Manchester United Football Club

But why did you not all protest when united floated on the stock exchange?
Answer, because everyone was gleefull at the amount of money this would and did bring in.

There were protests though i was far too young to take part i remember them. The original float was sold to the fans as an opportunity to own part of the club though as well as helping fund the necesary ground redevelopments post Hillsborough.

I do see your point though.

I dont really blame the Irish pair, i hoped they would stay long term but i think their hand was forced when SU began talks with Nomura. If that plan had succeeded the club would have been safe from the likes of Glazer but it also meant the offer of 300p per share was unlikely to be matched.

I do think Martin Edwards role shouldnt be forgotten in all this though. His father helped Busby build the club and when Edwards sold his significant holdings he put Utd at risk of this, as well as selling his own fathers legacy

As usual Utd are pioneers here but its quit likely plenty of big clubs will follow, even Milan could fall prey as Berlusconi wont be around forever

In many respects, ManYoo are now reaping what they have previously sown.

The absurd aspect of the ManYoo fans' mantra of 'Manchester United Not For Sale' is that, as a plc, this is exactly what they are.

Making the club a plc ultimately gave ManYoo a huge financial advantage over their competitors. But, as with any plc, it also left them vulnerable to potential takeovers.

Specifically, Glazer is now in control because JP McManus and John Magnier have sold their 28.9% stake in the club. And why did they sell? In a word, money. Or should that be 'profit'? The Irish duo have made a gain in the region of £80m to £100m from buying into the club.
At £3 a share, Glazer's offer to their pair was well above the market price. Had they rejected it then the American would have been forced to abandon his plans to take over ManYoo and the share price would have plummeted. Faced with a potential loss of perhaps £50m, rather than a huge profit, they made a decision that any businessman would have taken.

Having originally bought ManYoo shares to make a quick profit, they thus became Old Trafford kingmakers.

Apparently Malcolm Glazer has pledged to give the ManYoo boss, whoever he may be, £100m over the next five years to spend. That boils down to £20m a year. To put that in context, note that Wayne Rooney cost in the region of £28m, and that Wigan are planning to spend in excess of £25m this summer.

Originally Posted by Haroon

Why don't you crawl back in your mother's kunt you no good piece of cow dung? I haven't made fun of Utd. and here is another link for you to read you cock-faced w*nker. Read it properly you Fuking retard.

http://www.xtratime.org/forum/showpo...3&postcount=24

You fuking well disgust me with that post. Fuking tripe! What I said were FACTS. You have gone from becoming the most profitable club to the most debt-ridden club --- £550 million. Deny that you fuk.

Come on friends! Let's have a little more decorum here. Haroon??? I have never seen you post a message like this ever. I have to say I'm shocked because this is the first time I seen you lose your cool. Most of your posts are well thought and critical in mind. A good trait to be sure!
I think our friend in concern Raperiest is just a little tense himself because of the events taking place right now. I'm sure he didnt mean to cause you to explode.
I must admit I did get a little laugh at your reaction because this is a first for me coming from a person like you.

Originally Posted by rae

However we still all remain fans of Milan. Don't you want to have friends here too. IMo it would be better to take it easy, cuz we dont even know who is galzer, I just do not see hear any personalities. I have been punished for that some time ago, so I and eager to help other people not to do the same mistakes I have made myself. Peace.

True! Many dont know anything about Malcolm Glazer. The reaction is more out of personal fears than the character of this American. BTW Rae Glazer is a Lithuanian American just in case you did not know yet.
I can tell you all this. He got the most unlikely team in American football to win the NFL Superbowl title. Nobody would ever concieve the Tampa Bay Bucaneers to EVER win such a title. That would be like Derby County to winning the premiership these days. Fat chance right??? Yet this guy pulled it off with American Football.
It's foolish for people to start making assumptions and character assasinations on somebody they dont even know. First of all Glazer has a proven record of raising the value of everything he has touched in business. Yes the venture is risky, but no more risky than any other venture Man U has done in the past. Some ventures reap rewards while others have not. But I think you Man U fans are playing it a bit too safe right now and that "safezone" that you guys have set in your minds have historically won you nothing. All your titles and glory has been achieved through risks that executives have made.
Maybe you folks should a little bit more honest in your animosity to this take over. I can only guess. Do you not want a Jew to have control over your club?? Or a Lithuanian for that matter??? Or better yet, an American???
Before you Man U fans go senslessly off in your assumptions, know this first;
You feel it is an almost an endowed given that Man U should or will win a title and lots of it. How dare you portray this man in such a way after he was able to pull off the "impossible" here in the USA??? I'll tell you something... He has the character to overcome the impossible. It is guys like these Man U should have rather than the status quo "we deserve the title cause we are Man U" kind of mindset people.
There is a man like Malcolm Glazer who owns an Italian Serie team who took big risks buying a broke a$$ club and returned it to it's glory and giving it financial stability. I dont need to mention his name cause anyone with a brain will know who I'm talking about.

