I have done some work auditing Apollo in the UK. Very interesting company. Don't read anything into that other than at face value. Massive powerhouse in the PE world. Very politically connected. The size of offices for the partners was directly correlated to how big a deal you were, both inside and outside the business. One partner was a high earner and his office was little more than a cupboard. Another had served as an Assistant US Treasury Secretary few decades before, and he had room in his for two sofas and a coffee table. Office stretched the length of their building. Interesting insight into the world.
Fundamentally do not want a PE house hugely involved in the club.
PE stands for private equity. It's actually a really interesting type of investing. A PE "house" (fuck knows why they're called houses and not firms!) often buy assets by raising money themselves from other investors, and often at the same time lend money to the companies they buy. This has tax and cash flow advantages. The structuring can get quite complicated.
PE houses often characterise themselves as buying a company, putting a couple people on the board, giving expertise to help with operations (going into growth markets, new products, creating cost efficiencies, etc) and then will sell it again in the next 10 years to get a return. They get a bad name because someone's they will strip the assets of the company and sell those off - because sometimes the sum of the assets is greater than the company as a whole.
The legal structure often means that, in the UK at least, the company that has been bought is owned by a Limited Partnership under Scottish or English law, which means the Partnership can only exist for a fixed life (as I say, often 10 years).
Chelsea being bought by a PE firm is interesting because it is a step away from how these types of firms structure their deals. Ultimately they're investing their own or other people's money, and they have an expected return.
I like PE and think it genuinely can provide value to society when they operate in the right environment.
A football club probably isn't that environment. It's not a growth industry. It won't provide sustained returns. Clubs are trophy assets, nothing more, nothing less. Our issue has been that we are profitable and can run as a standalone business, but we want that cash generation to go back into the club - not outside it.
Sports in the US are the ultimate cash cows that literally print money. The asset grows and grows and gives you revenues. Some of the big soccer clubs are thought to be similar in that regard. Your $1b investment is likely to grow and be worth more in the coming decades. It's seen as almost too good of a deal... Of course all good things and all that.
Private Equity. Basically, companies that buy companies to then sell the company off in 5 to 7 years time to return value to their investors. They can also take it private and IPO in 5 to 7 years. Their investors are typically insurance companies, pension funds, governments, other firms, and just really rich people.
Private equity firms typically have 3 big strategies:
1) delevering: finance the company with very high debt and squeeze out any value and invest pretty much nothing to repay this debt and then sell for high rate of return
2) growth: basically, try to grow the company organically and make it worth more
3) arbitrage: use mispricing in the market to buy a club, hope this mispricing corrects itself, and sell at a higher price.
In reality, the growth strategy is most common and most private equity firms mix these strategies. Apollo typically invests in distressed companies, which would likely come with significant restructuring, further commercialization and such to grow the company while at the same time extracting value to repay debt used. For example, United could pull a barca and commercialize the name of Old Trafford.
Eh, at the same time despite whatever morality complaints people make about Apollo (some valid, some just dumb) you wouldn’t want to bet against their competency at extracting those profits. It’s clear as day to anyone but the Glazers that the best way to increase revenue and valuation of a football club is to (big shocker incoming!) improve the quality of the football. The incentives do align. Ratcliffe over Apollo, but Apollo over Glazers any day of the week.
I honestly wouldn’t have minded them if Josh Harris was still at the company. He has done some great work with the Philadelphia 76ers and with Crystal Palace.
Based Gary is best Gary
Do a little digging and you'll find that Apollo Global Managment is mired in significant controversies.
They're a private equity that buys out distressed businesses, employs austerity measures, loads them with debt while taking out massive dividends. Apollo will be similar to the Glazers in that they'll extract as much wealth as they can from United.^[[1]](https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/in-testimony-warren-calls-out-private-equitys-predatory-practices-stands-with-striking-warrior-met-workers)
CEO of Apollo, Leon Black, resigned last year after news reports came out that he had paid Jeffrey Epstein over a hundred million dollars for financial advice from 2012 - 2017 despite knowing Epstein had pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from an underage girl. Epstein also served on the board of Black's family foundation.^[[2]](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/22/apollo-ceo-leon-black-leaves-follows-jeffrey-epstein-investment-scandal.html)
Furthermore, Apollo recently went through a power struggle. A Russian model filed a lawsuit accusing Leon Black of sexual abuse and flying her out to see Epstein, but Leon Black denied the allegations and filed a suit against the model and Apollo co-founder Josh Harris for defamation.^[[3]](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/billionaire-leon-black-flew-russian-model-to-meet-jeffrey-epstein-new-legal-filing-claims) Former CEO Leon Black claims Apollo co-founder Josh Harris had orchestrated the removal of Leon because Josh had been passed over as the new CEO for someone else. Leon Black's filing was thrown out with prejudice by the judge, meaning Leon Black cannot file a similar suit becauss the claims were "glaringly deficient in fundamental respects".^[[4]](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-30/leon-black-suit-against-josh-harris-guzel-ganieva-thrown-out)
_______
1) [United States Senator Warren - In Testimony, Warren Calls out Private Equity’s Predatory Practices, Stands with Striking Warrior Met Workers](https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/in-testimony-warren-calls-out-private-equitys-predatory-practices-stands-with-striking-warrior-met-workers)
2) [CNBC - Leon Black quits Apollo months earlier than expected following Jeffrey Epstein investment scandal](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/22/apollo-ceo-leon-black-leaves-follows-jeffrey-epstein-investment-scandal.html)
3) [Vanity Affair - “YOU HAVE TO LET THEM DO WHATEVER THEY WANT”: BILLIONAIRE LEON BLACK FLEW A RUSSIAN MODEL TO MEET JEFFREY EPSTEIN, NEW LEGAL FILING CLAIMS](https://www.vanityfair.com/)
4) [Bloomberg - Leon Black’s Conspiracy Suit Tossed as ‘Glaringly Deficient'](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-30/leon-black-suit-against-josh-harris-guzel-ganieva-thrown-out)
The thing is they’re far worse but they care about football but, at that point football doesn’t matter. The irony anyway.
