MANCHESTER United's plc board has confirmed it has received a "preliminary approach" regarding a "possible offer" for the company.
The news follows increased speculation that billionaire Malcolm Glazer is planning to meet United chief executive David Gill later this month with a view to discussing a possible takeover.
United's plc board released a statement on the Stock Exchange which read: "The board of Manchester United plc (the company) notes the recent press speculation.
"It confirms that it has received a preliminary approach regarding a possible offer for the company. This approach contains a number of significant conditions.
"The company is seeking clarification of this proposal and at this stage it is unclear whether any offer will be made.
"The board will make a further announcement if appropriate."
Shares in United rose once news of the announcement had broken, and were up 4.66% to 269.25p by 4pm on Monday.
If the 'preliminary approach' is from Glazer he would need to satisfy United's leading shareholders JP McManus and John Magnier before he could secure a takeover deal.
Magnier and McManus' Cubic Expression company owns 29% of the club and it remains to be seen if Glazer is prepared to meet their shares asking price.
An alternative way for Glazer to raise funds for a takeover deal would be through securitisation deals, effectively a way of mortgaging against future season-ticket sales and revenue streams.
Glazer has a 19.2% stake in United and financial expert Keith Harris believes he would be wise to proceed with caution in any attempt to take over the club.
To increase his stake Glazer would need to acquire shares owned by Magnier and McManus and Harris, who was involved in the negotiations which transformed United's rivals Chelsea with the arrival of Russian owner Roman Abramovich, warned the most obvious winners in any deal are likely to be the astute Magnier and McManus.
'It is hard to tell if it looks like a very good investment for anybody other than the Irishmen who - if they sell - would look very smart indeed,' said Harris, of the racing businessmen who are expected to hold out for extra profits on the share price.
'He would have to buy them out to take control. I don't know if they would be interested, but they are known as very smart investors,' he added.
Harris also sees a potential problem for 75-year-old Glazer in the reticence of United's supporter shareholders to welcome more money from a man who already owns around a '140million interest in their club.
'I think there is one other quite big obstacle, and that is not just the hearts but the pockets of the fans who are shareholders,' he told Radio 4.
'Buying out the Irishmen is a financial matter. But with the fans it is something more than that.'
Comments
Login or Register to comment
Was bound to happen sooner than later. Any approach has to be open with all the facts on the table. Lets have Glaziers plans and future desires for United in the open,lets see whats on offer before panicing.
If the takeover will provide the manager with the financial clout to compete with Chelsea,then it may not be a bad thing,considering we have already spent our transfer fund for next season!
The only way for any prospective buyer to win over
fans would be to set aside say B#100m for new players,as part of the deal......or am I dreaming.
Trying to be as dispassionate as possible, what might a Glazer run club look like. Almost certainly ticket and merchandise prices would go up and initially that might go in to some pretty big transfers as a populist move. Personally, I would gladly pay more if it meant we competed even harder in the transfer market, but whether in the longer term the balance between the extra players bought and the extra money going in to Glazer's pocket is fair will be a big point of debate. I think the takeover may hasten SAF's departure, but only a little bit. It might have more effect on the identity of the next manager - e.g., if Wenger was approached he may look on the chairman as an unknown factor and look more at what side his bread is buttered at Arsenal. I think this may push us more down the O'Neill road since he has less to lose and more to prove. If he doesn't prove, it may lead to us becoming an increasingly hire and fire club for managers and we may get lucky on that merry-go-round, we may not and end up hiring some of the usual suspects. If and when Glazer loses interest several years down the line, his investment may be structured to saddle the club with significant debt and there is a degree of risk that we would not be one of the top clubs in England for a period of time whilst our finances are readjusted. But we would survive and return. The biggest irony is that this point would represent the best chance of an SU type cooperative taking hold of the club: they have little chance of doing it just by buying plc shares. Still, I favour the plc for now, its stability near the top policy always gives us a chance on the pitch even if it doesn't guarantee success. I am aware that the plc model leaves us open to the next Glazer, and the next one, and the next one, but I hope that day is a little further down the road just yet.
However ineffective our current board is would they be worst than Glazier. As one who was willing to accept a takeover if it was in the interests of United and fans alike, this guy frightens me. What can he offer us, what is he willing to gave us, is he really interested in the real long term goals of our club, or is it just a quick snatch and grab raid. Does he really understand that we`re a club with heart and soul, probably not but in the same breathe neither does the current board, with their oner reliance on financial matters. Finally maybe the IMUSA and shareholder groups have apoint, we can`t sign away our heritage to the highest bidder. Await further developments. Live the dream!
just to point out the bleedin' obvious. glazer buying all the shares in issue does NOT commit him to putting an extra penny of new money into the club. it does put him into an exceptionally strong position to take out what he can - whacking up prices, selling assets (players)taking out cash via dividends - without having to answer to anyone. i hope i'm wrong but i don't see this guy as some sugar-daddy.
