Sir Jim Ratcliffe and the Glazer family are on the brink of finalising a $33-a-share deal that will see the petrochemicals tycoon acquiring a 25% stake in Manchester United Football Club.
Sky News can reveal that months of talks between the Ineos billionaire and the Red Devils’ controlling investors for the last 18 years have settled on a price of roughly $33-a-share.
If confirmed, it would represent a premium of more than 75% to Thursday’s New York Stock Exchange closing price of $18.43, which gave the Old Trafford club a market capitalisation of $3.04bn (£2.44bn).
People close to the process cautioned on Friday that the deal had yet to be finalised and remained the subject of ongoing negotiations.
A transaction between the two parties is, however, close to being concluded almost exactly a year to the day since the Glazers confirmed a Sky News report that they were initiating a strategic review of Manchester United‘s ownership.
Sources said it could be announced as soon as Monday, although it could slip by a couple of days.
The Glazers are said to be keen to finalise the deal before the US Thanksgiving holiday begins on Thursday.
Sir Jim’s Ineos Sports plans to acquire 25% of both the listed A-shares and the B-shares, which carry greater voting rights and are held exclusively by the Glazers.
Image: Sir Jim Ratcliffe is seen visiting Manchester United’s facilities earlier this year
Earlier this week, the club confirmed that chief executive Richard Arnold is to leave after just two years in the job, in what is being viewed as a sign of Sir Jim’s influence.
Advertisement
Patrick Stewart, United’s general counsel, will become interim chief executive.
While United won its first trophy for six years by beating Newcastle United to win last season’s Carabao Cup, the last year has largely been one of turbulence on and off the pitch.
Sky News revealed earlier this month that Sir Jim is to commit $300m (£245m) from his multibillion pound fortune to overhauling United’s ageing infrastructure, in addition to more than £1bn he will spend on acquiring a 25% stake.
The funds will be financed by Sir Jim personally and will not add to Manchester United’s existing borrowings.
Reports in recent weeks have suggested that the billionaire will take immediate control of football matters at the club, alongside Ineos Sports colleagues including Sir Dave Brailsford, the former cycling supremo.
Many 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 presence at Old Trafford.
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.
Image: Avram Glazer (L) and Joel Glazer
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.
Qatari businessman Sheikh Jassim bin Hamad al-Thani withdrew an offer to buy 100% of the club after reaching an impasse over price.
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.
Image: Manchester United fans have opposed the Glazer family’s ownership from the beginning
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 was close or that the Glazers were poised to formally cancel the sale process.
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.
Manchester United and a spokesman for Ineos both declined to comment.
Mr Stuart said banks were spending “enormous” sums of hundreds of millions of pounds on IT systems – the biggest expense in their businesses.
“Cybersecurity is now very much at the top of our agenda,” he added.
Image: Ian Stuart, chief executive of HSBC UK, appearing before the Treasury Committee. Pic: PA
Concerns were also highlighted by Lloyds Bank chief executive Charlie Nunn, who said financial fraud will get worse if banks cannot intervene to prevent it and social media and telecoms companies are not incentivised to halt it.
Mr Nunn said the UK “has become the home of fraud”, adding that the number of victims is “pretty disturbing” and “individual cases are harrowing”.
Major high street businesses, including M&S and the Co-op, have been hit by cyber attacks in recent weeks and had their operations impacted.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:21
Who is behind M&S cyberattack?
Cybersecurity threats, however, were not behind the several-day outage at Barclays at the end of January, its UK chief executive Vim Maru said.
He added: “We’ve learned the lessons. We’re acting on the lessons, both work done internally, but also with help from third parties as well.
The steel tycoon Sanjeev Gupta is mounting a last-ditch bid to salvage his British operations after seeing an emergency plea for government support rejected.
Sky News has learnt that Mr Gupta’s Liberty Speciality Steels UK (SSUK) arm is seeking to adjourn a winding-up petition scheduled to be heard in court on Wednesday.
The petition is reported to have been brought by Harsco Metals Group, a supplier of materials and labour to SSUK, and is said to be supported by other trade creditors.
Unless the adjournment is granted, Mr Gupta faces the prospect of seeing SSUK forced into compulsory liquidation.
That would raise questions over the future of roughly 1,450 more steel industry jobs, weeks after the government stepped in to rescue the larger British Steel amid a row with its Chinese owner over the future of its Scunthorpe steelworks.
If Mr Gupta’s operations do enter compulsory liquidation, the Official Receiver would appoint a special manager to run the operations while a buyer is sought.
A Whitehall insider said talks had taken place in recent days involving Mr Gupta’s executives and the Insolvency Service.
More from Money
Steel industry sources said the government could conceivably be interested in reuniting the Rotherham plant of SSUK with British Steel’s Scunthorpe site because of the industrial synergies between them, although it was unclear whether any such discussions had been held.
Follow The World
Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday
Mr Gupta is said to have explored whether he could persuade the government to step in and support SSUK using the legislation enacted last month to take control of British Steel’s operations.
