Utds value soars past $3b

First sports club ever to do so. Almost 50% more than 2nd placed Dallas cowboys at $2.1b
Madness lol

What about the debt though? We're higher up on the revenue charts

I'll get on that..
Revenueeans nothing, your production costs for shirts etc eat waaaay into that.
I think it's soared because of the revenue stream from next year on, the record Chrysler and tv deal sent us over the top.
Our debt is nothing these days since the ipo

Its almost more impressive that the cowboys are number 2 considering they haven't won anything since 1996

cyberman wrote:I'll get on that..
Revenueeans nothing, your production costs for shirts etc eat waaaay into that.
I think it's soared because of the revenue stream from next year on, the record Chrysler and tv deal sent us over the top.
Our debt is nothing these days since the ipo

Whatever you say

EPL marketing strategists

POLISH THOSE TURDS, POLISH THEM HARDER

Value doesn't mean a turd.

For instance, Value of Barça real state assets is very low since most of them were bought 50+ years ago and its value has not been updated.

The only real important value data is the value of the players and the value of the brand (rough indicator of Club income ability and fanbase).

And we would surely be on top regarding the players' value and probably top 3 on brand value.

free_cat wrote:Value doesn't mean a turd.

For instance, Value of Barça real state assets is very low since most of them were bought 50+ years ago and its value has not been updated.

The only real important value data is the value of the players and the value of the brand (rough indicator of Club income ability and fanbase).

And we would surely be on top regarding the players' value and probably top 3 on brand value.

+1

We gunners always get fooled by our CEO how our club is valuable.

Everything is perfect at the Arsenal FC but what matters most, our players are not so valuable considering their performance.

Forbes, the tabloid of the financial world and their enterprise value's of sports teams

As if anyone would spend that much to buy Manchester United.

It's funny that you're so desperate. Citing Forbes team valuations, trying to use the rise of the stock price as an argument when the amount of share's traded is extremely low. (If any major moves are made the price will tank - what's the point of A shares if you can't trade them? - that's why they were only sold to supporters & families and the banks wont touch them.)

What I'm trying to figure out is what are you desperate for?
Is it respect for the Glazers? Because recent achievements financially are due to Gill & Ferguson's reputation.

Who cares about so called "value".

The only valuable things when judging clubs are trophies,players,history,transfer budget and fans.

Barcelona beats United on all of this criteria.Maybe United has more fans in Asia because of how they have marketed over there but Barca has much more real fans in South America,a place were there is football culture and a place which is an important place in football history.

worms wrote:Who cares about so called "value".

The only valuable things when judging clubs are trophies,players,history,transfer budget and fans.

Barcelona beats United on all of this criteria.Maybe United has more fans in Asia because of how they have marketed over there but Barca has much more real fans in South America,a place were there is football culture and a place which is an important place in football history.

No country and culture in the world beats England in terms of passion for football.

Out of subject: you are annoying!

OF course value matters when we've got shares on the freaking market.
Basic economics 101
Player values doesn't matter a squat freecat, it's only valuable to the buyer. What's the point in messi being worth 150m if nobody buys him? What if he runs down his contract and is on a free?
Not realistic to say the least

Omg utd are so stupid to float on this market.. Ahaha stupid glazers... It's goIng bust!bsjares won't trade past 6 ahahahahahaha
3 months later and shares are approaching 18 , club worth stands at 3b$ and It's all whatever.
I'll log on here in the summer and I'll still see outdated posts about debt and not affording players.
Notice how I only stated fact in the op and I get accused of running an agenda?
Must go.. This Forbes magazine won't edit itself..

cyberman wrote:OF course value matters when we've got shares on the freaking market.
Basic economics 101
Player values doesn't matter a squat freecat, it's only valuable to the buyer. What's the point in messi being worth 150m if nobody buys him? What if he runs down his contract and is on a free?
Not realistic to say the least

Ahem. Shares =/= the value of a company's assets. Basic finance 101.

A good example is when airhead journalists claimed Apple was the world's largest company because it's share price was the highest of all time adjusted for inflation. Complete garbage.

What's more is that Man U's shares are split into 2 categories. 1 category of share was kept by the Glazers and management and those shares have 10 votes attached to each individual share. The fans got offered these second class shares that nobody but a true fanatic would buy because you need 10 of them to get 1 vote. In addition, the proportion of each class of shares means that the fans get virtually no say in any matters and that their 2nd class shares are worth virtually nothing. Sure, they can say that they "own part of the club", and that's neat, but so what? As an investment, they just got ripped off. Nobody would ever want to buy them from a fan (except other fans). So, why did Man U list shares on the stock market? To make money, of course! It was basically just a capital raising exercise to pay off some of the club's debt.

free_cat wrote:For instance, Value of Barça real state assets is very low since most of them were bought 50+ years ago and its value has not been updated.

