Aug 03
Oh Manchester United, What Have You Become? #LUHG
Until the 1980s, English football was run by an innocuous assortment of local businessmen who demonstrated a distinct lack of national ambition. Their financial model amounted to little more than “putting bums on seats” for home games. The creation of the English Premier League in 1992 changed everything, triggering a gluttonous gold rush. Some of the most sophisticated global sports business minds poured into English football to exploit the new frontiers of domestic, international and digital rights, and the exploding universe of commercial opportunities.
On Aug. 10, this global gold rush will break new ground as the Florida-based Glazer family, which owns Manchester United, seeks to sell 10 percent of the club as an IPO on the New York Stock Exchange. Three months ago, Manchester United was transformed into an “emerging growth company” registered in the Cayman Islands. Now, the Old Trafford club is poised to become the ticker symbol MANU, traded on New York’s Big Board.
The IPO will make 16.7 million shares available at an expected price of between $16 and $20, raising approximately $300 million, and driving the club’s total valuation to $3 billion. It’s a remarkable sum, twice the $1.2 billion the Glazers paid to acquire the club in 2005 when they took the club off the London Stock Exchange and saddled it with debt, last reported at $656 million, in a leveraged buy-out.
Shorn of its financial elements, the IPO exposes the straining tectonic plates that lie just beneath the surface of the modern English game — the ever-increasing gap between the agendas of club owners, fan base factions and potential investors.
Crudely put, this gap in Manchester United’s case pits those who revere the 134-year-old club as the hallowed home of Bobby Charlton, George Best and Eric Cantona, and who expect the transfer market to be the priority destination for the club’s commercial profits so it can add to a record-haul of 19 league titles, against others who are perceived to view United primarily as a platform to sell 2 million jerseys a year, engage 26 million Facebook followers and profit personally from the team’s status as the richest side in the world (according to Forbes, which estimates it to be $385 million more valuable than the Dallas Cowboys and New York Yankees).
The IPO, led by New York City-based investment bank Jeffries, has been tinged by the surreal. It’s been an on-again/off-again process, abandoned first in Hong Kong, then in Singapore due to lukewarm demand, culminating in an eye-boggling valuation with the synchronized announcement of a record-breaking jersey-sponsorship deal with Chevrolet, which Reuters reported as being worth up to $600 million over seven years.
This stock will appeal to anyone looking to express a deep fan affinity rather than a real investment strategy.
– Scott Rosner, sports business professor, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
These financial headlines have been accompanied by a John Le Carre novel’s worth of subplots, including a change in destination for the profits, the mysteriously abrupt resignation of Chevy’s chief marketing officer, and legendary coach Sir Alex Ferguson’s public denial of allegations he was set to personally benefit from the transaction.
This drama has been enhanced and complicated by the ongoing silence of the Glazer family, which has been interviewed on the record only once about United since taking over the club. Jeffries, deemed by many to be a surprisingly small yet scrappy choice to act as lead banker on the deal, has been unwilling to comment for legal reasons. As a result, the owners’ long-term intentions remain opaque.
This lack of transparency has heightened fans’ anxiety, leaving them to analyze the minutiae of the IPO in the hope of reverse engineering the Glazers’ intentions, including why an English football club will be traded on a New York exchange in the first place.
Even those who routinely root for any sign of growing American involvement in the world’s game may find it hard to cheer for this one. “This may seem like an odd time to launch an IPO in the U.S. after the high-profile failures of Zynga and Facebook,” said Scott Rosner, a sports business professor at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. “But the attraction for the Glazers lies in the ‘dual-class’ ownership structure allowed on the NYSE.” American regulators’ light-touch permits the Glazers to retain 10 votes for every share they hold, while awarding merely a single vote to each new share, a structure which allows them to sell 10 percent of their holding yet retain 98 percent of the voting power.
Both Google and Facebook employed this dual structure in their IPOs, but as Andy Green, a football finance blogger, explained, “Larry Page and Sergey Brin built Google from nothing into one of the world’s greatest companies with their unique vision. There is nothing unique about the Glazers that necessitates their control of United has to be uniquely preserved.”