What kind of so called Man U fan are some of these protesters when they make idle threats by saying "If Glazer gets control, then we will pick up sticks and form a new club which will continue the traditions and heritage and the legacy of 125 years of Manchester United" - Jules Spencer (Independent Man U Supporters Association)????
First of all that is outright childish. Secondly who is he to claim sole right to the traditions and heritage of this club???? Was he around for 125 years??? BTW what is the traditions and heritage of this club??? I ask these questions so not to make accusations but what tradition is he talking about??? No Jewish owner??? I'll be interested to hear if he evens knows the traditions of Man U or just his opinions of what he wants the tradition to be in his own mind.

Why am I even bothering with you Man U fans anyway??? I do it in defense of this man who has been given an unfair portrayal of his character by some who are motivated by fear. Giving this control IMO will be a good thing for your club. I hope you guys are foolish and play on your ignorant beliefs cause that will only help other teams both in England and Europe cause you guys wont be their in the near future. So yeah go ahead!!! Protest. Stop form letting the right thing happen!!! No lost to me. I just had to make this commentary in the defense of Malcolm Glazer.

Totally agreed with you Kui. I do not see the END of our club. Especially if glazer has lithuanian roots Anyway, as you have mentioned many clubs are in possession of one person or a family, and they do exist and even prosper. So glory United, the one and the only United!!! Manchester United!

Originally Posted by KhRiS

Making the club a plc ultimately gave ManYoo a huge financial advantage over their competitors. But, as with any plc, it also left them vulnerable to potential takeovers.

Specifically, Glazer is now in control because JP McManus and John Magnier have sold their 28.9% stake in the club. And why did they sell? In a word, money. Or should that be 'profit'? The Irish duo have made a gain in the region of £80m to £100m from buying into the club.
At £3 a share, Glazer's offer to their pair was well above the market price. Had they rejected it then the American would have been forced to abandon his plans to take over ManYoo and the share price would have plummeted. Faced with a potential loss of perhaps £50m, rather than a huge profit, they made a decision that any businessman would have taken.

Having originally bought ManYoo shares to make a quick profit, they thus became Old Trafford kingmakers.

It was Alex Ferguson who invited JP and John to invest in the club when they were friends. Fergie did this to annony the board by having two of his friends in a position of power. as ye probably know fergie had a row with jp and john over the ownership of a horse. with the friendship with fergie gone they like any good business men waited for the best possible price they could make.

so its all fergies fault for getting them involved in the first place!

And yes when man u went public they raised money in equity getting benefits. they should have known that being public they were always running the risk of being taken over.

about this 'fans' burning season tickets, how stupid are they?
you dont change your football club like you do say what ceral you eat in the morning! they should get over it and support the new man for the good of the club because like it or not he's going to get control.

True! Many dont know anything about Malcolm Glazer. The reaction is more out of personal fears than the character of this American. BTW Rae Glazer is a Lithuanian American just in case you did not know yet.

Id heard he was Russian American but thats not the issue here anyway

It's foolish for people to start making assumptions and character assasinations on somebody they dont even know. First of all Glazer has a proven record of raising the value of everything he has touched in business. Yes the venture is risky, but no more risky than any other venture Man U has done in the past. Some ventures reap rewards while others have not. But I think you Man U fans are playing it a bit too safe right now and that "safezone" that you guys have set in your minds have historically won you nothing.

