NOT FOR SALE - тема исключение

[Dragonfly]

Сообщение от Moscow 333

ребят, а давайте без деления на национальности? одной пидаристической горстки отмороженных фашистов-расистов-националистов нам уже всем хватает :?

Правда давайте не трогать национальность. каким бы он не был дегенератом, трогать национальность не стоит.

[Moscow 333]

http://www.nwcfl.co.uk/

это сайт лиги, в которой будет играть ФК Юнайтед (видимо от этого названия будет тяжело избавиться, несмотря на официальное название ФК Юнайтед оф Манчестер)

[RASTOMAN]

Dragonfly

Правда давайте не трогать национальность. каким бы он не был дегенератом, трогать национальность не стоит.

КАНЭЧНА не буду больше.....ради красивой девушки все что угодно.

[Moscow 333]

много текста и весь на инглише. сегодня состоялась пресс-конференция SU (перевод быстро не ждите, на следующей неделе тока успею):

[19] SU Press Release
Thursday, June 16, 2005

Press Conference; 11.30am, Thursday 16 June 2005
Atlee Suite, Portcullis House, Westminster

“Shareholders United can only be good for the game.
I’d urge United fans to get involved.” – Sir Alex Ferguson

The Panel

Nick Towle, SU Chair
Oliver Houston, SU Vice-Chair
Richard Wilson, SU Patron & Actor
Tony Lloyd MP, Chair of Man Utd Group of MPs
Alan Keen MP, Chair of All-Party Parliamentary Football Group
Claudio Rojas, Capital Partners Group

Shareholders United, the Manchester United Supporters’ Trust, has approaching 35,000 members in almost 100 countries around the world (with approximately three-quarters of its membership in the UK & Ireland). SU is a not-for-profit, democratic organisation established in 1998 to safeguard the independence of United and to provide a collective voice to fans.

SU is part of a coalition of fans groups and fanzines who are all united behind the campaign to take the ownership of Manchester United out of the hands of one man and for the supporters to have a significant stake in what is still our club. After all, it it is the supporters who have been building and investing in United for generations before Malcolm Glazer appeared on the scene, it is those supporters who will still be here long after he has gone.

Over the coming seasons we will pursue a twin-track strategy to Reclaim United: firstly, put pressure on Glazer’s “aggressive” business plan by disrupting income streams and ‘tainting the brand’; secondly, build up sufficient funds to regain a significant collective stake in the Club once Glazer is forced to relinquish control, as we confidently believe he will be within three years.

The ‘Phoenix Fund’ to Reclaim United

The ‘Phoenix Fund’ is a working title for the fund to buy back our shares in United once Glazer has departed. Phoenix will begin its life with several million pounds (from the sale of shares to Glazer by SU and its members, as well as the 41,700 individual private shareholders), and will grow through one-off contributions, monthly standing orders and a variety of other fundraising mechanisms, including:

· a series of “Phoenix Nights”, beginning with a major fundraising benefit concert in Manchester to coincide with the beginning of the new football season;

· a special CD, which will soon be released. SU Patron, Primal Scream’s Gary ‘Mani’ Mountfield, formerly of Stone Roses, says: “I wanna get me, Squire, Ashcroft and Terry Hall [also an SU Patron] together to knock out a single. It'll be superb.” Other SU Patrons include Radiohead’s Ed O’Brien;

· a range of “Real United” merchandise, including an ‘alternative’ kit in the colours of Newton Heath (green/yellow) bearing the Phoenix crest, the dates 1878 & 2005 and the Latin motto ‘Numquam Moribimur’ (We’ll Never Die). This will be sold in, amongst other places, the new ‘Real United Megastore’ at Red Star Sports on Sir Matt Busby Way;

· a number of sponsorship and revenue-sharing schemes with corporate partners, including online gaming, travel and telephone deals.

SU is discussing the potential structure of Phoenix with our financial advisers, but we hope to be able to offer supporters a model based on our existing share scheme - a series of individual savings accounts, attracting a competitive rate of interest, held collectively with a financial institution and managed by professional fund managers. We expect to launch Phoenix officially within the next two months.