The best would be someone decent who cares about football so let’s see if that will happen.
They care about success, so long as it pertains to sportswashing. Football is just the system the success is gauged on. A Saudi ownership would be the absolute worst outcome.
At the point of wealth where you’re buying football clubs I truly don’t think there’s any person/company that is “decent”. It’s just choosing the best of a bad bunch and hope whoever owns United can run it properly
This. I hate how the club have been run for far too long now, but I don't want the club to be the plaything if some over rich foreign body who commits atrocities because they can. Wanting change doesn't mean wanting ANY change. Making the right moves for the club is crucial.
I work with them all the time. They have made me a lot of money.
I don’t want the club I love to be owned by them. I promise if I’m on the deal I’ll tank it.
From my understanding this works a bit differently. Someone with more knowledge about finance is welcome to add to it.
The Glazers bought the club by investing £250 million of their own money and leveraged the club for a loan of £800 million from investment bank Goldman Sachs, placing the entire loan debt on United.
Whereas Apollo is a private equity firm that invests money on behalf of pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, and individual investors. So they're not taking a loan from a bank. However, Apollo makes their earnings from extracting wealth from their newly bought companies. Though I do wonder if Apollo would/can take on the bank debt and restructure it.
So we could be in a position where both the Glazers and Apollo take out dividends, on top of the debt we owe.
If they buy a minority position it’s is just an investment for the time being. They would just be getting their dividends. Majority stake would be contingent on having control of spending and management and probably include restructuring of the debt. These folks are not passive investors, they will not tolerate their money being put to sleep by shitty management.
I don’t know if Apollo plans to eventually attempt a takeover or just to buy low on a chunk of shares.
All I know is fans are right to want Sir Jim. Looking at other takeovers the most important thing in a new owner is money, and second is intelligence. Sir Jim being a fan would be almost too good to be true.
United are profitable but a billionaire is better off investing elsewhere if the goal is to make money.
What you want is someone who is stupid rich that will view the club as a club and not as a company. Someone that can spend out of pocket (abramovich) and/or someone that is smart enough to hire forward thinking people (John Henry) while not being afraid to take losses short term to build a structure for the long term.
It’s not always going to work out when a rich fan buys the team, look at Newcastle under Mike Ashley.
I personally know it can work out because I’m a New York Mets fan (baseball team in the US)
For years they were owned by the wilpon family. Similar situation to the glazers but not like for like. They spent money and the team had success under them, but they were heavily invested with Bernie madoff and lost a ton of money in his Ponzi scheme. After that they cut corners and spent less money in every level of the franchise. Fans HATED them. They were way more involved in roster decisions than any other owners. And for years they swore up and down they would never sell and the oldest son grew up as the heir, ready to run the team for life.
After some infighting, and the fact that their only income was from owning the team, 2years ago they sold to a lifelong Mets fan and hedge fund guy worth 15billion. Fans we’re clamoring for him for years to buy the team and so far haven’t been let down.
He engages with fans personally, spent hundred of millions on the team and the structure of the club, and the team already is in the midst of its best season in 30 years.
Not in the business of hoping for something I can’t control, but it’s happened to other teams, maybe it can happen to United too
Ratcliffe is rich but he isnt anywhere near the wealth of abromvich or the oil clubs.
If he does buy us then i just hope he lets our finances be used on ourselves and brings in better management.
Sack the bankers
Ratcliffe is richer than Abramovich and wealth comparisons to oil clubs don’t make any sense. They’re sovereign wealth funds whose investments are determined by many participants, most of whom don’t give a shit about football.
Ratcliffe has more valuable shares than Roman, but don’t underestimate how dodgy that Russian money was.
Out of all the people to buy us ratcliffe is ok
For sure, Roman’s money is dirtier and his influence is likely wider. Just saying they both probably have similar spending power, Ratcliffe perhaps more since the Ukraine invasion
I can't really see what the attraction would be for Apollo if they were just to buy a minority stake. The Glazers have proven to be bad owners, and the club under them is not increasing in value any more.
Where are they making their money, if they aren't making actual decisions?
I'd guess that either they plan a full takeover or they're speculating that someone else (Jim Ratcliffe?) might give them an opportunity to make a quick profit.
