IS KIKO BACK! we can cope without super Owen H in midfield as we have cover, but with only 3 fit strikers, we need Kiko in ASAP!
Hargo! I want curly hair!
aig
how does it
the only reason diouf isnt on the bench after his wonderful form in the reserves is because owen is higher in the pecking order than him
kiko is also anounced fully fit and will play apart in the season run in
Rooney can be rested no problem
berbatov with diouf upfront if not on his owen for wolves rooney rest saturday for wednesday
I got a talking with a guy i know who always says he’s in the know yesterday saying hargeaves will play next week I just said stockport??? and he said next week !!
so you heard it here first i guess
Hi AIG.
Rooney can thank that prick Capello for that. Fergie is saying he is a doubt for tomorrow for that reason.
aig – Hello mate. Rooney won’t have to play every game, I am sure Berba, Diouf and Kiko can play certain games. Anyway we want Rooney to play every game on current form. Could not give a fuck if he is burned out for the summer to be honest. Great chance now for Diouf and Macheda to step up in the United traditions.
@ghtt
i know its only wolves but it is still an away game and it wont be that easy.The further we go in the Champions league we will have more situations of having to play 3 games in 7days and all of them will be important. Berbatov has done well recently but he fancies playing more in a deeper role and cant be relied on for goals. For that we need Rooney. Dioufs a great talent but will need regular games to do well consistently in the league.playing for the reserves and in the league are 2 different things.
We can have rooney on the bench though tomorrow. If things dont go according to plan we can throw him on.Players like Nani.
@King Eric
Hi mate.
Rooney will have to play almost every game. The only other game he can get a rest is Stoke home. All other games we have are not that easy.
Kiko has been out for a long time. berba plays very deep and cant be relied on for goals and diouf needs regular games to really start kicking.Cant just throw him on and expect him to start scoring immediately.
My fear with Rooney is he may burn out before the season ends. I am least bothered if it happens after the season or what he does at the WC
@Costas
Hi mate.
Was surprised he played 86 mins in midweek. Should have been taken off much earlier. 150 minutes on the wembley pitch in 3 days is really testing.How about trying someone from midfield up front?. dont think we have anyone who can do that after ronaldos departure. Possibly giggs when he comes back
Rooney is 24
He wont burn out
I think Diouf. Macheda and Hargreaves will bring some needed freshness for the last 10 games
We also should have Giggs and RIo back soon as well
Things are looking good!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc1O9FYJSso
Fulham game next sunday thats 2 reserve games away
hargreaves could well feature in a premer league game as soon 9 days away
its such a shame that nani and valencia are top form in the one possition
but everything seems to be coming together with players coming back
or players hitting form
its such a huge shame about MO7 but Its just luck that we havent been getting at all this season that with owen out kiko back
evans is out for tomorrow but rio is back
Hargo back to link up with scholes/fletcher/carrick/gibson
giggs is on the way back park was surreal last weekend nani is hitting that extra gear valencia is a wonderful wonderful winger brown had a fantastic game for england and in the last week our 3 keepers got 90 minutes under there belt
pick a number between 1 and 20——– im screaming 19
and plans seem to becoming together that the red knights are full on in trying to buy united because 1/its a wonderful investment
2/they’ll make so much money to put in there huge bank account
but importantly to me 3/ they know what the 2 words “manchester united” mean to english football european football and world football they know what the green and gold means theyknow what it means to the fans ,some are lifelong fans, and they are gonna save the club in my opinion
Scott, drasdo hasn’t answered anything. He has just reiterated what we all know that we need to join MUST.
When will someone answer this question: what guarantee do I have of reclaiming my season ticket when the gimps are gone if I default my ticket in the summer?
@AIG
That’s true. Giggs and is the only one who can do that. Anyway, here’s the line up I see for tomorrow:
VDS – Brown, Rio, Vidic, Evra – Valencia, Carrick, Fletcher, Scholes, Nani – Rooney.
Despite Fergie’s claims, I think he could play Wazza now and rest him against Milan.
Predicted scoreline: 1-0 to us.
I have a hunch that either Kiko or Diouf are gonna be important for us in the run in..
If we make it past milan i would only play rooney in the away games of the cl and keep him for the prem because to be honest i’d take being knocked out on wednesday if it meant winning the league..
But we are MANCHESTER UNITED and we always go for all trophies even if its against the odds thats what i love about us
I think it would be a better idea communicating with the Glazer’s and getting them to agree to set up an exit strategy setting up up a fan ownership scheme whenever that may be. That way we wouldn’t have to go through The Red Knights who to be honest with you haven’t said anything that makes me think they will be any better than the Glazer’s.
If MUST explored that idea maybe it could work out for the better?
@costas
agree with the line up. Think we will sneak it just.We may possibly be in 3rd place at kickoff with arsenal taking top spot so we will be under some pressure to get a win
@AIG
Yeah, Arsenal will win, no doubt. As long as we take Wolves seriously, I am confident in us picking up 3 points. The defence will be key for us. Our last clean sheet on the road was 3 months ago at West Ham.
@Costas
Is that so?. 3 Months is a long time. I am not sure about rio for tomorrow. The number of times he has withdrawn at the last minute i will only believe when he is on the pitch at kickoff. His back can trouble him anytime
Vidic back should help us defensively. Think we will keep a clean sheet tomorrow. Its high time we kept one on the road.
People should stop being emotional. I fully support Gill in his assertion that the red knights idea or whatever is unrealistic. We can’t have 40 people controlling the club. If 2 is a problem( ask Liverpool) plus these people are not here for fun. They are here to make money on their investment. We should not be fooled by their ‘i love manchester united’ gimmicks. Second they don’t have the means to really invest in the club. They will have to leverage to raise enough money for the bid. That is what we want to move away from. The Glazers have really improved the clubs commercial value even though the debt looms large in the background. They have given the manager funds when needed. We need regime change but not the Red Knights. Better look for Mansour or an Abrahamovic .
I don’t think scholes will start tomorrow, with carrick out for ac milan we’ll need scoles in tip top condition.
i think we’ll go 4-4-2
with fletch and carrick in the middle and rooney and berba up top.
hopefully we can find ourselves up by 2 with a half an hour to go so we can pull off ronney for maybe giggs(match time before milan) or diouf and fletcher for gibson so as to keep them fresh.. anyway just hope we win, no slip ups
i’d gladly take a 1-0 with another fine goal by ‘own goal’
@ Jish Inc —–”We cant have 40 people controlling a club”
Microsoft has thousands of people around the world as its owners…..I dont see a problem with its running!