Mohannad Aama, senior portfolio manager at Beam Capital Management, agrees, warning the dual structure is a “terrible red flag” because the owners “can continue to act in their own self-interest after the IPO without ever having to align that interest with that of their new shareholders.”
The projected pricing range of $16-20 a share has also shocked many analysts, including Guardian financial editor Nils Pratley. “Six times revenues,” he exclaimed. “That’s a rating associated with go-go technology stocks where income doubles every couple of years.”
In a 40-minute RetailRoadshow, a multimedia presentation, Manchester United attempted to justify the price by articulating its best sales case. The club is described as “one of the most successful and iconic sports brands in the world” with “more sports fans than any other team in the world,” a number they compute to be “659 million followers,” while promising “to engage with them in a much deeper manner and obviously to monetize that as well.”
Philip Hall, partner at Inner Circle Sports, which has completed several Premier League acquisitions, validated the club’s revenue-generating success. “United have built a world class sporting organization underpinned by a very strong commercial department that has created a series of staggering sponsorship deals,” he said. The maze of global partnerships the club has struck with official airlines, banks and beers in every region has made it football’s gold standard.
Despite this, Green considers the valuation to be “crazy,” pointing to the frailty of the sporting business model. “The profits at Manchester United fell last season simply because they did not qualify for the Champions League knockout stages,” he said. “This proves things can go wrong at any time, even at the biggest club in the world.”
While the Roadshow boasts Manchester United has “hardly begun to monetize” areas as diverse as “energy” and “consumer electronics,” few analysts project the kind of explosive revenue growth required to justify the share-pricing. Premier League clubs may continue to benefit from dizzying media rights deals, yet the share they receive has a bigger, proportional bottom-line impact for smaller-clubs such as Wigan or Everton, whose revenue base is tiny compared to United’s. In all cases, such increases can be eaten up by the accompanying increases in player salaries.
Who stands to profit?
Another controversy has been sparked by the ultimate destination of the IPO’s profits. The club originally expressed the intention of using the proceeds to pay down debt, enabling it to upgrade the squad by competing more aggressively in the transfer market. Even the club’s Roadshow acknowledged the critical nature of this step, acknowledging “success on the pitch is central to our strategy.” The announcement that the Glazers now intend to keep half of the profits has been received with surprise. As Green computes the numbers, “with half the money now going to the Glazers, the IPO will only save us a paltry $7.78 million a year, which is not enough to buy Wayne Rooney’s foot.”
Aama was damning in his summary of the offering. “They are not a good investment at the rumored sale price as there are so many red flags on the balance sheet and in their dual-class voting structure,” he explained before referring to the poor performance of the Boston Celtics, Cleveland Indians and Florida Panthers during their brief experiences on the public market. Aama added, “historically, sports franchises have not proven to be good investments in the United States.”
For Manchester United and the Glazers, a critical question remains. What would motivate an investor to pay up to $20 for a share which offers no dividend and unequal voting power? Philip Hall conjured the most positive spin, explaining that “the recent Dodgers sale proved that sports content and the rights fees it commands can generate higher and higher revenues. So an investment in Manchester United offers buyers an ownership stake in the one of the greatest content providers in the world’s most popular sport.”
In Andy Green’s analysis, “United are trying to make the case they have barely scraped the surface of what is commercially possible because they have a global fan base of 659 million, and all they have to do to grow is get $10 off each of them every year,” he said. “That prospect is so outlandish you would have to believe real investors are stupid enough to own gold plated bathtubs if you think they’ll buy into that.”
Rosner suggests the IPO’s success may boil down to whether it can attract enough obsessive fans who already own enough replica jerseys, scarves and John O’Shea bobbleheads. “This stock will appeal to anyone looking to express a deep fan affinity rather than a real investment strategy,” he said. “I am a Manchester United supporter, and I would never invest in the stock. For the share price, you are basically buying a piece of memorabilia you will never get a return on.”
