Takeover, financial situation and behind the scenes talk

[Bean]

The diagram below clearly illustrates whats happening behind the scenes. Just to note "the bank" is the gentleman on the left.

[meathman 007]

Dont worry, Mike Phelan will fill us all in 2moro at the press conference as to what is going on at the club

[meathman 007]

Originally Posted by intotheforest

We'll have to see about all this but if he has been given a budget meaning he can't afford Ljajic, you have to think positive and assume he is saving up for something much, much bigger.

I guess it's a case of seeing what January brings.

Surely you have contradicted yourself here. You are saying that we should think positive because he could be saving up for something much, much bigger....

By anyones logic, we should have 70 million+ to spend if were being run under normal circumstances (from the 80 million we got for Ronaldo and the money we saved from not buying Tevez). So how exactly could we not afford Ljajic? Do you seriously think we are going to spend close to 70 million net in the upcoming January and Summer transfer windows?

The whole thing stinks. But the reality is that we will never get a honest statement from the club and we will only officially hear that we are fcuked when the Glazers file for bankrupcy and leave the club saddled with huge debt.

[intotheforest]

Originally Posted by meathman 007

Surely you have contradicted yourself here. You are saying that we should think positive because he could be saving up for something much, much bigger.....

How so?

If you think positive and assume the only reason you dropped out this deal is because money is being saved up for someone like David Silva, how is that contradicting?

Thinking positive = money being spent on better, proven and world class players

[meathman 007]

Originally Posted by intotheforest

How so?

If you think positive and assume the only reason you dropped out this deal is because money is being saved up for someone like David Silva, how is that contradicting?

Thinking positive = money being spent on better, proven and world class players

What I mean is that we shouldnt have to pulling out of a 10 million deal for a reputed world class young player to fund other deals... when if we are being run normally, we should have a huge transfer budget.

I dont think that can be looked upon in a postive manner.

The club would have us believe that there are no major issues with the debt and that we have money to spend on players every season... but that just dosnt seem to be the case. We spent big one summer on Nani, Anderson, Hargreaves and the Tevez loan deal. We then shelled out a ridiculous 30 million on Berbatov... imo, the only reason we could do that, is that the Glazers knew that is was inevitable that Ronaldo would be sold for a huge sum within a couple of years.... That has now happened and we are now in net profit in transfer dealings since they arrived.

There is nothing good about them beeing our owners. They are milking match going fans for every penny they have, making cutbacks throughout the club and not backing Fergie in the transfer market. It is down to the management and the players that we have been so succesful over the past 3 seasons - nothing to do with uncle Glazer.

[Heneage]

Originally Posted by intotheforest

Now with Ljajic, I'm a firm believer in the you can never have enough young kids philosophy.

PEEEEDO.

It's not looking good is it. If it was a case of;

"He hasn't quite developed as we had hoped."

Then I could understand, sometimes players don't look as good on further viewings than they did at first. Even if you'd said, at this present time we are not looking to bring another young player in preferring to focus on the here and now. But to just say 'We feel we have enough quality in these positions.'

You guys have had these players for a while now, Cleverly is out of contract in the summer, and Simpson is already touting him about saying we should sign him, now given the choice he will stay at United over joining us, but what if one of your rivals come in?

Of the top four, I'd argue you have the worst luck with buying talents, you are fantastic at raising your own from the academy, but since Ronaldo & Rooney all of the players you have brought in have not quite lived up to their billing.

Nani, Anderson, Hargreaves, now you have Valencia and Obertan who are still in their settling in period. I'm still surprised you bought the former, he was hyped as a youngster at Villarreal but at Wigan he was not set apart from his peers. You did not see him scoring and getting time on Match Of The Day every week, billed as 'Another top performance from Valencia.'

His scoring record is not really great 1 in 10 at Wigan, but yes Akira he has scored 2 in 13 for you.

Obertan is the real one to watch, I read reports of him being 'The Next Zidane.' Who spent a year at Lorient after his career had stalled. His scoring record is even worse than Valencia's and he only got 15 games for Lorient a team who are average and had a good finish last year by their standards.

