Jump to content

The Official Manchester United Thread

Young £

By Young £
in Sports Room Archive

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mame Biram Diouf Newbie

Mame Biram Diouf

Posted
Posted
Only July 26, 2012, consistent with our strategy to grow our global sponsorship revenue, we entered into an agreement with General Motors for Chevrolet to become our exclusive shirt sponsor, beginning in our 2014/15 season. The term of the agreement runs through the end of the 2020/21 season. Annual revenue from our new shirt sponsorship agreement will be $70.0 million in the first season, and will increase by an additional 2.1% in each season thereafter through the term of the agreement. We will also receive approximately $18.6 million in fees in each of the 2012/13 season and 2013/14 season under the terms of our new shirt sponsorship agreement. Total revenue payable through the end of the 2020/21 season under our new shirt sponsorship agreement is approximately $559 million

there goes half of that debt?

could this be the reason for the IPO change?

lol @ half the debt

you ever heard of interest before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 13.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Kompressor

    1448

  • Mame Biram Diouf

    1068

  • Agony

    1003

  • Gambino

    589

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Mame Biram Diouf
Mame Biram Diouf

LAHI BE LIKE                                                                                          

BSOM
BSOM

'Look uncle, plenty space to sell dvds' haha

Flojo
Flojo
Kompressor Newbie

Kompressor

Posted
Posted

Wonder if Ice still thinks they have been great owners

they have

How so?

Most successful era in our Clubs History, hard to argue with that ain't it

I actually thought you were gonna come with a half way sensible argument, I.E things the Glazer's can be credited for, as in record sponsorship deals and revenues. These arguments can of course be thrown out by a few facts but they are at least some way decent arguments.

The foundations for the success were laid predominantly before the takeover, one of the reasons they were so eager to buy the club and one of the reasons they were confident of covering the debt incurred.

The Glazer family obviously have no input in team selection or identifying possible transfer targets, nor do they provide any of their "personal fortune" to finance said team so how can the success be down to them,

In fact it could be argued that after winning the Champions league in 08 beating Barca in the semi's we have steadily but definitely fallen behind Barca due to spending restrictions the put in place when they took over,

Said restrictions are again outlined in the new IPO paperwork, £25 million on transfers a season.

You may be thinking that's an OK transfer budget, but if that was the case in 2005 when the takeover happened, then surely the record sponsorship deals and increased revenues as well as tge continuation of the "financial Doping" carried out by to name two, Chelsea and City would call for an increase in these limitations.

No?

In the same way they say, wages will be taken up by a certain % of the revenue, why can't they do the same with transfers? Surely that is what good owners who want above anything else to ensure the succes and competitiveness of the club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Young £ Newbie

Young £

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Tbh i've had no sleep Kompressor, I really cant be bothered, but i've been reading more and more about this ever since the IPO was released and later on i'll give my personal opinion, but to me, as of this day, the Glazers have been good owners for Manchester United.

the thing is people zone out when it comes to finance and financials. It is not that difficult when one puts their mind to it. However, people look for an easy way out and there is a scope for someone to include bias in their interpretation even while appearing not to do so.

The problem with whole Glazers' affair is that people are thinking with their hearts, and that is not always a good thing. The debt aspect of the ownership is clearly bad, however, taking I think post-takeover Fergie has had more freedom in running the club instead of having people question his judgment in footballing matters. It allows him to do his job more peacefully, and it is better for him than having a PLC or owners like Abramovich. Also the commercial side of the club has been exploited much more by the Glazers, mostly through necessity but they have actually done a much better job than PLC did (it is not just a macro situation revolving around football). You could argue otherwise. While the Glazers have been leeching on our club at the same time the club has become more efficient in taking advantage of the economy. It doesn't suit everyone though and we have today a situation where some are unable to cope with the changes, but those changes have taken place everywhere not just at United.

If you're in the cheap seats, your ticket prices have gone up 36.4% (that's 4% per year) since the takeover; for the expensive seats that would be 72.4% (7% per year). For comparison, under the PLC the increases were 188.9% (7.9% per year) and 260.1% (9.6% per year) or, for the the last seven years under Edwards, 10.1% per year and 9.3% per year. So the rate of price increase has actually been lower since the takeover than over the twenty one years previously - those in East and West Lower have particularly benefited. Of course that's without the ACS - how bad that is depends on the individual and how many cup games he/she would have gone to regardless.