When asked if he can conjure a positive long-term scenario for the club under its current owners, Green is stumped, calling his inability “painful.” That said, he confesses his love for the team is not diminished. “The experience of United scoring is no different to how it felt when I was a kid,” he admits with a sudden relish. “I can’t tell you how much pain I felt when [Sergio] Aguero scored to clinch the title for Manchester City [last season]. All supporters can demarcate the difference between off-the-field and on-the-field. I find it impossible to want anything apart for Manchester United to win.”
Roger Bennett is a columnist for ESPN, and with Michael Davies, is one of Grantland’s “Men In Blazers.” Follow him on Twitter: @rogbennett.
This article was published here on ESPN. Thanks to Roger via Steve James for bringing it to our attention. Also, watch The ESPN’s: The Press Pass from 7mins 55secs here to hear the IPO and Sir Alex Ferguson’s comments.
Related Posts
Related items from Red Rants:
Tags: Manchester United
The_Philosopher (477)
Redrich (252)
Opti (215)
Stephen (185)
Moscow (150)
Great article! Nice overview of financial crisis at MANU… why did they not go under MUFC … seems like a blunder to me that has gone unnoticed.
Like?
0 
0
What crisis ? How about every club having their financial transactions and so-called debts splashed on the back page of every newspaper/website just before the season opens ? I don’t think I’ve heard, or seen more than 2 words on Barcelona’s massive debt of £ 550 million. That’s even bigger than United’s
Like?
2 
5
@ian harris: Are you drunk on Glazer’s tonic?
Different between Barca debt and United debt is EXACTLY that United’s debt is hampering them in transfer market, while Barca get and pay for their star(s) EVERY year.
If we continued with proper replacements for our sold players and did not waste time and money on raw potentials and Bebe’s, then few people would complain. But when leadership comes out and want to sell off part of the club b/c suddenly the debt is unmanageable, THEN it’s a crisis.
Like?
2 
0
In Lucas Moura news:
“Sky Sport Italia are claiming that Sao Paulo have agreed to sell Lucas to Italian club Inter Milan for a fee believed to be £21 million. Supposedly Lucas wants United move only.”
If true: either
(1) United never put in a bid > 20 million [i.e. they lied again!]
(2) Inter Milan bribed someone at Sao Paulo, b/c 21 million seems small.
If false: oh well. Don’t see reason to get Moura anyways.
Like?
0 
0
@Opti: Sao Paolo vice president denies Inter even making a bid
Like?
0 
0
@AS: ha wtf is going on………
Like?
0 
0
United bid € 33 million, which is about £25 million
Like?
0 
1
Just read about Fergie’s reaction about Profiting from IPO, I really think this kind of gossip can hurt an old man, current United team is his big achievement, I guess, Fergie can make mistakes but I don’t think he want to make money although it is a big one, where ignoring it can taint his reputation as a manager, of course it can be wrong guess though. Manage the blame from fan, defending player from press criticizing etc are all of manager’s job but making money from IPO claim is a bit bad punch from few people.
Like?
1 
0
@Yang: Fergie makes many mistakes but lacks the humility to acknowledge nor act on them. He is also a very greedy man, but I suppose everyone is greedy as humans.
The way he speaks to the fans is pathetic, always condescending and inconsiderate jibes aimed at people who really care about the club. And since he doesn’t give a flying fuck about us, he won’t be offended as long as we keep on giving the dough. Of this I am certain because when season tickets entered a bit of a crisis, he was begging like a dog on a Glazers cheerleader video. It was the only time he had to say something positive about us and sadly it was just a shameless bit of gainsmanship.
He is finished and on borrowed time.
Like?
6 
3
@Moscow: How can you talk such bullshit about a man who has given everything to this club? He is only negative towards idiotic fans that havent a clue about whats going on. He doesnt have to explain anything to anyone, he has earned this right. The fact is this club would crumble without him and he is doing a fantastic job considering we are no longer the financial powerhouse we used to be. Show the man respect for God sake!!
