(1/22) A big topic lately is if #MUFC need an owner with ‘super wealth’, like Qatar, or if the club could get back to the top if owned (indirectly) by one of the wealthiest individuals in the UK, Sir Jim Ratcliffe. The answer is given in this 🧵.
(6/22) The cost of a signing is (a) the transfer fee / length of contract + (b) salary. A transfer fee of 100m for a player on a 5 year contract at 250k a week, costs £20m + £13m = £33m/year. This would mean that we could sign 2 expensive players per summer the coming two years.
(8/22) If we would -- not -- finish top 4, we would have to sell just to be licensed for the EL. And so far, we are not calculating on – any – infrastructure investments.
(9/22) Now we have established where we are at with ETH magic and no #GlazersOut. We could remain competitive, but not invest in the infrastructure. So what would happen if SJR buys us? A new owner would definitely have some positive effects by itself.
(10/22) In addition, we know that SJR would move Glazer’s debts to an Ineos entity. Hence, we assume that that sponsorship, commercial income and ticket price increase 10% the first year and 5% the second year after #GlazersOut.
(13/22) Assuming that includes renovating Carrington, how could this be financed? A new stadium creates additional income, of which some can be ‘cashed in’ early in the project, like certain leases, naming rights, subsidies from the community (you create a lot of jobs) etc.
(15/22)…gain has been almost 150m per year. But they increased capacity with 25k and brings big income from hosting the biggest events in London. I think a truer number for #MUFC would be 75m per year.
(16/22) That leaves us with a yearly cost of 100m per year over 15 years. Since this does counts as a ‘Relevant Investment’ in relation to the FFP, it doesn’t impact our ability to spend in relation to those rules, but it of course impacts our cash-flow.
(17/22) A quick glance at our income and expenses, shows that this would mean that we could incur yearly costs of app. £50m per year, from a cash-flow perspective, which basically mean that we would have a £150m transfer budget yearly before any sale of players.
(18/22) With inflation back in society, and given the growth of the game world-wide, the biggest weight of the stadium debt is front-heavy. In 10 years, with 5% yearly growth, our revenue would be 1.15bn, resulting in the relative cost for the stadium going from 14 to 8.5%.
(21/22) Given that our non-stadium debt would be zero, we could easily build up a – still healthy – non-stadium debt of say 200-300m over the first 5 years after the stadium is built, to enable heavy spending on the squad for one or two windows.
Loading suggestions...