The mancityfans.net football forum

Breaking news on SSN.

This is fantastic

I think we need to commemorate the work of the Glazers perhaps with some kind of statue similar to the one the rags have outside OT.

Does that include the reported £150M+ owed personally by the Glazers, the payment of which is causing the rags so many problems.

Denying them their Wembley payout and marketting will not help them.

in the bond issue the Glazers have put in place structures where the family and the businesses they own can take up to £600m out of the club in the next five years. Why would they sell if they have a nice little cash cow like that? They have put fuck all of their own money in and now they can get £600m out. If they sell they would have to pay off all the debts so it makes sense that they would want at least £1.316bn for it just to break even. Why would you pay that for a team in decline? hahahahaha

More importantly...as the team and club decline...so does their turn over.
Would anyone invest in a business with a declining turnover?

For investors, the turn over is the big deal. They have earned millions from their success...they will have less scope to earn from their failures.

What a week god bless you Mr. Glazer, run the club into the ground!

Glazers have played a master stroke not putting their own money into it and borrowing off the banks plus putting all the debt onto the club.
The money they owe PIK can be covered by them if worst comes to worst,they are loaded but hey why pay it yourself when the rag fans can pay it off?

If it goes under,so what? theyve took out plenty of cash already,if its gets worse,fuck it sell the training ground,if it gets worse,fuck it sell the ground (Durex dome anyone),if it gets worse let the banks wind it up and jet off into the sunset.

Sir Malcolm Glazer.

Whoops!

Here is a frightening thought: If the rags had not become a plc and then taken over by the Glazers in a leveraged buyout, their financial advantage over the rest of the league (except us and perhaps Chelsea) would be absolutely staggering. Thankfully, when we are a regular Champions League side, the generosity of the Sheik will allow us to rake in the cash, rather than hand it over to creditors before it has the chance to draw interest.

cdncityfan wrote:Here is a frightening thought: If the rags had not become a plc and then taken over by the Glazers in a leveraged buyout, their financial advantage over the rest of the league (except us and perhaps Chelsea) would be absolutely staggering. Thankfully, when we are a regular Champions League side, the generosity of the Sheik will allow us to rake in the cash, rather than hand it over to creditors before it has the chance to draw interest.

They'd never have become so rich without becoming a PLC. John Magnier and JP McManus were well on their way to taking over the club when the Glazers upped the ante.

Even if they hadn't been taken over and had remained a PLC, they'd have spent less money (think Arsenal) and would be paying big dividends. The Glazers made money available for transfers to compete with Chelsea. The scum could quiet happily have turned a quiet profit living in Chelsea's shadow and competing in the Champions League. For all the money they've had, they've typically been a very tight club. They just wouldn't have increased ticket prices so much or been as ambitious. They have to win to pay the bills, a big club makes the debt seem smaller, they have to grow.

ronk wrote:

cdncityfan wrote:Here is a frightening thought: If the rags had not become a plc and then taken over by the Glazers in a leveraged buyout, their financial advantage over the rest of the league (except us and perhaps Chelsea) would be absolutely staggering. Thankfully, when we are a regular Champions League side, the generosity of the Sheik will allow us to rake in the cash, rather than hand it over to creditors before it has the chance to draw interest.

They'd never have become so rich without becoming a PLC. John Magnier and JP McManus were well on their way to taking over the club when the Glazers upped the ante.

Even if they hadn't been taken over and had remained a PLC, they'd have spent less money (think Arsenal) and would be paying big dividends. The Glazers made money available for transfers to compete with Chelsea. The scum could quiet happily have turned a quiet profit living in Chelsea's shadow and competing in the Champions League. For all the money they've had, they've typically been a very tight club. They just wouldn't have increased ticket prices so much or been as ambitious. They have to win to pay the bills, a big club makes the debt seem smaller, they have to grow.

The problem being now is that they have potentially tapped the majority of the resources available, as shown by the fact they would have posted a big loss without the sale of Ronaldo, despite winning most trophies available to them.