Like?
1 
4
@ash is the man: If you question the Glazers you are not a real fan according to Fergie. That is quite a lot of United fans.
Like?
7 
2
@ash is the man: What constitutes as an idiotic fan then ash?
Someone who dares find fault with people who have stolen £500m from the club and who continue to do so perhaps?
Someone who doesnt like being spoken to in a condescending and disrespectful manner from fergie and so, quite rightly, vents their frustrations after having their support questioned?
Well if that makes me an idiotic fan mate, then idiotic fan i am.
I cant quite see how you or anyone else can realistically defend these quotes.
At the end of the day, they were rude, disrespectful totally un necessary and flawed to the extreme.
As for fergie and this view that he should never be questioned, so are you saying then that he is bigger than the club?
That he say, do as he pleases and we cant ever say anything because of all the trophies weve won because of him. And you cant see what a problem that can cause?
Speaking personally as ive said many times before, fergie the football manager i will respect the rest of my life for everything he has brought to this club.
He is the best, end of, full stop.
As a person however, i find him a lying, greedy, hyprocrite and overall not a very nice man.
Dont mean i dont respect what hes done for us, ie again why im differentiating between fergie the man, and fergie the football manager.
Like?
3 
0
@ash is the man: The fact is this club would crumble without him
Some would say the club it already is crumbling as we speak, bearing in mind our decline these last 4 years, our lack of quality on the pitch, reduced spending and the glazers admitting in the IPO how our indebtedness could affect our health and standing.
and he is doing a fantastic job considering we are no longer the financial powerhouse we used to be.
And yet fergie still supports them? Are you alluding to the fact then glazer is holding out on fergie re transfer fees and not putting forward what they once did?
If so, how exactly is keeping quiet actually helping anything?
Does it not show how dangerous these people are that they take these sort of liberties with a man as powerful as fergie.
Does it bode well for fergie replacement whoever that may be?
Like?
2 
0
Great news everyone! Nuri Sahin is flying here on a loan deal… to Arsenal.
Like?
2 
1
@Moscow: Oh what a disappointment, he has really pulled up trees at Real,
Like most Turkish players, he is shit. I would rather give Cleverley a chance who has been brilliant in the Olympics.
Like?
0 
0
@Stephen: Sahin is competing with Xabi Alonso. Cleverley couldn’t get in the team ahead of a 37 year old and did SHIT in the Olympics.
Like?
3 
0
@Moscow: So why is that an issue? If he were ood enough he would have played more than 10 times all season.
?
Cleverley was injured hence Scholes coming back into the side. Who was brilliant and was voted 3rd in the player of the year for the whole league. Are you saying Cleverley was shit? That is rubbish, he had a great competion.
But why let facts get in the way eh
Like?
1 
2
@Stephen: defo agree stephan. I believe this will be a great season for cleverly. There is no point in bring in a cm unless he is top class ie modric, mounthino or even tiote. There would be no point bringing in nuri, fergie know want a man united type player is
Like?
0 
0
Boy we really showed everyone who’s the boss with those RvP and Moura bids! We’re the SHIT… *IPO passes* … err well, actually there is no value. Fuck off and support Chelsea if you don’t like it.
Like?
5 
1
So what does everyone think this “official club business” that Fergie has stayed behind in the UK for will turn out to be? Im sure the press will claim its to sort a deal for RVP or Lucas but these days I will believe it when I see it.
Like?
0 
0
@RedOrDead: I’m surprised Malcolm didn’t invite his lap dog Ferguson to join his Pacific cruise. I suppose helping people to suck 500 million out of a club isn’t enough these days.
Like?
4 
3
anyone get to see how united boys did vs s korea? watching the sootout now missed the match…
Like?
0 
0
@gator: sturridge
i am disappoint. rent boys are known to choke like that.
viva dan sturridge!
could have won the gold… but you made us fold??? idk someone will come up with a good one for next term im sure.
Like?