His venture is alot riskier than previous ventures. Utd are the best run football club on earth, he has taken a club that makes massive profit and plunged it into massive debt and in doing so removed the room for error. He now has to get that money back from somewhere and a few years of underperformance would seriously hinder that. Utds budgeting in past years has been based on the assumption that the club will reach the quarterfinals of the Champions League. For the past 2 seasons that hasnt been achieved but as the club were so profitable it didnt matter, now it could have serious implications. There is no way to guarentee Utd will stay near the top, with Chelsea around and Arsenals stadium finished 3rd place could be as good as it gets if we dont invest in the team, again how is he going to weigh up that risk?

Maybe you folks should a little bit more honest in your animosity to this take over. I can only guess. Do you not want a Jew to have control over your club?? Or a Lithuanian for that matter??? Or better yet, an American???

Sorry mate but thats absolute rubbish.

Glazers nationality has no bearing on this, what matters to the fans is that he has absolutely NO interest in Utd as a football club and is only interested in taking us over as a profit machine. To further discredit your point i'd point out that the Muslim crown prince of dubai was linked with a takeover too, the reaction to this was far more positive than that towards Glazer becuase A) the crown prince wouldnt risk the clubs future by plunging it into debt.
B) he has a genuine interest in the sport.
Utd dont need a single billionaire owner and the fanbase would prefer things to remain as they are, but the animosity to Glazer has nothing to do with anti semitism.

You feel it is an almost an endowed given that Man U should or will win a title and lots of it. How dare you portray this man in such a way after he was able to pull off the "impossible" here in the USA??? I'll tell you something... He has the character to overcome the impossible. It is guys like these Man U should have rather than the status quo "we deserve the title cause we are Man U" kind of mindset people.

No one here thinks we deserve the title simply for being Utd, we have however seen what happens to clubs in debt. Remember Leeds? from Champions League semi finals to relegation and the sale of their entire squad in barely 2 years. Why? because they were in debt and the team on the pitch couldsnt maintain that form. They got knocked out of the CL too early and had to sell players to make back the money, starting a downward spiral:

squad doesnt meet its targets - players have to be sold - squad doesnt meet its targets - more players have to be sold - and on

There is a man like Malcolm Glazer who owns an Italian Serie team who took big risks buying a broke a$$ club and returned it to it's glory and giving it financial stability. I dont need to mention his name cause anyone with a brain will know who I'm talking about.

Theres a big difference between the situations, Utd werent a "broke a$$" club and already had financial stability. Glazer has put us into debt and has risked Utd going through a reverse of Berlu's revival.

Giving this control IMO will be a good thing for your club. I hope you guys are foolish and play on your ignorant beliefs cause that will only help other teams both in England and Europe cause you guys wont be their in the near future. So yeah go ahead!!! Protest. Stop form letting the right thing happen!!! No lost to me. I just had to make this commentary in the defense of Malcolm Glazer.

You may think its great but Utd fans see it like this:

We were:
financially stable
massively profitable
debt free
well run

We will be:
financially unstable
massively in debt
well run? he may be a fantastic businessman but he knows nothing of football. In this game a club can spend 100m on players and still get worse! how would he handle that?

As for fear being the motivator, you are right. We fear the demise of Utd because the club is now in than hands of a man who doesnt care about it. We've heard the stories of his success in Tampa, as well as the costs of this, such as how he blackmailed the fans into paying for a new stadium (that he had promised to build for them) by threatening to move the team away from the region if they didnt agree to do it. If he can do that to people he has to share a stadium with what could he do to fans of a team he is 3000 miles away from?

And yes when man u went public they raised money in equity getting benefits. they should have known that being public they were always running the risk of being taken over.