Ownership and Management is DIFFERENT…..give them time to show their hand at least before jumping to conclusions!
RKs will need to show their hand sooner rather later as MUST has surpassed 100,000 and growing. If nothing viable is forthcoming then we will know if this one is a non starter.
aig – Arsenal won’t go top mate, they will be behind the Chav’s on gd if they win. We should really do more than sneak it, McCarthy’s teams are shite and will just sit back. We know how to break down teams now.
More encouraging words from SIR ALEX FERGUSON no less:
“I have no issue with the Red Knights. I know some of them. I don’t deny them their right to protest. If they want to try and buy the club that is entirely up to them.”
Fergie also loves the Green & Gold protest:
“I have no problem with protest. There were plenty of green and gold scarves on Sunday and I was delighted to see them supporting the club.
“We are quite happy. As long as they are supporting Manchester United they can wear whatever they like.”
I wonder if this part of his press conference will be reported o n the official site?
@Red Devil
“Microsoft has thousands of people around the world as its owners…..I dont see a problem with its running!”
When Windows XP flops, they come up with Windows 7. When Manchester United flops, they come up with administration? And did you have a say in what you wanted in Windows 7?
That is the problem here, alot of us are jumping into conclusion that RK is good when they have not even shown us their finger, let alone their hand. And who is the person in MUST that will decide if the RK proposal is good?
The article doesn’t offer any real new info. But what is interesting is that from MUSTs point of view, the RK proposal should gives fans the option of some forrm of ownership, if they choose it, in order for them to support it.
My guess is that this element of supporter ownership, whether that’s 5% or 25% will be held in trust (i.e. MUST), giving Scott’s pal Duncan a seat on the new board, acting on your behalf.
That is the end game, I believe.
Still more questions than answers (by a ratio 1,000,000 : 1) but this seems to be where it is headed.
Is it the right thing for Manchester United? Well that’s the brave part isn’t it. None of us will know for sure, until it actually happens.
So back to the picture today:
1. Hugely successful period for the club
2. Great squad
3. Greatest Manager in the history of the game
4. Best and one of the most respected CEO’s in football (in my opinion)
5. Total unity from top to bottom
6. (Mostly) great supporters
7. Strong growth in revenues
8. Solid financing in place
9. Debts now starting to fall
10. A bright future
There are many cliches that can be used; “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it”, “out of the frying pan, into the fire”, “better the devil you know” etc etc. I think you all know my view. I am more than sceptical about this campaign and highly supportive of the current management team and owners. This opinion is based largely on facts (not gut feeling), track records and current performance.
I wonder what the conversation will be like on Manchester United forums, or blogs in 3-5 years time….
I care about the club but I don’t know about finances. With that said in life I trust myself first and foremost, I will go against popular opinion and often be correct about things. (Well I would say that). But history is full of large groups of people eg Nazis coming to the wrong decisions. Honestly I don’t trust many united fans having a say about the club at times. I’d rather have one figurehead elected if the club comes under new ownership who is in charge.
I don’t really know what is going on but multiple people having a say is democracy and a supposed utopia but in my experience a benevolent dictator is best.
I’ll tell you one thing about the Glazers that I want to know. When is the debt going to be cleared? Nobody knows. I understand the ticket price increases have been bad, that the debt is bad but supposing they were to eradicate the debt, they have otherwise been very good owners. If we had no debt, they took a small amount out of the club as their business venture, and left ample money for transfers I would be satisfied.
Let’s face it. Martin Edwards, Michael Knighten, Magner, Murdoch, when has ownership ever been ideal?
Paul H, number 10 on your list is highly debatable, you may be happy how we are but many people aren’t. It is somewhat reassuring to hear from MUST but, yes, there are still a lot of questions that need answering.
can someone explain this to me, how come it was wrong for SKY to buy united and that takeover was stopped, yet somehow the parasites takeover was more acceptable and that went through, didnt the reason why SKY could not takeover because it was not the best interest of the fans yet the parasites takeover was not exactly the best interest of the fans. I think the only reason why SKY was stopped because everyone feared united would be more powerful, I think loads were delighted the parasites tookover because it would weaken united.
The Murdoch bid was halted because the Monopolies and Mergers Commision stated it would be anti competitive, against the public interest and bad for the game. Central to the decision was the other broadcasters ability to negotiate with the Premier League.
I think it was more to do with the fact that Murdoch/Sky was, is, the main broadcaster as opposed to the current owners, who were not involved in the Premier League at the time they became owners.
@paul h, wakey, et al
I respect the well-reasoned arguments you and your fellow nay-sayers put forward regarding the Glazers vis-a-vis the Red Knights/MUST/IMUSA/etc. But I’d be happier seeing you put your weight behind the protest campaign. We need to do all we can to end the current mess. And we need to stay United.
I’m not one to jump on any bandwagon, but I’m angry with myself that I chose not to listen to the siren voices five or six years ago when the Glazers first made their serious moves. At the time I was miffed at the way Roman Abramovich and his multi-million pound Chelsea bulletproof vest were threatening to take over English football and I was dismissive of the negative reports, in what I regarded as an ABU press, which painted the worst possible picture of Malcolm Glazer. Fleet St jumped into bed with Chelsea (how apt considering current affairs) and loved to put the boot into United. So I bridled against all that and thought, “let’s give the American guy a chance.’
What a bloody fool I was.
As United were buying ever more Brasso to polish our silverware I again chose to ignore what the papers were saying. After all, we were champions of the world, champions of Europe, champions of England … gee, weren’t these American guys wonderful? I didn’t even mind too much that the season ticket prices were going up: everything else was, so why should United tickets be any different? I think a great many United fans felt the same way.
Then in January, my United dream world was shattered, the full extent of the debts hit me in the face, the bond issue told me just how awful the situation had become and how were being taken for fools.
In a thread on a previous post – an interesting e-dialogue I was having with Wakey – I posed some questions which neither he, nor any of the pro-Glazer faction chose to answer. So, I will repeat these self-same questions in the hope that someone can explain why we should all fall in behind the Glazers and not the Red Knights/MUST?Imusa/etc.
Here was the gist of my earlier post:
“I’ve spent my career in an industry that is fed spin several times on a daily basis, and in that time we’ve learned to disseminate what is fact, spin, topspin and downright lies.
