Connect with us

Published

on

Sir Jim Ratcliffe, the petrochemicals billionaire, is contemplating buying a minority stake in Manchester United Football Club rather than seeking full control, in an effort to end a nearly 10 months-long process to resolve the club’s future ownership.

Sky News has learnt Sir Jim’s Ineos Sports vehicle has proposed to the controlling Glazer family a deal that would see it acquiring chunks of both their shares and the stock publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in equal proportion.

That offer would entail making an offer at the same price for both sets of shares, with one suggestion on Monday evening being that Sir Jim could seek a roughly 25% stake in the club as part of his latest proposal.

It would need to be pitched at a valuation that the Glazers would accept, implying that Ineos Sports could spend in the region of £1.5bn if it was to acquire a quarter of United’s shares – based on earlier reports that they were seeking a minimum valuation of £6bn.

If such a deal was to be implemented, however, the Glazers would almost certainly remain in control at Old Trafford, having taken control of the club in 2005.

 Sir Jim Ratcliffe and Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad Al Thani of Qatar have both made second, improved bids for Manchester United, the PA news agency understands.
Image:
Sir Jim Ratcliffe could seek a 25% stake in the club as part of his latest proposal

That would anger United supporters who have been vocal in their opposition to the family’s continued ownership, and would in turn raise a series of further questions about the club’s future.

On the pitch, the men’s team has had an indifferent start to the 2023-24 campaign, being beaten at home by Crystal Palace in the Premier League last weekend, and losing their first Champions League fixture of the season.

More from UK

One uncertainty on Monday evening related to the extent to which the Glazers and their advisers at Raine Group were engaged with Sir Jim on his minority stake proposal.

The family, who paid just under £800m in 2005, has remained inscrutable throughout the process and has said nothing of substance to the NYSE since the process of engaging with prospective buyers kicked off last November.

Another would be whether an offer to bring Sir Jim in as a major shareholder would raise any new capital to invest in the club, which is working towards a major renovation of Old Trafford.

The structure of an offer to acquire a minority stake is also unclear, with one analyst suggesting it could be undertaken through a process known as a tender offer.

Bloomberg News reported last week that Ineos was looking to restructure its bid without specifying details of how this would be achieved.

Some holders of the publicly traded stock – called A shares – have raised concerns about Sir Jim’s previous proposals, which focused on acquiring a majority stake in the club by buying shares from the six Glazer siblings who own the class of B shares which carry disproportionate voting rights.

Another uncertainty would centre on whether a minority deal, if agreed and implemented, would give Ineos Sports an eventual path to full control of Manchester United.

OLD TRAFFOD

Sky News revealed in May that its offer at the time included put-and-call arrangements that would become exercisable three years after a takeover to enable Sir Jim to acquire the remainder of the club’s shares.

The Monaco-based billionaire, who owns the Ligue 1 side Nice, had been focused on gaining control of Manchester United, meaning that switching his offer to a minority deal would represent a significant shift.

He is still understood to want to buy a majority stake but has pitched a restructured deal in an attempt to unblock the ongoing impasse over United’s future.

An Ineos spokesperson declined to comment on Monday, citing the terms of the non-disclosure agreement the bidders had signed as part of the process.

For months, Ineos has been pitched in a two-way battle for control of Manchester United against Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani, a Qatari businessman who chairs the Gulf state’s Qatar Islamic Bank.

Sheikh Jassim’s bid is reported to remain on the table, and the convoluted nature of the strategic review initiated by the Glazers late last year means that a revised proposal from the Middle East cannot entirely be ruled out.

The club’s executive co-chairmen, Avram and Joel Glazer, have been reported during the course of the process to be more reluctant to sell than their siblings.

In addition to the competing bids from Sir Jim and Sheikh Jassim, the Glazers received several credible offers for minority stakes or financing to fund investment in the club.

Manchester United's Chairman Avie Glaze before the League Cup final soccer match between Manchester United and Newcastle United
Image:
Avram Glazer is the club’s co-executive chairman

These include an offer from the giant American financial investor Carlyle; 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.

These were designed to provide capital to overhaul United’s ageing physical infrastructure.

