Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
@SwedishRumble
Jun 7, 2023 • 19 tweets • 7 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
💣🚨New improved bid from 9-2! Good news? Who is in the lead? A word of optimism including a little caution and some other thoughts in this 🧵, tag along! 👇 (1/n) dailymail.co.uk/sport/football…
For anyone wanting #GlazersOut, it's good news. The previous reported bids have been serious but neither have perhaps been as good as reported. Nobody want a penny more than necessary paid to the Glazers, but without improved bids, the risk for delay has been significant. (2/n) Image
What is reportedly offered? We all know that the Glazers will take the offer that pays the most to them. The new 9-2 offer seem to put it in the same ball park as Ineos' offer -- but the Glazers would get 100% of the money directly, while with Ineos offer would 1bn later. (3/n) Image
There is some -- is "gibberish" too strong word? -- out there claiming that Ineos offer would NOT mean a full sale and would allow the Glazers to stay. As made clear by the FT article, it is a standarlized earn-out construction resulting in Ineos buying 51% now and 18%... (4/n) Image
...over "coming years". To evaluate 9-2's offer, we need to decide if this is positive or negative for the Glazers. The assumption -- must (!) -- be that it is a concession by Glazers to Ineos. (5/n) Image
The sooner you get paid, the better. It's just 18% of the price that will be paid out over 1-3 years. Could this price be dependent on for example MUFC's turnover? Yes, but it is very reasonable to assume that nothing drastic is happening to our turnover in 1-3 years.(6/n) Image
If the Glazers knew something very positive nobody else did, they wouldn't sell. Could our turnover be 30% higher in 3 years? Sure, it could. But if that means that the purchase price is increased with 30% -- it is "just" 30% on the remaining 18%, and...(7/n)
...the gain vs. investing a purchase price paid in full directly in interest bearing bonds is minimal. I would like to say that there is a very small risk that the Glazers will -- not -- accept 9-2's bid because Ineos bid pays out the purchase price over time. (8/n) Image
Again, in all likelihood, this is what it is all about. "Who pays the Glazers the most?", period. And 3.6bn today is better than 2.6bn today and a 1bn in 1-3 years. It's probably better than 2.6bn today and 1.3bn in 1-3 years. (9/n) Image
But with that said, we do not know how high 9-2's bid actually is, this is what Keegan's article say (who is credible in relation to 9-2). If 9-2 raised their offer from say a 4.9bn EV valuation to a 5.25bn EV valuation -- it is probably not better. So watch this space. (10/10) Image
UPDATE: The "watch this space" part hit the head on the nail, due to below report, see following tweets. lequipe.fr/Football/Actua…
If the new improved offer is "just" for 5.8bn EUR -- which exactly is 5.0bn GBP -- it is a little concerning against the above background. If the reports on Ineos' bid valuing the club at 6bn is true, it seem like 9-2's bid could pay the Glazers less...(11/n) Image
But, there is definitely room for error going by the limited information we have. When talking about these sums, "Enterprise Value" is always used in M&A, just like when we talk about what a club paid for a player, you include transfer fee but not salary. Why? (12/n)
Purchase price is Enterprise Value - debt + cash. Why use EV? The value of an entity on a "cash and debt free basis" is consistent -- while the debt/cash change from day to day. We cannot be sure that nothing is lost in translation here re. 9-2 and Ineos bid. (13/n)
If 9-2's bid is €5.8bn/£5bn in purchase price (i.e. using an EV of app. €6.7bn/£5.8bn), it is more competitive (if the reported figures on Ineos bid are somewhat correct). (14/14)
Further reports supporting the Le Equipe report:
"Total package (with pledged investment) offered is around $7.5bn". $7.5bn=£6bn. £1bn investment. £5bn for the club and the debt. Of which the Glazers get £2.9bn. Hate to be the bearer of bad news (for many), but this is more or less Chelsea money for MUFC. (16/n)
Boehly paid 2.5bn and pledged to invest 1.75bn. Anyone wanting full control of MUFC, could bid over 9-2 by paying the Glazers more than 2.9bn. The pledged investment is app. 1.78bn. In addition, 9-2 would pay 1.3bn for the NYSE shares, but as FT said: Image
Update 2: Another uncertainty of course regards how high Ineos' bid actually is. The "first" 6bn report comes from The Sunday Times. Sky has also reported that the sale of the rest of the shares would take place 2026. It states that it could "reach" up to 6bn. This obviously… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with The Swedish Rumble 🔰

The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SwedishRumble

The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
May 14
There is one reason and one reason only why this case is not settled yet. When the PL launched the procedure for the 115 charges, City made sure that it got stuck in the courts for almost 3 years challenging every technical aspect it could to delay it.

