Man Utd Thread:

[EC Unique]

Hey Minder. Since you are so into your tabloids I got this for you from one of your favorites. Hope it clears this matter up for you

NEMANJA VIDIC has laughed off rumours of a rift with boss Alex Ferguson.
Manchester United defender Vidic has again been linked with a big-money switch to Spain in recent days, with Real Madrid said to be plotting a move.

The speculation increased following his bizarre withdrawal moments before Sunday's shock FA Cup loss to Leeds.

But it has now been established that Vidic tweaked a nerve in his leg that was causing him enough pain to make him sit out the game. He said: "Everyone in the club knows I have a marvellous understanding with Ferguson.

"He said he didn't talk with the club doctor but he didn't say he doesn't believe in my injuries and that we are in a fight.

"I am not unhappy at Old Trafford - I am just injured.

"I hope I will be able to play as soon as possible.

"The doctors said I will not be able to play for the next seven or 10 days so I don't think I will play against Birmingham on Saturday but I should be OK after that."



Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/2796315/Vidic-Me-and-Fergie-are-pals.html#ixzz0bpCMq8K7

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/2796315/Vidic-Me-and-Fergie-are-pals.html

[bingobus]

That clears that up...do you think he'll fit in at Real Madrid? 

[ross4life]

That clears that up...do you think he'll fit in at Real Madrid? 

he'll fit in a nicely as a 7th placed liverpool do in the premiership

[Minder]

That clears that up...do you think he'll fit in at Real Madrid? 

he'll fit in a nicely as a 7th placed liverpool do in the premiership

Can anyone translate?

[bingobus]

That clears that up...do you think he'll fit in at Real Madrid? 

he'll fit in a nicely as a 7th placed liverpool do in the premiership

Can anyone translate?

He'll look badly out of place but by end of season he'll be back where he belongs...simples 

[ross4life]

That clears that up...do you think he'll fit in at Real Madrid? 

he'll fit in a nicely as a 7th placed liverpool do in the premiership

Can anyone translate?

ok here goes in caps!

VIDIC JOINING MADRID WILL MAKE LIVERPOOL FANS AS HAPPY AS IT DOES MAKE MOST UNITED FAN'S TO SEE LIVERPOOL IN 7TH PLACE IN THE LEAGUE!!!

got that i hope so 

[EC Unique]

Birmingham City are "extremely confident" Saturday's match at St Andrew's (kick-off 17:30 GMT) will go ahead, despite recent adverse weather.

A statement on the club's official website reads: "Discussions have taken place with the local authorities, the emergency services and the Premier League and there is nothing to prevent the match taking place at present.

"The club's undersoil heating system means there are no problems at all with the pitch. Blues will continue to talk to the relevant authorities and monitor weather reports."

United fans due to travel to St Andrew's are encouraged to keep an eye on www.manutd.com and www.bcfc.com for further updates.

[gawa316]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/davi...d-glazers-debt

Apart from the snowfall which smothered the Carling Cup semi‑final between Manchester's two clubs, 2010 has dawned to wildly contrasting fortunes for City and United. Sunday's 1-0 FA Cup humbling by Leeds was accompanied by reports that United's owners, the Florida‑based Glazer family, are trying again to refinance the £700m debts which their 2005 takeover has imposed on the club. For City, Saturday's 1-0 Cup victory at Middlesbrough has been followed by the solid news that Sheikh Mansour, City's Abu Dhabi owner, has personally invested £395m in the club since he took over 17 months ago, converting all of it into shares, not loans.

In simple terms, the lottery of English football clubs being companies up for sale on the open market has delivered a winning ticket to the Blues, not the Reds. Mansour has made an enormous financial investment in City, while the Glazers, since they bought United in their bitterly contested takeover, have given the club not one penny to spend. Quite the opposite; their ownership has drained the club of huge sums of money. In only three years up to 30 June 2008, the closing date of their most recent published accounts, United became liable to pay a staggering £263m in interest alone. Despite that, the capital lump sum which United owe to banks and hedge funds has actually snowballed by £159m, from £540m in 2005, to £699m in 2008.


That increase is accounted for partly by the very high interest charged on the £275m the Glazers borrowed from three hedge funds to buy United. When the entire debt was refinanced only 15 months later in August 2006, the hedge fund debt had risen by £79.1m, which included £13.2m for "early redemption". The refinancing paid that off, leaving United with £525m owed to banks and £138m owed to hedge funds. An estimated £29m was paid in professional fees then, principally to bankers, lawyers and accountants. Reports that the Glazers have appointed two banks,JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank, to seek refinancing again with bank bonds should be understood in that context: huge fees will be charged, there are likely to be early repayment premiums again on the £175m hedge fund debt United now owe, and the refinancing is likely to increase the total debt owed.