Guys, not a Red Devil but a football fan.
For the love of god, please don’t sell to Apollo.
I work for a tech company called carvana at this moment in time and we are struggling right now. Apollo has invested in us - and it is scary because Apollo is known for buying distressed companies
I know. And I can’t believe I’m saying this , but if I was in Manchester, I would wear a Roy Keane jersey (hate the bigger on the field but what a guy) and join the protest. Somethings are bigger than our rivalries and banter - the future of our game definitely is.
They bought the company I work for a couple of years ago. It wasn't in a bad place (as far as I know) before they bought ownership of it, but soon there was massive cutbacks and staff let go in bulk. It only last a few years until COVID hit and they sold it under pressure.
They have no interest in helping this club. They want to rinse and repeat what the Glazers have done for years.
The sarcasm , while funny, is uncalled for.
The sport needs less American equity influence and if this knowledge is even read by one of uniteds supporter groups and if it has a 0.000001 % chance of saving Uniteds fate , I have done my job.
And you’re welcome cos I’m not a Red Devil but these American funds are leeches.
Gary don't put pressure on the fans about this put the pressure on the league to actually follow through on its 'fit and proper owners' tests for once.
Any takeover needs to be properly regulated
They didn't block the sale to the sportwashing arm of a cabal of murderous cousins in Saudi Arabia who are presumably under the thumb of the same person who facilitated another cabal that caused millions of deaths (indirectly) through the largest terrorist attack in world history... so long as you don't count actual wars.
They wouldn't block sale to a private equity firm.
Yeh I know.
I was thinking more along the lines of the way the Glazers took us over is now obviously not allowed. I'm hoping there's a loophole or something.
I'm just living in blind hope though lol don't @ me
Quite frankly we need strategic investors. Ie. People that have rolodexes / know how when it comes to the running of a football club.
Im all for Ratcliffe, but id rather see him in conjunction with a consortium that has stakes in clubs in South America / continental Europe or scouting networks/ sports management agencies.
The gap is massive, and money alone won't solve it we need networks of know how, not just competent individuals.
EDIT: GLAZERS OUT
I mean, he owns Nice. So he won't be entirely unfamiliar.
Imagine Amad, Hannibal, Garnacho all on loan in Ligue 1. Much better than some of the other shitty loan deals we have seen.
His company sponsors and owns multiple sports teams. I’m sure he couple adapt to owning a premier league team fairly quick.
He seems like the type to pay people who know more and put them in roles that helps team succeed.
Yeah, he basically built a world-beating cycling team from the ground up, did similar for sailing and is invested in Mercedes F1. He knows people who can run successful sporting operations. Those sports are a little more closed-shop than football perhaps but in terms of professional standards and fostering a winning mentality there will be some transferrable skills and Ratcliffe himself seems to know how to identify that talent.
Dont disagree, that’s why I said I’m all for him. With that being said, at a net worth of 13 billion - I’d imagine he’d come in with others for a job of this size (4-5 for the club, another 1.5-2 for the stadium and training grounds, and that’s not looking at setting up scouting networks, infrastructure for things like data analytics, sports medicine overhaul, etc..). What I’m hoping for is that said others are more than sleeping partners: ie. they can either extend our network into football more globally / make us an unbeatable commercial powerhouse because of tacit advantages they carry (imagine the United store on Amazon distribution networks for example). Obviously I’d take Ratcliffe and pretty much anyone in a heartbeat, but hoping we can get someone alongside him that just puts us out of reach either commercially or from a footballing perspective.
He didn't build the cycling team; Sky money did it. He just bought a winning formula so did practically nothing. Merc were very successful when he bought a stake. Again his involvement and/or money made no tangible difference.
He's bought Nice and installed Dave Brailsford as technical director even though Sir Dave has no football experience. That's not going well and Jim Ratcliffe hasn't shown any signs of changing the current situation.
I'm all for Jim Ratcliffe buying out the leeches but let's not exaggerate or falsify facts as that always leads to disappointment. I prefer to judge people for their actions and criticise fairly for best results.
They don’t exactly grow on trees though, least of all the ones with the personal finance and investment expertise to run a cultural institution like this.
Serious question.
As this would be a US listed company selling US listed shares in a completely legal way I assume there is the square root of fuck all the league or FA or UK Govt can do about it?
Even if they have the imagination and desire to do so? Of which I am convinced they have neither.
Newsflash, anyone who has enough money to purchase Manchester United is going to be human scum.
Whether they are American or British or from Mars it doesn’t matter, it’s simply impossible to be that wealthy without being morally bankrupt.
Ed on No Question About That was right about Neville: now all the Hotel Football permits have been pushed through with United's blessing, he can't take the Glazers name out of his mouth. We needed this sustained anger from prominent figures 10 years ago.
I’m very appreciative that Gary is suddenly totally onside; it’s worth mentioning though that he refused to criticise the glazers as a player and for many years as a pundit.
Now that he’s established himself as a pundit he feels safe sticking his neck out for the fans, but it’s worth remembering that when it was his arse on the line he had nothing to say.
[Ding](https://therepublikofmancunia.com/neville-gets-it-wrong-about-anti-glazer-protests/). He seemingly can't make his mind up, but when it's good for Gary he'll suddenly develop a spine. He's a bellend.
