The billionaire petrochemicals tycoon Sir Jim Ratcliffe is proposing a full buyout of Manchester United Football Club after three years if he succeeds with a £5bn offer to take control of the Old Trafford outfit.
Sky News has learnt that the Ineos billionaire’s takeover bid includes put-and-call arrangements which would become exercisable in 2026, and which would pave the way for the Glazer family’s complete exit as shareholders.
Image: Ineos chairman Jim Ratcliffe
The disclosure comes just over a week after the Glazers – who have controlled United since 2005 – sought a third round of offers for the club.
Sources said this weekend that Sir Jim’s offer for majority ownership would include the put-and-call options, which if triggered would either force the Glazers to sell their remaining shares to him, or force him to acquire them, at specified future dates.
One insider said the first window to exercise the option would occur three years after the deal completed, with subsequent periods built into the transaction if the first one was not used by either side.
The news may appease some members of United’s fan-base who are implacably opposed to the Glazers retaining an interest in the club they bought for just under £800m in 2005.
The executive co-chairmen, Avram and Joel Glazer, are said to be more reluctant to sell than their siblings, prompting Ineos to structure an offer which would allow them to remain as influential shareholders.
More from Business
A rival bid, from Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani, a Qatari businessman who chairs the Gulf state’s Qatar Islamic Bank, is proposing to buy the entirety of United’s share capital.
Recent reports have suggested that on a valuation basis, Ineos Sport’s offer is higher, although concrete details of the two proposals remain unclear.
Advertisement
Some people involved in the deal expect a decision about a preferred bidder to be made this month.
Later in May, the Red Devils will play in the FA Cup Final against neighbours, Manchester City, while they recently secured their first trophy for six years by beating Newcastle United in the Carabao Cup Final.
In addition to the two proposals which would trigger a change of control, the Glazers have also received at least four credible offers for minority stakes or financing investment in the club.
These include an offer from the giant American financial investor Carlyle, revealed by Sky News last month.
Other financial investors have shown interest in becoming minority investors by providing capital to allow United to revamp the ageing infrastructure of its Old Trafford home and Carrington training ground.
Those which have lodged minority investment proposals with Raine include Elliott Management, the American hedge fund which until recently owned AC Milan; Ares Management Corporation, a US-based alternative investment group; and Sixth Street, which recently bought a 25% stake in the long-term La Liga broadcasting rights to FC Barcelona.
Sky News exclusively revealed last November the Glazer family’s plan to explore a strategic review of the club its members have controlled since 2005, kicking off a five month battle to buy it.
The Raine Group, the merchant bank handling the sale, also oversaw last year’s £2.5bn takeover of Chelsea by a consortium led by Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital.
At a valuation of £5bn – below the Glazers’ rumoured asking price – a sale of Manchester United would become the biggest sports club deal in history.
It would eclipse even the $6bn (£4.8bn) takeover of the Washington Commanders NFL team agreed last month by Josh Harris, an American private equity billionaire.
Part of the justification for such a valuation resides in potential future control of the club’s lucrative broadcast rights, according to bankers, alongside a belief that arguably the world’s most famous sports brand can be commercially exploited more effectively.
United’s New York-listed shares have gyrated wildly in recent weeks amid mixed views about whether a sale of the club is likely.
On Friday, they closed down at $19.07, giving the club a market valuation of just over $3.1bn.
Image: United players celebrate the victory
Manchester United’s largest fans’ group, the Manchester United Supporters Trust, has called for the conclusion of the auction “without further delay”.
“When it was announced in November that the Glazers were undertaking a ‘strategic review’ and inviting offers to buy the club, MUST welcomed the news and went on to urge the majority owners to move ahead with the process with speed, so that any period of uncertainty was as short as possible”, it said in a statement last month.
The Glazers’ 18-year tenure has been dogged by controversy and protests, with the lack of a Premier League title since Sir Alex Ferguson’s retirement as manager in 2013 fuelling fans’ anger at the debt-fuelled nature of their takeover.
Fury at its participation in the ill-fated European Super League crystallised supporters’ desire for new owners to replace the Glazers, although a sale to state-affiliated Middle Eastern investors would – like Newcastle United’s Saudi-led takeover – not be without controversy.
Confirming the launch of the strategic review in November, Avram and Joel Glazer said: “The strength of Manchester United rests on the passion and loyalty of our global community of 1.1bn fans and followers.
“We will evaluate all options to ensure that we best serve our fans and that Manchester United maximizes the significant growth opportunities available to the club today and in the future.”
The Glazers listed a minority stake in the company in New York in 2012 but retained overwhelming control through a dual-class share structure which means they hold almost all voting rights.
For the last two years, the club has been promising to introduce a modestly sized supporter ownership scheme that would give fans shares with the same structure of voting rights as the Glazers.
