Would a change in ownership be a good or a bad thing for Manchester United?
By Nick Harris
05 October 2004

In Malcolm Glazer´s dream scenario, he will take control of Manchester United, brandish the golden key to the lucrative ( but arguably mythical) American and Asian markets, and then start plotting towards the fateful day when English football clubs are given the freedom to negotiate their own television deals.

If and when that day arrives - perhaps within three years, quite probably within a decade - he will be in a position to reap the rewards of United´s global fanbase, exploit the armchair fan for every pound, dollar, yuan and yen he can extract, and, in all likelihood, help to widen the financial abyss between football´s " haves" and " have-nots" to irrecoverable levels. That would constitute success.

In the meantime, he might take some of his own fortune, which at around £560m, including assets, is not to be sniffed at but far from Abramovich-esque, and enable Sir Alex Ferguson, or whoever replaces him in the shake-up, to increase his spending power, by a relatively small amount.

Analysts are sceptical that Glazer will be able to raise enough money to make a bid unless he sells his holding in the Tampa Bay Buccaneers ( unlikely) or part of his American property portfolio, and even that might leave United little room for spending on players.

If Glazer´s takeover goes well, and he can borrow enough cash against United´s future earnings to fund it, he might, however, allow United´s manager to go on the kind of spree not seen ( outside of Chelsea) since Peter Ridsdale was signing the cheques as he " lived the dream" on borrowed money at Leeds United.

And therein lies just one potential problem for Glazer, the 76-year-old American " sports tycoon" whose only major sporting success to date has been the purchase of the Buccaneers. ( He paid $192m [£107m] for them in 1995 and transformed them into Super Bowl winners by 2003, trebling the value of the franchise in the process). On the flip side of his dream scenario is a nightmare, not just for him but for United´s fans.

Glazer will have to borrow heavily to buy United. With the club´s value rising to around £700m yesterday, the purchase price, not to mention working capital, is beyond his reach on his own. The investment bankers, JP Morgan, are understood to be already looking to raise capital for Glazer, although they declined to comment yesterday. It seems Glazer´s buy out would be guaranteed in a securitisation deal against United´s future earnings. Leeds similarly borrowed against future earnings only for Ridsdale´s dream to collapse.

If Glazer seeks total control of United, the logical extension is that he will delist the company at some stage, removing the checks and balances of a plc, limited though they often prove and irrelevant as they were at Leeds. Glazer has, to date, shown no inclination to be transparent about his intentions or answer to anyone. The nearest he came, earlier this year, was to issue a statement to the Stock Exchange, and then only under pressure, to say that he might ( or might not) bid for United in the future. If his ownership style at the Buccaneers is any indication, he will not want the inconvenience of answering to a board and shareholders.

A scenario in which a delisted United, with heavy debts, is under the sole control of a foreign owner with no background in football might seem unlikely now, as does one in which United have a terrible season or two and fail to qualify for the Champions´ League. Yet since the demise of Leeds, the phrase, " It just couldn´t happen" no longer holds water.

So there are the two extreme scenarios: a dominant, thriving United who turn their back on the ethos of collective rights bargaining and profit from it to the detriment of everyone else via Glazer´s links to media magnates such as Rupert Murdoch; or a debt-laden United who teeter one or two bad seasons from the slippery slope of Leeds.

Somewhere in between lies what is likelier for United under a Glazer regime, which might be nowhere near as seismic. Glazer could raise enough finance to buy the 28.89 per cent holding of JP McManus and John Magnier and satisfy himself with majority ( and effective) control. Nothing much need change, although Glazer will clearly want to recoup his investment somehow, possibly by raising ticket prices, as he has done at the Buccaneers.

The most pertinent question remains, however: why on earth would United´s board recommend any takeover by Glazer, based on future earnings from hitherto untapped markets, when an effective plc with decent management could tap those markets itself? The easy answer is if he offers a large financial incentive to existing shareholders.

Yet that in itself is not the only factor the board will consider, not least because around 18 per cent of United is owned collectively by fans with small stakes. Those same fans, including many members of the influential Shareholders United group and the Independent Manchester United Supporters´ Association, will also campaign against any takeover by Glazer, as they did against Murdoch in 1998 and again last year at the merest hint that McManus and Magnier wanted control. By pressing ahead, Glazer risks not only acres of bad publicity but alienating the very customers on whom he would rely to make money.

