Connect with us

Published

on

Sir Jim Ratcliffe is to commit $300m (£245m) from his multibillion pound fortune to Manchester United Football Club’s ageing infrastructure as part of a deal to acquire a 25% stake that will be unveiled this month.

Sky News can exclusively reveal that Sir Jim, founder of the Ineos petrochemicals empire, will pledge the investment alongside the acquisition of a shareholding likely to be worth more than £1.25bn.

Sources said on Friday that the £245m investment would be staggered, with the bulk of it being handed to the club by the end of the year.

They added that it would be financed by Sir Jim personally and would not add to Manchester United’s existing borrowings.

Sir Jim’s purchase of a 25% stake in the Red Devils – first revealed by Sky News last month – will come almost exactly a year after the Glazer family, which has controlled the club since 2005, began formally exploring a sale.

Adding together the cost of the stock purchase and the other capital for investment means that Sir Jim will be committing about £1.5bn on day one of his United interest, although that figure could vary depending on the price he ultimately pays for the shares.

After months of negotiations with several potential buyers, including the Qatari businessman Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani, the British billionaire’s acquisition of a minority stake has emerged as the Glazers’ preferred option.

Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani
Pic:QIB
Image:
Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani
Pic:QIB

The deal is expected to be announced within a fortnight, although negotiations between Sir Jim’s team and the Glazers are ongoing, meaning that the timetable for an announcement remains subject to change.

One source close to the talks said the additional $300m investment would be focused on United’s physical infrastructure, and not on addressing deficiencies on the playing side of the club.

The men’s first team has been plunged into crisis after successive 3-0 home defeats in the Premier League by Manchester City, and then by Newcastle United in the Carabao Cup.

Manager Erik Ten Hag is facing intense pressure to turn United’s season around, with a Premier League visit to Fulham this weekend followed by a crucial Champions League game at FC Copenhagen next Wednesday.

The incremental sum to be pledged by Sir Jim will address the concerns of observers who have questioned whether Manchester United will benefit from new investment in Old Trafford, which has fallen well behind the stadia of rivals such as Arsenal, Manchester City and Tottenham Hotspur.

However, United’s home is likely to need far more than £245m to deliver the overhaul required to turn it into one of the world’s elite football grounds again.

Sir Jim is understood to be committed to investing additional sums in future, although it was unclear on Friday whether these will be publicly discussed at the time of the stake purchase.

Several other key questions remain about United’s future ownership, including whether Sir Jim will ultimately seek overall control of the club.

Reports in recent weeks have suggested that he will take immediate control of football matters at the club, alongside Ineos Sports colleagues including Sir Dave Brailsford, the former cycling supremo.

Another area of uncertainty is the precise mechanism that Sir Jim will use to acquire 25% of both the publicly traded A-shares and the class of B-shares held by the six Glazer siblings, which carry the overwhelming majority of voting rights.

Analysts have suggested that it could be undertaken through a process known as a tender offer.

The price that Ineos Sports will offer has also yet to be disclosed, although it will be at a very substantial premium to the $17.92 at which they closed on the New York Stock Exchange on Thursday.

Some United fans have expressed disquiet at the prospect of Sir Jim buying a minority stake given that it paves the way for the Glazers’ continued control.

Manchester United fans
Image:
Manchester United fans have been left frustrated by the club’s continued ownership under the Glazer family

The family, who paid just under £800m to buy the club 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.

Earlier iterations of Sir Jim’s offers for the club, which focused on gaining outright control, included put-and-call arrangements that would become exercisable three years after a takeover to enable him to buy out the remainder of the club’s shares.

The Monaco-based billionaire, who owns the Ligue 1 side Nice, pitched a restructured deal last month in an attempt to unblock the ongoing impasse over United’s future.

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.

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.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

September: Why Man United’s share price has sunk

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 absence 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 proposed participation in the ill-fated European Super League project in 2021 crystallised supporters’ desire for new owners to replace the Glazers.

Confirming the launch of the strategic review last 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.

“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 ability to generate sizeable profits.

Ineos and Manchester United both declined to comment.

Continue Reading

Business

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry’s row lingers

Published

on

By

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry's row lingers

Shares in The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) have fallen slightly on debut after the completion of its spin-off from Unilever amid a continuing civil war with one of its best-known brands.

Shares in the Netherlands-based company are trading for the first time following the demerger.