“Without trying to sound like the FSW, the facts are quite simple: pre- Glazers, United were hugely profitable. After they arrived, the club went massively into debt, unmanageable debt – if it wasn’t unmanageable, why did they have to embark on the bonds issue? Worse, the bonds issue laid bare just how they have been running the club – and, damningly, just how much they have been taking out to finance that mismanagement. For instance, I’d love to know exactly what the Glazer daughter has done to justify her fee? Equally, I’d love to know who the high-priced consultancies are (and who the owners/directors of these companies are), and what they’ve actually done to justify such high fees? If it’s to improve our financial husbandry, how then are we in such a mess? Then again, it might have been a PR consultancy to increase the profile of a football club that no one had ever heard of until the Glazers arrived on the scene.
“Wakey, it strikes me that what you are arguing is that it’s better we stick with the ‘(Red) devil you know’. Ordinarily, I might be tempted to agree with you, but we’re talking about the Glazers here. It’s on record that Malcolm Glazer and his own sisters went to court over their respective shares of their father’s legacy. It’s on record that the Glazers didn’t deliver on their promises when they bought Tampa Bay Bucs. It’s also on record that the Glazers underspent hugely on the Bucs’ salary cap – to the extent that they were warned by the NFL for their parsimony (can you imagine the Premier League being forced to chastise a club for paying too little to their players?). And what was the Glazers’ explanation for underspending at Tampa? They were channelling all their money into Manchester United, they said.
“These are the people you are defending.
“If you are an insider or Glazer confederate (and I’m happy to accept your assertion that you are not) I have two further questions that I would like someone to answer.
“Firstly, who is giving them PR advice: anyone with a basic knowledge of the football business would not advertise how much money a club has to spend on transfers as this pushes fees up. But the Glazers let it be known that Fergie will have a transfer pot of £100 million this summer. Now, that was really bright…
“Secondly, are the Glazers, following their enormous success with the United franchise, the Premier League club looking to acquire an Indian Premier League cricket franchise?”
That ended my earlier post, but I have one other question that no-one has answered: Why were the anti-Glazer banners forcibly taken down just before the start at Wembley on Sunday?
Until I get satisfactory answers to these questions I’ll be wearing green and gold.
@MKRed – I am sure Wakey will answer for himself but you are missing the point. Many of us are NOT PRO-GLAZER. We are just not necessarily ANTI-GLAZER. We certainly don’t want to take the first offer that comes along just because it is “anything but the Glazers”.
Some of us also have serious reservations about MUST’s true motives.
This article demonstrates the point perfectly. Drasdo given the chance to say something and says nothing but fluff.
The comments on here started off talking about it and then the conversation moved onto Kiko, Michael Owen, Hargreaves, Wolves etc etc – anything but the actual topic because Drasdo has said NOTHING to actually comment on.
What people want to know is what exactly are MUST/RK proposing?
It is becoming increasingly apparent that it is going to end up a case of how much can we as fans cobble together? With the wealth of the Red Knights, the campaign has a decent enough start but it is looking increasingly likely that they, by themselves won’t have enough to purchase the club (not that anyone knows what it will take to force the Glazers’ arm but forget £1 billion, it will be way more than that).
And then, assuming the money is generated and the Glazers agree to a sale and the club is purchased. What then? Who’s in charge? What “say” do the fans have?
There are a million and one questions that need answering. Drasdo is conveniently remaining very vague on the subject except to issue scary words to the effect of “If you don’t join MUST you might regret it.”
Don’t tell me I might regret it. Tell me why I will love it!
I wouldn’t really feel bad about not following the ‘siren voices’ from the beginning. Those were people who chose to leave the club instead of sticking by your team, the number one principle in the handbook of the football supporter. Some voiced strong opinons and stayed put. But surely there was enough of them to make a protest banner-2-3 years ago? No one was this militant or had the will back then. Everyone was complicit in doing little while the club was successful.
The people who warned us back then didn’t state anything particularly insightful or startling. We all know about the debt, potential for increased ticket prices and so forth. To a certain extent everyone was complicit in accepting that status quo.
The turning point has been the fact that the debt increased, rather than decreased. I somehow can’t imagine that the Glazer’s intended that at the beginning and as such no one could pretend that was their long term intention. The debt was a risk, everyone knew it, not just those of a militant attitude who shouted loudest.
In summary there was no mystic meg six years ago. There were people who wanted to protest strongly and now there are more people of that persuasion. Naturally the forebears feel vindicated but in reality their arguments have only partially and belatedly come to fruition.
@MKRed – Thanks, but if I thought it made sense, then I’d be behind it. But it just doesn’t (to me).
Your points are exactly that, points rather than real questions. I can’t answer them in any case and I’m not sure they’re relevant. Glazers’ legal battle for inheritance is not relevant to this discussion. Not sure where your going with The Tampa Bay Bucs players’ wages either. Why the question about banners being removed at Wembley?
What is important is whether or not you think the club is in good (not necessarily the best) hands, doing well and has a bright future. I do. You don’t. So we’ll agree to disagree.
Am I right? I honestly think so. Will I say “I told you so”, in a few months/years time? No I won’t, because I sincerely happen to believe the majority of people following the RK/MUST campaign are misguided but well intentioned people.
Although this subject is the one that compells me to write (at the expense of other things) the most. Let’s try and get back to the football
@Red phil
It backs up my belief that MUST have been blinded by their hatred of the Glazers and then cleaver talking by the Red Knights. We know from Tuesdays statements and interviews that the ‘Fan Ownership’ that Drasdo mentions in the line “supporters the opportunity to share in ownership of the club” is refering to a Golden Share which isn’t really ownership.
It seems like MUST believe what they have been told, hey the Red Knigts are finacial
@Red Devil
Its not quite the same as Microsoft Shareholders though is it. If Microsoft go bust then what do the Shareholders lose? They lose their initial investment and thats it. What happens to these Red Knights who based on the kind of worth of them means they are going to have to leverage themselves up to the hilt to make their share. The club goes bust not only do they lose their 20mill but they still have upto 20mill of borrowed money to pay back.