A mistaken belief that he can somehow tap enormous extra income from a business already near the top of its market might yet prove a headache for Glazer. His ignorance of English football culture, especially at United, may do likewise. In the past few weeks the Buccaneers have had PR headaches over performance ( no wins from four games), ticket prices ( rising steeply, 20 per cent this year), heavy-handedness ( a season ticket holder thrown out for flying a Stars & Stripes) and lack of public spirit ( refusing refunds to fans affected by Hurricane Charley). It would take a lot less at United to see him branded as an unwanted, mercenary chancer with no understanding of the club. And the fans might not put it so politely.

BUYING INTO THE DREAM WINNERS AND LOSERS IN THE STRUGGLES TO OWN UNITED

1902

John Henry Davies, managing director of Manchester Breweries, invested £60,000 in Newton Heath, with debts of more than £2,500, and changed the club´s name to Manchester United.

1931

James W Gibson, a manufacturer of army uniforms, injected £30,000, settling outstanding debts and paying wages.

1958

Louis Edwards, owner of a large company of wholesale meat suppliers, became a director. He bought up shares progressively so that in 1964 he became a majority shareholder ( 51 per cent) and was appointed chairman.

1980

Martin Edwards, already on the board of directors, inherited his father´s stake after his death.

1984

Martin Edwards rejected a £10m bid from the newspaper magnate Robert Maxwell.

1989

Michael Knighton appeared to have bought the club for £20m, with Edwards due to receive £10m for his stake. The deal fell through when it became apparent that Knighton did not have the necessary funds.

1998

Manchester United plc, having floated in 1991, accepted a £623m bid from BSkyB which was eventually rejected.

2001

JP McManus and John Magnier bought £30m of shares through their company, Cubic Expression.

2004

United announce an initial approach from Malcom Glazer.

j´espere que tout le monde se rends compte la merde dans laquel on est . ..

sportivement on est plus la meilleur equipe d´angleterre . ..

et avec gazier c´est la merde

glazer promets 25 millions de livres pour les transferts . ..

pas la peine de s´endetter pour ca . .

enfin bon l´année prochaine on a 0 alors

le probléme est simple . .

si glazier achéte le club il va devoir emprunter .

s´il emprunte les benifices du club iront aux remboursements de l´emprunt . ..

donc pas d´argent pour de nouveaux joueurs et comme on n´a pas l´équipe pour gagner de titres

I don´t know that it´s been mentioned yet, but even if it has every supporter must remember the facts.

If Malcolm Glazer - or any investor - were to " buy" United, what they would first have to do is take control of the shares. Regardless of whether this is 650 million sterling or 800 or even a billion, this transaction is just the buyer taking shares off other shareholders.

No new money is injected into the club as a consequence of this transaction! Yet because any buyer would likely need financial ´assistance´ in the form of a loan, the CLUB would inevitably bear the responsibility of repaying it!

In fact, the servicing of this financing arrangement would likely change our net cash flows so that we have more money going out than coming in. Who would bear the brunt of this shortfall? Well the new owner would either need to raise revenues or cut costs. That´s not a scare tactic - that´s economics 101.

Since supporters are the lion´s share of revenue ( directly and indirectly) that means you get to eat it. There´s proof positive that this has happened in Tampa Bay ( #3 in average ticket prices - the average seat is $91 per game according to NFL ticket manifests! Profits trebled since his takeover!) And since labour costs are the lion´s share of the expenses - what might happen? This isn´t a scare tactic either - Tampa has gotten rid of some very good yet very costly players. Sure the NFL salary cap has something to do with it, but make no mistake Malcolm Glazer is all about making money. I´d post the articles that the journos are writing about him at TB right now, but I can´t due to board restrictions. Check that SU website. None of these facts are in dispute.

Finally, for those of you who eye Roman and Chelski -- the latest figure has it that Chelsea are losing upwards of 60 MILLION ( STERLING!) a year. That means Roman is losing that money. Even a billionaire like Roman can´t do that forever, and Glazer has FAR less money than Roman.

Bottom line: Glazer is offering fool´s gold and he thinks we´re gullible enough to believe that his involvement would benefit supporters. I´m not buying it. But you should all make your own decisions.

Si Johansson fait abolir l´arrêt Bosman, ça va faire mal à Chelsea et Arsenal ^^

MU pourrait quand même aligner au minimum Smith, Rooney, Phil et Gary Neville, Brown, Ferdinand et Scholes.

Heinze - EPL September player of the month by ACTIM

--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------

HEINZE HEADS SEPTEMBER ACTIM INDEX
Manchester United defender Gabriel Heinze has wasted no time making his mark in the Barclays Premiership after being named the Actim Index player of the month for September.
The Argentina international - signed from Paris St-Germain for £6.9million in the summer - returned from gold medal-winning Olympic duty in Athens to add some much-needed steel to United´s defence.