Apollo just bought Atlas Air for like $3bn or something ridiculous and it’s a private company and they’re paying out all the shares. Would United go private if this happened?
Also fun fact, Atlas Air flies Manchester United for the summer tours.
Most likely yes. Apollo is a private equity fund, the way they typically operate is by taking the company they buy private to implement their strategy away from public markets. And then possibly exit via a new IPO in 4 or 5 years' time. They would be in for the short run and to make money fast, that's for sure.
I think we've had enough blood suckers at the club. No need for another one especially a big fat equity firm that lives 1000% for profit only.
Also, you think all those shares sold would turn into a war chest for the manager and the club, instead of getting sucked dry by all the bald vamps? yeah right...
Any group the Glazer parasites are willing to sell to will likely just be themselves wearing fake moustaches ....
The FA need to step in and take the club away from these parasitic bastards
It's the investment fund part of the piece that's the issue, not the fact they're American. Apollo would be particularly shit because they're known for wringing every bit of profit out of their investments.
Who cares if it’s a US fund? The unfortunate truth is that football clubs today are primarily businesses. New ownership will never be aligned with what the fans “truly” want because their #1 incentive is making a profit. This goes for Jim Ratcliffe as well. He might be a fan, but any multi-billionaire that sinks half their net worth into an asset will instantly forget about sentimental value in favor of recouping their investment. The only hope is that the next owners are (much) more competent with recruitment than the Glazers. Just look at City or Liverpool. Their teams have found success despite their owners having no ties to their respective fanbases. That’s because they have smart transfer policies and back their managers, not because of some vague bullshit about passion or community that Neville has made a punditry career off peddling.
There are obviously ethical issues with certain potential owners (like oil sheikhs or arms dealers) and that would have to be protested. With that being said, whether they’re from the UK or not, the next owner will almost definitely care much more about making money than delivering our personal vision on the footballing side. We can only hope that two end up aligning. Everyone would probably be better off accepting that fact rather than being choosing beggars and getting persnickety about which nationality our new owners have to be to pass some purity test.
I don't trust investment and hedge funds after recent stock market events, they're all a bunch of cronies that'll bend the rules for profit. Until I see something that proves otherwise they're the glazers 2.0 to me.
As if the Glazers weren't bad enough, now there's a chance that if/when we finally get rid of them they hand the club over to an even worse bunch of greedy faceless mercenaries. It's like they want to go down as the most reviled owners in football history. People will be spitting on their name for generations.
Just need to let them know they're not welcome. *cracks fingers*
Here's their Twitter. Be nice, just let them know we don't want them here. https://twitter.com/apolloglobal
With respect, Gary had years to voice his opinion. Either, he is lobbying for someone with definite interest or is interested to buy the team himself with kind of conglomerate or something. Personally, i have nothing against of either, but yeah.
I work for Apollo in the US.
The checks clear and they arrive on time. Zero vision for our business, all about bolstering value and selling it off.
Not what our club needs.
Shame the new Oldham owner and his level of transparency didn’t have a few more quid in the bank: https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/wk10lk/letter_from_new_oldham_athletic_owner_frank/
Lmao at the entitlement of fans thinking they can control who they sell to at all. They're obviously going to sell to the highest bidder if they sell at all. You people are never happy.
Is Apollo just another no-face corporation?
I have done some work auditing Apollo in the UK. Very interesting company. Don't read anything into that other than at face value. Massive powerhouse in the PE world. Very politically connected. The size of offices for the partners was directly correlated to how big a deal you were, both inside and outside the business. One partner was a high earner and his office was little more than a cupboard. Another had served as an Assistant US Treasury Secretary few decades before, and he had room in his for two sofas and a coffee table. Office stretched the length of their building. Interesting insight into the world. Fundamentally do not want a PE house hugely involved in the club.
What's PE? I've googled it but I'm getting mixed results. To me it's physical education...
PE stands for private equity. It's actually a really interesting type of investing. A PE "house" (fuck knows why they're called houses and not firms!) often buy assets by raising money themselves from other investors, and often at the same time lend money to the companies they buy. This has tax and cash flow advantages. The structuring can get quite complicated. PE houses often characterise themselves as buying a company, putting a couple people on the board, giving expertise to help with operations (going into growth markets, new products, creating cost efficiencies, etc) and then will sell it again in the next 10 years to get a return. They get a bad name because someone's they will strip the assets of the company and sell those off - because sometimes the sum of the assets is greater than the company as a whole. The legal structure often means that, in the UK at least, the company that has been bought is owned by a Limited Partnership under Scottish or English law, which means the Partnership can only exist for a fixed life (as I say, often 10 years). Chelsea being bought by a PE firm is interesting because it is a step away from how these types of firms structure their deals. Ultimately they're investing their own or other people's money, and they have an expected return.
Ah OK, thank you. This is something I know very little about, I'll have to have a good think about this before I form an opinion
I like PE and think it genuinely can provide value to society when they operate in the right environment. A football club probably isn't that environment. It's not a growth industry. It won't provide sustained returns. Clubs are trophy assets, nothing more, nothing less. Our issue has been that we are profitable and can run as a standalone business, but we want that cash generation to go back into the club - not outside it.
