[Archived] Fergie

[philipl]

£764m of debts, £81m a year in interest is hard fact as is the fact that EBITDA is below the target set by the Hedge Fund.

They are a big football club but they are not that big as a business. Empty headed emotion can take you a long way but eventually there is a brick wall and the if the Glazers sell Ronaldo they will get about 25% of the way to paying the way round their brick wall of May 2010.

Man U have had a tremendous run of football success yet they are still nowhere near resolving the ramifications of the Glazer takeover away from the pitch.

None of these statements are wrong.

[bellamy11]

£764m of debts, £81m a year in interest is hard fact as is the fact that EBITDA is below the target set by the Hedge Fund.

They are a big football club but they are not that big as a business. Empty headed emotion can take you a long way but eventually there is a brick wall and the if the Glazers sell Ronaldo they will get about 25% of the way to paying the way round their brick wall of May 2010.

Man U have had a tremendous run of football success yet they are still nowhere near resolving the ramifications of the Glazer takeover away from the pitch.

None of these statements are wrong.

So (and forgive me, I'm no good at these businessy things), assuming that they don't find three more Ronaldos and sell them, Man United have two years left before administration and folding as a football club?

Somebody really should tell them.

[philipl]

So (and forgive me, I'm no good at these businessy things), assuming that they don't find three more Ronaldos and sell them, Man United have two years left before administration and folding as a football club?

Somebody really should tell them.

No, two years before the Hedge Fund has the right to force a sale of the club to recover their money. In May 2010, they also get the right to appoint all the directors if their loan has not been settled.

The other people who put the money in will have been aware of those terms, priced their debt accordingly (one of the reasons why Man U's average rate of interest is at least 2% above the market rate and nearly 4% more than Arsenal are paying- that alone tells you this is a very dodgy one) and no doubt are watching very carefully and are ready to ride the Hedge fund's coat tails.

[M-K]

... that EBITDA is below the target set by the Hedge Fund.

You know full well 99% of the people reading have no flipping idea what you're talking about. At least, I don't.

Why not just stick to "Yeah, ManUre will be crap without that diver Ronalodo and all their players will leave and they'll go down and we'll buy Old Trafford and bulldoze it and build a Rovers superstore there."

Or something

[sleepyjack]

No, two years before the Hedge Fund has the right to force a sale of the club to recover their money. In May 2010, they also get the right to appoint all the directors if their loan has not been settled.

The other people who put the money in will have been aware of those terms, priced their debt accordingly (one of the reasons why Man U's average rate of interest is at least 2% above the market rate and nearly 4% more than Arsenal are paying- that alone tells you this is a very dodgy one) and no doubt are watching very carefully and are ready to ride the Hedge fund's coat tails.

You know full well that my good friend bellamy11 won't understand that.

In 2012 the Hedge Fund will sell the club? What would the criteria for sale be? Is there any chance that United will be able to pay the loan off in that time?

From that point on, will it be a pure asset-stripping exercise to pay off creditors?

What I (and obviously a lot of people here) don't understand is why this is portrayed as such a bad thing but United seem to be in no danger of administration, relegation, not being able to pay the elcrticity bills etc.

Will the Glazers be regretting their purchase right now? And will everybody who has loaned money to them be regretting it?

[philipl]

You know full well 99% of the people reading have no flipping idea what you're talking about. At least, I don't.

Why not just stick to "Yeah, ManUre will be crap without that diver Ronalodo and all their players will leave and they'll go down and we'll buy Old Trafford and bulldoze it and build a Rovers superstore there."

Or something

Sorry, when Man u/the Glazers took the money, the financial targets which they had to achieve in the year to 30 June 2007 were included in the papers filed before Man U ceased being a public company .

The accounts they published recently showed they missed the targets so the Hedge Fund can already put two Directors on the Man U Board whenever they want.

It gets progressively stickier for the Glazers' ability to control Man U, the closer May 2010 gets.