The initiative has, however, yet to be launched despite a pledge to have it operational by the start of the 2021-22 season.
“Love United, Hate Glazers” has become a familiar refrain during their tenure, with supporters critical of a perceived lack of investment in the club, even as the owners have taken huge dividends as a result of its continued commercial success.
The UK’s biggest housebuilders are set to pay a record sum to fund affordable housing after the competition regulator investigated sensitive information sharing among the firms.
A total of £100m, paid for by seven companies, will go to affordable housing programmes across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, following a Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigation.
The inquiry was launched last year due to concerns that the companies were sharing commercially sensitive information, which could influence the prices of new homes.
There was concern that the housebuilders – Barratt Redrow, Bellway, Berkeley Group, Bloor Homes, Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey and Vistry – exchanged details about property sales, including pricing, viewing numbers and buyer incentives such as upgraded kitchens or stamp duty contributions.
It’s resulted in an agreement to make the combined £100m payment – the largest secured via a commitment from companies under CMA investigation. Hundreds of new homes could be funded with the money, the CMA said, helping low-income households, first-time buyers and vulnerable people.
The businesses have voluntarily agreed to pay the sum and have not acknowledged wrongdoing. No finding of rule-breaking or illegality has been made.
More on Cma
Related Topics:
What next?
They have also offered to sign up to legally binding commitments to prevent anticompetitive behaviour.
Among the proposals advanced by the companies was an agreement not to share some information, like prices houses were sold for, with other housebuilders, except in limited circumstances, and to work with the Home Builders Federation and Homes for Scotland to develop industry-wide guidance on information sharing.
If accepted, the commitments will become legally binding, and the CMA will not need to decide whether the housebuilders broke competition law.
Initially, eight companies were under investigation, but following a merger of Barratt Homes and Redrow, the number became seven.
“Housing is a critical sector for the UK economy and housing costs are a substantial part of people’s monthly spend, so it’s essential that competition works well. This keeps prices as low as possible and increases choice,” the CMA chief executive, Sarah Cardell, said.
At least 13 people may have taken their own lives after being accused of wrongdoing based on evidence from the Horizon IT system that the Post Office and developers Fujitsu knew could be false, the public inquiry has found.
A further 59 people told the inquiry they considered ending their lives, 10 of whom tried on at least one occasion, while other postmasters and family members recount suffering from alcoholism and mental health disorders including anorexia and depression, family breakup, divorce, bankruptcy and personal abuse.
Writing in the first volume of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry report, chairman Sir Wyn Williams concludes that this enormous personal toll came despite senior employees at the Post Office knowing the Horizon IT system could produce accounts “which were illusory rather than real” even before it was rolled out to branches.
Sir Wyn said: “I am satisfied from the evidence that I have heard that a number of senior, and not so senior, employees of the Post Office knew or, at the very least, should have known that Legacy Horizon was capable of error… Yet, for all practical purposes, throughout the lifetime of Legacy Horizon, the Post Office maintained the fiction that its data was always accurate.”
Referring to the updated version of Horizon, known as Horizon Online, which also had “bugs errors and defects” that could create illusory accounts, he said: “I am satisfied that a number of employees of Fujitsu and the Post Office knew that this was so.”
The first volume of the report focuses on what Sir Wyn calls the “disastrous” impact of false accusations made against at least 1,000 postmasters, and the various redress schemes the Post Office and government has established since miscarriages of justice were identified and proven.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:28
‘It stole a lot from me’
Recommendations regarding the conduct of senior management of the Post Office, Fujitsu and ministers will come in a subsequent report, but Sir Wyn is clear that unjust and flawed prosecutions were knowingly pursued.
“All of these people are properly to be regarded as victims of wholly unacceptable behaviour perpetrated by a number of individuals employed by and/or associated with the Post Office and Fujitsu from time to time and by the Post Office and Fujitsu as institutions,” he says.
What are the inquiry’s recommendations?
Calling for urgent action from government and the Post Office to ensure “full and fair compensation”, he makes 19 recommendations including:
• Government and the Post Office to agree a definition of “full and fair” compensation to be used when agreeing payouts • Ending “unnecessarily adversarial attitude” to initial offers that have depressed the value of payouts, and ensuring consistency across all four compensation schemes • The creation of a standing body to administer financial redress to people wronged by public bodies • Compensation to be extended to close family members of those affected who have suffered “serious negative consequences” • The Post Office, Fujitsu and government agreeing a programme for “restorative justice”, a process that brings together those that have suffered harm with those that have caused it
Regarding the human impact of the Post Office’s pursuit of postmasters, including its use of unique powers of prosecution, Sir Wyn writes: “I do not think it is easy to exaggerate the trauma which persons are likely to suffer when they are the subject of criminal investigation, prosecution, conviction and sentence.”