No Customers = No Profits

We will soon distribute a “Little Red Book”, outlining how supporters can exercise their customer power and put pressure on Glazer’s debt-repayment plan. This will include ways in which not only can income be withheld from Glazer but can also be positively diverted to raise money for the Phoenix Fund.

Particular targets include:

Nike: encourage fans not to buy any ‘official’ merchandise (or any other Nike products), whilst offering them a range of ‘alternative’ items through which they can continue to show their allegiance for the Club they love – the ‘Real United’. We are currently in discussions with major suppliers and distributors.

Vodafone: encourage and facilitate the cancelling of contracts. SU has deals with two corporate communications firms, Phoenix Telecom and Upgrades Direct, which will allow fans to retain their telephone number and tariff when they switch from Vodafone (principally to Orange, but also to other networks), and will also provide an average of Ј60 to the Phoenix Fund per switcher. Fans locked-in to contracts are encouraged to switch to the lowest possible tariff and buy-out the remainder of their time. Those who cannot afford to do so, but who terminate their contracts in advance, will present a ‘ticking time-bomb’ for Vodafone over the coming 12 months.

MUTV: encourage the cancellation of subscriptions, whilst offering venues where fans can gather to, for instance, follow the fortunes of the team on their summer tour of the Far East.

Budweiser & Pepsi: encourage fans to boycott match-day catering, as well as encouraging bars and restaurants to remove these products from their shelves.

*** SU Patron, Primal Scream’s Gary ‘Mani’ Mounfield has pulled out of Glastonbury in support of United fans' ongoing offensive against Glazer. The former Stone Roses' star cancelled his slot at the festival after discovering that the venue he was booked to DJ in - The Crown - is sponsored by Budweiser. “I'm not having anything to do with Budweiser or any of the other United sponsors until they stand up to Glazer and help get him out of our club. I love Glastonbury and I was looking to forward to DJing there again, but there's no way I'm doing it if Budweiser are involved.” ***

Ladbrokes: encourage fans not to use high-street outlets, match-day kiosks or to bet online, whilst providing them with alternative gaming opportunities.


Glazer’s business plan is balanced on a knife-edge. He has borrowed hundreds of Јmillion to buy the club, but it will only take a few Јmillion of withheld custom to make his plan unworkable. Glazer has placed our club in jeopardy with his mountain of debt and he will continue to alienate fans with his drive to increase the revenues necessary to pay down this massive debt. United fans are being asked to pay that price and they are entitled to exercise their customer power in saying ‘No’ to the price increases he plans for tickets and every piece of merchandise on sale at Old Trafford.

Glazer has handed United fans the best possible opportunity to own a significant stake in their club and it is up to United fans to be ready to take that opportunity when the time comes. Glazer will have to disgorge the club sooner or later - let’s make sure it it’s the fans who are there to Reclaim United.


Glazer’s “damaging” and “aggressive” takeover - what they said:
(note - see our separate analysis of the business plan and financing of the deal)

Sir Alex Ferguson: “We don’t want the Club to be in anyone else’s hands. I support that.” (November 2004)

Eric Cantona: “If Glazer were to come here, we’d lose everything.” (October 2004). “I feel far less close to United today. I love this club for what it is and for what it has given me. But I fear that economics will now become the real priority. United have existed for more than a century. It has always been with a philosophy, an identity and a very solid youth system. Now there is an American who doesn't know the game arriving like this. I am with the United fans. I am angry and disappointed with the people who have let this person take control. This is a turning point in the history of the club but it is not in the right direction. We are getting away from the idea that I have of football. For me, Manchester United were the perfect example of it. Now they are anything but.” (May 2005)

Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, SU Patron: “I think it is important that the Club remains in the right hands. I am absolutely on the supporters’ side. I am a United fan myself and only want what’s best for the future.” (January 2005)

David Gill, MUplc chief executive: “The level of debt required is not in the best interests of the Club. The Club has 126 years of history and is recognised as one of the most successful football clubs in the world. I don’t think any sensible person would think we could recommend a proposal that could jeopardise something that has been built up over so many years. We have very vocal fans and one of the key strengths of Manchester United are those fan groups.” (October 2004).

