Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

David Prosser: Why a home fixture is not the preferred option for Man United

 

David Prosser
Tuesday 16 August 2011 19:00 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Outlook So why is Manchester United considering an IPO in Asia rather than the UK, where it was listed on the London Stock Exchange until 2005? Assuming the club goes ahead with the float, the answer will presumably be that Asia represents a hugely attractive market for the club, which reckons the continent is home to two-thirds of its 300 million-strong fanbase.

The more honest answer, however, would be that the Glazer family knows it would not get anywhere near as much money for the stake it wants to sell off were it to go for an IPO in London.

It is true that Man United enjoys huge support across Asia, but its successes in monetising that support have been modest so far. Its most recent results reveal that matchday income and media rights (mostly UK and European) account for two thirds of its turnover – there is no breakdown of its other commercial sales, but it is fair to assume much of those are here too.

The problem with London, however, is that it has plenty of experience of publicly listed football clubs and almost none of it is happy. A wave of football flotations over the past 20 years have seen investors lose money, the market knows how performance on the field – which is so unpredictable – can cause havoc to the bottom line, and the industry's financial precariousness is a national talking point.

The LSE has played host to its fair share of over-priced rights issues over the years. Still, it is difficult to imagine investors here being prepared to pay the mooted $1bn for a 25 to 30 per cent stake in a business that is loss-making after the costs of servicing its debt unless star players are sold.

Then there is the political factor – the green and gold campaign of the Manchester United Supporters Trust has been less vociferous this year, but would no doubt resurface in the run up to aLondon flotation, muddying the waters for the IPO still further.

Asia, then, looks more promising, particularly as the Glazers need the highest valuation possible – for the sake of the money itself, of course, but also to justify the short shrift given to the Red Knights, the group of wealthy businessmen who held discussions a year or so ago about bidding £1bn for the club.

However, Man United is still picking its market carefully. Singapore now appears to be the club's favoured destination, which looks rather Championship compared to the Premiership that Hong Kong, previously expected to be the IPO venue of choice, would represent. But then Hong Kong's listing rules are more exacting, especially when it comes to the requirements for recent financial performance.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in