Qtec
08-12-2012, 04:24 AM
This is exactly the MO of Willard and Bain.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Manchester United: The Glazer Family’s Bad Play
Aug 6, 2012 1:30 PM EDT
The Glazer family took a storied soccer team private, and changed the corporate agenda. Team fan Michael Moritz on why he thinks they’ve ruined the business as an IPO looms.
Long before some silvery-tongued devil rebranded corporate raiders as private equity players, they were called asset-strippers. The dubious tactics of what were once also known as leveraged buyouts (LBOs) are usually hidden from view. But the pending IPO of the Manchester United soccer club lays bare the consequences. Manchester United’s seamy tale is a small, but colorful example of what happens when a healthy business falls into the clutches of people who seize control of it by using enormous amounts of debt. The story of the depredation of Manchester United, <u>one of the world’s best known soccer teams</u>, closely parallels the manner in which a long list of other businesses including Federated Department Stores, Readers Digest, The Chicago Tribune, Masonite, Mervyns, Simmons Bedding, Station Casinos, and Six Flags were taken over by LBO firms, stuffed to the gills with debt and subsequently ruined.
First, a little history. In 2005, when the Glazer family of Miami, landed in the North of England, Manchester United was a publicly traded company, which was thriving both on and off the field. The club had healthy profits and was generating a good amount of cash—one of the surest measures of a well-managed business. Best of all Manchester United had enough cash on hand to eliminate almost all its borrowings. In other words, the management was in control of the destiny of the business.
<u>All this changed</u> after the Glazers, veteran corporate raiders who also owned the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers, <u>took the business private and loaded it with debt.</u> The corporate agenda suddenly changed, as it does with all leveraged buyouts. Instead of operating the business for the benefit of all its constituents—customers, employees, management and shareholders—two new groups had to be satisfied: the new controlling shareholders (in this case the Glazers) and the banks.
While the Glazers are the down-market, bucket-shop version of leveraged buyout practitioners, they followed the conventional playbook. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>They used very little cash to grab Manchester United. So while the Glazers like to portray themselves as “owners” of Manchester United, they are no such thing. Real owners buy and operate businesses with cash. People like the Glazers are little more than placement agents for lenders. Manchester United’s real owners—the entities that have title to the assets of the business—are now the banks.</span>
All this is made depressingly clear in the documents accompanying the proposed IPO. While Manchester United, thanks to the shrewdness of its longtime Manager Sir Alex Ferguson, has continued its winning ways on the field, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>the underlying business has been ruined because of the mountain of debt shoveled onto the company. The debt load is so vast that every asset of the club—including its training ground—has been mortgaged.</span> (The Glazers have generally declined to comment on criticism of their stewardship of Man U, talking instead about their continuing investment in the team. They have now entered the “quiet period” before the IPO and are not allowed to discuss the subject publicly) </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Manchester United lowers stock float value </div></div> link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19201427)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Glazers’ Disgraceful IPO U-Turn
July 31, 2012 262 Comments
The Glazers have revealed a massive u-turn in their IPO proposals in a revised filing of the IPO last night. In the original filing it was made absolutely clear that ALL of the proceeds of the IPO would go to paying down debt the Glazers have loaded onto Manchester United. The revised filing reveals they <span style='font-size: 14pt'>now plan to take half the IPO proceeds for themselves!</span> This can be seen in the red section in white text. The Glazers are selling the same number of shares as MU Ltd but costs are being loaded onto MU Ltd <span style='font-size: 14pt'>so Glazers will take more then 50% of net proceeds for themselves.</span> </div></div>
Nut said this.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."</div></div>
How apt!
Now you know why Mitt doesn't want to talk any more about what Bain actually does.
Q
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Manchester United: The Glazer Family’s Bad Play
Aug 6, 2012 1:30 PM EDT
The Glazer family took a storied soccer team private, and changed the corporate agenda. Team fan Michael Moritz on why he thinks they’ve ruined the business as an IPO looms.
Long before some silvery-tongued devil rebranded corporate raiders as private equity players, they were called asset-strippers. The dubious tactics of what were once also known as leveraged buyouts (LBOs) are usually hidden from view. But the pending IPO of the Manchester United soccer club lays bare the consequences. Manchester United’s seamy tale is a small, but colorful example of what happens when a healthy business falls into the clutches of people who seize control of it by using enormous amounts of debt. The story of the depredation of Manchester United, <u>one of the world’s best known soccer teams</u>, closely parallels the manner in which a long list of other businesses including Federated Department Stores, Readers Digest, The Chicago Tribune, Masonite, Mervyns, Simmons Bedding, Station Casinos, and Six Flags were taken over by LBO firms, stuffed to the gills with debt and subsequently ruined.
First, a little history. In 2005, when the Glazer family of Miami, landed in the North of England, Manchester United was a publicly traded company, which was thriving both on and off the field. The club had healthy profits and was generating a good amount of cash—one of the surest measures of a well-managed business. Best of all Manchester United had enough cash on hand to eliminate almost all its borrowings. In other words, the management was in control of the destiny of the business.
<u>All this changed</u> after the Glazers, veteran corporate raiders who also owned the NFL’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers, <u>took the business private and loaded it with debt.</u> The corporate agenda suddenly changed, as it does with all leveraged buyouts. Instead of operating the business for the benefit of all its constituents—customers, employees, management and shareholders—two new groups had to be satisfied: the new controlling shareholders (in this case the Glazers) and the banks.
While the Glazers are the down-market, bucket-shop version of leveraged buyout practitioners, they followed the conventional playbook. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>They used very little cash to grab Manchester United. So while the Glazers like to portray themselves as “owners” of Manchester United, they are no such thing. Real owners buy and operate businesses with cash. People like the Glazers are little more than placement agents for lenders. Manchester United’s real owners—the entities that have title to the assets of the business—are now the banks.</span>
All this is made depressingly clear in the documents accompanying the proposed IPO. While Manchester United, thanks to the shrewdness of its longtime Manager Sir Alex Ferguson, has continued its winning ways on the field, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>the underlying business has been ruined because of the mountain of debt shoveled onto the company. The debt load is so vast that every asset of the club—including its training ground—has been mortgaged.</span> (The Glazers have generally declined to comment on criticism of their stewardship of Man U, talking instead about their continuing investment in the team. They have now entered the “quiet period” before the IPO and are not allowed to discuss the subject publicly) </div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Manchester United lowers stock float value </div></div> link (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19201427)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Glazers’ Disgraceful IPO U-Turn
July 31, 2012 262 Comments
The Glazers have revealed a massive u-turn in their IPO proposals in a revised filing of the IPO last night. In the original filing it was made absolutely clear that ALL of the proceeds of the IPO would go to paying down debt the Glazers have loaded onto Manchester United. The revised filing reveals they <span style='font-size: 14pt'>now plan to take half the IPO proceeds for themselves!</span> This can be seen in the red section in white text. The Glazers are selling the same number of shares as MU Ltd but costs are being loaded onto MU Ltd <span style='font-size: 14pt'>so Glazers will take more then 50% of net proceeds for themselves.</span> </div></div>
Nut said this.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> "When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."</div></div>
How apt!
Now you know why Mitt doesn't want to talk any more about what Bain actually does.
Q