This is a crisis in ownership potentially coming to Man U, not directly a crisis for Man U itself.

However, ask Liverpool what a crisis of ownership feels like.

[JAL]

£764m of debts, £81m a year in interest is hard fact as is the fact that EBITDA is below the target set by the Hedge Fund.

Philipl,

What is the EBITDA target i.e. percentage and what that equates to in pound notes thanks, if they are off target at this the most successful time in the clubs financial history well can or will they ever be able to acheive it.

Work with a few ManU fans who know about EBITDA targets as we have a local target set in place at work it would be good to give them some hard facts about their club.

[philipl]

Contracted EBITDA target was GBP72m for 30/6/07.

I didn't see the full Man U accounts but working backwards from the information they commented upon, I struggled to push EBITDA much above GBP50m. I might be wrong and of course accounting conventions are elasticated in the right hands but the fact that Gill was totally silent on EBITDA suggests something was awry.

[blue phil]

It gets progressively stickier for the Glazers' ability to control Man U, the closer May 2010 gets.

This is a crisis in ownership potentially coming to Man U, not directly a crisis for Man U itself.

So in other words Man Utd the club will continue like a supertanker in the night seas - the only difference being that hands might - or might not - change at the helm .

Don't place any silly bets on Man Utd not being champs after the world ends in May 2010 is my conclusion ...

[Billy Castell]

So if the Glazer's debts get bigger and bigger, the hedge fund which is effectively those who they have taken loans from can put their men on the board and control Man U themselves. Is that correct?

Could such a situation lead to a fire sale in Salford?

[philipl]

The numbers that Man U are now supposedly worth means that Man U is no longer a football club but "high" finance. It is all about financiers and their formulae for valuing businesses.

These guys and girls are fallible, prone to hype and herd instincts etc etc so at the moment the numbers look dire but the Glazers are ok on the back of a double season and the Man U brand glamour cutting the Glazers a lot of slack.

But flog Ronaldo, miss out on defending the double because 42 goals have gone to Real Madrid, Ferguson reverts to his pre-Glazer hit and miss transfer dealings and those financiers will instantly forget the glamour and look at Man U as just another £200m a year business.

But its not just another £200m turnover business. It has debts of £764m and is not covering the interest charges out of current income let alone being in any position to pay its debts down. Oh, and there is an additional off-balance sheet but very real liability of nearly £30m for Tevez if he isn't going to be taken away from them for nothing.

Look at it through those glasses and there are heaps of trouble. I suspect that by 2010, there simply will not be a near enough prospect of value in Man U for the lenders not to take a very tough line. And the Glazers are shafted if they try to replace the current lenders with others in this current climate compounded by the hedge fund's contract sitting there to either put everyone off or encourage the new debt providers to write even tougher terms.

The people who are uncomfortable with what I am saying are responding with "Its United, they'll be alright."

It is precisely because of the "Its United, they'll be alright" thinking that the Glazers brass-necked their way to a wildly unrealistic price to buy Man U and now everyone is assuming it will come alright in the end. If you replace Manchester United and Red Football as the company names and put ANother in their place, everybody would be rushing to the company doctors and protecting their position- not least the football clubs Man U owe nearly £100m net to.

Let's see.

[thenodrog]

- not least the football clubs Man U owe nearly £100m net to.

Let's see.

So if the come in for RSC it's got to be pound notes or nowt eh?

Talking of RSC to Utd. Is it genuine or are they trying to simply influence the Berbatov and Spurs situation by panicking Berbatovs team and forcing Spurs to reduce the transfer fee?

[philipl]

The bad news is AC have just gone in for Berbatov.

But at this point I'd want cash off City, United and Liverpool.

City because it is still far from clear that Thaksin isn't all mouth- for a very wealthy man, he has nickled and dimed remarkably and not in a way that makes people say "well, that's how he came to be so rich". There are quite a few signs that Rovers took cash for the Hughes team.

