Football 2011-2012

[Wooderson]

The acid test will be the pressure that Alec's replacement gets. Specially if he's Johnny Foreigner.

About that Lucas article - hopefully we'll see similar back tracking from the naysayers with regard to Carroll in a few years. Ample time for him to improve.

[The Nal]

Either way its a daft idea. The player looks like a right pain in the hole to have about any club at the moment.

[ralph250]

Neil. Will just have to wait and see I guess.

I didn't like how the Knights surfaced only after the prospectus. Found it rather fishy personally.

We made profit last year, not just rising EBITDA. pre-tax c. £30m, post-tax c. £10m (although tax offset in the main).

IPO hasn't been done yet, and might even be delayed now given early exit from CL not exactly the best salespoint. Markets aren't the best either at the moment. Not sure that alarm bells should be ringing because they're looking at it though. As said before, the prospectus outlined a clause that could buy back around 35% of the bonds at par (as opposed to early redemption premium) if an IPO was made prior to something like 2013. The repurchases have been on the open market afaik and they're trading above par last I read.

As I said before, I think IPO is a result of changing situation in regards to City's emergence, and to a lesser degree Barcelona and Madrid's dominance of the Spanish TV market. Football landscapes massively changed with that, more so than when Roman first arrived. Even likes of PSG, Anzhi etc. Interest payments (and refinancing payments) such as ours aren't conducive to competing transfers/wages wise, with that. Kaosmark mentioned us going for Pastore the other day as a realistic target, but he went to PSG for around 40m euros, for a 22 yr old with zero CL experience.

I think we can spend money but we're not in their levels of financial capabality with our current liabilities. The club appear to be looking to reduce debt not take on additional, and thus exchanging debt for equity seems pretty self-explainatory to me if looking to raise cash fast to reduce that liability. Short of a player fire-sale and that's not particularly productive. What else do you suggest?

As I said, my valuation doesn't really come into it. Glazers valuation and investors valuation will.

High risk. Maybe. I did say at this time, and I think we're on a far stronger footing now than we were. Interest rates, we've been on pretty high anyways. Might go up further, or might reduce as part of lower borrowings/lower risk. Have to see.

Personally, I think there's room for growth (see revenues of Barca, Madrid, Bayern commercial). See likes of DHL deal which no-one would've thought possible, Nike renewal coming up, further expansion of terrority-specific deals (eg. the telecommunication partners. 35 countries. Lots more in the world). Perhaps looking for a better tomorrow, perhaps looking at trends, rise in overseas media payments etc.I'm not sure the looking at the 90's PLCs is particularly that indicative either. Sky/the Prem/the Internet was primitive, less exposed worldwide than now. Less exploited than now. Per your Kuper book you recommended, business in football wasn't the most savvy in the past either. E.g, the examples he gives of Liverpool not having a website years after the Internet came out. In the 70s clubs paying likes of Umbro for their clothing, without realising that they were giving free advertising, and it could work the other way. Replica shirts not being sold until the 80s. No live games being shown until 1982. Clubs not renovating their stadiums until required with the Taylor report. (which according to Kuper attendances rose thereafter with the improved facilities).

United's revenues have doubled since the PLC (£166 to £331m), and commercial revenue grown £55m (112%) to breach the £100m mark, and that's prior to the DHL and additional sponsors so far this year. (which going off the first quarters results extrapolated with be an additional £20m+). United now have a pretty large commercial team based in Mayfair. Pretty sure there's aims to have one based in Asia soon too. Gone are the days where teams would have one or two commercial staffers.

Bolded for emphasis.

United’s sales operation dwarfs that of any of its rivals. Chelsea, United’s chief Premier League competitor in recent seasons, has “a handful” of sponsorship sales staffers, one club executive told Bloomberg Businessweek. Liverpool, the team that comes closest to United in worldwide appeal, hired its first London-based employee earlier this year and didn’t have a commercial director until 2007

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-20/manchester-united-soccer-team-takes-old-trafford-game-to-hedge-fund-alley.html

[ralph250]

Truly gutted for Fletcher Explains a lot regards his absence last year, and surprised he even got back this season really.

Glad he's put his health first, though sadly envisage will be tough to carry on as a player.

[ralph250]

Ah yeah Ralph I shouldve put in my post that theres LFC heads that would want him back. But thats understandable is it not? I don't agree with it but he's still a recent hero to many Reds.

The abuse that he is given by your lot for his former allegiances leads me to make the point.

<snip>

"SIGN HIM UP ALEC!"

Edited December 14, 2011 by ralph250

[ralph250]

Liverpool fans are immune to fair criticism Ralph. You should know that by now. There are militant Muslim fundamentalists who are plotting to blow themselves up who are less sensitive to criticism than (a lot) of Liverpool fans.