[youtube]TX3UqY8KZpU[/youtube]

Somerset Blue wrote:[youtube]TX3UqY8KZpU[/youtube]

^^^^THIS

The debt most certainly is not sitting. It's going up a million quid a week at least.

That'd be a funny chant though.

and also

I heard on the radio tonight that the bonds issue will only address that part of the debt which is bank loans and at a lower interest rate. Then it was said that some of the other loans rise up to a 16% interst rate...That is quite serious shit they are in.

When one financier was asked about the bonds, he said he wouldn't touch them...any business that had to sell bonds to alleviate debt is in big trouble and too risky.

It all sounds good to me.....:-)

john68 wrote:I heard on the radio tonight that the bonds issue will only address that part of the debt which is bank loans and at a lower interest rate. Then it was said that some of the other loans rise up to a 16% interst rate...That is quite serious shit they are in.

When one financier was asked about the bonds, he said he wouldn't touch them...any business that had to sell bonds to alleviate debt is in big trouble and too risky.

It all sounds good to me.....:-)

The bond market is huge, I'd be more interested in seeing what someone who trades bonds wanted to say.

It's just an alternative way of borrowing money where instead of owing money to a bank or banks you are lent money by thousands of people/businesses who buy bonds and spread around relatively small packages of risk. Like any loan the higher the risk the higher the interest rate. Scum will be paying a premium due to their risk, but not necessarily a huge one.

As I understand it won't actually do a lot to reduce their repayments, especially in the short term, instead it will stabilise their arrangements so they won't be as effected by changes in interest rates. It will also de-leverage them somewhat. They'd like to pay the PIK notes (14.25% interest) with the bond money but I don't believe this will be possible because the banks have priority and some of them would rather get their money back now.

Whatever their prospects for paying back their debts, they're still profitable, have turnover and some assets. If things go pear shaped the banks can step in and sell. They probably wouldn't lose too much money (until the scum go into negative equity) but the Glazers would lose a fortune.

Please clarify the following for me mate.

If they are in so much debt, they can only regenerate their squad by buying players and increasing their debt.
Alternatively they can keep the debt as it is and not regenerate their squad.

If they start to fail on the pitch, their turnover is likely to decrease substantially and diminish their ability to service their debt.

Will any new buyer have to buy the debt + the club?

Is there any way the Glazers can pass on the risk to the club and financially protect themselves?

john68 wrote:Please clarify the following for me mate.

If they are in so much debt, they can only regenerate their squad by buying players and increasing their debt.
Alternatively they can keep the debt as it is and not regenerate their squad.

If they start to fail on the pitch, their turnover is likely to decrease substantially and diminish their ability to service their debt.

Will any new buyer have to buy the debt + the club?

Is there any way the Glazers can pass on the risk to the club and financially protect themselves?

Turnover has been raising for them. If they can continue to raise it fast enough they might be able to increase the wage bill and still pay off debts. Not really that plausible. In order to make big inroads in the debt they'll need to reduce the wage bill and increase turnover. That's what they're trying to do at the moment. They've been bringing through guys like Evans and Rafael (still expensive in their own ways) and shipping out guys like Tevez and Ronaldo. Even Valencia was a big transfer fee but probably much smaller wages than someone like Tevez.

A new buyer would have to take on debt but wouldn't need to pay it off immediately. The main obstacle at the moment is that there wouldn't be much money left for the Glazers once existing debts are taken into account. They're not going to want to sell unless they get a really good offer or they become desperate. The prize they make for paying off the mortgage is too significant right now. It's been the same with other clubs: the owner doesn't want to sell for a big loss because they'll lose only slightly more if the club fails and they might still even make money.

Most of the risk is on the club already, the Glazers seem pretty well insulated against a default, they'd lose a lot of money but it wouldn't affect their other holdings, so they wouldn't be forced to sell the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. The Glazers put up about a 3rd of the money they used to purchase and borrowed the rest from banks (secured against club property and ticket sales). They seem to have also borrowed their PIK notes secured against their own shareholding, not against the club.

Because the banks have been willing to accept ticket sales as security they'll know that it's not in their interest to do anything to cause the club to go under, so they'll be a little more flexible (eventually).