He says that even the process of being interviewed under caution by Post Office investigators “will have been troubling at best and harrowing at worst”.
The report finds that those wrongfully convicted were “subject to hostile and abusive behaviour” in their local communities, felt shame and embarrassment, with some feeling forced to move.
Detailing the impact on close family members of those prosecuted, Sir Wyn writes: “Wives, husbands, children and parents endured very significant suffering in the form of distress, worry and disruption to home life, in employment and education.
“In a number of cases, relationships with spouses broke down and ended in divorce or separation.
“In the most egregious cases, family members themselves suffered psychiatric illnesses or psychological problems and very significant financial losses… their suffering has been acute.”
The report includes 17 case studies of those affected by the scandal including some who have never spoken publicly before. They include Millie Castleton, daughter of Lee Castleton, one of the first postmasters prosecuted.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:34
Three things you need to know about Post Office report
She told the inquiry how her family being “branded thieves and liars” affected her mental health, and contributed to a diagnosis of anorexia that forced her to drop out of university.
Her account concludes: “Even now as I go into my career, I still find it so incredibly hard to trust anyone, even subconsciously. I sabotage myself by not asking for help with anything.
“I’m trying hard to break this cycle but I’m 26 and am very conscious that I may never be able to fully commit to natural trust. But my family is still fighting. I’m still fighting, as are many hundreds involved in the Post Office trial.”
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the inquiry’s report “marks an important milestone for sub-postmasters and their families”.
He added that he was “committed to ensuring wronged sub-postmasters are given full, fair, and prompt redress”.
“The recommendations contained in Sir Wyn’s report require careful reflection, including on further action to complete the redress schemes,” Mr Reynolds said.
“Government will promptly respond to the recommendations in full in parliament.”
The UK’s public finances are in a “relatively vulnerable position”, the government’s official forecaster has warned.
The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) cited a drag from successive economic shocks, recent U-turns on spending cuts and higher-than-expected policy commitments.
It sounded alarm over the projected path for debt as a result, in its annual fiscal risks and sustainability report.
It saw total debt above 270% of gross domestic product (GDP) by the early 2070s – up from a current level of 96.5% – declaring that rising debts have led to “a substantial erosion of the UK’s capacity to respond to future shocks”.
The OBR’s report highlighted damage from the COVID pandemic and cost of living crisis that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
But it raised fears that past and current government policies were further harming the sustainability of the public finances.
More from Money
The report said that the pension triple lock, for example, was now estimated to cost £15.5bn annually by 2029-30.
That was “around three times higher than initial expectations”, it said.
The lock, which rises each year in line with inflation, wage growth or 2.5% – whichever is higher – had risen by more than the 2.5% base in eight of the 13 years of operation to date, the report stated.
The watchdog said it reflected more volatile inflation than expected.
It also picked up on the latest government U-turns over planned welfare and winter fuel payment cuts in the face of rebellions by Labour MPs.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
9:11
Welfare U-turn ‘has come at cost’
The decisions are expected to leave Chancellor Rachel Reeves facing a black hole of £6.75bn while weaker-than-expected economic growth could add a further £9bn to that sum in the run-up to the autumn budget, according to Sky News projections that see a void of around £20bn.
The OBR highlighted future risks from rising defence spending and the impact of climate change.
Public sector pay demands could also prove a drag, with resident doctors voting in favour of strikes over pay.
While ministers acknowledge damage to the public purse from the U-turns, Ms Reeves has repeatedly ruled out a new wave of borrowing to fund a spending spree.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:56
Could the rich be taxed to fill black hole?
As such, the government has not ruled out the prospect of some form of wealth tax to help meet its commitments despite the top 1% of earners contributing almost a third of all income tax already – on top of other targeted taxes such as capital gains.
The report said: “Efforts to put the UK’s public finances on a more sustainable footing have met with only limited and temporary success in recent years in the aftermath of the shocks, debt has also continued to rise and borrowing remained elevated because governments have reversed plans to consolidate the public finances.
“Planned tax rises have been reversed, and, more significantly, planned spending reductions have been abandoned.”
Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said of the report: “The OBR’s report lays bare the damage: Britain now has the third-highest deficit and the fourth-highest debt burden in Europe, with borrowing costs among the highest in the developed world.
“Under Rachel Reeves’ economic mismanagement and Keir Starmer’s weak leadership, our public finances have become dangerously exposed – vulnerable to future shocks, welfare spending rising unsustainably, taxes rising to record highs and crippling levels of debt interest.
“Labour’s recklessness risks it all – your pension, your job, your home, your savings.”
A Number 10 spokesman said: “We recognise the realities set out in the OBR’s report and we’re taking the decisions needed to provide stability to the public finances.”