Even if you are saving up for a bigger player, surely that means your money has shrunk then, is £6-7M now a fair chunk for a team like Manchester United, that's normally how much you pull in for selling 2-3 Reserves or academy rejects, or even just Frazier Campbell on his own!

I'll be amazed if you spend big in January.

[Sparky]

We won't spend anything in January.

[Seifer]

Originally Posted by Sparky

We won't spend anything in January.

Of course we won't. Even if we had the money and were allowed to use it, the chances of Fergie dipping into the transfer market in the middle of a season would be slim!

He's obviously going to "cover up" for the Glazers and tell us all that it's not his philosophy to "buy players in the middle of a season". He's even stated this on numerous occations before!!

Here's what he said on the matter two weeks ago:

Sir Alex Ferguson does not expect to be busy in the January transfer market after again claiming that Manchester United will not pay over the odds for players.

Ferguson resisted the temptation to spend the £80million the club banked following the world record sale of Cristiano Ronaldo to Real Madrid during the summer.

"I would like to do business, but only if the prices are right - and that can be a problem in January" he said.

So, his excuse is already set.. we won't pay over the odds apparently.

[Scholesy18]

Man Utd fans concerned over Ljajic deal rejection

Manchester United's decision to pull the plug on a deal for Partizan Belgrade youngster Adem Ljajic has supporters concerned.

The decision has prompted the Manchester United Supporters' Trust to raise concerns over the club's clout in the transfer market.

Ljajic had been lined up for a potential move to Old Trafford next year but United, with a wealth of midfield talent available to them already, are not taking up the option to sign the Partizan Belgrade player.

However MUST chief executive Duncan Drasdo has responded to the news by questioning how much spending power United have at their disposal.

Drasdo said: "Whatever the reason for the Ljajic deal falling through the fact is with the revenues flowing into the club Manchester United should be competing with Real Madrid and Barcelona for players of the calibre of Messi and Kaka but instead we have to carry the deadweight of the Glazers' ownership on our backs.

"It is no coincidence that the ownership model of Madrid and Barca is one of supporter ownership where every penny is reinvested back into the club rather than being siphoned off and that is why MUST sees supporter ownership as our long-term objective.

"The true picture will not be clear until after the January transfer window but with the £80m Ronaldo transfer fee plus the supposed £25-30m annual transfer kitty a spend of £100m would effectively be break-even and supporters will rightly be asking where has the money gone when they've been forced to pay more and more through the huge ticket price rises in recent years.

"If that money isn't reinvested in the club, judging by the more passionate views expressed by supporters, many will see it as little better than theft and feel entitled to demand ticket prices are slashed to pre-takeover levels."

[mcfc]

imo you are all thinking the worst, yeah your in debt but the money that utd earn sponcers tv and club soveiners etc is ten fold plus on others, utd can buy who they want if fergie wants him, but fergie will not pay over the odds thats all

[ruudlover]

Davide Petrucci and Ravel Morrison FTW!

[fisherman]

Originally Posted by mcfc

imo you are all thinking the worst, yeah your in debt but the money that utd earn sponcers tv and club soveiners etc is ten fold plus on others, utd can buy who they want if fergie wants him, but fergie will not pay over the odds thats all

AGREED,BUT IN SOME CASES WE HAVE TO PAY OVER THE ODDS IF WE NEED A PLAYER

[nizmo]

So what happen if Man Utd are actually broke. I dont think the club gonna die or disappear. Its Manchester Utd, one of the biggest and most supported club in the world. Its always the same thing. If its happen then the Glazers are forced to sell, and i bet there a lot of big potential buyers who would snap up the chances to buy United. Yeah its sound horrible but thats reality.

Are we actually is dire financial crisis as the media let us believe it to be? I will believe it when i see it.

[Sparky]

They need to sell the Bucs and put the money into United, or just sell us.

The Times

The Glazer family, the owners of Manchester United, are struggling to refinance their enormous debts amid concerns about the impact they are having on the club.

The Times understands that the Americans have been trying unsuccessfully to secure a refinancing package for part of the club’s £699 million debt for months, having failed in 2007 and last year, because of the bleak global economic climate.

Fans’ groups have cast doubt over whether they will ever see the £80 million raised from the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo, the Portugal forward, to Real Madrid last summer reinvested in the squad.

