Adam Hobart-Williams

Arsenal have gone big, spending well over £200mn net this summer. The capacity for this has been partly created by allowing expensive players to leave for free and sending a number of players out on loan. But they are as close as they have ever been to UEFA’s 70% Squad Cost Rule target. If trophies elude #AFC again this season, Berta’s deal making will be tested as Arsenal may need to sell ruthlessly to go again. Full report: bit.ly/3JKR9BM

🏟️ 🔴 The blueprint to finance a New Old Trafford – unite the Club, Fans and the Community 🔴🏟️ In a new report today I lay out a blueprint for #MUFC to finance the New Old Trafford (bit.ly/47bp1BN). The club has an opportunity to be a pioneer once again when building the New Old Trafford. The talk of Personal Seat Licenses (PSLs) for regular matchgoers and 40% hospitality seating is worrying and unnecessary in my eyes. 40% hospitality in a 100,000 capacity stadium would leave less seats for regular matchgoers than what exists today (c.60k vs. c.67k). It will undoubtedly increase the prevalence of a prawn sandwich brigade and price out the loyal, legacy fan. A ratio that high would be 2x Liverpool and their fans have already noticed the difference in atmosphere as a result. Most new stadiums average at 10-15% Hospitality. PSLs are a fee fans have to pay for the right to purchase a season ticket. They’re prevalent in the US (20 out of 32 NFL franchises have a form of PSL) but even there many fans don’t like them. They are a common funding mechanism for new stadiums (LV Raiders raised $550mn from them) but they can be exorbitantly expensive (prices can go up to $100k). Not good for Jay from Eccles. Hospitality and up front payment for tickets can be meaning revenue drivers for stadia (Barcelona sell premium seats for up to €81k and Wimbledon debentures go for as much as £200k on the resale market). United need to tap into this but it doesn’t need to be so prevalent. They should harness the cultural power of the regular fan and balance that with the financial necessity of high quality premium seating. Even assuming overrun costs I see a scenario where the Club can fully fund a stadium whilst: · Increasing the number of regular fans that can attend New Old Trafford. · Having world leading high-end experiences for fans. · Rebuilding the bridge between fans and the Club. · Enhancing the legacy between the Club and the City of Manchester. A Manchester United Fan Bond can be introduced that allows participants to sign up to a multi-year season ticket, pay a manageable portion for that up front to fund the stadium, get voting rights for participants on key elements of the new stadium complex and get discounts (rate of return on the bond) on season tickets once the stadium is operational. The target funding structure for a £2.2bn (incl overruns) stadium: · Community style Hospitality PSLs: 28% · Naming Rights: 23% · Fan Bond: 4% · Debt: 40% · Other: 5% If structured correctly this would also positively impact the Club’s operating cash flow. The reality is that a project of this scale, if executed well, will easily pay for itself and the long-term finances of Manchester United. It can also be used as a beacon on how to strengthen ties of a Club with its fans and the local community in a unique way that others want to follow. My hope, perhaps naively, is the ownership and leadership don’t turn this into a monetary maximisation mission at the expense of fans. Full details in the report (bit.ly/47bp1BN)