In that situation you want more than just to sit back and let someone else play with your future
@Paul H
The Red Knights have already stated what the Fan Ownership is. In the event of the Red Knights accepting a takeover it will activate a 25.1% Golden share held by MUST who will then be able to effectivly veto the takeover. It will be intresting if the terms of the golden share mean that the Red Knights could still sell their 74.9% of shares without MUST being OK with selling or if it saying no would end the takeover attempt (Although most potential owners would almost certainly pull out of MUST didn’t agree anyway)
@MKRed
“I respect the well-reasoned arguments you and your fellow nay-sayers put forward regarding the Glazers vis-a-vis the Red Knights/MUST/IMUSA/etc. But I’d be happier seeing you put your weight behind the protest campaign”
Why do you want people to jump behind a campaign that they don’t believe in? Jumping onto things without giving it any thought or trying to actually understand the situation is one of the problems in the world today. We are too easierly swayed into following causes because we are told to. We have this brilliant ‘computer’ in our head that allows us to take in information, learn from it and then using it all come to critical and rational conclusions BUT people today just don’t seem to want to use it and just take the first thing they read as fact. Its why I got annoyed with Scott yesterday over his reporting on this site and why I grow to detest the media more and more by the day (Especially the print side) as quality journalism has gone out of the window and its just about sensationalism.
If the Red Knights want to come out and actually be open and honest without the spin they have been using and they have hit on some way that doesn’t increase the debt and actually lowers it then I might get behind them BUT i’m not about to jump on a campaign that largely isn’t based on facts and when it is are often out of context. And I’m certainly not about to support a group where the finances just don’t add up.
“In a thread on a previous post – an interesting e-dialogue I was having with Wakey – I posed some questions which neither he, nor any of the pro-Glazer faction chose to answer.”
I didn’t choose not to answer you. I’m guessing I just didn’t see it. Despite the amount of time I have spent on here taking part in these discussions I do have a life to live and a living to earn
“if it wasn’t unmanageable, why did they have to embark on the bonds issue?”
Have you ever paid attention to the ‘Money Experts’ that are often on TV shows discussing personal finances? What they are always telling you is that you shouldn’t just be happy with your Bank Accounts, your Saving provider, your Pension company, your mortgage provider, your credit card provider, your Utilty providers and so on. They tell you what you should always be doing is keeping an eye on the best deals and if theres a better deal to switch as its the switching that puts money back into your pocket.
Now Business Finance is the same, a good businessman doesn’t just assume its best to keep the status quo so should always be looking at the opertunities. In 2006 when they did their first round of refinanceing the press release actually stated that further refinancing might happen in the coming years and thats all this is. It provided a good opertunity to improve the situation further and make an already manageable Bank Loan even more manageable.
“For instance, I’d love to know exactly what the Glazer daughter has done to justify her fee?”
She didn’t take anything. A company of hers was given a loan which is a significant difference to just being paid money. Her company has to pay this money back with interest. Loaning money between companies in a group isn’t unusual, if you have money in one company that isn’t being used its cheaper than going to a bank and everyone gains in the end (The loan is used to better the other business and the original business then gets the money they weren’t using back with interest)
“Equally, I’d love to know who the high-priced consultancies are (and who the owners/directors of these companies are), and what they’ve actually done to justify such high fees?”
But the management fees are below what the PLC was paying so its not that high.
“It’s on record that Malcolm Glazer and his own sisters went to court over their respective shares of their father’s legacy.”
Is being a nice person a requirement to be a
“It’s on record that the Glazers didn’t deliver on their promises when they bought Tampa Bay Bucs.”
Oh come on thats bullshit. They won the Superbowl FFS with a Francise that was a nothing Francise. Since the Superbowl they have been a bit up and down BUT its hardly been a disaster period, they haven’t won a Superbowl again but they have generally performed better than they ever did pre Glazer.
The Glazers pumped alot of money into Tampa Bay, their ownership of them has been more like Abramavich at Chelsea than United as it was more a vanity project so they sank alot of money into them to drag them up the NFL. After the superbowl there were alot of problems with the Club, for starters to get the Coach they wanted to turn the team around to take them from the good level team that the Glazers had made them to Superbowl champions costs them draft picks for the upcoming years (Year 1: 1st and 2nd Round pick Year 2: 1st Round pick Year 3: 2nd Round Pick) which in American Sports is pretty major. Then this new coach fell out with the General Manager until it got so bad the GM quit. Some of the players got up themselves resulting in a couple being suspended and eventually traded and then you had Fans who now seemed to expect them to win the Superbowl every season. These fans then turned on the Glazers when it didn’t happen and understanably after a while they seemed to decided to take a step back and cut back funding rather to put it elsewhere rather than plowing money into the Buccs and making a loss on investment. They are running Tampa Bay more like like a Business and spending what the club can support which doesn’t go down well in America as they like their sports teams spending as much as possible.
We actually see Abramavich doing the same thing at Chelsea now. He isn’t spending silly money anymore and is trying to make it more business orientated. And his recent ‘Wiping out their debt’ has actually put him in a position to personally make more money as the debt was wiped ina debt for equity swap so he now has preferential shares that guarentee a certain dividend each year no matter what they make.
““If you are an insider or Glazer confederate”
I’m not but I will give you an answer to these
“Firstly, who is giving them PR advice: anyone with a basic knowledge of the football business would not advertise how much money a club has to spend on transfers as this pushes fees up. But the Glazers let it be known that Fergie will have a transfer pot of £100 million this summer. Now, that was really bright…”
Actually Gill did and he was forced into doing so by lies about the Ronaldo money that were doing the rounds. He had to mention that there was 140mill in the bank with 100mill to spend on transfers to try and put these to bed
““Secondly, are the Glazers, following their enormous success with the United franchise, the Premier League club looking to acquire an Indian Premier League cricket franchise?””
The Glazers and United have both denied its them. Although I have to admit I thought it may have been United when the story broke as certain things pointed at United.
Ofc it might be United and they are denying it because the franchises up for offer haven’t been ‘sold’ yet and they don’t want to tip their hat. It would be a pretty good opportunity worth alot of money and some great PR
“That ended my earlier post, but I have one other question that no-one has answered: Why were the anti-Glazer banners forcibly taken down just before the start at Wembley on Sunday?”
You will have to ask Wembely as it would have been them. Its possibly because they were either an H&S issue or interfering with peoples emjoyment (Some of the ones removed at OT for example hang down a fair bit off the tier and while I can’t say for certain look like they might obscure peoples view in the seats below).