The Glazer family's spokesman refused to comment this week on those reports, and both JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank issued no comments. However, City sources indicated the reports are correct, and the refinancing is thought to be concentrating on the hedge fund debt, which is accumulating interest at 14.25%. The interest is rolling up: £38m interest was payable to the hedge funds in 2006-07; £23m in the year to June 2008; £25m to June 2009. By the time the capital is due for repayment, in August 2017, if it has not been refinanced and already paid off, the accumulated capital will have risen from an initial £138m borrowed from hedge funds, when the Glazers refinanced in August 2006, to £580m. That is in addition to the £524m of bank and other borrowings which United owed at June 2008.

The club and the Glazer family's spokesman have insisted that despite the interest payable, £69m in the year to 30 June 2008, which helped push United from an operating profit of £80m to a £43m loss, Sir Alex Ferguson has money to spend. Ferguson has maintained since the summer that he has not done so because United-calibre players are not available, and there is not "value in the market". He argues that players are overpriced, partly because of Mansour's intervention.

After United lost the Champions League final in May, Ferguson might have been expected to substantially strengthen his squad, but instead, Cristiano Ronaldo was sold to Real Madrid for £81m, and the manager signed only Antonio Valencia, for £17.5m from Wigan, Michael Owen, on a free transfer, and Gabriel Obertan, for £3m from Bordeaux. Whatever their protestations that money remains available, United's weakening through injury, occasional underperformance and Ferguson's dismissive approach to buying players means United are simply not carrying themselves as proud, cash-rich, Premier League champions with the Ronaldo money still in the bank. Time is surely running out for the argument that the debts – now, with interest, certainly more than £700m, vastly more than any other English club – are not financially constraining.

The Glazers have overseen a period of sustained success at Old Trafford, winning three Premier League titles and the Champions League in 2008, and Ferguson has always spoken supportively of their regime, which he finds easier to deal with than the regulated stock market-listed entity United were before. United insiders credit the Glazers with bringing in some of the roster of sponsors whose lucrative deals reflect the club's global presence and popularity. However, by far the largest proportion of United's record £257m turnover was still earned in the UK in 2007-08, and the largest proportion, £101.5m, came from match days at Old Trafford.

There, ticket prices have been increased significantly since the Glazers took over, a policy presented as a commercial virtue when they sought the refinancing in August 2006. Although United still boast awesome near-76,000 full houses for Premier League matches, and 74,526 witnessed the Leeds crash on Sunday, tickets do now remain on sale for most matches. United's spokesman, Phil Townsend, confirmed this week that bookings of corporate hospitality packages are down in the recession, and a third-round FA Cup exit will not have been in Ferguson's plan for the season or the Glazers' financial projections.

Stories have seeped out of United this season about rounds of quite meagre cuts, and Townsend acknowledged that the club has indeed been looking to cut costs. Twelve staff have been made redundant recently, he said, although he pointed out that this was from around 550 people employed in various departments.

"Like all other businesses in the current financial climate we have been looking to keep costs down," he said. "The demand for match-by-match corporate hospitality packages has gone down, depending on the fixture, but our 55,000 season tickets are sold out. We present a stable business model, the interest payments are serviced from the operating profit, and the club has said there is money for the manager to spend."

It is difficult to decipher how far the Glazers' own fortunes have been affected by the economic downturn, because they operate principally as private investors in the US. The family's charitable foundation says of Malcolm Glazer on its website that he "owns, has owned or has been the largest shareholder" of companies including Harley Davidson, Formica, Tonka, and Omega Protein, but some of those interests were sold off several years ago. The US property industry, in which the Glazers are significant investors, particularly in shopping malls, via their First Allied Corporation, is one of the sectors most pulverised by the economic typhoon.

The family's NFL franchise, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, enjoyed sustained success under the Glazers, winning the 2003 Super Bowl, yet have just concluded a miserable season, finishing bottom of their division with three wins from 16 games. Media reports, never denied, consistently said the Bucs were spending $30m (£19m) less than the permitted $100m under the NFL salary cap; the system allows franchise owners to take surplus money out for themselves. In January last year, the Glazers replaced the veteran, Super Bowl-winning coach Jon Gruden with Raheem Morris, who at 32 was the youngest coach in the NFL. The Glazers are still hailing that as a "bold decision", but the series of defeats have led to profound disillusionment among Bucs fans, who have also endured ticket price rises, and crowds at the Tampa Bay stadium have declined.