Part of the Glazers’ justification for attaching such a huge valuation to the club resides in the possibility of it gaining greater control in future of its lucrative broadcast rights, 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 months as reports have suggested that either a deal is close or that the Glazers were about to formally cancel the sale process.

On Monday, they were trading at around $19.43, giving the club a market valuation of $3.25bn.

Earlier this year, Manchester United’s largest fans’ group, the Manchester United Supporters Trust, called for the conclusion of the auction “without further delay”.

The Glazers’ 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.

Manchester United fans
Image:
Manchester United fans want the Glazer family to sell the club

Fury at its participation in the ill-fated European Super League crystallised supporters’ desire for new owners to replace the Glazers.

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.

“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 reaped large dividends as a result of its continued profitability.

A Manchester United spokesman declined to comment on Monday.

Continue Reading

Business

Interest rate cut to 4.25% by Bank of England

Published

on

By

Interest rate cut to 4.25% by Bank of England

The Bank of England has cut interest rates from 4.5% to 4.25%, citing Donald Trump’s trade war as one of the key reasons for the reduction in borrowing costs.

In a decision taken shortly before the official confirmation of a trade deal between Britain and the United States, the Bank’s monetary policy committee (MPC) voted to reduce borrowing costs in the UK, saying the economy would be slightly weaker and inflation lower in part as a result of higher tariffs.

However, it stopped short of predicting that the trade war would trigger a recession.

Money latest: What rate cut means for you

Further rate cuts are expected in the coming months, though there remains some uncertainty about how fast and how far the MPC will cut – since it was split three ways on this latest vote.

Two members of the nine-person MPC voted to reduce rates by even more today, taking them down to 4%. But another two on the committee voted not to cut them at all, leaving them instead at 4.5%.

In the event, five members voted for the quarter point cut – enough to tip the balance – with the accompanying minutes saying that while “the current impact of the global trade news should not be overstated, the news was sufficient for those members to judge that a reduction in Bank Rare was warranted.”

Even so, the Bank’s analysis suggests that while higher tariffs were likely to depress global and UK economic growth, and help push down inflation, the impact would be relatively minor, with growth only 0.3% lower and inflation only 0.2% lower.

Governor, Andrew Bailey, said: “Inflationary pressures have continued to ease, so we’ve been able to cut rates again today.

“The past few weeks have shown how unpredictable the global economy can be. That’s why we need to stick to a gradual and careful approach to further rate cuts. Ensuring low and stable inflation is our top priority.”

Read more:
Federal Reserve eyes impact from Trump tariffs

The Bank raised its forecast for UK economic growth this year from 0.75% to 1%, but said that was primarily because of unexpectedly strong output in the first quarter.

In fact, underlying economic growth remains weak at just 0.1% a quarter.

It said that while inflation was expected to rise further in the coming months, peaking at 3.5% in the third quarter, it would drop down thereafter, settling at just below 2% towards the end of next year.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump set to announce US will agree trade deal with UK, Sky News understands

Published

on

By

Trump set to announce US will agree trade deal with UK, Sky News understands

Donald Trump is set to announce that America will agree a trade deal with the UK, Sky News understands.

A government source has told Sky’s deputy political editor Sam Coates that initial reports about the agreement in The New York Times are correct.

Coates says he understands a “heads of terms” agreement, essentially a preliminary arrangement, has been agreed which is a “substantive” step towards a full deal.

Three sources familiar with the reported plans had earlier told the New York Times that the US president will announce on Thursday that the UK and US will agree a trade deal.

Shortly after the report emerged the value of the British pound rose by 0.4% against the US dollar.

Mr Trump had earlier teased that he would be announcing a major trade deal in the Oval Office at 10am local time (3pm UK time) on Thursday without specifying which country it had been agreed with.

Writing in a post on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday, he said the news conference announcing the deal would be held with “representatives of a big, and highly respected, country”.

More from US

He did not offer more details but said the announcement would be the “first of many”.

A White House spokesperson has declined to comment on the New York Times report.

Senior Trump officials have been engaging in a flurry of meetings with trading partners since the US president announced his “liberation day” tariffs on both the US’ geopolitical rivals and allies on 2 April.

Mr Trump imposed a 10% tariff on most countries including the UK during the announcement, along with higher “reciprocal” tariff rates for many trading partners.