It creates the world’s biggest ice cream company, controlling around one fifth of the global market.

Primary Magnum shares, in Amsterdam, opened at €12.20 – down on the €12.80 reference price set by the EuroNext exchange, though they later settled just above that level, implying a market value of €7.9bn – just below £7bn.

The company is also listed in London and New York.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

Unilever stock was down 3.1% on the FTSE 100 in the wake of the spin off.

More from Money

The demerger allows London-headquartered Unilever to concentrate on its wider stable of consumer brands, including Marmite, Dove soap and Domestos.

The decision to hive off the ice cream division, made in early 2024, gives a greater focus on a market that is tipped to grow by up to 4% each year until 2029.

Ben & Jerry's accounts for a greater volume of group revenue now under TMICC. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Ben & Jerry’s accounts for a greater volume of group revenue now under TMICC. Pic: Reuters

But it has been dogged by a long-running spat with the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s, which now falls under the TMICC umbrella and accounts for 14% of group revenue.

Unilever bought the US brand in 2000, but the relationship has been sour since, despite the creation of an independent board at that time aimed at protecting the brand’s social mission.

The most high-profile spat came in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s took the decision not to sell ice cream in Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories on the grounds that sales would be “inconsistent” with its values.

Unilever responded by selling the business to its licensee in Israel.

A series of rows have followed akin to a tug of war, with Magnum refusing repeated demands by the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s to sell the brand back.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sept: ‘Free Ben & Jerry’s’

Magnum and Unilever argue its mission has strayed beyond what was acceptable back in 2000, with the brand evolving into one-sided advocacy on polarising topics that risk reputational and business damage.

TMICC is currently trying to remove the chair of Ben & Jerry’s independent board.

It said last month that Anuradha Mittal “no longer meets the criteria” to serve after internal investigations.

An audit of the separate Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, where she is also a trustee, found deficiencies in financial controls and governance. Magnum said the charitable arm risked having funding removed unless the alleged problems were addressed.

The Reuters news agency has since reported that Ms Mittal has no plans to quit her roles, and accused Magnum of attempts to “discredit” her and undermine the authority of the independent board.

Magnum boss Peter ter Kulve said on Monday: “Today is a proud milestone for everyone associated with TMICC. We became the global leader in ice cream as part of the Unilever family. Now, as an independent listed company, we will be more agile, more focused, and more ambitious than ever.”

Commenting on the demerger, Hargreaves Lansdown equity analyst Aarin Chiekrie said: “TMICC is already free cash flow positive, and profitable in its own right. The balance sheet is in decent shape, but dividends are off the cards until 2027 as the group finds its footing as a standalone business.

“That could cause some downward pressure on the share price in the near term, as dividend-focussed investment funds that hold Unilever will be handed TMICC shares, the latter of which they may be forced to sell to abide by their investment mandate.”

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros ‘could be a problem’, Donald Trump says

Published

on

By

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros 'could be a problem', Donald Trump says

Donald Trump has said he will be “involved” in the decision on whether Netflix should be allowed to buy Warner Bros, as the $72bn (£54bn) deal attracts a media industry backlash.

The US president acknowledged in remarks to reporters there “could be a problem”, acknowledging concerns over the streaming giant’s market dominance.

Crucially, he did not say where he stood on the issue.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

It was revealed on Friday that Netflix, already the world’s biggest streaming service by market share, had agreed to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s TV, film studios and HBO Max streaming division.

The deal aims to complete late next year after the Discovery element of the business, mainly legacy TV channels showing cartoons, news and sport, has been spun off.

But the deal has attracted cross-party criticism on competition grounds, and there is also opposition in Hollywood.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Netflix agrees $72bn takeover of Warner Bros

The Writers Guild of America said: “The world’s largest streaming company swallowing one of its biggest competitors is what antitrust laws were designed to prevent.

“The outcome would eliminate jobs, push down wages, worsen conditions for all entertainment workers, raise prices for consumers, and reduce the volume and diversity of content for all viewers.”

File pic: Reuters
Image:
File pic: Reuters

Republican Senator, Roger Marshall, said in a statement: “Netflix’s attempt to buy Warner Bros would be the largest media takeover in history – and it raises serious red flags for consumers, creators, movie theaters, and local businesses alike.

“One company should not have full vertical control of the content and the distribution pipeline that delivers it. And combining two of the largest streaming platforms is a textbook horizontal Antitrust problem.

