GLAZER PROFILED

Last updated : 11 October 2004 By editor

’After months of stalking, Glazer has built up a 19% stake in the world’s most famous football club. He now has JP Morgan, the investment bank, working on a bid. Last week United was forced to announce it had received an approach but it has yet to confirm officially that Glazer is behind it. Even so the bid has United fans up in arms.

’Glazer has never set foot in Manchester and he is, to say the least, a controversial businessman. The owner of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers American football club does have his fans in Florida. Before Glazer’s takeover in 1995 the Bucs were a losing team. He built them back up to win the Super Bowl in 2003. But ticket prices have rocketed and, said Bill Poe, the city’s former mayor, Glazer has been a bad owner for the city. He has, he says, “taken every advantage that he could have taken and put very little back in”. Poe is so incensed he has broken a 10-year silence to warn United fans against the Bucs’ boss.

’He is now semi-retired, but his former company, Poe Associates, a real-estate insurance company, was once the 12th largest in America. In 1996, after the Glazers had taken over the Bucs, Poe spent $1m of his own money fighting their plans to move the Bucs’ stadium out of Tampa. Glazer wanted the local authorities to spend hundreds of millions of taxpayers’ dollars building a new stadium. Poe lost and the Raymond James stadium was opened in 1998. Poe said the cost to Tampa was enormous — some $400m, he claims — and that the Glazers had taken far more than they had put back into the city.

’Poe has been asked on many occasions to comment on the Glazers, but has refrained until now. This weekend he said he had decided to speak out after hearing about the Glazers’ potential bid for Man U.


’“The British government and its citizens have been great allies and friends of America,” said Poe. “I would question whether I would want someone like Glazer representing American business in Britain.”

’Tampa’s experience should serve as a warning to Manchester, said Poe. By threatening to move the Bucs out of Tampa, Glazer in effect blackmailed the city into paying for a new stadium. The Glazers now rent the 122-acre complex for $3.5m a year, a figure that Poe said would barely cover the city’s costs.

’“The Glazers will never be helpful or friendly unless they do it for themselves. They are not good citizens,” he said.’

Glazer’s business history:


’When Malcolm Glazer was 15 his father, Abraham, died of cancer. Abraham had fled Russia to make a new life in America as a watchmaker. Malcolm, the eldest son, set out to support his mother, Hanna, five sisters and a brother. Working seven days a week, within five years he had saved enough to start buying property. From there he moved into managing trailer parks.

’Controversy has dogged his mobile-home sites. Residents have sued for poor upkeep and complain of price gouging and extra charges for dogs, $5, and for children, $3.

’When his mother died in 1980, Glazer was well on his way to establishing his fortune, having branched out into shopping malls and other investments. Hanna left $1m in her will and litigation broke out soon after when Malcolm’s brother, Jerome, fell out with a brother-in-law.

’While the decade-long feud continued, Glazer amassed a fortune estimated at $1 billion. He also started to make a series of hostile bids that set the pattern for his stalking of United. Not all paid off and many of them ended in court.

’In 1988 he launched a bid for Formica, the plastic-coverings firm, that ended in court. And in 1991 he went after Harley-Davidson, the motorcycle manufacturer. The management asked for a court injunction and at a hearing Terence Evans, the judge, likened Glazer to “a snake in sheep’s clothing”. His advances were rejected.

’In the 1990s Glazer made a series of failed bids for American sports clubs before bagging the Bucs for $190m in 1995. Glazer started building a stake in United last year, For a long time he refused to see any of the team’s representatives. Even now, with his holding at 19%, United has no clear idea of his intentions.’