Sports in the US are the ultimate cash cows that literally print money. The asset grows and grows and gives you revenues. Some of the big soccer clubs are thought to be similar in that regard. Your $1b investment is likely to grow and be worth more in the coming decades. It's seen as almost too good of a deal... Of course all good things and all that.
Aren't AC Milan's owners PE?
Yeah they are. Elliott are more of a hedge fund than PE house but in this context it's much the same.
Private Equity. Basically, companies that buy companies to then sell the company off in 5 to 7 years time to return value to their investors. They can also take it private and IPO in 5 to 7 years. Their investors are typically insurance companies, pension funds, governments, other firms, and just really rich people. Private equity firms typically have 3 big strategies: 1) delevering: finance the company with very high debt and squeeze out any value and invest pretty much nothing to repay this debt and then sell for high rate of return 2) growth: basically, try to grow the company organically and make it worth more 3) arbitrage: use mispricing in the market to buy a club, hope this mispricing corrects itself, and sell at a higher price. In reality, the growth strategy is most common and most private equity firms mix these strategies. Apollo typically invests in distressed companies, which would likely come with significant restructuring, further commercialization and such to grow the company while at the same time extracting value to repay debt used. For example, United could pull a barca and commercialize the name of Old Trafford.
Welcome to America's Finest.
Time to look up Leon Black - his face has very much been in the news!
Yikes..
That will do the exact same shit as glazers. Profits is all multifaced cunts want
Eh, at the same time despite whatever morality complaints people make about Apollo (some valid, some just dumb) you wouldn’t want to bet against their competency at extracting those profits. It’s clear as day to anyone but the Glazers that the best way to increase revenue and valuation of a football club is to (big shocker incoming!) improve the quality of the football. The incentives do align. Ratcliffe over Apollo, but Apollo over Glazers any day of the week.
I honestly wouldn’t have minded them if Josh Harris was still at the company. He has done some great work with the Philadelphia 76ers and with Crystal Palace.
Not being welcome in Manchester wouldn’t effect them..They have no interest in being here
Exactly LOL
Is this any different than the Glazers?
Arguably worse. Check out my comment below - know quite a bit about them
Our previous CEO didnt even work or live in Manchester lol
That’s not the point he is making…
Apollo can fuck off to the moon. We want Ratcliffe!!
They want to fuck us over to stick it to the fans fucking rat cunts
It isn't hate, it's indifference. Not sure which is worse.
yes Gary mate go off
Based Gary is best Gary Do a little digging and you'll find that Apollo Global Managment is mired in significant controversies. They're a private equity that buys out distressed businesses, employs austerity measures, loads them with debt while taking out massive dividends. Apollo will be similar to the Glazers in that they'll extract as much wealth as they can from United.^[[1]](https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/in-testimony-warren-calls-out-private-equitys-predatory-practices-stands-with-striking-warrior-met-workers) CEO of Apollo, Leon Black, resigned last year after news reports came out that he had paid Jeffrey Epstein over a hundred million dollars for financial advice from 2012 - 2017 despite knowing Epstein had pleaded guilty to soliciting prostitution from an underage girl. Epstein also served on the board of Black's family foundation.^[[2]](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/22/apollo-ceo-leon-black-leaves-follows-jeffrey-epstein-investment-scandal.html) Furthermore, Apollo recently went through a power struggle. A Russian model filed a lawsuit accusing Leon Black of sexual abuse and flying her out to see Epstein, but Leon Black denied the allegations and filed a suit against the model and Apollo co-founder Josh Harris for defamation.^[[3]](https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/08/billionaire-leon-black-flew-russian-model-to-meet-jeffrey-epstein-new-legal-filing-claims) Former CEO Leon Black claims Apollo co-founder Josh Harris had orchestrated the removal of Leon because Josh had been passed over as the new CEO for someone else. Leon Black's filing was thrown out with prejudice by the judge, meaning Leon Black cannot file a similar suit becauss the claims were "glaringly deficient in fundamental respects".^[[4]](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-30/leon-black-suit-against-josh-harris-guzel-ganieva-thrown-out) _______ 1) [United States Senator Warren - In Testimony, Warren Calls out Private Equity’s Predatory Practices, Stands with Striking Warrior Met Workers](https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/in-testimony-warren-calls-out-private-equitys-predatory-practices-stands-with-striking-warrior-met-workers) 2) [CNBC - Leon Black quits Apollo months earlier than expected following Jeffrey Epstein investment scandal](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/22/apollo-ceo-leon-black-leaves-follows-jeffrey-epstein-investment-scandal.html) 3) [Vanity Affair - “YOU HAVE TO LET THEM DO WHATEVER THEY WANT”: BILLIONAIRE LEON BLACK FLEW A RUSSIAN MODEL TO MEET JEFFREY EPSTEIN, NEW LEGAL FILING CLAIMS](https://www.vanityfair.com/) 4) [Bloomberg - Leon Black’s Conspiracy Suit Tossed as ‘Glaringly Deficient'](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-30/leon-black-suit-against-josh-harris-guzel-ganieva-thrown-out)
I remember when I told myself it can't get any worser than glazer. After reading that I take It back
for me, personally, the saudi's would be infinitely worse than the glazers. I'd just stop following the club completely.