And his 0.73 score from his first three matches - including a goal on his debut at Bolton Wanderers - saw him edge out Newcastle United full-back Stephen Carr in second place on 0.72 points.

Heinze´s Old Trafford team-mate Mikael Silvestre claimed third, partly due to his headed double against rivals Liverpool in his side´s 2-1 win.

And with Rio Ferdinand returning from his long-term suspension to score 0.42 in just two games, Sir Alex Ferguson´s men now look a different proposition at the back.

Predictably, leaders and champions Arsenal were also represented with Ashley Cole their highest ranked player for September in fourth, with Highbury colleagues Freddie Ljungberg ( 6th) and Thierry Henry ( 8th).

Three 1-0 wins helped Everton to a nine-point haul over the course of the month to defy the critics and two match-winning performances from Tim Cahill saw him take seventh spot with fellow Toffee Marcus Bent in 10th place.

There was good news for the red half of Merseyside as well with former Fulham man Steve Finnan justifying the faith shown him in by coach Rafael Benitez with 0.66 points in fifth spot.

The Actim Index is the new official ratings system for the Barclays Premiership, which has been statistically proven to identify the best players.

Each player earns points based on their positive actions during the game ( such as shots, saves and tackles), their time on the pitch, the final match result and goals scored.

ACTIM PLAYER OF THE MONTH - SEPTEMBER:

1 G Heinze Manchester United 0.73

2 S Carr Newcastle United 0.72

3 M Silvestre Manchester United 0.70

4 A Cole Arsenal 0.68

5 S Finnan Liverpool 0.66

6 F Ljungberg Arsenal 0.64

7 T Cahill Everton 0.64

8 T Henry Arsenal 0.63

9 A O´Brien Newcastle United 0.63

10 M Bent Everton 0.62

Heinze has been a ´revelation´ - Fergie

--------------------------------------------------
------------------------------

Sir Alex Ferguson feels Argentinian signing Gabriel Heinze has been a " revelation" since joining Manchester United club last month.

Heinze actually signed during the summer but his arrival was delayed as he took part in the Copa America before helping Argentina win Olympic gold in Athens.

The defender made an instant impact, scoring on his debut at Bolton and Ferguson said: " He´s been fantastic and I´m pleased about him. I knew he could defend well and that was why I brought him here and there was a good option in that I could play him as a centre-back. He has done really well for me. He´s got a toughness there."

Heinze has also proved popular with the Old Trafford support and Ferguson sees that as important.

" You can´t kid fans. They love people who try and he is a determined, aggressive full-back and he enjoys playing."

Heinze is currently away on international duty and preparing for Argentina´s World Cup qualifiers against Uruguay on Saturday and Chile next Wednesday.

mais C bon ivguenyp2 on va releV la tete tinkiète pas!!on l´a tjrs fait!!!et apres tout si glazer veut reprendre le club C pas pour nou endéter!!

le club ne sera pas racheté si les supporters ne veulent pas et comme c´est parti c´est bien ce qui pourrait se produire.

j´espere que brown va signer un nouveau contrat ça serait une grosse perte...

Rooney Targets Champions League Success

Wayne Rooney believes Manchester United now have the squad to win the European Cup this season.

The striker, who turns 19 later this month, told United magazine that he sees no reason why the team cannot win the trophy for the third time.

Rooney’s debut hat-trick in the competition against Fenerbache last week sent a shudder down the backs of rival managers and got fans dreaming of a repeat of the team’s Nou Camp triumph of ’99.

Wayne told the club´s official magazine: " I want to get some silverware this season.

" There´s no reason why we can´t win the European Cup with the squad we´ve got."

Rooney says his first target is to get in the team and keep his place. The striker, who has only played two matches since recovering from a broken metatarsal injury, accepts he may have to be on the bench as part of his development at Old Trafford.

And with Alan Smith netting an equaliser against Middlesbrough on Sunday he knows he will have a fight on his hands to stay in the side.

" If I´m not playing well then I can´t have any complaints if I´m not in the team," he says, " but my aim is to get a regular place in the side.

" I´m only 18 and have still got a lot to prove and learn, but there´s no better place to do it than here."

glazer est obligé de s´endetter il n´a pas l´argent pour acheter le club . ...

tout le probléme est la . .

donc oui c´est trés grave . ..