“Prices, choice, and creative freedom are at stake. Regulators need to take a hard look at this deal, and realize how harmful it would be for consumers and Western society.”

Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the parent company of Sky News, were two other bidders in the auction process that preceded the announcement.

The Reuters news agency, citing information from sources, said their bids were rejected in favour of Netflix for different reasons.

Paramount’s was seen as having funding concerns, they said, while Comcast’s was deemed not to offer so many earlier benefits.

Read more:
Why Netflix could yet get its way in Trump’s America
Netflix flexes its muscles – and could yet get its way

Paramount is run by David Ellison, the son of the Oracle tech billionaire Larry Ellison, who is a close ally of Mr Trump.

The president said of the Netflix deal’s path to regulatory clearance: “I’ll be involved in that decision”.

On the likely opposition to the deal. he added: “That’s going to be for some economists to tell. But it is a big market share. There’s no question it could be a problem.”

Continue Reading

Business

Young people may lose benefits if they don’t engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Published

on

By

Young people may lose benefits if they don't engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Young people could lose their right to universal credit if they refuse to engage with help from a new scheme without good reason, the government has warned.

Almost one million will gain from plans to get them off benefits and into the workforce, according to officials.

Latest updates from the Politics Hub

Pic: iStock
Image:
Pic: iStock

It comes as the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) has risen by more than a quarter since the COVID pandemic, with around 940,000 16 to 24-year-olds considered as NEET as of September this year, said the Office for National Statistics.

That is an increase of 195,000 in the last two years, mainly driven by increasing sickness and disability rates.

The £820m package includes funding to create 350,000 new workplace opportunities, including training and work experience, which will be offered in industries including construction, hospitality and healthcare.

Around 900,000 people on universal credit will be given a “dedicated work support session”.

That will be followed by four weeks of “intensive support” to help them find work in one of up to six “pathways”, which are: work, work experience, apprenticeships, wider training, learning, or a workplace training programme with a guaranteed interview at the end.

However, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden has warned that young people could lose some of their benefits if they refuse to engage with the scheme without good reason.

“Doing nothing should not be an option,” he told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“If someone just took that attitude, yes, they would then be subject to, you know, the obligations that are already part of the system.”

“What I want to see is young people in the habit of getting up in the morning, doing the right thing, going to work,” he added.

“That experience of that obligation, but also the sense of pride and purpose that comes with having a job.”

Some young people on benefits will be offered job opportunities in construction. Pic: iStock
Image:
Some young people on benefits will be offered job opportunities in construction. Pic: iStock

Read more from Sky News:
Child poverty strategy unveiled – but not everyone’s happy

Universal credit claimants soar by over million in a year

The government says these pathways will be delivered in coordination with employers, while government-backed guaranteed jobs will be provided for up to 55,000 young people from spring 2026, but only in those areas with the highest need.

However, shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately, from the Conservatives, said the scheme is “an admission the government has no plan for growth, no plan to create real jobs, and no way of measuring whether any of this money delivers results”.

She told Sky News the proposals are a “classic Labour approach” for tackling youth unemployment.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Youth jobs plan ‘the wrong answer’

“What we’ve seen today announced by the government is funding the best part of £1bn on work placements, and government-created jobs for young people. That sounds all very well,” she told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“But the fact is, and that’s the absurdity of it is, just two weeks ago, we had a budget from the chancellor, which is expected to destroy 200,000 jobs.

“So the problem we have here is a government whose policies are destroying jobs, destroying opportunities for young people, now saying they’re going to spend taxpayers’ money on creating work placements. It’s just simply the wrong answer.”

Ms Whately also said the government needs to tackle people who are unmotivated to work at all, and agreed with Mr McFadden on taking away the right to universal credit if they refuse opportunities to work.

But she said the “main reason” young people are out of work is because “they’re moving on to sickness benefits”.

Ms Whately also pointed to the government’s diminished attempt to slash benefits earlier in the year, where planned welfare cuts were significantly scaled down after opposition from their own MPs.

The funding will also expand youth hubs to help provide advice on writing CVs or seeking training, and also provide housing and mental health support.

Some £34m from the funding will be used to launch a new “Risk of NEET indicator tool”, aimed at identifying those young people who need support before they leave education and become unemployed.

Monitoring of attendance in further education will be bolstered, and automatic enrolment in further education will also be piloted for young people without a place.

Continue Reading

Trending