American buys majority share of Manchester United

AeroJonesy

Diabloii.Net Member
American buys majority share of Manchester United

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/soccer/05/12/bc.soc.manunited.glazer.ap/index.html?cnn=yes

sportsillustrated.com said:
Glazer gains control of Man U
Tampa Bay Bucs owner secures majority stake
Posted: Thursday May 12, 2005 10:11AM; Updated: Thursday May 12, 2005 5:21PM

LONDON (AP) -- Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner Malcolm Glazer gained control of the world's richest soccer team Thursday, drawing resentment from Manchester United fans who fear the "heart and soul" of the storied club has been sold to foreign interests.

Glazer began a $1.47 billion takeover bid of the team by becoming its majority shareholder. His ownership reached 56.9 percent after he bought a 28.7 percent share held by Irish racehorse owners J.P. McManus and John Magnier.

Financial analysts said the deal seemed certain to succeed, and suggested Glazer's ownership could quickly reach the critical 75 percent threshold. At that level, he could take the club private.

Two weeks ago, Man United's board said it would not recommend Glazer's takeover to investors because his business plan appeared "aggressive."

Glazer was given a May 17 deadline to submit a plan or withdraw his attempts to buy the club. Glazer's first two proposals were rejected by the board, which said the package relied too heavily on borrowed money.

"The board awaits the formal terms of the Red Offer and a further announcement will be made once the board has reviewed that announcement," a club statement said.

The Glazer family had no comment, Buccaneers spokesman Jeff Kamis said. Glazer's sons, Joel, Bryan and Edward, are expected to help run the team. Glazer bought his first stake (2.3 percent) in the club in 2003.

"Manchester United's heart and soul has been sold today," former team manager Tommy Docherty said. "It has changed for ever today."

Several hundred fans gathered outside Old Trafford stadium to protest. English fans fear Glazer will raise prices and sell key assets like Old Trafford stadium.

"I'm giving up my season ticket," Shareholders United president Nick Towle said. "I'm not putting a penny of my money into this guy's pocket.

"It's a really sad day for Manchester United, for the supporters, for the whole club and I think it's a sad day for football in general," he added.

Shareholders United represents 17 percent of the club's stockholders, a number estimated at 20,000. Towle said at least half -- and maybe all -- would give up their tickets and stop attending games.

Manchester United dominated English soccer for more than a decade, winning eight Premier League titles in 11 seasons, four FA Cups in 10 and capturing the European championship in 1999.

But the Red Devils are now third in the Premier League for the third time in four years. With a game left, they are 20 points behind champion Chelsea and nine behind runner-up Arsenal. Glazer's move came just before Man United's May 21 FA Cup final against Arsenal, its only chance for a trophy this season.

Glazer offered $5.58 per share, and United share prices rose 13 percent to $5.57 upon news of the sale. Analysts estimated it would take several months to wrap up the deal, with the formal offer going to remaining shareholders.

In a report February by the British accounting firm Deloitte summarizing revenues for the world's top soccer teams, Man United was listed No. 1 for the 2003-04 season at $311 million, followed by Spain's Real Madrid at $283 million.

McManus and Magnier are reported to have made about $186.3 million on the sale. Roy Kaitcer of Manchester stockbrokers Brewin Dolphin Securities said the stake held by the Irishmen was the key to the bid, and Glazer now has a "great platform to start his bid."

"Once other shareholders see what has happened, they will say they better take that as well," he said. "It looks like Mr. Glazer is on his way to owning Manchester United."

Professor Bill J. Gerrard of Leeds University Business School added: "He now controls the destiny of Manchester United. It's as simple as that."

Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
So what do you guys think? I know we've got some soccer hooligans here. I'm a little hesitant on this, just as I would be if some Brits wanted to buy a baseball team. But I suppose we'll see where this goes.
 

axeil

Diabloii.Net Member
I'm hopeful. This could be the spark needed to learn how to do soccer over across the ocean. MLS never really took off here, probably because no one knows what makes a great team. I personally love soccer and would love to see more games stateside.

Let's just hope the owner of the Bucs doesn't win a championship and then lose his whole team like he did with the Tampa Bay team a few years ago.
 

AeroJonesy

Diabloii.Net Member
I don't really see it helping US soccer at all, other than telling Europe some Americans are willing to put the big bucks into it.
 

Echod16

Diabloii.Net Member
looks like an example of how public teams (with shares) can be bought and used to churn out money instead of memories

and going to a Manchester United game (or any major European soccergame) was one of my "things to do in life" : /
 
I think it's funny that people are so concerned about it. Didn't some Russian gajillionaire just buy Chelsea into a title? Hell, he makes them listen to Cossak music before every game. Imagine the outrage if the Yank made em play Bruce Springstein before every match. They'd declare war!
 