@brett1985
“The turning point has been the fact that the debt increased, rather than decreased”
The debt hasn’t increased though and thats the problem with the reporting. The debt has actually DECREASED slightly in actual amount and the value of the clubs debt has fallen massively (Initially it was £514mill and we had had £28mill in the bank so the clubs debt level was £486mill. The Bond is £509mill and we have £140mill in the bank leaving a debt value of £369mill)
116,435
I find it incredible that you’re really defending the Glazers and how they run the club from all angles.
Just out of curiosity, how would you want a possible takeover to go down? What realistic changes would you like to see happen?
I think getting behind the G&G campaign is being wound up to alot more than it really is at the moment. We’re merely showing our discontent with the current ownership and the way the club is currently run (not just financially) and that we’d like things to change for the better of both the team and the supporters. We’re not saying the club should be sold to the first buyer that comes along. Proper terms need to be negotiated, which is what MUST are up to at this moment. It’s no wonder there’s not much information about it since nothing has been agreed upon yet.
I find it interesting to see what terms they eventually come up with, ’cause even if it doesn’t work out with these Red Knights in the end, it sets a benchmark for what terms MUST expect a potential owner to be compatible with.
hmm 116,435 now at the Supporters Trust.
and unlike Wakey, my figures are accurate.
Wakey Said,
March 5th, 2010 @19:56
@brett1985
“The turning point has been the fact that the debt increased, rather than decreased”
The debt hasn’t increased though and thats the problem with the reporting. The debt has actually DECREASED slightly in actual amount and the value of the clubs debt has fallen massively (Initially it was £514mill and we had had £28mill in the bank so the clubs debt level was £486mill. The Bond is £509mill and we have £140mill in the bank leaving a debt value of £369mill)
—-
I have already stated that I don’t know much about the figures -so I wont be telling anyone what’s what- but I do still have logic. I just don’t believe that if the debt was coming down, that such a fact would not be shouted from the rooftops. Moreover, the Ronaldo money is supposedly part of the money in the bank, that isn’t money off the debt until it goes to cutting the debt. And isn’t there loans to do with subsidiary companies which are presumably going to be paid of eventually by the club.
My grasp of exact figures may be incomplete, but people aren’t disputing a debt which is decreasing. For all the good things you’ve said that is ludicrous. Supposing you are right, surely you would know that the folly of the whole situation is 5 years of forum debates- including your posts doesn’t work. Surely the only action worth taking is for the glazer’s to spell out what debts there are in a concise manner.
@ Paul H; @ Wakey
Paul, in my previous, the questions I asked were rhetorical – or at least semi-rhetorical in that I didn’t necessarily expect answers, merely conjecture, although if I did get any I’d be delighted. And the question about the banners concerns who imposed the censorship. It was only the anti-Glazer banners within camera shot that were forcibly taken down and, as a natural cynic, I want to know why and by whose authorisation.
Wakey, I don’t want to go into a point by point rebuttal – I’ve rambled on long enough already – but what I was trying to illustrate is the kind of person Malcolm Glazer is. My understanding of his situation is that the dispute with his sisters, that ended up in court, was over their birthright. Equally, my understanding of the Tampa Bay situation relates to certain pledges he made when trying to buy the franchise (such as the stadium situation) which were not met. With regard to the Glazer daughter, my understanding is she took a fee on top of the loan. It might be that you and I are getting our respective information from different newspapers. Anyway, these are the people who have it within their power to strangle the life out of our football club, and would do so without a moment’s thought for the fans who are the lifeblood of the club.
The very fact that you are discussing debt at all is the crux of the matter for me. We shouldn’t be talking about debt, merely the football club we love. Until the Glazers came along, United were hugely profitable, a football club that had grown organically from its humble green and gold roots into a football powerhouse. In one fell swoop, this family illustrated the worst excesses of American imperialism and capitalism by taking over our football club purely because they saw it as an easy vehicle to increase their wealth. That is not their fault: that was the situation that pertained at the time, and no-one can blame them for seeing it as a chance to make a ral killing. We, the fans, meant sod all them – other than being the stupid sops who would continue shovelling our hard-earned into their pockets.
So, do I think the club are in good hands? Most definitely not. Do I think the Red Knights and their fine words are the answer? Well, I believe they certainly cannot be any worse than the Glazers. Yes, we’ll be stuck with debts – and that will be the Glazer legacy – but I would prefer that to be in the hands of people who actually care for the club rather than a bunch of foreigners who are only interested in the biggest and quickest profit.
Wakey, I did kinda think you’d missed my final post in that previous thread, so please don’t think I was being critical or inferring anything.
I agree wholeheartedly with your criticism of Fleet Street. Hopefully, you’ll have seen my own criticisms, and because I know a little about the business and the individuals involved, I know you are right on the money. As I’ve mentioned previously, Fleet Street sports desks are invariably run by London journalists employing London reporters who support London clubs. They hate the north, particularly United, Newcastle and Liverpool. Put it this way, one London sports journo I bumped into the other day said he actually hoped United went bust. The same with Liverpool. He’s a Spurs fan and his reasoning was that with United and Liverpool out of the way his team would have a better chance of honours. That’s the world of newspapers we have today: no wonder we continually get jaundiced views on the Old Trafford situation – not helped, of course, by United being notoriously bad at press and public relations. At least Duncan Drasdo opens his mouth, even though it’s invariably the same mantra albeit worded differently each time (he’s not alone in that: try listening to David Cameron and tell me what he actually says other than, ‘We wouldn’t do that’)
To sum up, what I’m saying is that in a forum such as this we should be talking about things like whether Berbatov is good or bad for United, whether we’re more balanced without Ronaldo, etc. Or about our rivalry with Liverpool and City, combined with the essential barbs. Instead, all we seem to be talking about is the obscene debt that was imposed on us, and how best it can be managed. And that really annoys me.
brett1985 – at this moment of time debt stands 507 million decreased from 538 million. gill says its 378 million but who believes him.
@brett1985
Except Gill has stated the facts about the debt. The problem is its not something that sells papers where as announcing the debts risen using some very flaws logic does.
And yes the book value of the clubs debt does include the money for Ronaldo but seeing as debt is “Money Owed – Money in the bank” then the clubs debt has fallen. We have 112mill more in the Bank than we did when the takeover happened and even removing the 80mill for Ronaldo thats still 32mill more than was in the bank
And when the takeover happened the bank loan I believe was £538mill. The 2006 refinance reduced this to a figure that I believe Gill mentioned to be £514. And the Quarterly results published the other day show with the refinance via the bond issue that’s fallen to £507mill (I know I typed 509m before, was a typo that I didn’t notice till after I posted and realised the mistake) so thats a fall in debt.