[kaosmark2]

The guy in the middle of that pic. hehe.

Understandable some Liverpool fans would like him back. The guy was pretty bloody deadly tbf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3JUdryT9zI

edit: He's scored more premiership goals for Liverpool in 2011 than Chelsea. Would've been interesting had Liverpool had Suarez operating behind a Torres of old too. Not really seen that Torres for pretty much 2 years now though.

[ralph250]

I'd forgotten just how good his movement used to be.

Suarez needs a goalscorer to play behind IMO. Not that he's doing too badly without, but I think we'd see a rise to 1/2 rather than 1/4 if he's not the main threat. Of course, Torres isn't that player any more. Shame really, considering just how good he was.

[kaosmark2]

Indeed. Hammy injuries have probably caught up with him, robbed him of that initial explosiveness but be interesting how much he's inhibited from a confidence drain. The movement as you say hasn't been there, the instinctiveness, the anticipation, the decision making, the composure. It's just not there with him at the moment.

He's looked a handful still at times this season (against us for one), flickers of old, that wonder whether its recoverable. I can see why some people wonder whether he's worth a punt for £20m, but its a hefty risk. He's not really ever looked particularly happy at Chelsea, and as discussed before, their teams not really set up to get the best out of him.

Kinda wonder whether things might've been different had he not missed the sitter against United too. Concentration really. He'd been giving it to the United fans when he scored the first goal, and I guess was thinking of his next celebration prior to getting the job done. Being sent off next game didn't help either. Seemed to set him back again.

[The Nal]

He's looked a handful still at times this season (against us for one), flickers of old, that wonder whether its recoverable. I can see why some people wonder whether he's worth a punt for £20m, but its a hefty risk. He's not really ever looked particularly happy at Chelsea, and as discussed before, their teams not really set up to get the best out of him.

Edited December 14, 2011 by The Nal

[ralph250]

I don’t buy the “Chelsea don’t play the right way for him” viewpoint at all.

Edited December 14, 2011 by ralph250

[eFestivals]

Neil. Will just have to wait and see I guess.

I didn't like how the Knights surfaced only after the prospectus. Found it rather fishy personally.

We made profit last year, not just rising EBITDA. pre-tax c. £30m, post-tax c. £10m (although tax offset in the main).

Yep, we'll have to wait and see. I've been wrong so far in that they've not gone bust yet, but it's clear to see that the various options to buy time for the Glazers (cos time is their only realistic hope of salvation, or a mad sugar daddy) are slowly getting fewer.

That profit makes Utd worth £120M at most (tho £50M is probably more like it, given they make a loss at times too), plus the assets. Whatever that might total up as it's well short of the fantasy figures that the Glazers dream of.

IPO hasn't been done yet, and might even be delayed now given early exit from CL not exactly the best salespoint.

while that makes sense from one angle, it's a delay they probably can't make, because...

1. they spent a fair bit on players in the summer, which is likely to put a dent in the accounts as they don't normally spend those sorts of sums or only do when they've re-couped a bit from significant sales.

2. the CL exit will make a further dent in profits.

3. they're probably in desperate need of the money. From what they've done previously, a share sale is probably the very last thing they wanted to contemplate for raising money, and they're probably wanting to raise money to cover another debt.

As I said before, I think IPO is a result of changing situation in regards to City's emergence, and to a lesser degree Barcelona and Madrid's dominance of the Spanish TV market. Football landscapes massively changed with that, more so than when Roman first arrived.

you think the money is going to be invested in the team and not used to pay debts?

The club appear to be looking to reduce debt not take on additional, and thus exchanging debt for equity seems pretty self-explainatory to me if looking to raise cash fast to reduce that liability.

while that's a sound financial move, it's one with a cost - reduced ownership. To date they've shown themselves as not wanting to relinquish a jot of that, so I can't see it as anything but a necessity.

That necessity might be for playing a longer game than what I suggest in 3 above tho. It could, possibly, be them looking ahead to rolling over loans (say) five years from now, and them setting the ground in a number of ways to help ensure they're able to.

As I said, my valuation doesn't really come into it. Glazers valuation and investors valuation will.

how is an investor able to know what they're really buying into when tens of millions have been magic'd out of the air and the accounts that really matter are hidden away out of sight?

For a number of reasons (which pretty much boils down to them owning Utd) they're being treated with a lightness that a more-normal commercial business of the same turnover wouldn't get. People are blinded by the glitz, if you like, just as they were in the footie plc rush of the 90s.

The ability for Utd to exploit this has a while to run yet (perhaps until all of euro footie falls on its arse as it surely will), and has even got a bit easier since the Utd fans had to stop supporting Norwich cos the real Norwich are back.