Thats not really the problem, before the club was floated we were owned by Martin Edwards and he had been trying to sell us for years. The reason was that he thought Utd werent worth much because back then football was in trouble in England, with Heysel and Hillsborough and Hooliganism combined there didnt seem much future to owning a club. Remember he once almost sold Utd for £10 -20m Sky's revolution changed that though and put plenty of money into the game again (that money and exposure was worth far more to Utd than the float)

I dont buy into this reap what you sow argument because floated or not all clubs are available. Utds "crime" was to be run far better than the rest, if we had been like Milan in the 80s or Chelsea 3 years ago then we'd probably have a sugar daddy instead of a vulture.

you dont change your football club like you do say what ceral you eat in the morning! they should get over it and support the new man for the good of the club because like it or not he's going to get control.

to be honest that was largely an empty threat, i've heard from plenty of fans who had threatened it but it was a bluff (threaten Glazer with a half empty stadium) and Glazer called it. The more likely protests will be in the form of buying a ticket only, and nothing from the ground/megastore, as well as most fans who owned MUTV cancelling subscription(many have already) and the sponsors such as Nike and Vodafone being boycotted.

Originally Posted by almilan

about this 'fans' burning season tickets, how stupid are they?
you dont change your football club like you do say what ceral you eat in the morning! they should get over it and support the new man for the good of the club because like it or not he's going to get control.

I agree with you on this.

Is it possible Stez, that the Club is going through a financial crisis like any natural business enterprise behaves? Are you trying to tell me that Man U have never gone through a financial crisis??? And is it fair to blame it on this man???
What is it that u Manu fans want???? Do you want him out??? or Do you just not want him controlling the club???? You have called this man a vulture. You met or seen one before???
Give me at least your facts to how and why this club went into debt. That's important to know before we even continue this discussion. Dont give me rumours or any of the cr@p give me solid facts. My family has been in business for nearly a century now and we've gone through hard times as well as good times. You see from an owners point of view it isnt always the case of incompetence that attributes to a company not doing well. It can be attributed to many reasons and honestly it is impossible for the fans to see it from an ownership point of view.
Please tell me more I like to hear it. Just be fair to this man who you know nothing about.

Is it possible Stez, that the Club is going through a financial crisis like any natural business enterprise behaves? Are you trying to tell me that Man U have never gone through a financial crisis???

before his takeover there was no financial crisis. The only reason Utd are at risk is becuase when he gets 75% of the club he can transfer the debt he incurred when he borrowed money from the banks to buy the club. The club can make the money he needs to pay back those loans but it requires maintaining levels on the field, something that cant be guarenteed at any club.

Have the club encountered this before? no, not on this scale and certainly not because of an outside force. Basically the situation is this:

Utd were financially secure and the most profitable club in the world. Glazer bought the club with a loan totalling near £500m and plans to transfer the debt to Utd as soon as he passes 75% (he's at 74.8 at the moment) he has essentially taken out a mortgage, the club will have to pay back the loan (with interest of course) which will put enormous strain on all aspects of the club to achieve. In normal business circumstances this is fairly straghtforward, but Utd are not a normal business, as a football club financially success is linked to success on the pitch and no club can guarentee that.

Glazer is now in a position were he does have to maintain a level of success in order to pay off the debt he brought to the club. How will he do this? At present Utd have finished 3rd 2 seasons running and not made the quarter finals in Europe over the same period. This level of success is unlikely to be enough to pay back the loan long term and means Glazer will have to strengthen the team, something he has apparently promised £20m a year for 5 years to do. He will leave these decisions to the management as he has already conceded he knows nothing of the game he has just bought into. Now, if Fergie buys the right players (a midfielder and keeper this year) and makes Utd genuine challengers for all competitions again it will be enough to break even, if he fails how will Glazer pay the money back then? the answer: raise prices and sell assets.

Rio and Rooney would certainly raise enough money to cover a poor season but by selling off the best players you only make another poor season the next year more likely, the downward spiral i mentioned in the last post kicks in.

Glazer is smart, and he knows Utd must have a successful team for him to maximise his return on this but any team can have a lean spell. Before the takeover a lean spell wouldnt have put the entire survival of the club at risk, like it is now.


A question for you: If Milan had been in the same secure situation as Utd were and Glazer had done this to them would you be happy about it?

Originally Posted by Stezagud

Rio and Rooney would certainly raise enough money to cover a poor season but by selling off the best players you only make another poor season the next year more likely, the downward spiral i mentioned in the last post kicks in.

What do you mean?! Roon and Rio are leaving us?! WTF We have paid for them so much. But money is not everthing - we have put so many hopes and dreams in them...