United because they have "overpaid" transfer fees for so many players now- in reality rolling up the interest for a very slow payment stream into the headline transfer fee number that anyone else now selling to them goes to the back of a very long queue. I'd take £12m cash on the nose rather than a typical £16m Man U deal. Man U last season could take a 15 point hit for reneging on football debts and still qualify for the Champions League.

Liverpool because they have very little cash and nobody really knows who is in charge there. The short answer is the Royal Bank of Scotland holding £270m of their £350m debt but they want their debt renegotriating in September with every prospect of the £60m assigned to the new stadium being a straight write-off.

[IAN57]

Typical manc hypocrites.

Complaining about madrid's illeagal approach

and doing it themselves with RSC.

It is nice though, to see the mancs getting a reality check.

Now they know how we feel when a 'Big' club wants one of your players.

Viva Madrid.

or as the itv commentator says it.

Veeeva Marthreth

[JAL]

The numbers that Man U are now supposedly worth means that Man U is no longer a football club but "high" finance. It is all about financiers and their formulae for valuing businesses.

These guys and girls are fallible, prone to hype and herd instincts etc etc so at the moment the numbers look dire but the Glazers are ok on the back of a double season and the Man U brand glamour cutting the Glazers a lot of slack.

But flog Ronaldo, miss out on defending the double because 42 goals have gone to Real Madrid, Ferguson reverts to his pre-Glazer hit and miss transfer dealings and those financiers will instantly forget the glamour and look at Man U as just another £200m a year business.

But its not just another £200m turnover business. It has debts of £764m and is not covering the interest charges out of current income let alone being in any position to pay its debts down. Oh, and there is an additional off-balance sheet but very real liability of nearly £30m for Tevez if he isn't going to be taken away from them for nothing.

Look at it through those glasses and there are heaps of trouble. I suspect that by 2010, there simply will not be a near enough prospect of value in Man U for the lenders not to take a very tough line. And the Glazers are shafted if they try to replace the current lenders with others in this current climate compounded by the hedge fund's contract sitting there to either put everyone off or encourage the new debt providers to write even tougher terms.

The people who are uncomfortable with what I am saying are responding with "Its United, they'll be alright."

It is precisely because of the "Its United, they'll be alright" thinking that the Glazers brass-necked their way to a wildly unrealistic price to buy Man U and now everyone is assuming it will come alright in the end. If you replace Manchester United and Red Football as the company names and put ANother in their place, everybody would be rushing to the company doctors and protecting their position- not least the football clubs Man U owe nearly £100m net to.

Let's see.

I like what you say philipl, could the hedge fund people possible be United fans who are just waiting to see this one out to gain control and duly shaft an American family in the process for their own ultimate pleasure.

Look forward to seeing your review this time next season.

[Billy Castell]

Man U have to keep winning everything or else the debts will catch up with them. Sounds like a potential Leeds to me.

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Link: Fergie covered in wine courtesy of Capello

A wonderful achievement from Capello which I think deserves to be placed on his managerial CV alongside the European Cup he won with AC Milan in 1994 and the league titles he won with Real Madrid, Roma, Juventus and Milan.

To cover the furious Ferguson in wine deserves long-lasting praise and recognition.

[almuncle]

Almost as funny as the popping balloon clip and city losing to Brighton!

[BuckyRover]

A nice little interview; they are not all bad

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Alex Ferguson has a £22m fortune burning a hole in his pocket, according to the current 'Football Rich List', published this week. His rival Arsene Wenger has to make do with only being worth a mere £14m.

Fergie isn't as rich as Robbie 'landlord' Fowler though. Our former Rovers striker Fowler, who grew up as boy in the grim streets of Toxteth at the time of the 1981 Toxteth riots, now lives in an enormous mansion in the Wirral. I've seen it and it's huge.

Fowler has built up a large number of properties which he rents out to tennants and is worth a cool £28m, according to the Rich List. David Beckham - at £125m - being the richest current British footballer.