As for other loans, yes there’s the PIK but this is attached to the Glazers themselves so its being serviced by their empire and not United. Sure money they draw from United may help directly or indirectly but its not the clubs responsibility to service them (Mind you it could and still make enough profit to buy a Ronaldo every season)
Didn’t have time to read through all the comments.
But anyway…
@rooney the new king
Isn’t the total debt around 700m including the 202m PIK loan who Glazer is personally liable for? He isn’t using his own money to pay for that loan so I would reckon we could count that as well as “our” debt since profits made by the club are used to pay off that loan…and its ridiculous interest rates which are around 16.25%. Or am I misunderstanding something?
Wakey, interesting points which I tentatively accept, not all of them, but I’m not going to be pedantic. Isn’t the real issue though about PR and getting the message across now. I mean debt is either decreasing or increasing it can’t be both. I smell a fish if the Glazers can’t put across the point and make it stick that the debt is going down. What gives?
They have allowed the situation to escalate to painful levels over what you would advocate is much ado about nothing. If that is the case I’d like them out if it were to give my head peace!
In general I find these discussions to be worthless (but here I am). There is never really a resolution or determination of what the real debt situation is and that is as much an indictment of the current admininstrators at the club for not putting the message across and making it the dominant discourse over those who would wish to protest.
Furthermore, the club have been active but only in suspicious ways- for example removing protest banners. Surely they could have got the upper hand by simply clarifying the debt situation. In fairness- David Gill has defended the Glazers recently which no matter what you think about Gill is a brave move.
@Wakey – re: the MUST 25.1%, I hadn’t seen that as a confirmed figure so thanks for the insight. So I guess this affords the general secretary (or whatever he’s known as) of MUST a seat on the hypothetical new board. Will this be a salaried appointment, I wonder? Will there be any fees involved? Will this result in access to the players’ lounge, dressing room and directors’ enclosure? A front row seat on the club’s official charter to European away games. Swapping the half time pie and pint for canapes and champagne. Do you see the picture evolving here?
If that happened, followed by one or two things going wrong, such as the club going on an extended poor run, or losing a key sponsorship deal or two, or losing a crowd favourite to another club, then supporters will be pointing the finger and calling for the heads of the Red Knights and MUST. Football really is that fickle.
Except the 25.1% golden handcuffs will have caused paralysis.
The 25.1% rather than serving a purpose of a being a fan-based fit persons test, would actually put off anyone credible coming in to take control in the future, because the MUST hierarchy, in order to preserve their new found privileges will make negative noises about potential buyers and generate propaganda accordingly, simply to preserve their comfortable new world.
People need to be very careful of what they wish for. You could end up with some very dubious characters occupying key positions, riding the crest of apparent popular opinion, abusing the trust placed in them.
And people can keep posting the latest website registrations all they want. It doesn’t mean anything. For every serious registrant, their will be around 100 who haven’t a clue what they are signing up for. This probably includes a good deal of supporters to other clubs, having some fun at our expense.
Still way too many questions and too few answers. They will keep it that way for some time, because you might not like some of the answers.
Gudjohnsen – no that 700 million is a myth, the debt since the refinancing must have given them room to start repaying down the debt so it now stands at 507 million, Wakey will tell you a better idea from the 700 million pound figure to now the current figures but it stands at 507 million.
On that final point. Even the signatures topped 1,000,000 from the 330,000,000 fans around the world, that would make it 0.3% dissentment.
Hardly enought to keep me awake at night, if I’m the owner.
Paul H – yea and microsoft have thousands of customers around the world that still does not mean how they have treated their cutomers is right, for example how they rip off cutomers on the X BOX 360.
you should look at the number of season ticket holders that could defect than picking out some random number that may not be a factual number on the number of fans around the world. Woolworths made far more profit than united done and they went under, there have been far bigger and more profitable names than united that have gone bankrupt, say that number of fans that you brought up were match going fans and they did defect then they would be sweating.
@SteniS
“Just out of curiosity, how would you want a possible takeover to go down? What realistic changes would you like to see happen?”
Any takeover has to leave the club in an improved situation as a business. We can be idealistic as fans and say our wellfair should be considered too but ultimately we can’t be a factor because as much as we may not like it footballs an international business with alot of money attached and as fans our feelings just don’t fit in to a business plan. And before some of you get too up in arms about this let me explain myself. As a football fan each one of us are like two people in one, theres the person who wants no make thatdemands the club spend money no matter the cost to get the best players possible but then the other person in us demands that at almost no cost to ourselves
So what we want we really need is to have someone who can pay off the bonds today and can pay the asking price without having to borrow any money to do so. This person should then be like the Glazers when it comes to football matters and stay completly out of it. They should however like the Glazers be able to grow the business as even if he can afford to be a sugar daddy we don’t want that. The person can obviously draw a dividend and take management fees, personally I don’t even care if they end up taking a higher percentage than the current interest and management fees as I have no problem them recouping their investment.
A group like the Red Knights don’t come close to this. Even if todays reports are true and they now have 60 people and 1.5bn they are still looking at a stake being £25million and the bonds still won’t be paid off. These people don’t have 25mill each to throw around so they are going to have to borrow it like the Glazers did with the PIK loans but unlike the Glazers these people don’t have a large and successful business empire to help fund personal loans. None of the Red Knights have anything close to this to fall back on which makes their investments much more risky and more linked to the club as for many the money they would draw from the club would be the main source of servicing their borrowing.
And in 2017 these Red Knights then have to find a further 500mill from somewhere to pay off the Bonds. Paying them off will save 44mill a year.