0 
0
@gator: Gator mi man, everyone knows the Rent boys choke like that – errrrrr Rooney, Nani and dipstick Young all proved they don’t choke when they took penalties against Barca eh? Our strikers look like they couldn’t put the ball in the net IF the goal was doubled in size. We look so extraordinarily ORDINARY a team these days.
Like?
0 
0
The Olympics inflate transfer fees so it is difficult to find value
Like?
3 
2
Ferguson misses the point as usual. He is motivated by entirely selfish reasons-IE desire to keep his job for as long as he likes and have total control over the day to day running of the club. As far as I can tell the Glazers never question anything Ferguson does just as he never questions anything they do. It is quid pro pro. The fact this unholy alliance screws over the fans and left us trophyless this season is incidental.
Most of the managers who clamour for transfer funds do so because they don’t feel their position is secure and know that they will get stick from the owners if they don’t win trophies. Ferguson doesn’t face any of those pressures.
I still believe Ferguson wants to win trophies (well the Premier League at least). But I think he is quite arrogant and underestimates the opposition and overestimates the ability of his team and his managerial ability.
Like?
3 
0
Seems like Fergie is staying back to clinch Lucas signing for 30 million pounds, according to ESPN.
The interesting bit is that “[Lucas] Moura will receive 30% of the transfer fee [if sold].” That’s a whopping 10 million pounds, which may indicate that Lucas would accept low weekly wages (<50K/week) ??
Like?
0 
0
I don’t care for the Glazers but they have the better management model in the League. I’m not actively in support of their leveraged takeover method but it has had no serious financial effect so far. Why do I say their management is better? Look at Chelsea or City. Truth be told, their mega cash investments have helped them with gains but it’s so disproportionate. Nearly half a billion spent by each club to get players and between them they have one Champions League, 4 league titles and 2 FA Cups in nearly 10 years. In the same period, United have won 4 league titles and 1 Champions League. That’s one billion dollars combined vs our modest budget. They hire the best players, best coaches and pay the most money and struggle to match United, who have lacked a real trainer since 2008. Why? Something none of us ever think of. United apply common and business sense. The Glazers don’t understand the game of football on the pitch. They leave football matters to those who understand them. They however understand business and commercial issues. They understand that long term strength is found in efficient business,not paper fires.
Believe it or not, the club has actually advanced as whole, far beyond the previous regime. Ferguson had problems with the previous regime and often implied, particularly the lack of flexibility the plc had especially in approving transfers. Now he’s getting even more freedom, so obviously he’s pleased with that. The Glazers model is based on profit meaning,they view United as a business with profit opportunities. It’s in their best interest that the club prospers. They understand the brand power and potential of United and concentrate on increasing the value of the club. Not because of benevolence,or goodwill, but for their own personal gain.
Contrary to public opinion, the profiteering nature of the Glazers is what gives United the advantage. It’s my personal belief that they want to sell the asset in the long term and have adopted a Berkshire Hathaway model that Warren Buffet uses for investment. Invest in a potentially profitable asset, increase it’s value in the long term,get your money back with substantial gains. So the only way they can gain from their investment, is by increasing the value of the asset. Conversely,the Chelsea, City model has very little to do with common sense and business. The owners of these clubs are very much unlikely to benefit from their assets even in the very long term. These guys are not in it for the profit that’s for sure, which means it’s a non business interest. For me that’s a terrible position. Manchester City and Chelsea are owned by people who have an estimated zero chance of gaining financially from their assets or more accurately, liabilities. That makes it a questionable situation. If they are not in it for profit, what in the world are they in it for? Benevolence? Prestige?
My estimation is this. These guys are primarily, business people and entrepreneurs. I’m strongly convinced they miscalculated. They were attracted by the vast economic growth and opportunities that were becoming prevalent in football as a whole. Definitely the highest grossing sport in the world, with a huge market across all continents. The idea here being, “you want to make big money, get into football.” Unfortunately,the reality is, the biggest beneficiaries are FIFA,players, coaches, UEFA and mainly the TV networks. Very few football clubs get significant returns so if you invest in a football club, invest in the right one. If I were Abramovich,I’d have invested in Arsenal not a nearly bankrupt asset with a cult following.