Originally Posted by Stezagud

before his takeover there was no financial crisis. The only reason Utd are at risk is becuase when he gets 75% of the club he can transfer the debt he incurred when he borrowed money from the banks to buy the club. The club can make the money he needs to pay back those loans but it requires maintaining levels on the field, something that cant be guarenteed at any club.

Have the club encountered this before? no, not on this scale and certainly not because of an outside force. Basically the situation is this:

Utd were financially secure and the most profitable club in the world. Glazer bought the club with a loan totalling near £500m and plans to transfer the debt to Utd as soon as he passes 75% (he's at 74.8 at the moment) he has essentially taken out a mortgage, the club will have to pay back the loan (with interest of course) which will put enormous strain on all aspects of the club to achieve. In normal business circumstances this is fairly straghtforward, but Utd are not a normal business, as a football club financially success is linked to success on the pitch and no club can guarentee that.

Glazer is now in a position were he does have to maintain a level of success in order to pay off the debt he brought to the club. How will he do this? At present Utd have finished 3rd 2 seasons running and not made the quarter finals in Europe over the same period. This level of success is unlikely to be enough to pay back the loan long term and means Glazer will have to strengthen the team, something he has apparently promised £20m a year for 5 years to do. He will leave these decisions to the management as he has already conceded he knows nothing of the game he has just bought into. Now, if Fergie buys the right players (a midfielder and keeper this year) and makes Utd genuine challengers for all competitions again it will be enough to break even, if he fails how will Glazer pay the money back then? the answer: raise prices and sell assets.

Rio and Rooney would certainly raise enough money to cover a poor season but by selling off the best players you only make another poor season the next year more likely, the downward spiral i mentioned in the last post kicks in.

Glazer is smart, and he knows Utd must have a successful team for him to maximise his return on this but any team can have a lean spell. Before the takeover a lean spell wouldnt have put the entire survival of the club at risk, like it is now.


A question for you: If Milan had been in the same secure situation as Utd were and Glazer had done this to them would you be happy about it?

Ok Stez you are now making fair points to the debate. I'll continue to ask more questions so that we can have a better understanding to the club situation. My next question(s) are:
As the current stockholder how much control does Glazer have now??? When I mean control, I mean how much of the financial part of the club was he given the power to drive this company into debt???
What is a big mystery to me is that MAN U is essentially a corporation. Now I would think a corporate entity in Britain is by the same rule similar to that in the US. Getting back to my questions, As a corporation an owner does not really have day to day control in most cases does it??? Where did the financial responsibility of the club fall to??? The shareholders, the fans as well as Glazer???? or The managing board of the day to day affairs of the Club??? Glazer isnt the chairman of the club I would make an educated bet??? Isnt it they (executive board) and not shareholders who handle the fiscal responsibility of the Man U??? You failed to mention anything critical about those who sold their shares particularly Mcmanus and Magnier. Why did they sell??? Maybe the price was right and maybe more so they knew from a while back where this club was going financially after very poor decisions made by whoever was calling the shots before Glazer even bought into the club.
Granted Glazer is no Abramovich, but a club doesnt just go into debt overnight or even over a period of a couple of years. It takes a slow progression of poor financial decisions that could have been made years ago way before anyone of you knew who Malcolm Glazer was because he wasnt in the organization yet! That is why I always pose the question whether you guys are given this guy a fair judgement???
Getting back to the corporate side of this club. A corporation can be headed for financial downturn years befoe the public even gets wind of it. You fans are kinda too late in knowing a big secret that has finally come out. That is the club has been losing money or making poor financial decisions for quite a few years now. This is yesterdays news and when I mean yesterday I mean way before Glazer gain a majority of the shares in 2005. Was the question even posed by you fans concerning this??? Highly unlikely at the least! It's like blaming the guy who showed up upon an accident scene while all those involved never saw the trainwreck coming ahead of time and then accusing this guy who just "showed up" saying he did it!

And to reciprocate and answer your question regarding Milan, the answer is no I would not blame Glazer. I have followed this mans business prowess and have seen him take a broke A$$ American team no one in their dreams ever thought to win a championship do so under his control. Tampa Bay Bucaneers were a small income team and he had brought it to financial success making it a big team with stability and big income in just a few years.
The man hasnt run away and has put his business credibility on the line sticking around while the others are no where to be seen. He has stayed while these so called fans are threatening to leave.