A summary:
November-December 2018: The Premier League write to City requesting certain information and documents in relation to potential breaches of their rules — known as the information claim. City object to the request — after what has been published by Der Spiegel/the Football Leaks.
21 August 2019: The PL issue a complaint against City, since it has still not received the documents and information it has the right to receive under the Premier League Rules and which City refuse to give the PL access to. City responds by challenging the PL's disciplinary system, challenging a technicality (only highly regarded barristers could be elected for the commission).
22 October 2019: With the documents and information not forthcoming, the PL begin arbitration against the club seeking a declaration that they are contractually obliged to provide them. The club try to stop the arbitration by arguing to the tribunal involved that the PL had no power to start it. They also claim that the tribunal does not appear impartial.
26 June 2020: City issue an application in the Commercial Court repeating their argument that the tribunal lacks jurisdiction on the information claim and is tainted with “bias”.
2 November 2020: City’s claim that it has no obligation to to pass on the requested information and documents to the PL — is rejected. It’s clearly stated in the rules that they must do so. The order to provide them is however postponed pending the outcome of the Commercial Court case.
17 March 2021: In the Commercial Court, Mrs Justice Moulder more or less summarily dismisses the club's challenge to the jurisdiction and impartiality of the tribunal, dismantling the City’s lawyers arguments clearly hinting that it was felt that it had abused the public court system. She refuses permission to appeal her judgment.
24 March 2021: Mrs Justice Moulder said her judgment should be published, in order to reveal the lengths to which City had attempted to resist passing on information to the PL. City successfully seeked permission to appeal the decision to make the information public in the Court of Appeal. So we get another delay (I think you are starting to get the drift by now, it’s an appeal of an appeal of an appeal about a pure nonsense technicality. On a side
30 June 2021: The Court of Appeal opens its hearing into the club's appeal against publication. The Court of Appeal handed down its decision dismissing the appeal.

So it took the PL almost three years to just have it sorted out that it has the right to receive the information the Premier League Rules clearly states that City must submit to the PL. After this, we know that City made another challenge of the impartiality of an experienced barrister in no way connected to the Premier League, in KC Murray Rosen. How much delay this caused is unknown.

During this time, City was also sentenced by UEFA for failing to produce requested information and delaying procedures.

I am sure we all come across City PR people, at twitter, during City’s PCs, and so forth, telling us that the reason no decision have been made against City is because it is quote “complicated“. Decide for yourself!
Lastly, in this entire shambolic procedure and abuse of the game of football, one person have done more than all fancy pundits, journalists and experts combined — to protect the integrity of the game — and should be singled out and that is Justice Dame Clare Moulder. Without her…

Despite what seems to be attempts for interference on the governmental level, she took the bold decisions set out above without which it’s perfectly possible that we still wouldn’t be aware of the charges and that still would have been caught in some court somewhere.Image
Someone cynical might speculate on that it was a blessing that she ended up drawing this case just before her retirement in 2022, when she had nothing to lose, but since I am not cynical/conspiratorial — I wouldn’t believe that. But it’s the one big loss City have had in the judicial system up until now despite some pretty horrible looking circumstances speaking against the club… 😅
Read 4 tweets
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
May 8
🚨🚨🚨Very remarkable that the @FA_PGMOL selects Michael Oliver for the FA Cup Final -- despite it appearing to be a possible breach of the FA's "Regulations for the Registration and Control of Referees".

🔺A referee has an obligation to decline an appointment if he has a "material interest" conflicting with his duties.

🔺Does Michael Oliver have a material conflict of interest? Oliver has -- this season -- accepted what reportedly was a well paid assignment from Manchester City's owner.

Is this material? A Premier League referee can of course not be on the payroll of an owner of a PL club playing in one of the game he is reffing. An auditor who works as a referee on the side and has a client that is a football club, cannot ref a game involving that team. It is different if your cousin's son play for a team or something like that, in which case it could be argued that it is not material. But it speaks for itself in relation to the Premier League, that a ref can't work for one of the owner of a PL club.

What was Oliver paid for his work in the UAE? Say that it was first class tickets to Abu Dahbi, three nights in a five star hotel, and £5,000 for "90 minutes of work" -- I cannot see how anyone could find that it is not 'material'. What would the threshold be, "you can accept payments from an owner of a PL club as long as it is under £50k?"

If Michael Oliver becomes the public enemy No 1 of City after awarding three incorrect penalties to MUFC -- does he get another offer to call games for the UAE Pro League next season?

So what is the problem? Is there any question-marks if the UAE Pro League is controlled by City's owner, Sheikh Mansour, who is the deputy prime minister of the UAE and a core member of the ruling royal family?

It is generally stated that it is not possible in the UAE to separate different parts of government even from the private business sector. KC Murray Rosen -- who is the chair of the PL's Independent Disciplinary Commission handling the City Case -- could for this reason never accept an assignment from the UAE to say prepare a draft for a new constitution or whatever, while being in charge of the City case. It wouldn't even be considered for three seconds. A government official in charge of a large multi billion public procurement for which Sheik Mansour have made a bid, could never accept well paid side job from the UAE while considering Mansour's bid, without facing grave risk of breaking the law. It is unthinkable that this would be accepted. I am not an expert on English law, if anyone familiar with these issues in the UK think I am on thin ice here, let me know.