Chelsea and Man City are very much dependent on the sustained charity and benevolence of their benefactors. That’s a rubbish position to be in,especially considering the uphill battles ahead for these clubs institutionally and financially. Abramovich and the Abu Dhabi guys, will forever have to dip into their pockets to sustain these clubs. Platini has made sure their model will collapse in the coming years and the market has not been very receptive,particularly given the blockbuster re emergence of Barcelona and the brand monster Real Madrid. But both these clubs are behind United in market share. With 6 billion people on the planet and nearly half of them supporting, Manchester United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, Arsenal and Milan, it’s easy to see how the market is saturated.
To make matters worse, Chelsea in particular are being defeated by Abramovich. He decided that he is an expert in football and should be heavily involved in team affairs. Well he’s not. They have also created a work environment of player power. The players know who brought them there and have very little respect for the manager. Again that’s a terrible position. My opinion is the Glazers did their homework and have not tempered with a working formula. People complain about ticket price increase but the prices of everything else,everywhere else, is rising. It’s only at United where it’s considered criminal. Our transfer policy has not changed, “buy potential, make stars”. The money is definitely there as Ferguson has said. The small problem we have is, how he is using that money. Buying wingers and defenders and strikers. Instead of replica purchases like Jones and Smalling, we could have brought some midfield assets. It’s clear Ferguson really believes Anderson, Cleverly, are the midfield requirements. That’s his choice. That’s why he is manager and it’s his responsibility. Right now there is divided opinion on RvP. Why we even have to consider him, is beyond me. We are technically covered in attack, we need an injection in the middle. But apparently Ferguson is looking into it. It’s his choice. If you have a problem, take it up with him. £15m to get Jones is enough to get Seydou Keita for 6 years. It’s enough to get Scott Parker,Diarra,Veloso. But we get Young, Jones and dump Pogba. Clearly that’s Ferguson’s decision.
Bottom line is the Glazers invested in the right asset and are working flat out to increase the value of the asset exponentially. It’s in their interest that Manchester United prospers on and off the field. They know how to do it off the pitch and they trust the team managers, coaches and scouts to do it on the pitch. They work autonomously. The Glazers can afford to do this because they are operating a business for profit. Abramovich is operating a status symbol and has to be heavily involved for his prestige. And many make the incorrect assumption that the negative remarks and publicity have a material effect but however angry you may be with Ferguson,he was right. It’s only a small portion of the fans making noise. Outside of Britain, no one cares. The greater contingent of United fans is outside the UK and they don’t bother with propaganda machines like MUST which are poisoning people with baseless accusations and threats. United will continue to grow, as City and Chelsea sink deeper in financial pits. I’m sure before September we would have brought in more quality, hopefully in midfield. Let’s not panic yet.
Like?
6 
8
@Jay wire: “The Glazers model is based on profit meaning,they view United as a business with profit opportunities. It’s in their best interest that the club prospers.”
— The definition of “prosper” is different if you are Glazers and fan. Being 2nd in EPL + Semi-finals of ECL for the next 20 years would be prosperous for Glazers, because prize-money and ad money would stay steady (look at non-achievers Liverpool living off their reputation, financially). For the fans, winning trophies is definition of prosperous (look at Arsenal fans whining despite being financially prosperous). What I am trying to say is: Glazers’ interests (profits) are not the same as fans interest (success). Equating the two in false in my eyes.
“People complain about ticket price increase but the prices of everything else,everywhere else, is rising. It’s only at United where it’s considered criminal.”
—- It’s only United which is the most profitable sports brand in the world. With increase in commercial income, ticket revenue makes up less than it ever has, so why not reward match-going fans with a break? The rise in tickets have priced out many “normal” fans. As price goes up, atmosphere goes down. It’s the equivalent of gentrification. Prawns.