Going back to Fergie, I noticed recently that he accused the Premier League of deliberately fixing the Premiership fixture list to handicap Man United and put them at a disadvantage.

"Infamy, infamy. They've all got it in for me," says Fergie.

The Premier League say that the fixtures are put together through a random process. They say that the list is created by specialist software. It is then approved by the police before it's sent to Premiership clubs.

Ferguson though isn't happy and says that he's going to send a United club official to oversee the process of the fixture list in the summer.

This would perhaps tie in with what Alan Green says in his excellent book "The Green Line", where he said that Ferguson clearly suffers from paranoia and believes the whole world is against him.

Fergie's managerial career and his £22m fortune could have been different if Mark Hughes hadn't scored a late equaliser in the 1990 FA Cup final against Crystal Palace. We'll never know for sure, but I think there was certainly a strong possibility he could have been sacked if he hadn't won the Cup in 1990 - which would have meant him going his first five years at Old Trafford without a trophy.

The current Football Rich List - which has the Walker Family at £660m - is at the link below.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/7813483.stm

[DeadlyDirk]

Alex Ferguson has a £22m fortune burning a hole in his pocket, according to the current 'Football Rich List', published this week. His rival Arsene Wenger has to make do with only being worth a mere £14m.

Fergie isn't as rich as Robbie 'landlord' Fowler though. Our former Rovers striker Fowler, who grew up as boy in the grim streets of Toxteth at the time of the 1981 Toxteth riots, now lives in an enormous mansion in the Wirral. I've seen it and it's huge.

Fowler has built up a large number of properties which he rents out to tennants and is worth a cool £28m, according to the Rich List. David Beckham - at £125m - being the richest current British footballer.

Going back to Fergie, I noticed recently that he accused the Premier League of deliberately fixing the Premiership fixture list to handicap Man United and put them at a disadvantage.

"Infamy, infamy. They've all got it in for me," says Fergie.

The Premier League say that the fixtures are put together through a random process. They say that the list is created by specialist software. It is then approved by the police before it's sent to Premiership clubs.

Ferguson though isn't happy and says that he's going to send a United club official to oversee the process of the fixture list in the summer.

This would perhaps tie in with what Alan Green says in his excellent book "The Green Line", where he said that Ferguson clearly suffers from paranoia and believes the whole world is against him.

Fergie's managerial career and his £22m fortune could have been different if Mark Hughes hadn't scored a late equaliser in the 1990 FA Cup final against Crystal Palace. We'll never know for sure, but I think there was certainly a strong possibility he could have been sacked if he hadn't won the Cup in 1990 - which would have meant him going his first five years at Old Trafford without a trophy.

The current Football Rich List - which has the Walker Family at £660m - is at the link below.

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/7813483.stm" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/7813483.stm</a>

I know it's meant to be random but it clearly isn't. Skysports definitely have some kind of say over it, and why not because they plow so much money into it. The way the fixtures are organised can make a more exciting league.

How else do you explain 2 years ago when it was Chelsea vs Arsenal and Man Utd vs Liverpool on the same day, then the following season it was Chelsea vs Liverpool and Manchester City vs Man Utd on the same day, meanwhile Arsenal played us who we had forged a bit of a rivalry with after Wenger's comments. They always throw some of the big games together, it makes great television.

With his point about this season it does seem a little unfair that after all their European games they have away fixtures and that they have already played 8 of the top ten from last season away from home this year meaning all but one as they were obviously one of the top ten themselves.

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

"Fergie turns black players white" says Rio Ferdinand

In an interview with GQ magazine this week Rio Ferdinand said: "I've seen black players turned white in United's dressing room."

Before the PC brigade choke on their coffee reading that (naturally that would be coffee without milk rather than black coffee) , I should point out that I think Rio Ferdinand meant that Alex Ferguson turns his black players white with fear.

