The Glazer family, the owners of Manchester United, are struggling to refinance their enormous debts amid concerns about the impact they are having on the club.
The Times understands that the Americans have been trying unsuccessfully to secure a refinancing package for part of the club’s £699 million debt for months, having failed in 2007 and last year, because of the bleak global economic climate.
Fans’ groups have cast doubt over whether they will ever see the £80 million raised from the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo, the Portugal forward, to Real Madrid last summer reinvested in the squad.
Dragan Djuric, the Partizan Belgrade president, meanwhile claimed this week that United pulled the plug on a deal to sign Adem Ljajic, the Serbia Under-21 midfield player, because “maybe they are in financial crisisâ€.
United dismissed Djuric’s claims and a spokesman for the Glazer family has maintained publicly that there is plenty of money available for Sir Alex Ferguson, the manager, to spend on players, but supporters are unlikely to be pacified until they see the arrival of some big names or evidence that the spiralling debt is under control. The main concern is understood to centre around the £175.5 million worth of debt that the Glazers are personally responsible for, not the £518.7 million of loans secured against the club.
It is these so-called Payment In Kind (PIK) notes, money borrowed from US hedge funds that “rolls up†at an annual interest rate of 14.25 per cent, that the Americans are believed to have been trying to refinance.
The intention was always to pay off these loans within a few years of the takeover in May 2005, but while they managed to redeem some of the original PIK debt of £275 million, the credit crunch has made this difficult.
By the time the debt matures in 2017, it will stand at £580 million unless the Glazers can pay part or all of it off before then, or secure a preferential rate of interest. With the club also facing rising capital repayments from 2013, the PIK debt is a concern. It grew from £152 million to £175.5 million in one financial year.
Previous reports that the Glazers could persuade the banks to refinance by offering securitisation against future match-day revenues are said to be wide of the mark; ticket sales are already factored into the borrowing.
As such, given that the 14.25 per cent interest rate was agreed the last and only time the Glazers have been able to refinance, in August 2006 when the financial climate was rosier, they will do well to secure a lower rate unless they have something tangible to offer would-be lenders.
It is understood that United are operating well within the financial terms set by their lenders. However, Perry Capital and Citadel — the two US hedge funds that provided the Glazers with PIK loans — get a range of rights over the club in the event that their financial performance falls beneath a certain level, including the right to appoint their own directors to the board.
Ultimately, they could seize control of the club should revenues plummet.
Documents obtained by The Times also reveal that the terms of the loan put a cap on United’s spending.
A spokesman for the Glazer family said: “We continue to keep our financial options for the club under review jut like any other business.â€
The Times understands that the Americans have been trying unsuccessfully to secure a refinancing package for part of the club’s £699 million debt for months, having failed in 2007 and last year, because of the bleak global economic climate.
Fans’ groups have cast doubt over whether they will ever see the £80 million raised from the sale of Cristiano Ronaldo, the Portugal forward, to Real Madrid last summer reinvested in the squad.
Dragan Djuric, the Partizan Belgrade president, meanwhile claimed this week that United pulled the plug on a deal to sign Adem Ljajic, the Serbia Under-21 midfield player, because “maybe they are in financial crisisâ€.
United dismissed Djuric’s claims and a spokesman for the Glazer family has maintained publicly that there is plenty of money available for Sir Alex Ferguson, the manager, to spend on players, but supporters are unlikely to be pacified until they see the arrival of some big names or evidence that the spiralling debt is under control. The main concern is understood to centre around the £175.5 million worth of debt that the Glazers are personally responsible for, not the £518.7 million of loans secured against the club.
It is these so-called Payment In Kind (PIK) notes, money borrowed from US hedge funds that “rolls up†at an annual interest rate of 14.25 per cent, that the Americans are believed to have been trying to refinance.
The intention was always to pay off these loans within a few years of the takeover in May 2005, but while they managed to redeem some of the original PIK debt of £275 million, the credit crunch has made this difficult.
By the time the debt matures in 2017, it will stand at £580 million unless the Glazers can pay part or all of it off before then, or secure a preferential rate of interest. With the club also facing rising capital repayments from 2013, the PIK debt is a concern. It grew from £152 million to £175.5 million in one financial year.
Previous reports that the Glazers could persuade the banks to refinance by offering securitisation against future match-day revenues are said to be wide of the mark; ticket sales are already factored into the borrowing.
As such, given that the 14.25 per cent interest rate was agreed the last and only time the Glazers have been able to refinance, in August 2006 when the financial climate was rosier, they will do well to secure a lower rate unless they have something tangible to offer would-be lenders.
It is understood that United are operating well within the financial terms set by their lenders. However, Perry Capital and Citadel — the two US hedge funds that provided the Glazers with PIK loans — get a range of rights over the club in the event that their financial performance falls beneath a certain level, including the right to appoint their own directors to the board.
Ultimately, they could seize control of the club should revenues plummet.
Documents obtained by The Times also reveal that the terms of the loan put a cap on United’s spending.
A spokesman for the Glazer family said: “We continue to keep our financial options for the club under review jut like any other business.â€