Dragan Djuric, the Partizan Belgrade president, meanwhile claimed this week that United pulled the plug on a deal to sign Adem Ljajic, the Serbia Under-21 midfield player, because “maybe they are in financial crisis”.

RELATED LINKS
Squaring Glazer's £300m debt circle
Liverpool owners back in business
What will Malcolm Glazer's takeover mean for Manchester United?
United dismissed Djuric’s claims and a spokesman for the Glazer family has maintained publicly that there is plenty of money available for Sir Alex Ferguson, the manager, to spend on players, but supporters are unlikely to be pacified until they see the arrival of some big names or evidence that the spiralling debt is under control. The main concern is understood to centre around the £175.5 million worth of debt that the Glazers are personally responsible for, not the £518.7 million of loans secured against the club.

It is these so-called Payment In Kind (PIK) notes, money borrowed from US hedge funds that “rolls up” at an annual interest rate of 14.25 per cent, that the Americans are believed to have been trying to refinance.

The intention was always to pay off these loans within a few years of the takeover in May 2005, but while they managed to redeem some of the original PIK debt of £275 million, the credit crunch has made this difficult.

By the time the debt matures in 2017, it will stand at £580 million unless the Glazers can pay part or all of it off before then, or secure a preferential rate of interest. With the club also facing rising capital repayments from 2013, the PIK debt is a concern. It grew from £152 million to £175.5 million in one financial year.

Previous reports that the Glazers could persuade the banks to refinance by offering securitisation against future match-day revenues are said to be wide of the mark; ticket sales are already factored into the borrowing.

As such, given that the 14.25 per cent interest rate was agreed the last and only time the Glazers have been able to refinance, in August 2006 when the financial climate was rosier, they will do well to secure a lower rate unless they have something tangible to offer would-be lenders.

It is understood that United are operating well within the financial terms set by their lenders. However, Perry Capital and Citadel — the two US hedge funds that provided the Glazers with PIK loans — get a range of rights over the club in the event that their financial performance falls beneath a certain level, including the right to appoint their own directors to the board.

Ultimately, they could seize control of the club should revenues plummet.

Documents obtained by The Times also reveal that the terms of the loan put a cap on United’s spending.

A spokesman for the Glazer family said: “We continue to keep our financial options for the club under review just like any other business.”

[Sparky]

LOL

Daily Mail

Bayern Munich have added to the growing consensus among European clubs that Manchester United face an imminent financial crisis because of the £700million debt laden on the club by the Glazer family.

Partizan Belgrade president Dragan Djuric raised the spectre last week by suggesting that a lack of funds might be a reason for United's failure to follow through on the proposed signing of Serbia Under-21 midfielder Adem Ljajic, even though United insist it is a decision made purely because of the strength of their emerging players.

But directors at Bayern Munich formed the same impression as Djuric in the summer when United made an early inquiry about the availability of Bayern winger Franck Ribery.

Bayern suggested a price in the region of £60million, heard nothing more and concluded that United didn't have the money to spend, despite the £80m sale of Cristiano Ronaldo.

[Scholesy18]

lol..........

Though there's something about Phelan talking about Dzeko today, saying we've been watching him, probs regular talk though before we play Wolfsburg.

[Rorge]

Bayern suggested a price in the region of £60million, heard nothing more and concluded that United didn't have the money to spend, despite the £80m sale of Cristiano Ronaldo.

Easy to jump to conclusions. I've got one of my own, in that United didn't want to spend £60million on a player, because that price for Ribery is absurd. If United were broke, they wouldn't have asked about Ribery in the first place, for Christ's sake.

[Gib710]

Originally Posted by Rorge

Easy to jump to conclusions. I've got one of my own, in that United didn't want to spend £60million on a player, because that price for Ribery is absurd. If United were broke, they wouldn't have asked about Ribery in the first place, for Christ's sake.

That was my initial reaction as well.

Valencia > Ribery, Gibson > Ljajic. Simples.