Ferdinand was talking about the 'hairdryer' treatment that the Glaswegian ogre is infamous for. Rio said: "I got the full force after a Champions League game in Benfica. At the time, I was exploding because I thought he was being unfair. But if you talk back to him, he just keeps going louder and louder until you shut up."

"The worst we've seen is after we have behaved badly on a night out. Then, the fireworks explode and he goes bananas," said the United defender.

Ferdinand also revealed that he had a discussion with Patrice Evra and Wayne Rooney as to whether they would join Manchester City if they were offered more money by City. "None of us would go," said Ferdinand. 'I couldn't wake up in the morning and have people say, "He's sold his soul for money".

Don't worry Rio - modern-day footballers like yourself sold your soul years ago. That's why Man United fans booed Ferdinand a couple of years ago when he stubbornly refused to sign a new contract on the table for £90,000 a week. Rio demanded £130,000 a week, which is what he's currently earning now.

Ferdinand is now trying to paint himself as some kind of loyal saint and role-model who isn't interested in money. A man who failed to attend a drug test because he was busy going shopping in Manchester. A man who has been banned from driving on four separate occasions and was convicted of drunk driving in 1997. A man who swore at Chelsea stewards and kicked a female steward at Stamford Bridge last season.

I believe that Roversmum isn't a fan of Mr Ferdinand. That makes two of us....

Within our liberal happy-clappy media now, there are a few football pundits who seem to have their heads firmly up Rio's backside at the moment. They think that the United defender can do no wrong and that he's a shining example to inner-city kids who are growing up on the type of grim estates that Ferdinand grew up with in Peckham, as part of a single-parent mixed-raced family. But for me, Rio Ferdinand and Ashley Cole are two prime examples of the current breed of selfish modern-day footballers.

Both of them greedy individuals who claim they are not interested in money, whilst acting in the opposite way. They epitomise the selfish brat pack within football and are the type of players responsible for some fans becoming disgusted and disenchanted with footballers.

A link to the interview with Ferdinand that I referred to earlier is below:

"Fergie goes bananas," says Ferdinand

[neekoy]

Ferdinand also revealed that he had a discussion with Patrice Evra and Wayne Rooney as to whether they would join Manchester City if they were offered more money by City. "None of us would go," said Ferdinand. 'I couldn't wake up in the morning and have people say, "He's sold his soul for money".

Don't worry Rio - modern-day footballers like yourself sold your soul years ago. That's why Man United fans booed Ferdinand a couple of years ago when he stubbornly refused to sign a new contract on the table for £90,000 a week. Rio demanded £130,000 a week, which is what he's currently earning now.

Ferdinand is now trying to paint himself as some kind of loyal saint and role-model who isn't interested in money.

This was the best bit

[Eddie]

To play devil's advocate, not that I don't agree that Ferdinand has already shown himself to be largely motivated by money, but he would probably say that his contract hold-out at United was simply part of negotiations and that simply because he wanted to play for the club and the fact that they were offering him large sums of money shouldn't mean that he has to accept the first offer on the table and that he was simply seeking parity with his colleagues both at Old Trafford and at clubs of similar stature throughout Europe. Whilst he's moved clubs a couple of times now he has never made a move where money can be pointed at as his only motivation (West Ham to Leeds made sense, as did Leeds to Manchester United). I would never argue that footballers aren't vastly overpaid, as are plenty of other occupations, but wanting to get as much money as possible from the right place and being motivated only by money aren't exactly the same thing. In thirty years time people will not look back on Ferdinand and say that he was someone only out to make the extra pound and his contract and drug issues will probably be largely forgotten; whereas, if he decided to move to Manchester City I think he would always be one of those remembered for making the leap from one of the greatest club teams around to a mid-table Premiership side funded by the super rich who are attracting a caliber of player their league performance doesn't warrant simply because they can offer ridiculous sums of money.

I'm done defending the devil for the moment.

[Ozz]

A fair summary Eddie, but you forgot to mention that Rio is a grade one ballbag.