Financially it just doesn’t add up as being something that makes us better off, it just looks like all we do is remove the Glazers and their PIK which their other assets should be able to service and swap it for more debt attached to the new owners but with them having less resources outside the club to service it so you have to ask yourself whats the point in a change of owners. We have actually seen it a number of times in the last 20years where fans have hated the current owner and eventually helped to remove them and they have pinned their hope on the new owner and held them up as a knight in shining armour ONLY for a year down the line (Or if you are Pompey not even that long as they have had that situation about 4 times
this season alone) to find the rose tinted glasses have come off and the situation is now 10 times worse than under the old owners
@brett1985
The problem is its so much easier for the likes of the Red Knights and MUST to take figures out of context and then apply emotion to persuade people they are right than you can then counter with the simple truth. As a number of us on this blog have found when we try and bring some balance by trying to bring some of the truth out of the situation. Again if you look Gill has tried a couple of times and he has basically been called a liar, where as if a tabloid prints something or someone like Harris opens his massive gob and starts spouting its often taken as gospel because they use emotion and are able to use simple but powerful statements without being too bothered with it being completly accurate. The Perfect example is with the bond brocher and the mention of selling OT and Carrington, this was in the Risk section and was a legal requirement but it was something that was spun as being ‘fact’ and despite Gill confirming it was a legal requirement and it would be highly unlikely ever to happen it was easier for the “Glazers are sellling carrington and OT’ stories to get a hold as it used Fans emotion in a way facts cant.
“Furthermore, the club have been active but only in suspicious ways- for example removing protest banners”
The thing is these banners are not ok’d by the club before hand and they are almost always ‘oversized’. As a business owner myself I know the kind of ridiculous health and safety rules you have to abide by to keep things like insurance cover and things like licences. We just have to look at the way a few years back parts of OT were shut down for a few games because fans had continued to ignore requests to stay seated. So while its easy to jump on it as shutting down protests we don’t know for sure as there could be valid reasons for the removal. Perhaps if a same size banner without approval was to be displayed midgame with a none ‘Glazer Out’ message then that would be removed too and hey for all we know a G&G or even anti Glazer banner may even be approved by the club
@MKRed
“but what I was trying to illustrate is the kind of person Malcolm Glazer is. My understanding of his situation is that the dispute with his sisters, that ended up in court, was over their birthright”
When businessmen are in business mode then pretty much all of them are horrible creatures who would sell their own grandmother. This can be despite them being great people outside the ‘office’. I don’t think its a bad quality in an owner and certinly not relivant.
“Equally, my understanding of the Tampa Bay situation relates to certain pledges he made when trying to buy the franchise (such as the stadium situation) ”
They didn’t make a pledge on the staduim as part of the bidding on the francise. Any pledges they did make were met. What you are refering to is the fact that upon getting the Francise the Glazers declared the current staduim not fit for purpose and the idea of moving the francise to a new city was mooted. This was largely to get a new stadium to be built that they could use. To keep the franchise is Tampa they buckled and the Glazers got their wish. The staduim wasn’t just for the Buccs though (Its kind of like the Wastelands except rather than being sold to a sports team it its leased to sports teams to use) but that meant a new tax was added to help finance it. So the Glazers said “if we get 50k deposits on 10 year season ticket we will be able to justify paying half of the cost”. They didn’t get the 50k so were able to back out. So they got a new state if the art staduim for ‘Free’ so was a pretty good piece of business while Tampa put the city on the map as a serious sports city. Sure alot of Tampa weren’t exactly happy about it but for the Glazers it was a great piece of business
“With regard to the Glazer daughter, my understanding is she took a fee on top of the loan. It might be that you and I are getting our respective information from different newspapers.”
Its possible that one of the companies getting the management fees was hers. I don’t believe she got a direct payment though.
@Wakey Said,March 5th, 2010 @19:54
@Red Devil
Its not quite the same as Microsoft Shareholders though is it. If Microsoft go bust then what do the Shareholders lose? They lose their initial investment and thats it. What happens to these Red Knights who based on the kind of worth of them means they are going to have to leverage themselves up to the hilt to make their share. The club goes bust not only do they lose their 20mill but they still have upto 20mill of borrowed money to pay back.
In that situation you want more than just to sit back and let someone else play with your future
————————————————————————————————–
I could argue similarly about Glazers…what if the club goes bust under their ownership………they would lose their entire equity investment and still have loans of 500 millions to bondholders and 202+ worth of PIK’s to pay back—-so even in that situation you want more than just to sit back and let someone else play with your future (Note how I am using your own words and just replacing red knights with glazers and their numbers…!)
2) Secondly, why would the club suddenly go bust if taken over by the red knights as you try to argue?! I would say there is an equal chance of going bust now under the Glazer ownership.
3) Besides if there were to be financial troubles later on, It would be easier for the Red Knights to find additional “fan investors” to put equity in return for a small stake, rather than the Glazers now who will struggle to find anyone to invest in the club in the current environment —-that is if they would want to dilute their ownership in the first place….. I’d rather the club is in the hands of people who are fans and may expect a return on their investments if everything goes well RATHER than have people who are in it ONLY for Financial return…
4) Dont get me wrong, I am not saying we should just jump into bed with the Red Knights at the drop of a hat…….but at least give them a chance to show their proposals rather than bad-mouthing them at every given opportunity…..
Cheers!
Fact is: we don’t know anything of Red Knights’ plans. And Mr Drasdo said absolutely nothing important.
And I believe that Red Knights have to prove to me and rest od ManU fans, that their intensions are good. I won’t be blind believer.
BTW: “Prove” – doesn’t mean saying “I’m a fan! I’ll be good owner”
@Wakey, thanks for the response. I’m not really that educated in the way the financial world works, but this whole campaign has really made me make some effort to try to get my head around it. So, you’re more or less saying that if we don’t get an owner who can pay off the bonds quickly, we’re better of sticking with the Glazers out of a purely financial point of view?
Call me naive, but I really can’t get myself to think from such a purely financial point of view. They have put the club in a bloody mess and I think we have every right to show our disapproval. The way they are only in it to make as much money as possible for themselves is clearly evident and by that I’m not saying that a potential owner shouldn’t expect some return for their investments if it’s going well. I’m sure that if they could get away with renaming Old Trafford to make some more money they wouldn’t hesitate a second. Or increase ticket prices further and further. I mean as long as the club is bringing in good money, they really have no real interest in how the team is doing. I just think that having such owners is damaging and if they could be replaced by someone who shows more sympathy and respect towards the club and it’s supporters without getting us in to a much worse situation finacially, I’m all for it.
As for the Red Knights, I’m curious to see what they come up with, but I will keep your point regarding the bonds in mind. I’m actually quite excited to see what plans they come up with to tackle these challenges and I think most people are. I just want to reiterate that supporting the G&G campaign (led by MUST) and lining up behind the Red Knights is NOT necessarily the same thing. I do believe that if us supporters want a say in a potential future ownership we must unite in the way the campaign is uniting us now.