MUplc Board: “The Board continues to believe that Glazer’s business plan assumptions are aggressive and that the direct and indirect financial strain on the business could be damaging. The Board believes that the nature and return requirements of this capital structure will out pressure on the business.” (February 2005)

Sir Roy Gardner, MUplc chairman: “The board has considered it appropriate to operate the business since its flotation in 1991 on a largely debt-free basis principally to ensure that the company would not come under financial pressure in the event of poor playing performance. When a football club is under financial pressure, some of the key assets which it can sell are its players and, at a time of poor performance, such sales are likely to make playing performance worse. Too much leverage could therefore drive a downward spiral in both team and financial performance. During its discussions with [Glazer], the board sought a range of legally-binding protections for the football club, its fans and any minority shareholders, including in relation to future levels of net debt, new player investment and transfers, team selection, Old Trafford [and] ticket prices. No such protections or assurances have been forthcoming.” (May 2005)

Greg Dyke, former United director: “Most of us who have looked at it think he can't conceivably fund that bid. He's clearly bought this on borrowed money and I don't think a club like Manchester United could sustain that. Two years out of the Champions League and the cash flow dries up. My guess is that in five years' time the Glazer family won't own Manchester United.” (May 2005)

Robert Cole (Times, Deputy Business Editor)
”It might all turn out just fine, financially. But then again it might not. And because Malcolm Glazer has borrowed such a large amount of money to fund the purchase of Manchester United, and is locking himself into such punishing rates of interest, there is precious little margin for error.” (June 10 2005)
“So how should United fans respond? The clever thing to do, would be to settle for watching United on TV and to set up an investment fund. Imagine that everyone who goes to Old Trafford now decides to stop going and instead contributes Ј50 for every unattended home game to a fund. In just six seasons that fund would be worth Ј500 million and, if Glazer’s intricate financing does fall over — and it might — fans could find themselves in a position to take the club off his hands.” (June 11 2005)

William Lewis (Sunday Times, Business Editor)
“The fans left it too late to muster a mutual-style alternative takeover proposal [with Nomura]. But I strongly recommend that they do not give up on the idea. I have a sneaky suspicion that Glazer will flip United back onto the public market or to another buyer. So if fans keep up their protests – making life uncomfortable for Glazer – I suspect United will be back on the market before Wayne Rooney matures.” (May 15 2005)

Stuart Brennan (Manchester Evening News)
“If I hear one more so-called Red on the telly or the radio telling me I should "wait and see" what Malcolm Glazer has to offer, the blood vessels will start to burst. How long do we have to "wait and see" what this man is planning to do with our football club? So far, he and his family have said NOTHING about their intentions. It is a display of arrogant contempt for United supporters that bodes ill for the future. And yet the "wait and see" brigade continue to urge appeasement. And too often these people, when asked about Glazer, begin by saying: "I don't really understand all this financial stuff, but ..." If you don't understand it, don't comment on it. We can see what Glazer brings to the club. First and foremost, he brings Ј540million of debt, to a club that had built its own fortune on the backs of a loyal and committed support. If we "wait and see", there may be nothing left to see. Luckily, there are still United supporters out there who care enough about the club to keep the fight going. That might damage the club in the short term, but it is for the long-term future. Think of it as lancing a boil with a blunt instrument. The real supporters know that Glazer will only stay as long as there is money to be made, or until United collapse around his ears. And when he does go, it is to be hoped that there will be enough real United fans left to pick up the pieces.” (May 2005)

Paul Hince (Manchester Evening News): “Glazer’s bid has got disaster written all over it. For the future well-being of this country’s biggest and most famous football club, for the image of the city which bears its name and for the good of English soccer as a whole, it mustn’t be allowed to happen. He is not welcome in Manchester and he must be made aware of that fact by the people running the club, by every last one of the club’s shareholders and by every true football supporter who cares about our national game.” (October 2004)

Sepp Blatter, FIFA President: “I offer you my personal support in your worthwhile and remarkable endeavour. I commend you and the thousands of Manchester United fans for your collective effort. It is my belief that football must not only respect its base – the fans – without which it is doomed, but must also engage in meaningful dialogue with them.” (October 2004)