Do we think that Abramovich is good for Chelsea or the game in general? I think most people would say no.
Does spending 100s of millions of B#s buy you an attacking, interesting & settled team? Not necessarily, given Mourinho's 1-0 philosophy and the demands for instant success that mean the revolving door policy on transfers every year if the squad doesn't deliver immediately.
Does having one all powerful man bring the right players to the club or keep the right players at the club? If looking at Real Madrid & Perez then no. He splashes his cash on expensive forwards and midfielders while not understanding what the squad needs to be successful again.
So what does the plc (or a similar board structure) give? Despite the ineptitude of our board on occasions at least you have debate, different points of view, a self-checking sense if you like. And since the plc is answerable to the FTSE, things have to be done in a pretty above the board sort of way.
I'm not saying I would give our board the biggest pat on the back for all their actions but sometimes it's better the devil you know.....
Excellent comments Pro-rata. I can't see any advantages that Glazier would bring. He's not got the money of Abramovich to pile into the club so he's going to be interested to see what he can get out. Time for the small shareholders to stand together but if Cubic sell out Glazier will be able to get majority control even if he can't get the 90% to force the rest of us to sell out.
Tempest in a tea pot? Probably won't happen, Magnier & McManus want at least 3 quid /share so they can reap a profit of around 300 mill. Glazer really has no interest in the "company" or the team/fans, he just wants the money which will ultimately cause the demise of the club, financially at least. The present board is no screaming hell, but I look to it to excercise some common sense here, and firmly reject it. I can understand Glazer's objectives and motives, but it just won't happen. He controls Tampa Bay Buccaneers NFL franchise, which is going to hell in a handbasket under his leadership, a once proud and successful franchise languishing in mediocrity...whoa, wait a minute, that sounds familiar...
Glazier does not have the financial clout to buy the club and inject cash. As far as we know, he has little interest in football, much less United as a football club. He is only interested in making money out of an investment and that spells bad news for us. Those of us who are shareholders should resist him.
People - please get real. The views, opinons or actions of a few fans or minority shareholders will count ofr nothing. The club is abouit to be bought and sold like a commodity for its market value -- i.e. what people wil be prepared to pay. Do not bother about sentimentality or tradition or what the ordinary public want. Those factors amount to nothing, so dont worry about that. The club will be traded like waterm, beans oe shoes. Get real and get used to it.
The idea of Glazer taking over United fills me with dread. Especially since all the financial pundits agree that he hasn't got the money himself to buy the club outright. He would have to raise the money by using United's future earnings, from ticket sales and merchandising, in order to get the sum needed to buy all the shares. Meaning the shareholders and fans would be paying him to buy them out. This puts us on the same street tht Leeds went down! Does any sane Red believe that he wants to give United money to buy new players, and make everything in the garden rosy? All the world has heard of the way this man treated the fans of the Buccaneers, raising ticket prices 20% this year alone, as well as suing the ones who complained he had given them inferior seats, after he moved them, so that he could increase his corporate hospitality areas. He sued his own sisters, for God's sake, so that he could do them out of the money their mother left them in her will. This is a man who is a very astute businessman. He isn't the type to give money away. He likes making it too much. All he will want from United, is to pay the interst on the loans he has taken out, and then syphon off as much as he can to line his own pockets. And who will pay? We will, the rank and file United fans who turn up at every match and pay more than enough already. He could even take United away from Manchester. He threatened to do that if Tampa didn't cough up, to build the new stadium he had promised the fans. And if the American Football Club he bought, has done so well since he took over, how come they are at the bottom of the NFL at the moment? He bought them when they were struggling financially and were deep in debt. United is the only club totally free from debt. We might not be doing as well as we have done in the past on the pitch, at the moment, but glory times will come again. Only we might not be around to see them if Glazer takes over. We could be bankrupt, after he has milked United of all that makes it great. Reds unite, fight this takeover for all you are worth! This really is crunch time. We have to stop him, or United will finish up in the dustbin. Glazer couldn't give two hoots for us, or our beloved club. All he sees are dollar signs. IMUSA and SU will never stop fighting. Join them and man the barricades!
Glazer is no Roman for sure. He is nothing compare to Roman and Roman, my comrade is real Chelsea fan. However, can we stop him from increasing his stake in Manchester United PLC? What he got to do is just convince JP and his partner. What next? Just stay positive and hopefully somebody like Roman will take over. May be some Arab Sheikh. Sooner or later Manchester United will be control by a single major shareholder. For MU fans, just get real.