[Zanu Bob]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-17116060

'Manchester United says its revenues for the last six months of 2011 increased to £175m, as it released its latest financial figures.

It is an increase of £18.5m on the Old Trafford club's revenues for the same period last year.

The Premier League club said debt was £439m at the end of 2011, less than the £508m reported 12 months previously.

Last year, United said it would partially float on the Singapore Stock Exchange, but that has yet to happen.

The team, currently second to rivals Manchester City in the Premier League, are also competing in the Europa League.

Match day revenues (up from £52.4m to £54.5m), media revenue (up from £53.7m to £60.9m) and commercial revenue (up from £50.4m to £58.6m) were all ahead.

United were taken over by the Glazer family in 2005 and have had a rocky relationship with many of the fans since then over the level of debt at the club.

A buyback of bonds, sold as part of a £500m refinancing operation two years ago, helped bring down the latest debt figures.

However, total operating costs - up from £96.9m to £110.8m - and net player capital expenditure - up from £11.7m to £47.9m - both rose.

The latter's rise was due to a summer outlay on players David de Gea, Ashley Young and Phil Jones, as manager Sir Alex Ferguson set about freshening up his team.

Other figures show a bank balance of £50.9m and a £10.4m rise in general capital expenditure, mainly due to upgrading hospitality areas.

Without the lucrative revenue streams garnered from competing in the Champions League, the club is expected to see a decline in income over the next half-year.'




tick tock tick tock.if they go pop it will be funny.

quite how they're proposing to clear that debt I don't know?

This post has been edited by Zanu Bob: 21 February 2012 - 02:44 PM

[Grrrr I'm a tiger]

Whose debt? Was that the debt loaded onto the club to buy it in the first place and to save some Yank shopping malls?

Pity the fans.

[Sour Mash]

Zanu Bob, on 21 February 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-17116060

'Manchester United says its revenues for the last six months of 2011 increased to £175m, as it released its latest financial figures.

It is an increase of £18.5m on the Old Trafford club's revenues for the same period last year.

The Premier League club said debt was £439m at the end of 2011, less than the £508m reported 12 months previously.

Last year, United said it would partially float on the Singapore Stock Exchange, but that has yet to happen.

The team, currently second to rivals Manchester City in the Premier League, are also competing in the Europa League.

Match day revenues (up from £52.4m to £54.5m), media revenue (up from £53.7m to £60.9m) and commercial revenue (up from £50.4m to £58.6m) were all ahead.

United were taken over by the Glazer family in 2005 and have had a rocky relationship with many of the fans since then over the level of debt at the club.

A buyback of bonds, sold as part of a £500m refinancing operation two years ago, helped bring down the latest debt figures.

However, total operating costs - up from £96.9m to £110.8m - and net player capital expenditure - up from £11.7m to £47.9m - both rose.

The latter's rise was due to a summer outlay on players David de Gea, Ashley Young and Phil Jones, as manager Sir Alex Ferguson set about freshening up his team.

Other figures show a bank balance of £50.9m and a £10.4m rise in general capital expenditure, mainly due to upgrading hospitality areas.

Without the lucrative revenue streams garnered from competing in the Champions League, the club is expected to see a decline in income over the next half-year.'




tick tock tick tock.if they go pop it will be funny.

quite how they're proposing to clear that debt I don't know?

They do seem to be paying it down, so far, though.

However they are constantly balancing on the edge and a decline in revenue (e.g. by them dropping out of the Champions League early on as pointed out in the article) could have repercussions in the not too distant future. A bit like overindebted householders managing to make ends meet only because of incredibly low base rates.


Big clubs are not immune from the consequences of taking on too much debt as evidenced by the Glasgow Rangers situation North of the border.

Dare I say that a dose of 'austerity' is needed in terms of managing their budgets, though I'm sure we'll get scaremongering talk of the 'talent' leaving for higher pay elsewhere as with those other overpaid buffoons, the banksters.

[R K]

!EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Whose debt? Was that the debt loaded onto the club to buy it in the first place and to save some Yank shopping malls?

Pity the fans.

Very frustrating to see the debt interest exiting the club of course, but it's still a very strong looking business.
Has AVB been sacked yet? Wenger looks safe as he steers Arsenal into mid-table mediocrity.

What they appear to have done is used part of the 'Ronaldo' money to cover around 20% of the bonds which save just under 10%p.a. in interest payments. I guess on balance they figure that's the best use of the cash for now.

Given the Glazer history they'll have refinanced any remaining debt by 2017 and probably on more favourable terms.

[Zanu Bob]

!EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 03:11 PM, said:

Whose debt? Was that the debt loaded onto the club to buy it in the first place and to save some Yank shopping malls?

Pity the fans.

that was the moment beyond parody when the glazers iirc,bought the club with borrowed moeny and used the club as collateral.....RK will nkow

[Zanu Bob]

Sour Mash, on 21 February 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

They do seem to be paying it down, so far, though.

However they are constantly balancing on the edge and a decline in revenue (e.g. by them dropping out of the Champions League early on as pointed out in the article) could have repercussions in the not too distant future. A bit like overindebted householders managing to make ends meet only because of incredibly low base rates.


Big clubs are not immune from the consequences of taking on too much debt as evidenced by the Glasgow Rangers situation North of the border.

