Manchester United Seeks Singapore IPO

[[DY]]

For Buddies who missed the local ver. of the same news. (link here)

And the paras I thought was most telling...

With nearly two-thirds of its 300 million fans in Asia, the region has become an important growth area for the loss-making Manchester United. Earlier this month, the United Kingdom's Sunday Mirror reported the Glazer family, which controls the club, was looking to sell as much as 25 per cent in an IPO.

Despite mounting talk of a Hong Kong offering, the territory bars unprofitable companies from listing on its exchange. Singapore is more liberal in this respect. The IPO of a globally recognised brand such as Manchester United would be a coup for Singapore, which has been competing with Hong Kong for international listings.

Our competitive advantage is having more lax standards.

the article isn't correct. it is possible to list a loss making company on the SEHK.

our listing requirements (both SGX and SEHK) are quite similar.

[freedom]

also profit is just an opinion. I am sure accounts can do some financial engineering to make a profit out of loss.

[Contrarian]

> Instead of having to deal with a set of different listing rules and other regulatory requirements, why
> can't Manchester United just raise more or less the same amount of capital in the familiar home
> market of London?

Because they probably get some commitment from cornerstone investors to list here, and agree to their valuations.

It's a coup for SGX, but i am not sure if the shareholders get the best deals. Maybe the shareholders get a season pass as an attraction?

[Jared Seah]

Thanks DY! You are a true value investor! You bother to check the facts yourself and not blindly believe what a reporter (or analyst) says. Thumbs up!

http://www.hkex.com.hk/eng/listing/listr...uities.htm

For a moment, I was scratching my head... I thought once upon a time "investors" who lost money buying "stuffs" in Singaopore always complain to MAS that they thought all financial "stuffs" sold in Singapore were considered "safe"? So trusting!

Now SGX is considered "lax"? The pendulum has swung to cynicism?

Anyway, let's not get too serious. It's just shoot the breeze talk talk. Lucky we not like one Presidential candidate who says he will do this and that if elected - but never bother to read the by-laws and constitution... Just like investors who don't read the prospectus during IPO but follow the crowd. Make money we so smart! Lose money SGX this, SGX that...

LOL!

[Musicwhiz]

The Straits Times
Aug 18, 2011
Man U's finances floundering in the red
Football club suffered $164m loss in financial year 2010

By Aaron Low

MANCHESTER United is one of the world's most successful and popular football clubs but huge debts have put its finances as deep in the red as the team's famous playing strip.

The reigning Premier League champions lost £83.6 million (S$164 million) in the year up to June 30, 2010 - a grim turnaround on the £25.5 million profit racked up in 2009.

The loss was mostly due to the huge interest rate payments the club was saddled with when America's Glazer family used debt to finance the purchase of the club in 2005.

Manchester United's latest annual report shows they paid £42 million in interest on debt estimated to be about £700 million. They also paid a one-off £64.6 million as a result of a £504 million bond issue exercise held last January that enabled the club to pay back most of its bank debt.

The crippling interest payments have sparked fan protests against the Glazers, with accusations the family has mismanaged the club's finances.

But take away the burden of the interest payments and it is clear that Manchester United is one of the most profitable clubs in the world.

Its huge fan base, estimated to number more than 330 million according to the club's own survey, has enabled the club to generate massive revenue.

Last year, revenue rose 3 per cent to £286.4 million, while operating profits hit a dazzling £100.8 million.

In comparison, Spanish and European champions Barcelona Football Club recorded an operating loss of €7.9 million (S$13.7 million) last year.

Manchester United was also third behind Real Madrid and Barcelona in Deloitte's report of the richest soccer clubs by revenue, published in February.

A big part of Manchester United's strong revenue growth was due to its commercial activities and the many sponsorships inked in recent years.

In its yearly report on the world's richest clubs, Deloitte noted that Manchester United's commercial revenue stream was the fastest-growing, jumping 16 per cent last year to £81.4 million. 'United have built on the commercial success of previous firms which boosted revenues in 2009/2010 including deals with Turkish Airlines, Betfair and several telecommunications companies,' said Deloitte.