With a United squad looking suddenly threadbare, and a vintage manager due for retirement himself before too long, United supporters cannot help but see parallels between Stretford and Florida. Duncan Drasdo, chair of the Manchester United Supporters Trust, said this week: "We warned from the beginning that the Glazer takeover would saddle the club with huge debts and now we can see them biting. If it were a race, then United are dragging their owners behind them like a tractor, while City's owners are providing rocket fuel."

Before the Glazers arrived in 2005, nobody could have foreseen this bizarre reversal in Manchester. United, then the world's richest club, are lurching into the new decade with punishing debts, while City, of all clubs, are being roundly criticised after the sacking of their manager for being too ruthless, driven and improbably rich.
__________________


It seems both the mancs and Liverpool are bucked

[Minder]

Not in EC Unique or Ross4lifes view I bet............

[EC Unique]

Not in EC Unique or Ross4lifes view I bet............

You will find that a few months ago when Liverpool's financial troubles were really coming to a head I stated on here that I was watching closely what was happening in Anfield as I think Utd are not that far behind them. Utd's financial affairs are a disaster.. I was never a fan of the yanks and i would llike to see them sell to a billionare Arab but this looks unlikely. Not even sure if that is the answer but I am no expert in finances.

[bingobus]

Not in EC Unique or Ross4lifes view I bet............

You will find that a few months ago when Liverpool's financial troubles were really coming to a head I stated on here that I was watching closely what was happening in Anfield as I think Utd are not that far behind them. Utd's financial affairs are a disaster.. I was never a fan of the yanks and i would llike to see them sell to a billionare Arab but this looks unlikely. Not even sure if that is the answer but I am no expert in finances.

Are United that far behind Liverpools troubles or ahead of them? I'm not having a go by the way. Was a good article on the BBC website the other day about how Uniteds FA exit could even have a big affect on their ability to repay the Interest on debt, they are on such a fine line at present.
As one United fan pointed out to me yesterday when he sent me that article, why would an arab buy United for 1billion when they could buy an Everton/West Ham/Sunderland etc for 100m and make a real go of them at a fraction of the price ala Man City and Chelsea.

[EC Unique]

I read that article about FA cup exit. Hard to know where they are in comparison with Liverpool. Not too far apart either way but Utd look like a top 4 this season where as Liverpool have a lot to do to achieve that. This could be a big difference.

The only difference in Utd and the clubs you mentioned is International profile. Utd is a massive world wide product. This may or may not be of interest to Arabs. Like I said I am no expert in this sort of stuff. I just like watching Utd play football

[thebigfella]

I read that article about FA cup exit. Hard to know where they are in comparison with Liverpool. Not too far apart either way but Utd look like a top 4 this season where as Liverpool have a lot to do to achieve that. This could be a big difference.

The only difference in Utd and the clubs you mentioned is International profile. Utd is a massive world wide product. This may or may not be of interest to Arabs. Like I said I am no expert in this sort of stuff. I just like watching Utd play football

I agree, why buy an established brand with a global presence, loads of history, good assets and revenue? or try to create one from scratch? I don't think you can create that sort of brand/history that Utd, Liverpool and few other teams have.
The current setup of collective TV rights lasting too much longer for a number of reasons, I would expect prospective investors would feel the same. Utd could easily pay back the debt with the TV revenue from Asia alone over a couple of seasons. If this happens, smaller teams will get left behind; potentially buying a small team and building it up may be a bigger risk than buying Utd.

[bingobus]

I read that article about FA cup exit. Hard to know where they are in comparison with Liverpool. Not too far apart either way but Utd look like a top 4 this season where as Liverpool have a lot to do to achieve that. This could be a big difference.

The only difference in Utd and the clubs you mentioned is International profile. Utd is a massive world wide product. This may or may not be of interest to Arabs. Like I said I am no expert in this sort of stuff. I just like watching Utd play football

Missing 4th will be massive to Liverpool. United have had 2/3 really good years, yet they have only used returned a profit above to meet interest repayments. A bad year for either club will have massive affect on them.
International profile helps in terms of TV audience but it has proved to be a very fickle audience as well and as above a bad year would have hugh impact particularly with the rise of profile of the spanish game and clubs are making big noises their to schedule games to suit foreign markets. The merchandise markets in asia are so swamped with fake goods that this has little impact on profit lines.