@Red Devil
1)Come on you know full well what you just wrote is wrong. In the event of the club going under the Glazers wouldn’t have to pay off the bonds. And the difference is that they have a vast business empire to service the bonds.
These Red Knights don’t have this. From their own mouths most of them are worth millions or tens of millions so they don’t have the assets to service the kind of personal loans they are going to have to take out (as the 20mill is more than many of their total worth). They are going to have to be taking healthy returns to service these debts
2) I wasn’t saying the club would go bust, I was highlighting the fact that they were each going to have to be borrowing so much money that we aren’t looking at people who will be taking peanuts out of the club.
3) I think thats a bit debatable. You might be right but finding ‘fan investors’ with enough money to make a difference isn’t as easy as you seem to think. Just look atm they are having to get people only worth millions or tens of millions to give 20mill for their stake which means in some cases they are investing more than their worth and for many of the rest a vast chunk of their worth.
4) The thing is i’m not just pulling things out of thin air about them. I’m using things they have said against them that don’t add up. They love going for their headline grabbing comments that pull at fans heart strings but when they have been challenged on things they have shown their true face. The problem is things which show their true face get ignored by the likes of Scott and the media buries it at an end of a article about their headline grabbing comments. I mean lets just look at the timeline
- Harris goes on football Focus and claims
+ The Red Knights have 1.5bn to spend
+ Theres 40-50 of them
+ They are Super Rich
+ They will put the club on solid financial footing
+ They are not in it for the money and will put the club in the fans hands like at Barca
- Later that day hes on BBC Radio 5 where he repeats most of his claims
+ When challenged on the bonds he admits these won’t be paid off
+ The super rich people are fans who are mainly London Money Men and a few northen businessmen
- Harris does a press interview
+ States that the buyout won’t be Barca style but Villa style (I have explained what that means elsewhere)
- We get a Press inteview with Fred Done
+ States he is one of the Red Knights
+ This tells us that when Harris says Super rich he didn’t mean billionaires but millionaires
- Harris does another interview
+ Calls on fans to ‘Walk Out’
+ States that the Red Knights are looking to pay the Glazers 1bn and they have that money
- Harris does another interview as the walk out idea didn’t go down too well
+ Now states that MUST will be given a ‘Golden Share’ that will be activated if the Red Knights sell
- We then get to Monday’s meeting and over the last few days we have learnt
+ They are looking to pay 1bn
+ They will put up 20mill each
+ The remaining 200mill will be a joint bank loan
+ The richestest Red Knight has a WORTH of £270mill
+ Most of the Red Knights have worths between millions and tens of millions
- Yesterday one of them told the press
+ They now have 60 Red Knight
+ They have 1.5bn to spend
+ They won’t overspend
SO you see why I’m highly critical as what they are saying isn’t consistant and the figures don’t match up with what they are often saying. Even the latest 60 Red Knight and 1.5bn doesn’t fit as unless they have upped the stake that each needs to make 60 people at 20mill each is only 1.2bn which means the 200mill bank loan has to rise to 300mill. And if they have upped each person stake thats more money that these people many of whom cant really afford the stake anyway without borrowingng it all are going to have to find even more.
And rather than actually try and address the clear concerns they keep making nothing statements that tug at Fans heart strings and buy MUST off to get them to persuade the likes of Scott. And its really not a difficult thing for them to answer the concerns, they just have to let people know how not clearing the Bonds makes the financials any better, how taking out bank loans of 200mill (or 300mill) makes things better and how these Red Knights each expect to service personal debt accrued to pay for their stake. Specifics aren’t even needed. If they aren’t willing to explain themselves then they should stfu and stop using the fans as puppets in their game.
@SteniS
“They have put the club in a bloody mess and I think we have every right to show our disapproval”
The problem is its easy to make statements like this but try and prove it? Even statements like “The way they are only in it to make as much money as possible for themselves is clearly evident” can’t really be proven.
On the ‘Mess’ claim what mess are the club actually in. It has £507mill of debt but is that actually a problem. Kraft just bought Cadburys with a Leveraged buyout (7bn of the purchase price is borrowed against Cadburys) and many other companies have bought other companies by leveraging a loan against the new accusation. Its just not as simple as “Debt is Bad”
I’ll agree with Red Knight that the amount leveraged was pretty high BUT actually with the improvements the Glazer have made to United as a business (They have streamlined business practices and opened up new revenue streams) as well as improved media and bringing ticket prices inline with our local rivals (Liverpool specifically) the Levergaed amount isn’t nearly as high as when it was taken out. Last year we made over 90mill AFTER servicing the loan (so over £130mill before) so its more than manageable. With Next years accounts due in the summer including 80mill from the sale of Ronaldo this will be even higher.
As for the making money for themselves is hard to prove. Up until the bond issue what had the Glazers taken. They had taken just over 20mill in 5 years. 10mill of thats loans which means it will come back with interest and the other 10mill in in management fees.
They have taken NO DIVIDENDS at this point. The bond issue does allow them to take a Dividend of 70mill and a further 25mill at any time BUT we don’t know for certain that they have taken this option (After all they could have been taking Dividends every year but haven’t).
“I just think that having such owners is damaging and if they could be replaced by someone who shows more sympathy and respect towards the club and it’s supporters without getting us in to a much worse situation financially, I’m all for it.”
Well I see no way these people can’t make the situation worse. And the problem is will the Red Knights show ‘Sympathy’ to the fans, they are business men after all (A number of them being responsible for screwing over millions of people in the UK with actions that were responsible for the worldwide recession just to make themselves and their employers massive amounts of money) so seriously are they going to sit back and bother about what the fans want. Especially when alot of what the fans would want is lower costs but more money spent on the club.
Also does having ‘fans’ as owners really bring a good situation. Mike Ashley claims hes a Fan of Newcastle and many of his decisions early on were motivated as a Fan but none of that really worked out. Then you Had city with their Franny lee takeover. Oh and look at some of the issues Barca and Real have when their President is a fan and has total control. You can even look at the Glazers with Tampa Bay where much of the reason they are no unpopular is that they acted as the fans they are with their ownership and took a decision that won them the Superbowl but which hindered the team for the next few seasons. Sometimes its better to have owners who don’t have any kind of emotional investment as it allows them to act in a much more realistic manner. If the Red Knights do take over I hope that they are actually playing up how much of a fan they are.