United to pay PIK debts in full

Originally Posted by Coracao

Murmurings on the streets that we've sold a replica European Cup to the Sheikh for £250m.

[quote=Harri Jaffa;2232752][quote=Albert Tatlock;2232704]It isn't, but...

Since they refinanced the senior debt, i.e. the 500 million, they are allowed to take out 70 million or so per year in dividends, so although the PIKs are technically their responsibility, it's United that will utimately pay for them. Their @#%&!ishness knows no bounds...[/QUOTE]

I genuinely still don't understand how they are legally allowed to do what they have done[/QUOTE]

I'm the same mate. I genuinely cannot get my head around it.

They've not taken any money out of the club peeps...

Originally Posted by Coracao

Thanks for that, Keynes.

ive got a quiet admiration for joel from a purely a business perspective.

his plan is currently approaching 60% complete.....

as a fan. he is a @#%&! obviously.

Originally Posted by marlo

ive got a quiet admiration for joel from a purely a business perspective.

his plan is currently approaching 60% complete.....

as a fan. he is a @#%&! obviously.

You're a cheeky little bugger, you know what you're doing!

I'm going to sit back and watch.

Some of you £#%&!ers can't even figure out how to quote properly, so I'm not surprised high finance is beyond you.

I don't understand any of it either

Originally Posted by Grimson

Some of you £#%&!ers can't even figure out how to quote properly, so I'm not surprised high finance is beyond you.

I don't understand any of it either

" "

Originally Posted by safingtons

NO money has been taken from the club.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...rate-debt.html

They must be off, surely?

Hmmm, so where has the money come from...

Perhaps a loan (taken out against United) to pay off the full amount. They can then claim no club funds were used, but the debt mountain United's responsible for gets higher. Either that or they've sold a share of the club.

@#%&!s.

If as it seems from Bloomberg they haven't taken the club's money I'm curious to see where and how they've managed to borrow the money to give themselves a better deal. Unless they've sold a stake in the club. Which seems out of character.

Originally Posted by marlo

ive got a quiet admiration for joel from a purely a business perspective.

his plan is currently approaching 60% complete.....

as a fan. he is a @#%&! obviously.

Of course you do. Both got an easy life off the back of daddy's hard work.

You've got a lot in common.

Originally Posted by RedMenace

If as it seems from Bloomberg they haven't taken the club's money I'm curious to see where and how they've managed to borrow the money to give themselves a better deal. Unless they've sold a stake in the club. Which seems out of character.

Surely they'd sell their stake in other assets first.

Originally Posted by jem

pretty much.

Well, if thats it Ive got to agree with Benson

Youve got to admire the neck of these @#%&!s in a roundabout way

they can't take more than a certain amount of money out of the club but can they use the club's assets as collateral for a loan? using, say, old trafford itself as collateral would help them borrow money relatively cheap, or at least cheaper than the piks.

Originally Posted by Coracao

Surely they'd sell their stake in other assets first.

or else they've found some nutter willing to pay 1.5 billion to buy the club from them..

Originally Posted by borsuk

they can't take more than a certain amount of money out of the club but can they use the club's assets as collateral for a loan? using, say, old trafford itself as collateral would help them borrow money relatively cheap, or at least cheaper than the piks.

ding ding ding

naming rights????

Originally Posted by borsuk

they can't take more than a certain amount of money out of the club but can they use the club's assets as collateral for a loan? using, say, old trafford itself as collateral would help them borrow money relatively cheap, or at least cheaper than the piks.

I may be wrong but I thought that all the assets of the club were used to secure the bond... or were they ?

Originally Posted by Harry Flashman

ding ding ding

naming rights????

that would still be money coming into the club which they are not allowed to take out, if i understand correctly. they can't draw on the club's income or cash pile, above the £70m already mentioned.

however, using the club's assets as collateral might be allowed, i don't know.

Originally Posted by Albert Tatlock

I may be wrong but I thought that all the assets of the club were used to secure the bond... or were they ?

Carrington wasn't

Originally Posted by borsuk

they can't take more than a certain amount of money out of the club but can they use the club's assets as collateral for a loan? using, say, old trafford itself as collateral would help them borrow money relatively cheap, or at least cheaper than the piks.

Getting rid of the PIK debt would be a positive spin the @#%&!s would try to put on a doomsday scenario such as that , the quarterly results are announced soon aren't they? Doom.

Originally Posted by Coracao

Surely they'd sell their stake in other assets first.

Their other main assets are in property in the US south so I'm not sure they've got much to sell. The most likely outcome to me is the sale of a stake.