United: Rivals line up new bid
A rival consortium last night declared war on US tycoon Malcolm Glazer´s bid to take control of Manchester United. Former Football League chairman Keith Harris is heading a team of ´red knights´ to wrestle the club from dollar billionaire Glazer. And he has insisted that it can only succeed with the support of United´s share-owning fan base, who he believes have the power to make or break any deal. Harris is asking the club´s biggest shareholders John Magnier and JP McManus to join a plot to scupper Glazer´s plans once and for all. The consortium wants the Irish racing tycoons to join with them and oust Glazer, with the possibility of buying him out. To secure the support of the Irish duo, a radical overhaul of the way the club is run has been mooted with sweeping changes at board level. Harris insists United´s small share-owning fans could be the giant-killer to destroy Glazer´s dream. He said: " If a galvanised body of 17per cent of share ownership don´t want this to happen then they can prevent it."
Gary Jones, Daily Mirror
You´re not United fans, you´re just customers...get used to it
I admire the sound and the fury of Manchester United supporters protesting so loudly at the prospect of the club being sold to American tycoon Malcolm Glazer. Good luck to them. I mean that. Good luck to them for loving their club so much they want to protect it from a predator who already owns gridiron´s Tampa Bay Buccaneers and who they view as a pirate. But I think it´s too late for our Premiership clubs. Don´t United fans mind shelling out £5million or more to agents for players who would walk on broken glass to go to Old Trafford? Would they get that much worse under Glazer? I doubt it. Anyway, don´t pretend the club´s not for sale. That´s a joke, of course it´s for sale. People own shares in it, for pity´s sake. It´s for sale every second of every day of its life.
Oliver Holt, Daily Mirror

Rebel fans turn their spite on Watkins
Maurice Watkins looks to have become the first victim in the dirty war declared by Manchester United fans to block American tycoon Malcolm Glazer taking control of the club. The United director and legal expert woke up yesterdat to find red paint had been daubed over two cars parked on the drive of his home, as well as on part of the house. Watkins provoked fury among United fans in April when a million shares he put up for sale ended up in the hands of Glazer.

Bigger than Man U
Arsenal are ready to hammer Manchester United in football’s battle of the bank balances. The champions are already ahead of their northern rivals on the field of play. Now they aim to do what once seemed unthinkable - OVERTAKE the Old Trafford money-making machine. Gunners bigwigs say their new £100million sponsorship deal with Emirates Airlines will propel the London giants to a new level. And their new stadium will put them within reach of United in terms of profit. Chairman Peter Hill-Wood said: “It is vitally important to catch them up. We might even overtake them now.”

< <<< de pire en pire . ..

Manchester interdit sur le site officiel de parler de la future reprise de glazer . ..

je commence a étre dégouté la vraiment . ...

Due to current circumstances at Manchester United FC, NO takeover discussion can take place on this message board.

We apologise for this tough stance, but we ask that you strictly adhere to this new ruling.

ALL messages/threads on the subject will be removed immediately.

Thank you in advance for you cooperation

If you do not understand or wish to know more about this subject block, please email chatsupport@londonweb.net

< <<< voila ce qu´on trouve sur le forum . scandaleux .

on verra bien ce qui se passera mais si ça se confirme on pourrait peut-etre voir un stade vide...

et une équipe et un club en pleiné déroute . ...

Chelsea lining up bid for Torres

Chelsea are reportedly lining up a renewed bid for Atletico Madrid star Fernando Torres - and hope to use Adrian Mutu as a makeweight.

Owner Roman Abramovich first made a move for Spanish international Torres in 2003, shortly after buying the west London outfit.

Atletico stood firm, though, and over the last two seasons have also rejected offers from Milan and Manchester United, all of which were around the £27m mark.

Chelsea are now ready to offer them Romanian misfit Mutu, plus an estimated £24m in cash for the striker, who featured only briefly in Spain´s disappointing Euro 2004 showing.

The Spanish giants remain reluctant to lose a player who is the club symbol, however, with Torres idolised by the red and white half of the Spanish capital.

The 20-year-old has hit 42 goals in just over three seasons and is also coveted by Spanish giants Barcelona and Real Madrid.

If Atletico were to sell, they would rather see Torres move abroad than play for one of their deadly rivals.

Chelsea are now looking to land Torres as early as January, with unsettled forward Mutu the possible key to any deal.

Atletico have always vehemently denied that they would be ready to listen to offers for Torres, but Abramovich is confident of persuading the Rojiblancos to sell

abra a dit qu´il metterait l´argent u´il faudrait quel que soit le prix . ..

au moins en 99 on gagnait quand rupert voulait le club . ..

la on ne gagne méme plus . .

abra lui au moins il a pas besoin d´emprunter...

je pense ken gro ca sera ou bien on coule ou bien on defonse tje veu dire par la ke ou bien glazer si il rahete le club investi sendette on achete des joueur pourri pa de rsulta pa dargen et donc le club coule

ou

glazer le pren investi on achetze de bpon joueur on gagne de largen grace au victoire et on renbourse cette dette