[Boovy]

Think the main thing with the Ljajic deal is that it was pretty much sewn up. Its not as though we didn't realise how much he was going to cost, it was already agreed. Just seems odd

I fully agree with not spending £60M on Ribery though. When I read "Bayern had not heard anything back" I thought the sentence was going to end with "...apart from the sound of people falling off their chairs laughing"

[Bossanova]

Originally Posted by Boovy

Think the main thing with the Ljajic deal is that it was pretty much sewn up. Its not as though we didn't realise how much he was going to cost, it was already agreed. Just seems odd

I fully agree with not spending £60M on Ribery though. When I read "Bayern had not heard anything back" I thought the sentence was going to end with "...apart from the sound of people falling off their chairs laughing"

too true.

Kaka cost £50m or whatever, and has achieved 10 times what scarface has

[VanDerVaart]

Originally Posted by Sparky

LOL

Daily Mail

No quote, not real.

[Gib710]

Maybe the work permit actually was a factor with Ljajic. Why spend £10m on someone who you can't play? If he wasn't going to get a 'special talent' permit then we would have become reliant on Serbia calling him up, and in World Cup year that probably isn't very likely for at least another season. Perhaps we will use that £10m on someone in January, whether its Dzeko, Kjaer, Defour or whoever.

Of course, we're probably broke and Ljajic could have got the permit had we pushed the issue... I'm just attempting to find a positive in there somewhere.

[bambergascoigne]

Originally Posted by Rorge

If United were broke, they wouldn't have asked about Ribery in the first place, for Christ's sake.

keeping up appearances

[Sparky]

The Sun

THE owner of cash-strapped Manchester United has sold his mansion in Palm Beach.

Malcolm Glazer's home sold for £14.5million amid concern at how the credit crunch has affected him.

United were plunged £690m into debt following Glazer's 2005 takeover.

Since then ticket prices have been hiked up by 42 per cent and just £1.25m net has been spent on the squad.

Last week United pulled out of a £10m transfer for Partizan Belgrade's 18-year-old Adem Ljajic.

Duncan Drasdo, Chief Executive of Manchester United Supporters' Trust, said: "With our revenues we should be competing for players of the calibre of Lionel Messi and Kaka.

"Instead we have to carry the deadweight of the Glazers' ownership."

[Sparky]

NFL’s Glazer Sells in Palm Beach’s Biggest Deal of 2009

Malcolm Glazer, the owner of the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers who also has controlling stakes in soccer team Manchester United, has closed Palm Beach, Fla.’s biggest deal of the year with the sale of a nearly-12,000-square-foot spread on 3.8 acres for $24 million. The buyer was Los Angeles real estate investor Jeff Greene.

Called La Bellucia, the nine-bedroom, nine-and-a-half-bathroom home at 1200 S. Ocean Blvd., had a price tag of $27.5 million and was on the market for less than 30 days, says Dana Koch of Corcoran Group, who shared the listing with Paulette Koch. The oceanfront home has stone and hardwood floors, outdoor terraces and an oversized swimming pool.

Willey J. Kingsley, a physician and capitalist in Rome, N.Y., built the home in 1924. He named it after his wife, Lucy, according to the Palm Beach Daily News. The home exchanged hands several times over the years, and Mr. Glazer’s company, First Allied Jacksonville Corp., bought it in July 2000 for $14 million. “Their plan was to renovate the entire property back to its former grandeur,” Mr. Koch says. But he says the Glazers decided against the renovations and have decided to remain in their current home nearby, also on Palm Beach’s Billionaire’s Row. Though the Glazers never lived in La Bellucia, they maintained the property “meticulously,” Mr. Koch says.

Mr. Koch says the unit had multiple offers and that the quick sale didn’t surprise him because it was “priced properly.”

Unable to sell a 25-acre estate in Beverly Hills, Calif., Mr. Greene, the buyer of La Bellucia, put that property up for lease in October, asking $250,000 a month. Mr. Greene bought the unfinished property out of receivership for $35 million in 2006 and has spent nearly three years and $15 million finishing it. The 43,000-square-foot main house has 11 bedrooms, 14 bathrooms and a 6,000-square-foot ballroom. Six acres of vineyards produce 400 cases of wine annually on the property. Mr. Green held his wedding there in 2007, but, he says, the home is too lavish for him and his wife to occupy full-time. Instead, they spent most of their time at a Miami condominium.