Clubs not renovating their stadiums until required with the Taylor report. (which according to Kuper attendances rose thereafter with the improved facilities).

I think it'd be a mistake to think that the stadium revamps account for more than 10% of that. Football became 'sexy' again at around that time as the holigan thing subsided (in the public's eyes at least) and England reached the WC semis.

That Fergie's delivered what he has, has probably benefitted the club to the tune of £40-50m (maybe even more) per year, let alone how the squad would look like otherwise. The club most likely wouldn't have the revenue growth to be able to afford the likes of Rooney to resign. Vidic would've found it easier to answer his wifes calls to move to sunnier climes had we not been enduring the success he's found at the club. Evra would've probably gone to Spain.

They have him to thank for everything imo.

then there's another reason for fear. How many years do you think he has left, and how quickly do you think the club will slide either/or financially and on the pitch afterwards?

[The Nal]

Torres used to excel in tempo change. Pace, then slow it down...... then a quick dart and release.

[ralph250]

1. they spent a fair bit on players in the summer, which is likely to put a dent in the accounts as they don't normally spend those sorts of sums or only do when they've re-couped a bit from significant sales.

2. you think the money is going to be invested in the team and not used to pay debts?

3. while that's a sound financial move, it's one with a cost - reduced ownership. To date they've shown themselves as not wanting to relinquish a jot of that, so I can't see it as anything but a necessity.

That necessity might be for playing a longer game than what I suggest in 3 above tho. It could, possibly, be them looking ahead to rolling over loans (say) five years from now, and them setting the ground in a number of ways to help ensure they're able to.

4. how is an investor able to know what they're really buying into when tens of millions have been magic'd out of the air and the accounts that really matter are hidden away out of sight?

5. then there's another reason for fear. How many years do you think he has left, and how quickly do you think the club will slide either/or financially and on the pitch afterwards?

[ralph250]

Anyways, I'm leaving it at that regards Glazers etc. All conjecture at the moment, and don't want to derail the thread anymore.

[strummer77]

http://www.telegraph...d-of-cases.html

Now it just seems bizarre. Surprised Evra's taken this case this far when he said "You're only booking me because I'm black" and the "South American" jibe. Both should both get him in some trouble as well.

Edited December 15, 2011 by strummer77

[The Nal]

David Villa broke his leg. Out for the season.

[eFestivals]

http://www.telegraph...d-of-cases.html

Now it just seems bizarre. Surprised Evra's taken this case this far when he said "You're only booking me because I'm black" and the "South American" jibe. Both should both get him in some trouble as well.

I certainly don't envy the people that have to rule on this - it's mightily difficult because of all the different cultural angles.

However, from the angle of these words:-

"It is “alleged that this included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra”, the FA adds."

... I can't see how Suarez can not be guilty.

But I think that's a ridiculous angle to make a ruling via - after all, if I state the fact that "Patrick Evra is black" then I'm guilty of racism from that wording which would be an extremely ridiculous line to take.

From what that article says was exchanged between the players (more of it than I've previously read) then it appears that Evra is also guilty of racism via that wording, by describing Suarez as 'South American' and by saying "You’re only booking me because I’m black".

As I said, I certainly don't envy the people that have to rule on this.

[Steve P]

David Villa broke his leg. Out for the season.

[The Nal]

Torres on loan to Barca?

Edited December 15, 2011 by The Nal

[TheGayTent]

Phil Brown to join WHU coaching staff in January

[strummer77]

I certainly don't envy the people that have to rule on this - it's mightily difficult because of all the different cultural angles.

However, from the angle of these words:-

"It is “alleged that this included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra”, the FA adds."

... I can't see how Suarez can not be guilty.

But I think that's a ridiculous angle to make a ruling via - after all, if I state the fact that "Patrick Evra is black" then I'm guilty of racism from that wording which would be an extremely ridiculous line to take.

From what that article says was exchanged between the players (more of it than I've previously read) then it appears that Evra is also guilty of racism via that wording, by describing Suarez as 'South American' and by saying "You’re only booking me because I’m black".

As I said, I certainly don't envy the people that have to rule on this.

Edited December 15, 2011 by strummer77

[strummer77]

Torres on loan to Barca?

[eFestivals]

How times change eh? Torres to Barca was once something that sounded sensible.

I think it probably still does. It's the sort of deal which would allow everyone to save face .... providing Barca actually want him of course.

Even at his best I always thought Torres as an inferior player to Villa, so if others think the same then people would be expecting less from Torres anyway, while still bringing in a (overall) highly-regarded player as a replacement. It takes the pressure off Torres.

[eFestivals]

just seen on BBC website that AVB is saying Torres isn't for sale at any price.

So I guess that Roman has told him Torres is staying.