That's not true. Even the turd that is Forbes magazine knows that you update static values like real estate in terms of inflation, and in relation to purchasing power - so you can be sure that Barcas real estate is valued as it would be priced now - because otherwise it would make even less sense, since ManUs real estate would've been bought even longer ago, and what is with real estate that was gifted to the clubs?
By your logic it would be valued at 0. That's not happening, lol.

Hold on, if nobody would buy the shares then why is there a demand for them? What? More utd fans? Fact is people are buying them and not just utd fans.
Surely if they had voting rights then the shares would be worth more?
Estimating utds full worth seems a pretty easy job to do:.

worms wrote:Who cares about so called "value".

The only valuable things when judging clubs are trophies,players,history,transfer budget and fans.

Barcelona beats United on all of this criteria.Maybe United has more fans in Asia because of how they have marketed over there but Barca has much more real fans in South America,a place were there is football culture and a place which is an important place in football history.

Where are you from? That's the most butthurt, racist post I've read here in a long while.
Lot of Asians have one club,of of south Americans have Spanish 2nd clubs. Who's plastic what?

highburied wrote:

worms wrote:Who cares about so called "value".

The only valuable things when judging clubs are trophies,players,history,transfer budget and fans.

Barcelona beats United on all of this criteria.Maybe United has more fans in Asia because of how they have marketed over there but Barca has much more real fans in South America,a place were there is football culture and a place which is an important place in football history.

No country and culture in the world beats England in terms of passion for football.

Out of subject: you are annoying!

LOL,typical SKY propaganda.

Football has only been big in Asia in the last 20 years,it's a fact that Asia has had very little to do with the development and history of football.I don't consider one of their fans as important as ten South American fan.Most Asian football supporters have just been brainwashed by Uniteds and Liverpools to a smaller extent relentless advertising campaign.All the people there support United the brand but they don't really understand football,it's just a part of pop culture over there.They are just exploited as a cash cow for United and I feel sorry for them.

On the other hand having lots of football loving South American fans shows how big and important the likes of Barca and Madrid are,any South American youth dreams of playing for these clubs because of what they stand for.The pinnacle of football,these two clubs are cultural monoliths in South America.

bullsh*t all round, no way yanites (or any football club for that matter) is worth half of the reported figure, jog on cyber ya old man

worms wrote:

highburied wrote:

worms wrote:Who cares about so called "value".

The only valuable things when judging clubs are trophies,players,history,transfer budget and fans.

Barcelona beats United on all of this criteria.Maybe United has more fans in Asia because of how they have marketed over there but Barca has much more real fans in South America,a place were there is football culture and a place which is an important place in football history.

No country and culture in the world beats England in terms of passion for football.

Out of subject: you are annoying!

LOL,typical SKY propaganda.

Have you been in England?

highburied wrote:

worms wrote:

highburied wrote:

No country and culture in the world beats England in terms of passion for football.

Out of subject: you are annoying!

LOL,typical SKY propaganda.

Have you been in England?

I live in England,I was born in England,My Parents are English,My ancestors are English,I am English.

Beat that.

Making money and winning trophies

Also looool at the passion comment, especially in a United thread.

VivaStPauli wrote:

free_cat wrote:For instance, Value of Barça real state assets is very low since most of them were bought 50+ years ago and its value has not been updated.

That's not true. Even the turd that is Forbes magazine knows that you update static values like real estate in terms of inflation, and in relation to purchasing power - so you can be sure that Barcas real estate is valued as it would be priced now - because otherwise it would make even less sense, since ManUs real estate would've been bought even longer ago, and what is with real estate that was gifted to the clubs?
By your logic it would be valued at 0. That's not happening, lol.

So, you are telling me that Forbes magazine, for the sake of just one article, hires a real state valuator who updates the value of every Club real state?

Certainly that's not the case. Perhaps they apply some updating criteria, but seeing the valuations Barça is given (around 1.00 milion, with the squad being valued at around 500 or more milion) I can assure you that it is not an exhaustive market value analysis.

cyberman wrote:OF course value matters when we've got shares on the freaking market.
Basic economics 101
Player values doesn't matter a squat freecat, it's only valuable to the buyer. What's the point in messi being worth 150m if nobody buys him? What if he runs down his contract and is on a free?
Not realistic to say the least

Player values wins you trophies. Football is about entertaining and winning, not about having pricey assets.