However those reciprocal tariffs were later suspended for 90 days.

Britain was not among the countries hit with the higher reciprocal tariffs because it imports more from the US than it exports there.

However, the UK was still impacted by a 25% tariff on all cars and all steel and aluminium imports to the US.

A UK official said on Tuesday that the two countries had made good progress on a trade deal that would likely include lower tariff quotas on steel and cars.

Read more:
UK chancellor outlines red lines for US trade deal
Will MPs get a vote on a trade deal with Donald Trump?

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump Tariffs: How the 10 days unfolded

Mr Trump said the same day that he and top administration officials would review potential trade deals with other countries over the next two weeks to decide which ones to accept.

Last week he said that he has “potential” trade deals with India, South Korea and Japan.

Asked on Sky News’ Breakfast programme about the UK-EU summit on 19 May and how Mr Starmer would balance relationships with the US and EU, Coates said: “I think it is politically helpful for Keir Starmer to have got the heads of terms, the kind of main points of a US-UK trade deal, nailed down before we see what we have negotiated with the EU — or, more importantly, Donald Trump sees what we have negotiated with the EU.”

Coates said there was “always a danger” that if it happened the other way around, Mr Trump would “take umbrage” at negotiations with the EU and “downgrade, alter or put us further back in the queue” when it came to a UK-US trade deal.

US and Chinese officials to discuss trade war

It comes as the US and China have been engaged in an escalating trade war since Mr Trump took office in January.

The Trump administration has raised tariffs on Chinese goods to 145% while Beijing has responded with levies of 125% in recent weeks.

US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent and US trade representative Jamieson Greer are set to meet their Chinese counterparts in Switzerland this week to discuss the trade war.

China has made the de-escalation of the tariffs a requirement for trade negotiations, which the meetings are supposed to help establish.

Continue Reading

Business

UK-India trade deal: Is Farage right to call out ‘big tax exemption’?

Published

on

By

UK-India trade deal: Is Farage right to call out 'big tax exemption'?

Britain’s trade deal with India has created a pocket of controversy on taxation.

Under the agreement, Indian workers who have been seconded to Britain temporarily will not have to pay National Insurance (NI) contributions in the UK. Instead, they will continue to pay the Indian exchequer.

The same applies to British workers in India. It avoids workers from being taxed twice for a full suite of benefits they will not receive, such as the state pension.

Money latest: How dynamic pricing is coming to UK restaurants

Politicians of all stripes have leapt to judgement.

Nigel Farage has described it as a “big tax exemption” for Indian workers. He said it was “impossible to say how many will come,” with the Reform Party warning of “more mass immigration, more pressure on the NHS, more pressure on housing.”

But, is this deal really undercutting British workers or is it simply creating a level playing field?

More from Money

Be wary of any hasty conclusions. In the absence of an impact assessment from the government, it is difficult to be precise about any of this. However, at first glance, it is unlikely that some of Reform’s worst fears will play out.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Whisky boss toasts India trade deal

Firstly, avoiding double taxation is not the same thing as a “tax break.’ This type of agreement, known as a double contribution convention, is not new.

Britain has similar arrangements with other countries and blocs, including the US, EU, Canada and Japan.

It’s based on the principle that workers shouldn’t be paying twice for social security taxes that they will not benefit from.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

UK-India trade deal explained

Indian workers and businesses will still have to pay the equivalent tax in India, as well as sponsorship fees and the NHS surcharge.

Crucially, the deal only applies to workers being sent over by Indian companies on a temporary basis.

Those workers are on Indian payroll. It does not apply to Indian workers more generally. That means businesses in the UK can’t (and won’t) suddenly be replacing all their workers with Indians.

Read more:
What’s in the UK-India trade deal?
India trade deal: The devil is in the detail

The conditions for a company to send over a secondee on a work visa are restrictive. It means it’s unlikely that these workers will be replacing British workers.

However, It does mean that the exchequer will not capture the extra national insurance tax from those who come over on this route.

The government has not shared its impact assessment for how many extra Indians they expect to come over on this route, how much NI they will escape, or how much this will be offset by extra income tax from those Indians. The net financial position is therefore murky.

Continue Reading

Trending