Likewise, Forbes magazine estimates the team's worth as £1.2 billion, making the Red Devils the most valuable football team in the world.

A Manchester United listing here could give its finances a huge leg up, say analysts. Brokerage Kim Eng noted that Manchester United could be 'highly profitable if the club finds a strategy to monetise its fan base of 190 million in Asia and 300 million globally'.

But ultimately, the club's success lives and dies by its performance on the field so it will want to ensure that the on-field success continues.

Manager Alex Ferguson spent more than £50 million in the latest transfer season to recruit Spanish goalkeeper David de Gea, Blackburn defender Phil Jones and Aston Villa winger Ashley Young in a bid to defend Manchester United's league title and launch an assault on the coveted UEFA Champions League.

The team started off the season on a bright note by winning 2-1 at West Brom.

[email protected]

[iff]

For Buddies who missed the local ver. of the same news. (link here)

And the paras I thought was most telling...

With nearly two-thirds of its 300 million fans in Asia, the region has become an important growth area for the loss-making Manchester United. Earlier this month, the United Kingdom's Sunday Mirror reported the Glazer family, which controls the club, was looking to sell as much as 25 per cent in an IPO.

Despite mounting talk of a Hong Kong offering, the territory bars unprofitable companies from listing on its exchange. Singapore is more liberal in this respect. The IPO of a globally recognised brand such as Manchester United would be a coup for Singapore, which has been competing with Hong Kong for international listings.

Our competitive advantage is having more lax standards.

This listing going to be kind of evil, I hope it won't happen!

[kazukirai]

the article isn't correct. it is possible to list a loss making company on the SEHK.

our listing requirements (both SGX and SEHK) are quite similar.

Thanks for pointing out.

Yea, taking a quick look at the respective listing criteria (HKex and SGX's)

It's possible for loss-making companies to seek a listing on the HKex under criteria 2 (Mkt cap/Revenue Test). SGX provides a similar criteria for listing (Criteria 3) but for SGX, the hurdle is much lower at only $80mil mkt cap compared to HKex (HKD4Bil or approx. $615mil). So I guess it's still fair to say that our listing standard provide a lower hurdle to cross.

One line of thought that many others have already voiced- If I bought a football club, loaded lots of debt on it to the point it's loss-making because of the interest on the debt; and now I'm selling part of it off after having held onto it for some years. Should a shareholder-to-be expect things to turn around anytime soon?

[freedom]

I think it is reasonable for SGX to lower the mkt cap standard. after all, Singapore can't compete for international funds with HK. But today, the gap should not be that wide any more

[orang]

the article isn't correct. it is possible to list a loss making company on the SEHK.

our listing requirements (both SGX and SEHK) are quite similar.

Thanks for pointing out.

Yea, taking a quick look at the respective listing criteria (HKex and SGX's)

It's possible for loss-making companies to seek a listing on the HKex under criteria 2 (Mkt cap/Revenue Test). SGX provides a similar criteria for listing (Criteria 3) but for SGX, the hurdle is much lower at only $80mil mkt cap compared to HKex (HKD4Bil or approx. $615mil). So I guess it's still fair to say that our listing standard provide a lower hurdle to cross.

One line of thought that many others have already voiced- If I bought a football club, loaded lots of debt on it to the point it's loss-making because of the interest on the debt; and now I'm selling part of it off after having held onto it for some years. Should a shareholder-to-be expect things to turn around anytime soon?

I think there are two scenarios to your question

If the subject company is Man U then the question may not arise as presumably we know the reason why the present owners are selling part of it.

Perhaps a breakeven is something to anticipate.

If it is not specific but in the general sense we may want to know why the owners are selling.

Then of course there is a question of value to consider

[brattzz]

don't think man-u is a fly by nite setup...most properly they list in sgx to get a higher equity amount..

and singapore needs the advertisting!!

but i won't buy in though..