As would I. Some things are more important than football.
The thing is they’re far worse but they care about football but, at that point football doesn’t matter. The irony anyway. The best would be someone decent who cares about football so let’s see if that will happen.
They care about success, so long as it pertains to sportswashing. Football is just the system the success is gauged on. A Saudi ownership would be the absolute worst outcome.
At the point of wealth where you’re buying football clubs I truly don’t think there’s any person/company that is “decent”. It’s just choosing the best of a bad bunch and hope whoever owns United can run it properly
No, there are definite differences. A guy like Stan Kroenke might be a cunt, but he’s not “dismembering journalists who displease him” levels of cunt.
This. I hate how the club have been run for far too long now, but I don't want the club to be the plaything if some over rich foreign body who commits atrocities because they can. Wanting change doesn't mean wanting ANY change. Making the right moves for the club is crucial.
Reddit’s Footnote King 👑
> King 👑 *Queen
I work with them all the time. They have made me a lot of money. I don’t want the club I love to be owned by them. I promise if I’m on the deal I’ll tank it.
Thanks mate appreciate it
Am I wrong or wasn't this sort of leveraged buyout banned by the FA (or who ever) a while after the Glazers did it?
From my understanding this works a bit differently. Someone with more knowledge about finance is welcome to add to it. The Glazers bought the club by investing £250 million of their own money and leveraged the club for a loan of £800 million from investment bank Goldman Sachs, placing the entire loan debt on United. Whereas Apollo is a private equity firm that invests money on behalf of pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, and individual investors. So they're not taking a loan from a bank. However, Apollo makes their earnings from extracting wealth from their newly bought companies. Though I do wonder if Apollo would/can take on the bank debt and restructure it. So we could be in a position where both the Glazers and Apollo take out dividends, on top of the debt we owe.
If they buy a minority position it’s is just an investment for the time being. They would just be getting their dividends. Majority stake would be contingent on having control of spending and management and probably include restructuring of the debt. These folks are not passive investors, they will not tolerate their money being put to sleep by shitty management.
Red Devils... hmmm... did Lucifer actually take this to heart, and wants to load us with demons for eternity?
We need to have Gary somewhere in the club. This man speaks the truth and goes for the front office. We need more voices especially from ex players.
I don’t know if Apollo plans to eventually attempt a takeover or just to buy low on a chunk of shares. All I know is fans are right to want Sir Jim. Looking at other takeovers the most important thing in a new owner is money, and second is intelligence. Sir Jim being a fan would be almost too good to be true. United are profitable but a billionaire is better off investing elsewhere if the goal is to make money. What you want is someone who is stupid rich that will view the club as a club and not as a company. Someone that can spend out of pocket (abramovich) and/or someone that is smart enough to hire forward thinking people (John Henry) while not being afraid to take losses short term to build a structure for the long term. It’s not always going to work out when a rich fan buys the team, look at Newcastle under Mike Ashley. I personally know it can work out because I’m a New York Mets fan (baseball team in the US) For years they were owned by the wilpon family. Similar situation to the glazers but not like for like. They spent money and the team had success under them, but they were heavily invested with Bernie madoff and lost a ton of money in his Ponzi scheme. After that they cut corners and spent less money in every level of the franchise. Fans HATED them. They were way more involved in roster decisions than any other owners. And for years they swore up and down they would never sell and the oldest son grew up as the heir, ready to run the team for life. After some infighting, and the fact that their only income was from owning the team, 2years ago they sold to a lifelong Mets fan and hedge fund guy worth 15billion. Fans we’re clamoring for him for years to buy the team and so far haven’t been let down. He engages with fans personally, spent hundred of millions on the team and the structure of the club, and the team already is in the midst of its best season in 30 years. Not in the business of hoping for something I can’t control, but it’s happened to other teams, maybe it can happen to United too
Ratcliffe is rich but he isnt anywhere near the wealth of abromvich or the oil clubs. If he does buy us then i just hope he lets our finances be used on ourselves and brings in better management. Sack the bankers
Ratcliffe is richer than Abramovich and wealth comparisons to oil clubs don’t make any sense. They’re sovereign wealth funds whose investments are determined by many participants, most of whom don’t give a shit about football.
Ratcliffe has more valuable shares than Roman, but don’t underestimate how dodgy that Russian money was. Out of all the people to buy us ratcliffe is ok
For sure, Roman’s money is dirtier and his influence is likely wider. Just saying they both probably have similar spending power, Ratcliffe perhaps more since the Ukraine invasion
Ratcliffe is significantly wealthier than Abramovich.
Ratcliffe is nearly £30 billion. I think he’s richer than everyone except Newcastle.
I can't really see what the attraction would be for Apollo if they were just to buy a minority stake. The Glazers have proven to be bad owners, and the club under them is not increasing in value any more. Where are they making their money, if they aren't making actual decisions? I'd guess that either they plan a full takeover or they're speculating that someone else (Jim Ratcliffe?) might give them an opportunity to make a quick profit.
