Jump to content


- - - - -

Manchester United Boosts Revenues And Cuts Its Debt..£439Million


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 hotairmail

hotairmail

    Tired of life

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,951 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 03:11 PM

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. B)

"The chicken is radiating disorder out into the wider universe."


#2 Sour Mash

Sour Mash

    HPC Senior Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,898 posts
  • Location:rwxrwxr-x

Posted 21 February 2012 - 03:13 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-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.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

#3 R K

R K

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,452 posts
  • Location:Republik of Mancunia

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:03 PM

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. B)


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? B) 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.


"The problem with capitalism is that eventually you end up with everyone else's money" RK
"We have now entered The Great Rebalancing 2007-20xx" - RK
"Gold will go to $1000, Silver to $18" - RK August 2011
QE £100bn and build 1m council homes - RK
Carney announces the launch of Empire 2.0 - Rise of the Banksters Oct '13


#4 leicestersq

leicestersq

    HPC Guru

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,404 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 05:39 PM

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.

#5 hotairmail

hotairmail

    Tired of life

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,951 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 06:57 PM

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.

"The chicken is radiating disorder out into the wider universe."


#6 frozen_out

frozen_out

    HPC Senior Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,213 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 07:04 PM

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.
The only thing they'll understand is a wall against their backs. - Paul Weller

#7 Confusion of VIs

Confusion of VIs

    HPC Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Location:Croydon

Posted 21 February 2012 - 10:42 PM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-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.

#8 Sir Harold m

Sir Harold m

    HPC Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 972 posts

Posted 21 February 2012 - 11:13 PM

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"

Edited by Sir Harold m, 21 February 2012 - 11:14 PM.


#9 Charlie The Tramp Returns

Charlie The Tramp Returns

    EU Troll Buster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,630 posts
  • About Me:Originally joined the Forum on 30 October 2003

Posted 21 February 2012 - 11:16 PM

Bums on seats as in the past and today they would not have this problem. :rolleyes:
I have been studying the European Economic Community which became the European Community and finally becoming the European Union since the 1st January 1973. As each year passed the stench of corruption, financial recklessness, and Dictatorship has got totally out of control.

In an interview,( on holiday in the exclusive Swiss ski resort of Davos ) the Liberal Democrat leader was asked whether he was in charge while the Prime Minister was away from Britain travelling in the Middle East. Sipping from a mug marked “Deputy Prime Minister,” he said: “Yeah, I suppose I am. I forgot about that.( Proves what a total berk he is )

Cameron must learn the basic rule in politics and life ( Put brain in gear before putting mouth in motion ) and Miliband with no direct British Lineage should dig a hole and disappear down it.

Is Nicholarse Elcleggski ( 25% British ) insane? Who, in their right mind would willingly appease the French and Germans?

In our Country today THE TRUTH MUST NEVER BE SPOKEN, I will leave you all with your very bleak future as I will be gone.

The Lib/Dems who over the years have supported the demise of the moral and accepted standards we were all brought up to respect. The party who would lead us the way of the Ancient Greek and Roman Empires. We can Add David Cameron and Ed Miliband as Leaders of their parties who are heading for the buffers

#10 hotairmail

hotairmail

    Tired of life

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 29,951 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 09:06 AM

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.

"The chicken is radiating disorder out into the wider universe."


#11 Sir Harold m

Sir Harold m

    HPC Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 972 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:11 AM

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

It wasnt, and they didnt. There have been no securitisations. They used various forms of financing including Pik loans and pledged the assets of the club in totality.

This is different from securitising ticket sales. Quite different in fact.

The glazer model is. We borrrow shed loads against the club in order to raise enough financing to buy the equity.

In order to finance the loans we get enough willing numpties to pay triple or quadruple what used to be paid for tickets and we use this to pay off the loans.

The fans are willingly and happily buyng the club for him.

From an objective point of view he spotted an undervalued asset, and saw an easy way to get someone else to pay for it for him, at no personal risk to himself. It was simple.

The takeover of Manchester United by Malcom Glazer has been voluntarily financed and paid for by the 60,000 season ticket holders who look resplendent in their green and gold protest colours.

The only way his mission would have failed was a fan boycott. Only 5,000 or so of us cared enough to do it. Simple really, he won, we lost.

#12 leicestersq

leicestersq

    HPC Guru

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,404 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:17 AM

thats what I thought they did.

took a compliant banking sector too.


Banks make money by lending, accepting the risk that goes with it. They have all been repaid so far and it has been a good deal for them.

#13 R K

R K

    I live on HPC!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,452 posts
  • Location:Republik of Mancunia

Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:30 AM

It wasnt, and they didnt. There have been no securitisations. They used various forms of financing including Pik loans and pledged the assets of the club in totality.

This is different from securitising ticket sales. Quite different in fact.

The glazer model is. We borrrow shed loads against the club in order to raise enough financing to buy the equity.

In order to finance the loans we get enough willing numpties to pay triple or quadruple what used to be paid for tickets and we use this to pay off the loans.

The fans are willingly and happily buyng the club for him.

From an objective point of view he spotted an undervalued asset, and saw an easy way to get someone else to pay for it for him, at no personal risk to himself. It was simple.

The takeover of Manchester United by Malcom Glazer has been voluntarily financed and paid for by the 60,000 season ticket holders who look resplendent in their green and gold protest colours.

The only way his mission would have failed was a fan boycott. Only 5,000 or so of us cared enough to do it. Simple really, he won, we lost.


Agree completely re boycott. That was always going to be the only way they'd have been forced sellers.

Raising ticket prices has contributed of course but it's the expansion of commercial revenues that's done it for them. That and keeping Ferguson onside. He's done what Wenger and no-one at Chelsea or Lpool have done.

Unless there's some sort of shock behind the Nevada holding co. refinancing then they're clearly home and dry. Worst case they'll float off part or refinance the bonds.*or sell Rooney and repeat the Ronaldo/bond repo trick.

Edited by Red Knight, 22 February 2012 - 11:34 AM.


"The problem with capitalism is that eventually you end up with everyone else's money" RK
"We have now entered The Great Rebalancing 2007-20xx" - RK
"Gold will go to $1000, Silver to $18" - RK August 2011
QE £100bn and build 1m council homes - RK
Carney announces the launch of Empire 2.0 - Rise of the Banksters Oct '13


#14 leicestersq

leicestersq

    HPC Guru

  • New Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,404 posts

Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:32 AM

qualified.


No need to qualify it. The risk for the bankers has now melted away, the asset looks to be much larger than the debt outstanding. That is a good place for a banker to be.

#15 Warwick-Watcher

Warwick-Watcher

    HPC Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,200 posts
  • Location:Banbury

Posted 22 February 2012 - 11:33 AM

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"



Oh dear, presumably your dad didn't pass on his shares in the "club that he built". How much did he invest in shares in the club?

MUFC is a business, not a social project. Good luck building your new club and hopefully you'll make a fortune too.

:)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users