Whitehall insiders said, however, that Mr Gupta’s overtures had been rebuffed.
He had previously sought government aid during the pandemic but that plea was also rejected by ministers.
The SSUK division operates across sites including at Rotherham in south Yorkshire and Bolton in Lancashire.
It makes highly engineered steel products for use in sectors such as aerospace, automotive and oil and gas.
A restructuring plan due to be launched last week was abandoned at the eleventh hour after failing to secure support from creditors of Greensill, the collapsed supply chain finance provider to which Mr Gupta was closely tied.
Under that plan, creditors, including HM Revenue and Customs, would have been forced to write off a significant chunk of the money they are owed.
The company said last week that it had invested nearly £200m in the last five years into the UK steel industry, but had faced “significant challenges due to soaring energy costs and an over-reliance on cheap imports, negatively impacting the performance of all UK steel companies”.
It adds: The court’s ability to sanction the plan depended on finalisation of an agreement with creditors.
“This has not proved possible in an acceptable timeframe, and so Liberty has decided to withdraw the plan ahead of the sanction hearing on May 15 and will now quickly consider alternative options.”
One source close to Liberty Steel acknowledged that it was running out of time to salvage the business.
They said, however, that an adjournment of Wednesday’s hearing to consider the winding-up petition could yet buy the company sufficient breathing space to stitch together an alternative rescue deal.
A Liberty Steel spokesperson said on Tuesday: “Discussions continue with creditors.
“Liberty understands the concern this will create for Speciality Steel UK colleagues and remains committed to doing all it can to maintain the Speciality Steel UK business.”
The Insolvency Service and the Department for Business and Trade have also been contacted for comment.
The publisher of the Daily Mail has held talks in recent days about taking a minority stake in the Telegraph newspapers as part of a deal to end the two-year impasse over their ownership.
Sky News has learnt that Lord Rothermere, who controls Daily Mail & General Trust (DMGT), was in detailed negotiations late last week which would have seen him taking a 9.9% stake in the Telegraph titles.
It was unclear on Monday whether the talks were still live or whether they would result in a deal, with one adviser suggesting that the discussions may have faltered.
One insider said that if DMGT did acquire a stake in the Telegraph, the transaction would be used as a platform to explore the sharing of costs across the two companies.
They would, however, remain editorially independent.
Sources said that RedBird and IMI, whose joint venture owns a call option to convert debt secured against the Telegraph into equity, were hoping to announce a deal for the future ownership of the media group this week, potentially on Thursday.
However, the insider suggested that a transaction could yet be struck without any involvement from DMGT.
More from Money
The progress in the talks to seal new ownership for the right-leaning titles comes days after the government said it would allow foreign state investors to hold stakes of up to 15% in British national newspapers.
That would pave the way for Abu Dhabi royal family-controlled IMI to own 15% of the Daily and Sunday Telegraph – a prospect which has sparked outrage from critics including the former Spectator editor Fraser Nelson.
The decision to set the ownership threshold at 15% follows an intensive lobbying campaign by newspaper industry executives concerned that a permanent outright ban could cut off a vital source of funding to an already-embattled industry.
RedBird Capital, the US-based fund, has already said it is exploring the possibility of taking full control of the Telegraph, while IMI would have – if the status quo had been maintained – been forced to relinquish any involvement in the right-leaning broadsheets.
Other than RedBird, a number of suitors for the Telegraph have expressed interest but struggled to raise the funding for a deal.
The most notable of these has been Dovid Efune, owner of The New York Sun, who has been trying for months to raise the £550m sought by RedBird IMI to recoup its outlay.
On Sunday, the Financial Times reported that Mr Efune has secured backing from Jeremy Hosking, the prominent City investor.
Another potential offer from Todd Boehly, the Chelsea Football Club co-owner, and media tycoon David Montgomery, has failed to materialise.
RedBird IMI paid £600m in 2023 to acquire a call option that was intended to convert into ownership of the Telegraph newspapers and The Spectator magazine.
That objective was thwarted by a change in media ownership laws – which banned any form of foreign state ownership – amid an outcry from parliamentarians.
The Spectator was then sold last year for £100m to Sir Paul Marshall, the hedge fund billionaire, who has installed Lord Gove, the former cabinet minister, as its editor.
The UAE-based IMI, which is controlled by the UAE’s deputy prime minister and ultimate owner of Manchester City Football Club, Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, extended a further £600m to the Barclays to pay off a loan owed to Lloyds Banking Group, with the balance secured against other family-controlled assets.
Other bidders for the Telegraph had included Lord Saatchi, the former advertising mogul, who offered £350m, while Lord Rothermere, the Daily Mail proprietor, pulled out of the bidding for control of his rival’s titles last summer amid concerns that he would be blocked on competition grounds.
The Telegraph’s ownership had been left in limbo by a decision taken by Lloyds Banking Group, the principal lender to the Barclay family, to force some of the newspapers’ related corporate entities into a form of insolvency proceedings.