Sven Hotz, FC Zurich President: “Three years ago I had an offer from Glazer. He said ‘When I take over, no-one has a say apart from me.’ I couldn’t allow that to happen.” (October 2004)

Bill Poe, former Mayor of Tampa: “The British government and its citizens have been great allies and friends of America. I would question whether I would want someone like Glazer representing American business in Britain. He’s taken every advantage that he could have taken from Tampa and out very little back in.” (October 2004)

Glazer's sister: "People in Britain should be very wary of him. I don't think he is fit to own such a famous and historic club as Manchester United. If he gets his hands on it the only one who will benefit is Malcolm.” (November 2004)

Sports Minister Richard Caborn: in reply to a parliamentary question from Tony Lloyd MP in January 2005: “I was pleased to read the statement made by the chief executive of Manchester United, David Gill, when he said any decision would be taken reflecting both present shareholders and future shareholders. I think that is important to a club like Manchester United who have a tremendous role to play not just in the game, but in the community as well.”

Comments from some other SU Patrons:

Chris Eccleston: “There's not doubt Glazer has no emotional investment in the club what so ever. It's high finance and he's obviously a gambler and he's gambling with our club. Duncan Edwards Roger Byrne none of those names mean anything to Glazer, it's just money. If you look at Leeds United five or six years ago they were in the semi-finals of the European Cup. I couldn't tell what league they are in now. People think because it's Manchester United it won't happen but it can happen with high finance, because he cares little. We were a solvent plc. We were a profit making plc. We are now privately owned with a massive debt and that can't be a good thing. This is not good for football generally. Already the FA are now thinking about trying to prevent this kind of ownership.” (June 2005)

Lord Alf Morris: “It is scandalous that any one individual shareholder can trample all over thousands of others to take away the Club they love and have supported through so many decades.”

Ian McShane: “Repel all borders. I suggest peaceful protest, but would not rule out nuclear reaction if pushed. Power to the people.”

Alex Stepney: “Why should the best Club in the world, which is debt-free due to all the fantastic support of the fans and the achievements of the players and managers over all these years, be plunged into debt to satisfy the greed of one man?”

John Monks, European TUC: “I strongly support SU’s opposition to the Glazer takeover. The Club should not be a plaything for rich men or a cash cow for people with no commitment to it, to Manchester or to football. Our great Club deserves better.”

Paddy Crerand: “I support what you’re doing. Your cause is just.”


Fit & Proper People?

US Securities & Exchange Commission on JPMorgan’s role in the collapse of Enron (July 2003) said they: “engaged in, and indeed helped their clients design, complex structured finance transactions. The structural complexity of these transactions had no business purpose aside from masking the fact that, in substance, they were loans. By engaging in certain structural contortions, these financial institutions: 1) inflate reported cash-flow from operating activities; 2) under-report cash flow from financing activities; and 3) under-report debt. As a result, Enron presented false and misleading pictures of their financial health and results of operations.”

An investigation by the US magazine Business Week in 2004 revealed that the SEC probed sharp increases in the value of both Zapata and Omega stock, raising the value of the Glazer family investment by $50m. The movements tended to coincide with significant purchases of United stock by Glazer. The SEC is understood to have subpoenaed Theodore Roxford, a mysterious corporate raider who has admitted to being behind trading in Zapata shares, which sent them soaring from $22 a share in November 2002 to over $63.00 13 months later, and in Omega, where shares rose from under $6.00 to more than $8.00. John Held, the general counsel at Omega, has admitted that the SEC requested company documents late last year. When asked, Roxford claimed that he was acting for a group of investors with stock in Zapata and when further asked whether those investors might be connected to the Glazers, Roxford did not deny it. Neither Zapata nor any of the Glazer family was prepared to comment on the SEC investigation.

In 1998, Zapata even launched an unsolicited all-paper (i.e. payment in Zapata shares) offer for up-and-coming internet portals Excite and WhoWhere for $1.68 billion and $400 million respectively. Both offers were made by FAX – and unsurprisingly rejected with derision. Zapata’s share price rocketed on the back of this news.