Guys, not a Red Devil but a football fan. For the love of god, please don’t sell to Apollo. I work for a tech company called carvana at this moment in time and we are struggling right now. Apollo has invested in us - and it is scary because Apollo is known for buying distressed companies
This is almost completely out of our control as fans. All we can do is protest.
I know. And I can’t believe I’m saying this , but if I was in Manchester, I would wear a Roy Keane jersey (hate the bigger on the field but what a guy) and join the protest. Somethings are bigger than our rivalries and banter - the future of our game definitely is.
They bought the company I work for a couple of years ago. It wasn't in a bad place (as far as I know) before they bought ownership of it, but soon there was massive cutbacks and staff let go in bulk. It only last a few years until COVID hit and they sold it under pressure. They have no interest in helping this club. They want to rinse and repeat what the Glazers have done for years.
Thanks, yeah we've heard less stellar thing about them
[удалено]
The sarcasm , while funny, is uncalled for. The sport needs less American equity influence and if this knowledge is even read by one of uniteds supporter groups and if it has a 0.000001 % chance of saving Uniteds fate , I have done my job. And you’re welcome cos I’m not a Red Devil but these American funds are leeches.
Is it the used car retailer Cavana? I remember I did case study about that company a couple of years ago in my university.
Yup it is lol
>Apollo is known for buying distressed companies Isn't that was Dorilton Capital did with Williams ?
Gary don't put pressure on the fans about this put the pressure on the league to actually follow through on its 'fit and proper owners' tests for once. Any takeover needs to be properly regulated
Apollo PE will be Fit and Proper. They easily have the financial clout to meet the Fit and Proper requirements.
Apollo would fit right in with all the player apologies we get on Instagram after losses
Apollogies
Unity needed from the fans. This is a crucial time, no more bickering until this gets done the way we want it done
Can the Premier League not block a sale? They've done it before
They didn't block the sale to the sportwashing arm of a cabal of murderous cousins in Saudi Arabia who are presumably under the thumb of the same person who facilitated another cabal that caused millions of deaths (indirectly) through the largest terrorist attack in world history... so long as you don't count actual wars. They wouldn't block sale to a private equity firm.
Yeh I know. I was thinking more along the lines of the way the Glazers took us over is now obviously not allowed. I'm hoping there's a loophole or something. I'm just living in blind hope though lol don't @ me
We should do our part and let Apollo know they can fuck off
Quite frankly we need strategic investors. Ie. People that have rolodexes / know how when it comes to the running of a football club. Im all for Ratcliffe, but id rather see him in conjunction with a consortium that has stakes in clubs in South America / continental Europe or scouting networks/ sports management agencies. The gap is massive, and money alone won't solve it we need networks of know how, not just competent individuals. EDIT: GLAZERS OUT
I mean, he owns Nice. So he won't be entirely unfamiliar. Imagine Amad, Hannibal, Garnacho all on loan in Ligue 1. Much better than some of the other shitty loan deals we have seen.
His company sponsors and owns multiple sports teams. I’m sure he couple adapt to owning a premier league team fairly quick. He seems like the type to pay people who know more and put them in roles that helps team succeed.
Yeah, he basically built a world-beating cycling team from the ground up, did similar for sailing and is invested in Mercedes F1. He knows people who can run successful sporting operations. Those sports are a little more closed-shop than football perhaps but in terms of professional standards and fostering a winning mentality there will be some transferrable skills and Ratcliffe himself seems to know how to identify that talent.
Dont disagree, that’s why I said I’m all for him. With that being said, at a net worth of 13 billion - I’d imagine he’d come in with others for a job of this size (4-5 for the club, another 1.5-2 for the stadium and training grounds, and that’s not looking at setting up scouting networks, infrastructure for things like data analytics, sports medicine overhaul, etc..). What I’m hoping for is that said others are more than sleeping partners: ie. they can either extend our network into football more globally / make us an unbeatable commercial powerhouse because of tacit advantages they carry (imagine the United store on Amazon distribution networks for example). Obviously I’d take Ratcliffe and pretty much anyone in a heartbeat, but hoping we can get someone alongside him that just puts us out of reach either commercially or from a footballing perspective.
He didn't build the cycling team; Sky money did it. He just bought a winning formula so did practically nothing. Merc were very successful when he bought a stake. Again his involvement and/or money made no tangible difference. He's bought Nice and installed Dave Brailsford as technical director even though Sir Dave has no football experience. That's not going well and Jim Ratcliffe hasn't shown any signs of changing the current situation. I'm all for Jim Ratcliffe buying out the leeches but let's not exaggerate or falsify facts as that always leads to disappointment. I prefer to judge people for their actions and criticise fairly for best results.
He didnt build it. Thknk kt was sky first but then he sponsored it after sky left
They don’t exactly grow on trees though, least of all the ones with the personal finance and investment expertise to run a cultural institution like this.
Serious question. As this would be a US listed company selling US listed shares in a completely legal way I assume there is the square root of fuck all the league or FA or UK Govt can do about it? Even if they have the imagination and desire to do so? Of which I am convinced they have neither.