🔺So why did Howard Webb tell Michael Oliver that he could take the job? And does it matter? First of all, I think Howard Webb should answer this question. Maybe he didn't know that City was owned by the deputy prime minister of the UAE? He was a good ref, maybe geography, politics or whatever isn't one of his strengths... I just cannot imagine that Webb even would consider telling a Michael Oliver that it was OK for him to say accept an offer of 20k from the Glazers to fly to Florida and call a charity game arranged by the Glazers.

But I don't know know the reasons for why he accepted it, I am just speculating.

But does it matter if Webb gave a green light? Of course not, it is completely irrelevant, at least as far as I can tell. Michael Oliver must comply with the FA's fundamental rules for referees. Howard Webb appears to have zero authority to set aside these rules.

And I have said it before, I am very surprised that a PL ref even would consider accepting an assignment from the owner of a PL club. How can they not realize how problematic that is?

🔺But surely, Michael Oliver -- will -- be impartial? But it is completely irrelevant. This is because the Conflict of Interest rules does not exist exclusively to ensure impartiality, it is deemed to be just as important to safe guard the integrity of the game. Let say that it came out that Howard Webb while being a PL ref had been paid 5m by J.P. McManus for a side gig while McManus was the majority owner of Manchester United -- it would significantly damage the integrity of the game, regardless if Webb called every game in an impartial way and never felt any obligation towards Mr. McManus.

🔺From my viewpoint, this is clearly a very problematic issue and I have to say that I think that it is remarkable that the the PGMOL -- in light of the above -- still appoints Michael Oliver to referee the FA Cup Final when Manchester City is playing in it.Image
Image
Anyone savvy should set up an online petition to get Oliver removed, PGMOL doesn’t have to pick the one referee who appears to quite possibly have a conflict of interest to be VAR for the FA Cup Final.
The PL have enough issues with “asterisks” as it is…
Read 4 tweets
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
Nov 19, 2023
💣💣🚨🚨With the Everton decision at hand, it is now possible to -- with far greater certainty than before -- predict the outcome of the Manchester City case.

In my view, it must now be expected that MCFC will get EXPELLED from the PL!! ⚠️

A 🧵. Image
What is MCFC charged for? The below table summarize the charges, they can be sorted under 5-6 categories, I would say that it is 32 charges, some will say 115 since each "X" regards several provisions in the PL Rule Book.

Some of these charges are really complex -- but not all! Image
MCFC for example admitted a breach to, and was sanctioned by, UEFA in 14' -- which is a breach of the PL rules.

The PL also claims that agreements have been made to pay wages and transfer fees under the table in 2010 and 2011, which seems to be supported by strong evidence. Image
Read 21 tweets
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
Oct 30, 2023
🤔I see so many comments questioning ETH’s XI.

A 🧵on why those decisions were — completely irrelevant — and what indisputably cost us the game.

Can anyone disagree with the below?? And can anyone give even a suggestion of what ETH could have done different??? Comment 👇. Image
At the 16:15 mark, MUFC were in the games. It then changed completely. Why? After failing to play up from the back ONCE — MCFC controls the play for 4:07. At the 20:22 mark, when the ball goes out of play 👇, nobody would say that the game is even.
So what happens next? The exact same thing over again, we fail to play up from the back, MCFC gains control, and draws the FK — resulting in MCFC’s penalty at 22:45.
Read 10 tweets
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
Oct 26, 2023
🚨🚨💣💣 #MUFC's Q4 report is out, part II. What is our FFP status? A 🧵 looking at (a) how much we can spend in January and (b) how much we can spend during the summer of 2024. Lets dive into it! 🔰
🔺First of all, what we spend in January, will impact our profit from the 23/24 season. In the summer of 2024, PL and UEFA will determine if we are compliant with their FFP provisions against this and other seasons. Image
Under the UEFA provisions and namely the Football Earnings Rule (#FER), during the summer of 2024, our aggregate earnings from 22/23 + 23/24 cannot be lower than -60 MEUR. Image
Read 12 tweets
The Swedish Rumble 🔰 Profile picture
Oct 21, 2023
🚨💣A 🧵 covering all relevant questions on the takeover of #MUFC! I think it is safe to say that we now can answer what will happen to:
🔺 the Management Personnel;
🔺the Transfer Budget;
🔺 Old Trafford and Carrington; and
🔺 MUFC's position in a MCO.

Lets dive into it!💪 Image
🔺IS IT DONE?
No. The proposed structure is complex and 'custom made' for this deal. A lot of details must be agreed on between Ineos and the Glazers. Before an agreement is in place, I would not trust the Glazers.⚠️
🔺HOW DOES INEOS OFFER WORK? (1/5)
It will have three components: (1) one share purchase, (2) one agreement between the Glazers & Ineos on management of the club, and (3) an investment injecting funds into MUFC.

The result of the purchase of shares an be assumed to be: Image
Read 30 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(