In the mid-90s, Avram Glazer persuaded his father to allow him to play with his own train set – a internet division of Zapata called “Zap.com” which he promised would provide untold riches in the new dot.com world and turn fish oil producer Zapata into a player in the internet game. Zap.com proved to be a money drain for Zapata, which owns 98% of Zap.com. The company blames its Internet operations for $5.7 million in losses for the nine months ended on Sept. 30. The company lost $20.3 million, or 85 cents per share, on revenue of $93.7 million in 1999.

Zapata’s ventures into the internet world failed miserably, as did many others. But few were so comprehensively criticised by insiders – “[Avram] Glazer knew nothing about the internet”, said Marisa Bowe (editor-in-chief of Word.com). “His ambition was to build up Zap and then cash in by selling shares in a stock-market float. Avram had this dream of being a big swinging dick of the internet,” she said. But his ambition was hampered by an “almost surreal incompetence”. Bowe remembered how in awe he seemed of his father. “He’s pathetic. Such a daddy’s boy. This is the one thing he had tried to do on his own and he couldn’t have done it worse. I really hope Manchester United find someone else.”



[18] SU summary of Glazer's plans
Thursday, June 16, 2005


SUMMARY
Details of Glazer’s business plan have been leaked to the Times. Based on those leaks, SU has reconstructed Glazer’s business plan, attached as Annex 1. Key points have already been highlighted:

· Ticket price rises totalling 54% within 5 years
· Commercial revenues increased by 76% over the next 5 years
· Player net transfer budget capped at max. Ј27.3million

It is clear that even if this plan represented the whole picture, there are major doubts about his being able to achieve his targets – his revenue growth assumptions are over-optimistic in many eyes, and there are too many variables outside his control which could scupper the plan in any one year. And achieving his targets relies on compliant fans paying higher and higher prices for everything at Old Trafford – something which many have pledged to resist.

SU has no reason to believe that the plans are not genuine – they chime with many of the assumptions and projections we had already been making about life under Glazer.

But the leaks are just as interesting for what they do not reveal as for what they do. There will have been several variations on the model which have not been included in the leak e.g. a securitisation or sale & leaseback scenario, which any banker worth his salt will have prepared for his client. This makes us suspicious that the plans have been leaked from the Glazer side, to show the rosiest possible picture of a club thriving and able to meet all its obligations and demands for on-the-pitch success.

The plans show that the only debt to be secured on the assets and income of Manchester United is the Ј373.9 million JP Morgan Senior Secured Loan facilities. This debt has been structured so that payments of interest and principal are ‘light’ in the first 7 years, allowing Glazer maximum time and cashflow in the early years to make his plan work. The transfer budget depends on free cash being available for this purpose rather than for debt service.

This is where the suspicion lies – how is Glazer going to service and/or refinance all of his debts (including the PIK), which are punitive in terms of their interest burden, while keeping enough cash in the company to rebuild the team with world-class players? There is not enough cashflow generated to do both.

The leaked plans show the Ј275 million PIK debt (preferred securities issued to the 3 hedge funds in Red Football Ltd) as remaining in place throughout their life of 15 years. But these PIK accrue compounded annual interest at a frightening rate (see Annex 2 and Table 2 below) – they are a ticking timebomb. It is not credible that Glazer has no strategy to redeem and get rid of these punitive securities as soon as possible, otherwise he risks destroying any equity gains he hopes to make at the end of the day. Plus he loses control of key segments of the MU business if he has not completely redeemed the PIK in 5 years time.

And significantly, there is no mention in the leaked plans of the potential sale & leaseback of Old Trafford, which would provide him with significant cash lump sum enabling him to refinance a chunk of the Senior Debt and/or the PIK..

So some big questions remain:
· How is Glazer going to service and/or refinance all of his punitive debt and pay for the rebuilding of the team?
· Will he quickly go for sale & leaseback of Old Trafford, allowing him to pay down much of the Senior Debt and refinance the PIK by loans taken out by the club?
· How will he cope with variables outside his control – such as failure to qualify for the Champions League in one year, or the withholding of custom by a significant element of the United fanbase?
· How far can he aggressively drive revenues to meet his over-optimistic growth assumptions? Will we see stadium naming rights, an explosion of sponsorships and ‘match presenting’ rights etc?

