GLAZER'S PLANS EXPOSED AGAIN

Since Sunday two separate documents from within Glazer’s camp have exposed his plans to:

-Sell Old Trafford
- Limit Fergie’s transfer budget to £10m
- Aggressively increase ticket prices
- Prostitute the naming rights to Old Trafford
- Jeopardise the future of the club through “junk bonds”

This scenario is even worse than the anti-Glazer campaign would have thought. Glazer’s representatives such as Brunswick and Ridley are furiously trying to deny the documents are genuine but they were passed on to one City-based RI contact so we know (as does anyone else with a brain) not to believe Brunswick’s protestations.

From the Guardian:

Malcolm Glazer's camp was furiously denying yesterday that the American's plans for Manchester United involved raising £500m, including £150m in junk bonds. Yet as every day passes the Buccaneer looks like a loser in his attempt to buy the Premiership's richest club.

Whether it is £500m or £400m or £300m, not even Glazer's biggest fans would deny his plans involve heavy leverage. In the absence of any formal details, the best we have is the view of United's directors. They threw it out as bad for the company, full stop.

There is an argument here about whether the directors were acting in shareholders' interests, but Glazer should not waste time bleating over this. His problem is practical: without the say-so of the board he cannot conduct due diligence; without due diligence, JP Morgan and its syndicate will not advance £300m, let alone £500m. In other words, going hostile is not a realistic option.

Glazer's plan now seems to be to try to persuade Cubic, with its 29% stake, to put pressure on the board to reverse the decision. The hope seems to be that JP McManus and John Magnier, despite turning away Glazer at the outset, would like to be shot of their investment and are really sellers at 310p-ish.

Who knows, maybe they are, but so what? It would not alter the board's analysis of Glazer's plans as being bad for United.

If Glazer, with or without the Irish, wants to press the matter, he can call an extraordinary meeting and put it to a vote. If he won, the board would presumably have to resign. That radical step of calling an extraordinary meeting still seems to be under consideration, but momentum is rapidly running away from Glazer.

JP Morgan went into this fight with its eyes open, but is it really prepared, if necessary, to overthrow an independent, popular board? That is where Glazer is at.