Meanwhile, compared to the seven years before the takeover, since the takeover Staff Costs have just about doubled from £436m to £870m in aggregate and spending on players has gone from £189m to £293m (using estimates for the full FU2012 numbers). With costs going up to that extent, revenues obviously had to increase - would you have expected that to happen without ticket price increases? It's lucky Commercial has done so well.

The prices went up higher under Edwards? who would of thought?

Edwards was a real operator. He (and his father before him) compiled a controlling interest in United for around £800,000. The sole rationale for the initial IPO was to enable him (and his cronies on the board) to make money. During and after the IPO he sold his shares for over £100m.

Which indirectly led to the takeover by Glazers.

So we might aswell say bastards the lot of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Young £ Newbie

Young £

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The foundations for the success were laid predominantly before the takeover, one of the reasons they were so eager to buy the club and one of the reasons they were confident of covering the debt incurred.

The Glazer family obviously have no input in team selection or identifying possible transfer targets, nor do they provide any of their "personal fortune" to finance said team so how can the success be down to them,

lol @ this bit though

the foundations were laid, but were completed and executed while under the Glazer reign, how ever you want to dress it up the fact remains the same, do not try and discredit it by saying the foundations were laid before. If they fuck off in a few years and we get someone else or a PLC and we win another 3 back to back PL's I bet you wont say the Glazers laid those foundations

and like that quote said above, by them not having no direct input in team selections, possible targets was THEIR choice, not Fergies, but I bet Fergie has loved opearting under this model more so than any other before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kompressor Newbie

Kompressor

Posted
Posted

Your telling me nothing new mate, I gave up my season ticket couple seasons before the takeover in 2003, you don't gave to tell me about price increases,

Season before last I was talking to a guy at FC who decided to stop going in 1993. My Uncle stopped in 2000.

It's old news how the previous regime was flawed,

The difference is back then when the ticket prices went up, so did our record transfer fee's and wages, now that money goes towards paying the banks for the "privilege" of their ownership,

Yes incoming money has gone up, but the team and club don't and haven't benifitted as a lot of the money has gone to paying off debts,

I'd there was no debt to be paid off, and the transfer budget was more flexible then it'd be harder to argue,

Yes Fergie is left with less hoops to jump through to get the cash, but he is also left with less potential cash each season.

Remember the days of spending big on Veron Ferdinand and RVN all in a couple seasons, add in a world cup winning Barthez as well as other, As well as constantly upping wage allowances?

If they're so good why do we struggle to pay these transfer fee's 10 years later despite the increase in financial income?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kompressor Newbie

Kompressor

Posted
Posted

The point I'm making is it's very rich for Mr Ferguson to come out talking about the crazy transfer Market when he has been apart of it and contributed to the insanty for the past 15 years.

Another thing, surely "value" for your money is related to how much money you have or ate earning?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Agony Newbie

Agony

Posted
Posted

How much is the debt currently?

£425m

How much is that sponsorship deal?

£357m over 7 years

£73m will be used from the IPO to reduce the debt

And our 13 year Nike deal expires in 2015 and its fair to assume that they'll offer us a better deal than the £38m per year they recently gave to the French Football Federation

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Young £ Newbie

Young £

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The point I'm making is it's very rich for Mr Ferguson to come out talking about the crazy transfer Market when he has been apart of it and contributed to the insanty for the past 15 years.

Another thing, surely "value" for your money is related to how much money you have or ate earning?

lol but so has every manager in the world, it was bound to happen, there was always an upways trend since the premiership came in and even before that, granted this rate has probably accelerated way too quickly for Fergies liking and he is more than entitled to have his opinion and reasons.

Not really, value could be determined by each player and transfer specifically, from the fee, to the wages to the length of contract, and with the way wages and prices are going, Fergie is better placed to tell us what value is than any of us

\

thanks Agony

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Agony Newbie

Agony

Posted
Posted

Did Carrick play CB against Barca?

Yeah he switched positions to CB when Vidic got subbed off. Did the same in the pre-season game vs Valerenga.

/

Speaking of CBs, Evans is scheduled to return on August 20th and Smalling on October 7th. No return date for Jones yet. http://www.physioroom.com/news/english_premier_league/epl_injury_table.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...