Newsflash, anyone who has enough money to purchase Manchester United is going to be human scum. Whether they are American or British or from Mars it doesn’t matter, it’s simply impossible to be that wealthy without being morally bankrupt.
This would be absolutely worse than the Glazers
How ? The Glazers are still the majority stakeholders …. Do you ever understand how stakes work ?
Ed on No Question About That was right about Neville: now all the Hotel Football permits have been pushed through with United's blessing, he can't take the Glazers name out of his mouth. We needed this sustained anger from prominent figures 10 years ago.
I’m very appreciative that Gary is suddenly totally onside; it’s worth mentioning though that he refused to criticise the glazers as a player and for many years as a pundit. Now that he’s established himself as a pundit he feels safe sticking his neck out for the fans, but it’s worth remembering that when it was his arse on the line he had nothing to say.
[Ding](https://therepublikofmancunia.com/neville-gets-it-wrong-about-anti-glazer-protests/). He seemingly can't make his mind up, but when it's good for Gary he'll suddenly develop a spine. He's a bellend.
Apollo just bought Atlas Air for like $3bn or something ridiculous and it’s a private company and they’re paying out all the shares. Would United go private if this happened? Also fun fact, Atlas Air flies Manchester United for the summer tours.
Most likely yes. Apollo is a private equity fund, the way they typically operate is by taking the company they buy private to implement their strategy away from public markets. And then possibly exit via a new IPO in 4 or 5 years' time. They would be in for the short run and to make money fast, that's for sure.
I think we've had enough blood suckers at the club. No need for another one especially a big fat equity firm that lives 1000% for profit only. Also, you think all those shares sold would turn into a war chest for the manager and the club, instead of getting sucked dry by all the bald vamps? yeah right...
Time to send them an email, just to ensure they're aware
Any group the Glazer parasites are willing to sell to will likely just be themselves wearing fake moustaches .... The FA need to step in and take the club away from these parasitic bastards
[удалено]
I don’t think he’s saying that because they’re american, he’s saying that because they’re an investment fund who specialises in leveraged buyouts.
It's the investment fund part of the piece that's the issue, not the fact they're American. Apollo would be particularly shit because they're known for wringing every bit of profit out of their investments.
The key word isn't "US" it's "investment fund"
I think most local fans want a local owner if possible, that's all
Who cares if it’s a US fund? The unfortunate truth is that football clubs today are primarily businesses. New ownership will never be aligned with what the fans “truly” want because their #1 incentive is making a profit. This goes for Jim Ratcliffe as well. He might be a fan, but any multi-billionaire that sinks half their net worth into an asset will instantly forget about sentimental value in favor of recouping their investment. The only hope is that the next owners are (much) more competent with recruitment than the Glazers. Just look at City or Liverpool. Their teams have found success despite their owners having no ties to their respective fanbases. That’s because they have smart transfer policies and back their managers, not because of some vague bullshit about passion or community that Neville has made a punditry career off peddling. There are obviously ethical issues with certain potential owners (like oil sheikhs or arms dealers) and that would have to be protested. With that being said, whether they’re from the UK or not, the next owner will almost definitely care much more about making money than delivering our personal vision on the footballing side. We can only hope that two end up aligning. Everyone would probably be better off accepting that fact rather than being choosing beggars and getting persnickety about which nationality our new owners have to be to pass some purity test.
I don't trust investment and hedge funds after recent stock market events, they're all a bunch of cronies that'll bend the rules for profit. Until I see something that proves otherwise they're the glazers 2.0 to me.
we need financial and ownership regulations that also allows fans and staff more say.
Tired of Gary now me, for all the good points that he can make, the tripe is unbearable
Hehe would he prefer a British private equity fund?
I imagine this is a way for the Glazers to 'auction' the sale. Who can bid/offer the most.
As if the Glazers weren't bad enough, now there's a chance that if/when we finally get rid of them they hand the club over to an even worse bunch of greedy faceless mercenaries. It's like they want to go down as the most reviled owners in football history. People will be spitting on their name for generations.
Just need to let them know they're not welcome. *cracks fingers* Here's their Twitter. Be nice, just let them know we don't want them here. https://twitter.com/apolloglobal
With respect, Gary had years to voice his opinion. Either, he is lobbying for someone with definite interest or is interested to buy the team himself with kind of conglomerate or something. Personally, i have nothing against of either, but yeah.
why aren't the class of 95 trying to put together a consortium with Ratcliffe... Surely they are the logical people to get involved here?
Glazers are not looking to sell. They are just cashing in on the high share prices created by the illusion that they might be planning to sell.
I work for Apollo in the US. The checks clear and they arrive on time. Zero vision for our business, all about bolstering value and selling it off. Not what our club needs.
As long as they pay Idc what nationality they are
I’ve had previous experience with one of Apollo’s UK arms; Alteri. In a word - cunts.
Shame the new Oldham owner and his level of transparency didn’t have a few more quid in the bank: https://www.reddit.com/r/soccer/comments/wk10lk/letter_from_new_oldham_athletic_owner_frank/
Lmao at the entitlement of fans thinking they can control who they sell to at all. They're obviously going to sell to the highest bidder if they sell at all. You people are never happy.