Dare I say that a dose of 'austerity' is needed in terms of managing their budgets, though I'm sure we'll get scaremongering talk of the 'talent' leaving for higher pay elsewhere as with those other overpaid buffoons, the banksters.

man utd have the earning power of few other clubs.they may well make it through the other side,mnost of the rest won't.

[leicestersq]

They have nearly done it. Pare the debt down for a couple of years, and the reduction compounds quickly until it ceases to become a burden.

Good deal for the Glazers.

[Grrrr I'm a tiger]

Zanu Bob, on 21 February 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

that was the moment beyond parody when the glazers iirc,bought the club with borrowed moeny and used the club as collateral.....RK will nkow

I heard on the radio this evening...but it's just come out that that is exactly what that tw@t at Rangers did as well. He had previously denied it.

[frozen_out]

leicestersq, on 21 February 2012 - 05:39 PM, said:

They have nearly done it. Pare the debt down for a couple of years, and the reduction compounds quickly until it ceases to become a burden.

Good deal for the Glazers.

This is my view. I was incredibly pessimistic when the Glazers first took over but it's seriously starting to look like they might just pull this off.

A debt about 3*revenue and I would guess an asset to debt ratio of about 1. They're actually starting to look like a reasonably well run business. Not out of the woods yet, but if they can carry on like this for the next 5 years they'll be home and dry.

[Confusion of VIs]

Zanu Bob, on 21 February 2012 - 02:30 PM, said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-17116060

'Manchester United says its revenues for the last six months of 2011 increased to £175m, as it released its latest financial figures.

It is an increase of £18.5m on the Old Trafford club's revenues for the same period last year.

The Premier League club said debt was £439m at the end of 2011, less than the £508m reported 12 months previously.

Last year, United said it would partially float on the Singapore Stock Exchange, but that has yet to happen.

The team, currently second to rivals Manchester City in the Premier League, are also competing in the Europa League.

Match day revenues (up from £52.4m to £54.5m), media revenue (up from £53.7m to £60.9m) and commercial revenue (up from £50.4m to £58.6m) were all ahead.

United were taken over by the Glazer family in 2005 and have had a rocky relationship with many of the fans since then over the level of debt at the club.

A buyback of bonds, sold as part of a £500m refinancing operation two years ago, helped bring down the latest debt figures.

However, total operating costs - up from £96.9m to £110.8m - and net player capital expenditure - up from £11.7m to £47.9m - both rose.

The latter's rise was due to a summer outlay on players David de Gea, Ashley Young and Phil Jones, as manager Sir Alex Ferguson set about freshening up his team.

Other figures show a bank balance of £50.9m and a £10.4m rise in general capital expenditure, mainly due to upgrading hospitality areas.

Without the lucrative revenue streams garnered from competing in the Champions League, the club is expected to see a decline in income over the next half-year.'




tick tock tick tock.if they go pop it will be funny.

quite how they're proposing to clear that debt I don't know?

By selling the club at a massive profit would be my guess, didn't they turn down an offer last year that would have enabled them to walk away with over £500m.

[Sir Harold m]

Of course it will work for the glazers. Those of us who surrendered our season tickets (I held my first one as a kid on Salford in the early 80's) and helped to form FCUM were never in any doubt it would.

The problem is that the Glazers knew and were aware they had an inelastic product on their hands.

For years united, despite their fame, glamour, and latterly success were one of the cheapest clubs to watch in the country and not just the premiership.

They also had a waiting list of tens of thousands and enough one off numpties who wanted to sample the atmosphere such that the tripling of prices would have no effect on the attendance.

They are well on the way to achieving this, season tickets now cost nearly three times what they did seven years ago.

Those pricks who turn up to games with green and yellow scarves are more than willing to buy the club for glazer. Have no sympathy for them at all.

Please save sympathy for those Salford and other local men who now find themselves unable to watch their team their dads and dads dads had built and passed onto them.

Biggest collaborator of all was Sir Alex ' big socialist' ferguson. Obviously the only driver in his life was success ( and to be fair noone can ever deny his unique ability to achieve this) but I wish he'd spare us his 'primciples' on his various autobiographies.

Fine if you call them 'man ewe' and only care about winning trophies. A good number of us were there before Fergie started winning trophies and will no doubt be back when he's long gone.

As the guy in Wall Street said, "I don't go to bed with no whore and I don't wake up with no whore, that's how I live with myself"

This post has been edited by Sir Harold m: 21 February 2012 - 11:14 PM

[Charlie The Tramp Returns]

Bums on seats as in the past and today they would not have this problem.

[Zanu Bob]

!EURO!, on 21 February 2012 - 06:57 PM, said:

I heard on the radio this evening...but it's just come out that that is exactly what that tw@t at Rangers did as well. He had previously denied it.

wonder which bank is on the hook for that loss?

[Grrrr I'm a tiger]

Zanu Bob, on 21 February 2012 - 11:42 PM, said:

wonder which bank is on the hook for that loss?

'Ticketus' lent the money that apparently went 'missing'.


http://news.stv.tv/s...us-in-24m-deal/


Effectively he securitised future ticket sales to buy the club....just like the Glazers.

[Zanu Bob]

!EURO!, on 22 February 2012 - 09:06 AM, said:

'Ticketus' lent the money that apparently went 'missing'.


http://news.stv.tv/s...us-in-24m-deal/


Effectively he securitised future ticket sales to buy the club....just like the Glazers.

thanks for the detail didn't realsie that was how it was achieved.