SU’s belief that the Glazer business plan is unworkable has been reinforced by the leak of these incomplete plans. If this is the best he can do, then supporters have a very realistic opportunity to buy their club back if and when Glazer is forced to disgorge it, either by his banks or by financial pressure.

SUMMARY of the SUMMARY

· The high interest rates he is paying for both Senior Debt and the PIK classify this deal as high risk, ‘junk-bond’ status

· The debt mountain which Glazer has taken on to acquire MU is growing a such a rate that the longer it stays in, the harder it is to repay

· This deal can only be done by keeping the Ј275m of PIK debt off the MU balance sheet – but Glazer has to refinance the PIK sooner rather than later – if he does not do this by 12.08.2010, the hedge funds can take control rights over the major part of the MU business (ticket prices, player transfers & contracts, sponsorships & merchandising) and put the club up for sale

· Our analysis is that Glazer will find it very difficult to refinance the PIK with his own equity, unless he sells the Tampa Bay Bucs, for example

· Glazer therefore has to try and use the club’s assets to refinance, with potentially disastrous effects on the company and the club – “potentially damaging” and “putting a direct and indirect strain on the business” to quote the MU board in February

· No prudent board of directors would allow their company to take on such punitive debt – and if they did, they would surely try to pay off that debt before splashing out on player transfers

· Glazer is planning to gamble, to ignore the growing debt mountain and make available some Ј25 million per year for players instead of reducing the debt risk – endangering the club in the style of the recent Leeds meltdown

· SU does not think this strategy is sustainable, especially in view of Glazer’s “aggressive” projections of EBITDA and commercial revenue growth for MU

· Nor do these projections take into account the impact of a widespread campaign of customer power and exercise of consumer choice by fans - the withholding by supporters of custom from a Glazer-owned MU and its sponsors, which is already beginning to bite (e.g. Vodafone and Nike recent public reaction) – this campaign is expected to grow over the next two years as Glazer is forced into (or chooses) unpopular, profit-based decisions on ticket prices and other commercial matters which cause more fans to give up watching and paying for their team

· It seems to us that the risks of failure of Glazer’s model and his business plan far outweigh the prospects of success – the margin for error is too narrow and the potential debt downsides too great for a company and a team struggling to regain and retain the supremacy it recently enjoyed over its rivals on and off the pitch

· We confidently forecast failure of the Glazer financing model and business plan within 3 years followed by one of the following:
a flotation of all or part of MU
an attempted sale of the club and/or its assets by Glazer
a forced sale of the club and its assets by the banks

· That is why we call on all fans, from all over the world, to be prepared for that day, when supporters stand ready with a warchest to reclaim our club – or significant ownership stake in it

[Belousoff Nick]

Недавно услышал что Глейзер теперь до 97% выкупил акций?!!!?? Неужели Shareholders United Тоже акции продали????

[Bel]

Да

[7.BeL@Rus-Beckham7.]

а че это они так ???

[Bel]

Про фонд "Феникс" почитайте, поймёте

[RED_BAKU]

да ладно вам, ругаете Глейзера а как выйграем кубки будете ему диферамбы петь!нормальный он парень, бизнесмен, нам трофеи, ему-деньги!вот и весь расклад!и что за идиотизм создавать какой то другой Юнайтед?чушь собачья!все говорят убить Глейзера, убить Глейзера, да ни у кого духа на это не хватит!все только выпендриваются!!!

GLORY GLORY MANCHESTER UNITED
GLORY GLORY MANCHESTER UNITED
GLORY GLORY MANCHESTER UNITED

[RED_BAKU]

to Bel

GLORY GLORY MAN UNITED, GLORY GLORY MAN UNITED, GLORY GLORY MAN UNITED, AND THE RED ARMY MARCHING ON ON ON!!!

ТАК ПРАВИЛЬНО...