“Outside of Britain, no one cares. The greater contingent of United fans is outside the UK and they don’t bother with propaganda machines like MUST”
—- Two points here. 1) Some fans outside Britain care, because debt is affecting the United machine in being a force in world of football. In the US, I always get sh*t from Barca/Madrid “fans” who brag about their new exciting transfers. It’s part of the business to make headlines and I think Glazer’s PR is among worst of ALL owners. 2) I agree with you on MUST. They are a force no different from Glazers, but trying to stir populist ideals to force Glazers to sell below value. Either they pay up or shut up. Anything else is propaganda.
Like?
2 
0
@ash is the man: Ash, I totally agree Cleverley last season before his injury was flying. There is a certain element of our fan base who don’t rate him simply because he is English. For me he has all the ability in the World and a good attitude. He is a local boy so wearing the shirt means something. Sahin for me would be signing for the sake of a signing. I like most fans would welcome a World class midfield player, he isn’t one.
Cleverely had a great Olympics and bar Bellamy was GB’s best player. For me he will be an England regular and with Wiltshere the future actually looks good.
Like?
0 
0
@Stephen: When Cleverley was playing for the reserves, Sahin was too busy picking up the Bundesliga Player of the Year award. Cleverley just happens to be one of many overrated young Englishmen.
I don’t have anything against English people.
Like?
0 
0
@Moscow: The issue is with the press. I wouldn’t say he is overrated as no one really talks about him. Walcott when he broke through like Oxlade-Chamberlian were and are heavily talked up by the press. But all countries over hype young talent, how many Brazilians have been tagged the new Pele? I have a house in Italy and the Itlian press are awful, very similar to the press in the Uk. They build up players and knock them down.
We are no different in this repsect, but our tabloid media is ghastly. My personal belief is that we have lot of talent in this Country. But the players egos are too large and they are vastly over paid.
Like?
0 
0
I find the negativity towards United signing RVP odd, surely the thought of him and Rooney in tandem is mouth watering?!
Hey is is also “value”.
Like?
1 
0
@Stephen: The negativity is not aimed at RvP’s ability. It’s aimed at yet another half arsed bid to win popularity before the IPO.
Like?
0 
0
@Moscow: This maybe true, but if we do sign him he and Rooney would be immense, hey we may get rid of Welbeck in the process.
Like?
2 
1
IF we fail to sign both Moura and RvP this will be yet another monumental disappointment of a Summer. I have to say £30m for yet another wringer would be money badly spent, but the Dutchman would at least give us a crumb of excitement. I fail to see the logic of Moura, but a proven striker would be a super signing.
Why are we yet again in this predicament? We are less than 2 weeks away from the start of the season and all we have is a Japanese player, who was in the last season of his contract who more than likely has paid for himself already and a player from Crewe. Both may well be inspired purchases, but being linked to players who will benefit the side two fold like Tiote, Moutinho and Modric have al failed to come to pass.
The window hasn’t shut yet but again we are leaving this until the the last knockings yet again. We all really know what is happening here, the IPO is probably the main factor with this posturing. If this is the case the soul has finally been ripped out of the club, we are slaves to the Glazer cash cow and this is very sad for all reds. Yet again the fans who underpin the club have been treated like idiots.
Like?
2 
0
David ‘debt is the road to ruin’ Gill, has reportedly admitted in a sky interview in NY that he personally will be remunerated from the IPO money. What a total tosser he is. He also said when questioned, that it is fine for the Glazers to take half, 75 million pounds of the IPO money, because they are the owners of Man Utd and they DESERVE it. I wish Gill would just piss off somewhere so far away, United fans will not have to look at him anymore. I DISPUTE that the Glazers OWN Man Utd, and will never do so as long as they owe more money to the banks than they have in what they call their empire. If I ever default on payments of my mortgage, no matter how much I feel I own my house, I don’t until its paid for. Neither can the Glazers say they own Man Utd until they clear their debt, United belongs to the loaning Banks, and all the other investors. Get real David Gill, no right minded United fan believes a word that comes out of your mouth anymore.
Like?
1 
0