As the current stockholder how much control does Glazer have now??? When I mean control, I mean how much of the financial part of the club was he given the power to drive this company into debt???

He broke through the 75% threshhold today and now has the option to thake the club private.

Getting back to my questions, As a corporation an owner does not really have day to day control in most cases does it??? Where did the financial responsibility of the club fall to??? The shareholders, the fans as well as Glazer???? or The managing board of the day to day affairs of the Club??? Glazer isnt the chairman of the club I would make an educated bet??? Isnt it they (executive board) and not shareholders who handle the fiscal responsibility of the Man U???

Maybe i didnt make this clear earlier (my rants can be hard to follow sometimes ) Utd are not operating at a loss. There have been no bad financial decisions and the club is still raking in profits at a level no other side can match. These profits are down slightly because of the on pitch performance (prize money is down because of early Europe exit and match day revenue is down for the same reason as there were less games played) In this situation there would be absolutely nothing to worry about, as i said the club can easily absorb these poor performances (though of course they're not ideal )

However. Glazer couldnt afford to buy the shares he needed to take control of the club with his own money. He has had to borrow £500m from banks in order to buy the shares from Cubic, Dobson et al and now that money has to be payed back. When he passed 75% today he has the option to delist the club taking it private and transfer his debt to it.

Think of Utd as a house. The owners of the house had it running smoothly, they were wealthy enough to be able to pay off all their bills and there was no financial trouble. Glazer comes along and buys the house using a mortgage and now the house has repayments to be met. If he has a tough year and cant afford the repayments the house is at risk, so he will have to sell something to meet the payments

You failed to mention anything critical about those who sold their shares particularly Mcmanus and Magnier. Why did they sell??? Maybe the price was right and maybe more so they knew from a while back where this club was going financially after very poor decisions made by whoever was calling the shots before Glazer even bought into the club.

Cubic sold because this probably was the best they could hope to get, a £90m profit. Again there was no financial problem for them, the share price was high because of Glazers interest and would have fallen if his interest had been rebuffed. If the price fell Shareholders Utd would have had a better chance of securing a significant share of the club. If SU had reached 25% they would have been in a position to prevent any future owner from taking the club private = no debt transfers = only the super-rich could afford the club = less chance Cubic could have sold their stake. I dont like what they did but i do understand why they felt they had to do it.

"Granted Glazer is no Abramovich, but a club doesnt just go into debt overnight or even over a period of a couple of years. It takes a slow progression of poor financial decisions that could have been made years ago way before anyone of you knew who Malcolm Glazer was because he wasnt in the organization yet! That is why I always pose the question whether you guys are given this guy a fair judgement???

As i mentioned before, the debt was incurred by Glazer to buy the club and will be transfered to it. Right now, at this moment the club is probably still debt free but as soon as he draws up the relevant paperwork it will be saddled with £500m debt. That is practically overnight

Getting back to the corporate side of this club. A corporation can be headed for financial downturn years befoe the public even gets wind of it. You fans are kinda too late in knowing a big secret that has finally come out. That is the club has been losing money or making poor financial decisions for quite a few years now. This is yesterdays news and when I mean yesterday I mean way before Glazer gain a majority of the shares in 2005. Was the question even posed by you fans concerning this??? Highly unlikely at the least! It's like blaming the guy who showed up upon an accident scene while all those involved never saw the trainwreck coming ahead of time and then accusing this guy who just "showed up" saying he did it!

Im a shareholder in Utd, one of nearly 30,000 'supporter shareholders', and a member of SU. We're kept well informed of the clubs stability and Utd are far more transparent than most football clubs anyway. When Cubic posed their infamous 99 Questions last year very few of the questions were concerned with Utds financial decision making, though a question was raised about how much was payed to agents. Since then Utd break down every deal publically and the agent fee is always highlighted.

And to reciprocate and answer your question regarding Milan

I'll ask it again, If Glazer payed Berlu £500m for Milan and then transfered all the debt he incurred raising the funds onto Milan, putting a strain on them to perform to a certain standard on the pitch or risk selling players to raise money to meet the repayments. Would you be happy about it?