I know we all love to watch football but unfortunately these clubs have turned into business's and this side of things will have a massive impact in years to come.

[Celt_Man]

Here is the United Financa article from the BBC website by Robert Peston, the Business Editor which was mentioned earlier.... very interesting


Can Man Utd spend?

This week's epistle to fans from Arsene Wenger muses on whether Manchester Utd will derive advantage from being knocked out of the FA Cup by Leeds Utd.

Man U's Wayne Rooney and Dimitar BerbatovThe always counter-intuitive Arsenal supremo points out that FA Cup matches tend to be hard on the heels of Champions League games - which implies that Man Utd's players will be fresher for the matches that really matter.

Bankers however take a different view of Man U's humiliation by a team two divisions below.

They point out that debt-laden Man U needs posteriors on seats in as many games as possible to service the interest charge - and that the 3rd round exit from the cup deprives the club of important revenue.

One banker with a close knowledge of the club put it like this to me: Manchester Utd as a business is a delicately balanced financial machine, which works when the team is winning and revenues are pouring in, but where there is not much of a financial cushion to absorb the inevitable occasional flop.

He said that the huge debt that was taken on when the Glazer family bought the club was predicated on the basis that Man Utd would have decent runs in the Champions League and FA Cup in most years - which of course is typically what has happened.

The important numbers are these, as of 30 June 2008, the date of the last published accounts for Man Utd's holding company, Red Football Joint Venture Ltd.

Red Football JV had £519m of secured bank loans, on which it paid £45.4m.

And it had £175.5m of so-called payment-in-kind notes, where the interest is rolled up into the principal rather than paid in cash. The interest rate on these is 14.25%.

So the total annual interest bill was just under £70m (including rolled-up interest).

That compares with a net cash inflow from operating activities (largely profit before interest and taxation) of £88m.

So in that year, if Man Utd did not want to increase its overall level of debt, it had less than £20m to spend on players and other investments.

In fact, it spent £43m - so its indebtedness increased, by just under £33m to £699m gross in total.

Now Man Utd fans would presumably say that was money well spent, since the club won the Premier League for the umpteenth time last year.

But the big question is whether the current level of indebtedness is excessive for this point in both the footballing cycle and in the economic cycle.

To state the obvious, post-Ronaldo Man Utd does not look as invincible as last year's team. And a weak British economy deprives all clubs of incremental revenues.

Which is why Man Utd is looking at ways to reinforce itself in a financial sense.

As has been widely reported, Man Utd is considering taking on new debt to pay off some of the old debt.

According to bankers, it would like to raise around £600m through a bond issue.

The reason is that - in theory at least - the interest payable on the bond would be significantly less than the interest on the payment-in-kind notes (PIKs): Man Utd would probably have to pay around 8% interest on a bond, which looks very attractive compared with the 14.25% interest on the PIKs.

But here's the funny thing. The interest on the much bigger bank loan of £519m is very competitive. It ranges between 2.125% and 5% over Libor. So right now it should be paying no more than 5.5% - which is cheap money.

It does not seem to make sense to pay off that low-interest debt with the proceeds of a bond paying a higher interest rate.

But that's to ignore the problem that the burden of the PIK is growing exponentially, because the 14.25% interest rate applies to the original principal plus the rolled up interest.

In other words, Red Football JV is this year probably paying 14.25% on PIKs with a value of £200m - or more than £28m in interest. Which would imply that next year it will be paying 14.25% on almost £230m, and so on, to financial ruin.

The other important point is that Man Utd's banks are the so-called senior creditors and have first claim on any money deployed to repay loans, so they would probably not allow the PIKs to be redeemed unless some or all of their loans were also repaid.

So there is a logic to a comprehensive refinancing via a bond issue.

This is a long-winded way of saying that the UK's most formidable football team is not without its financial issues.

Which is also to say that the relative immunity of top-flight football from the impact of credit crunch and recession has been delayed, not avoided.

The simplest way for Man Utd to alleviate the immediate financial pressure would be to spend very little in the January transfer window.

And it certainly would not be the only club to sit on its hands rather than buy new players.

With clubs like Portsmouth and Crystal Palace in serious difficulties, right now there are arguably more forced sellers of players than buyers with deep pockets.

Man City may have a bottomless purse. But the noises from Chelsea suggest even it isn't likely to spend like it once did.

Perhaps this is the moment when the transfer market will crack and player prices fall significantly.

Which - of course - would further weaken the finances of clubs where the value of players represents a significant proportion of balance-sheet assets.

The finances of the Premier League are probably as perilously poised as the finances of the British government.