DaviddeJong

Diabloii.Net Member
ManU

You're right DC; much ado about nothing.

But really; Abramovic didn't influence Chelsea that much, except for the 200 milion or so he spent on new players (which helped them out quite a bit!).

That Glazer guys will probably just expand merchandising and try to get more money for the ManU television-rights and stuff. I don't think he'll start telling Ferguson how to run the team.

Don't think a little Springsteen ever hurt anyone though.......

David.

EDIT: Glazer's ownership won't do anything to help US soccer, IMO.
 

TheJarulf

Banned
AeroJonesy said:
Copyright 2005 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Funny how someone includes the the copyright statement, yet fail to understand its meaning, thus commiting copyright infringement.
 

bluedragoon

Diabloii.Net Member
there is so much comotion about it, because Glazer isn't interested in soccer at all. When he started investing in Man U he did it for the money, unlike abramovich who comes to watch every game and is a big fan. Many fans are concerned that all the merchandise prices will go up, and the tickets will become more expensive, and he won't invest much in the team like abromovich did.

gotta love abramovich :):)
 

Namyeknom

Diabloii.Net Member
I think the difference between Abramovich and Glazer, is that Abramovich basically had enough loose change to plough all the money in himself (might be wrong, please correct if you know better), where as its believed Glazer had to secure a loan to complete the take over (believed to be £790 million/$1.47 billion), effectively putting a £300 million ($556 million) debt against the Man Utd name. (All sorts of hostile take over law type stuff I missed out, I'm sure any decent report on it will fill in the gaps...)

Personally I don't think its going to work. The fans are already up in arms (they already had a burning effigy outside old trafford :D ), his going to royally screw the rest of the premiership if he starts selling tv rights on an individual basis, and its a totally different sports world over here.

Still, it'll be interesting to see...
 

DaviddeJong

Diabloii.Net Member
Abramovic vs. Glazer

It's true that Abramovic is both richer and more interested in soccer than Glazer, who is clearly all about the money.

I'm sure Chelsea-fans love Abramovic because he won them a championship; but soccer-fans in general (IMO) dislike the way a mediocre team suddenly dominated the Premier League this year. (Moreover they don't like Mourinho, but that's a totally different subject.)

We'll see what Glazer will do in terms of ticket-prices, TV-licensing and merchandising. I just don't think it'll become any cheaper!

David.
 

jimmyboy

Diabloii.Net Member
I would like some changes to Manchester United games from now on.

1 - hotdogs
2 - cheerleaders
3 - players wearing pads
4 - amendment to the rules to allow the use of forward passing by hand
5 - change the name to Tampa-Manchester United States Patiots
 

myleftfoot

Diabloii.Net Member
jimmyboy said:
I would like some changes to Manchester United games from now on.

1 - hotdogs
2 - cheerleaders
3 - players wearing pads
4 - amendment to the rules to allow the use of forward passing by hand
5 - change the name to Tampa-Manchester United States Patiots
:lol: 10 chars
 

AeroJonesy

Diabloii.Net Member
TheJarulf said:
Funny how someone includes the the copyright statement, yet fail to understand its meaning, thus commiting copyright infringement.
Have no fear, I fully understood the irony when I purposefully copied that part, and then purposefuly added in the link to the Associated Press. I figure I'm going to post the article anyway, I might as well include the legal stuff so if anyone rips it from here, at least they know what they are getting into.

And to me it seems better than taking the article without including any of the copyright information.
 

TheJarulf

Banned
AeroJonesy said:
Have no fear, I fully understood the irony when I purposefully copied that part, and then purposefuly added in the link to the Associated Press. I figure I'm going to post the article anyway, I might as well include the legal stuff so if anyone rips it from here, at least they know what they are getting into.

And to me it seems better than taking the article without including any of the copyright information.
From a copyright infringement point of view? Hardly!

Or are you sugesting that it is OK as long as one include copyright notices and source? I mean, can I start posting music and perhaps the Diablo game at different forums as long as I include Blizzard's copyright notice and a link to Blizzard's page were one get the game? Of coruse one can't.
 

Namyeknom

Diabloii.Net Member
TheJarulf said:
From a copyright infringement point of view? Hardly!

Or are you sugesting that it is OK as long as one include copyright notices and source? I mean, can I start posting music and perhaps the Diablo game at different forums as long as I include Blizzard's copyright notice and a link to Blizzard's page were one get the game? Of coruse one can't.
Aero, it appears your humourous talents are saddly overlooked by some...
 
Top