text:
I am thrilled to be welcoming the first-ever class of TechGirls to the United States next week! TechGirls connects and supports the next generation of women in technology sectors by providing them the access and opportunity needed to pursue higher education and eventually careers in technology. We've got an exciting program in the works and are grateful for the support from the technology community.
Building on the State Department's landmark TechWomen program, TechGirls brings teenage girls ages 15-17 from the Middle East and North Africa to the United States for a three-week exchange. The girls will travel to Washington, D.C. and New York City for workshops and visits with a broad range of American innovators, including technologists from Development Seed, the DC Digital Divas Dinner, Facebook, Frontline SMS, George Washington University Hospital, Google, iStrategy Labs, and the Youth & Media Lab at the Berkman Center for Internet at Harvard University. The State Department is also pleased to have the collaboration of the White House for our TechGirls program.
While in Washington, D.C., the girls will take part in a two-week computer and technology camp where they can learn about game design, technology, media and graphics, and programming. The TechGirls will also engage with Americans through home hospitality and community service projects.
The inaugural class of 25 TechGirls hails from Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, the Palestinian territories, Tunisia, and Yemen. Their career goals range from genetic engineering to telecommunications to astrophysics, and their tech backgrounds comprise everything from high school science fairs to university-level coursework.
When the participants return home, they'll develop tech training for their peers to keep "paying forward" their experiences in the United States. We couldn't be more excited for their arrival -- or to find out what they accomplish in the future.
Join the conversation on Facebook and follow @TechGirls on Twitter!


text:
The Kids Are All Right: Featurette
Watch the featurette for The Kids Are All Right
The Kids Are All Right
Directed by Lisa Cholodenko
Watch the featurette for The Kids Are All Right
Milk has World Premiere In San Francisco
Pictures from the premiere of Focus Features' new film Milk.
Where Are They Now?
FilmInFocus finds out what happened to Harvey Milk's friends and colleagues after his tragic death.
The Incredible True Stories from the Milk Mosaic
Harvey Milk's life touched and inspired thousands of people; here are just a few of them.
Podcast: Out of the Bars and into the Streets
Walk through the streets of San Francisco with Harvey Milk with this special audio tour.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Planning On Graduating in June?
All senior students planning on graduating in June with the Clovis Campus will need to meet with the academic counselor as soon as possible.
Click Here For Graduation Information
A complete FAFSA must be submitted to the Federal Student Aid Information Center requesting that the analysis be sent to Wayland.
The form may be obtained and submitted over the Internet from the website: http://www.fafsa.gov. However, the student must still see the Financial Aid Advisor.
All financial aid students MUST have an award letter before using financial aid at registration. All students MUST have an admission letter from the University to be eligible for Financial Aid. Please see a counselor for further clarification.
CLEP/DANTES Testing
CLEP & DSST testing is available through the Cannon AFB Education Office, Building 600. For information call: 575-784-4184.
Proctored Exams
Proctoring exams are offered M-Th during normal office hours. Please schedule an appointment and provide course, instructor section & the instructors name so proper password can be accessed. Proctored exams on Friday must be scheduled before 1000 hours, to insure staff availability.
Veterans' Affairs (VA)
Please be aware that the VA pays directly to the student. The student is then responsible for paying the school. The majority of the time, the VA pays in monthly increments. To generate those payments, the student must verify at the end of each month that he/she remained in class for the certified number of hours. There is an automated system to verify by phone at
1-877-823-2378. You may also contact David Nelson at 575-763-0535 if you need any additional information.


text:
Daenerys Targaryen Season 2
this wiki
In Season 2 Daenerys Targaryen remains a major character. She is left with a diminished khalasar and, despite the potential of her newborn dragons, is extremely vulnerable to her rivals. She leads her people east into the Red Waste hoping to find sanctuary. She is invited to Qarth but is betrayed by her hosts and has her dragons stolen.gfhb
The North Remembers
In the Red Waste Drogon alights on the shoulder of Daenerys and hisses at the desert. Daenerys tries to feed the dragon a morsel of raw meat as she walks with her khalasar through the barren desert but it shows no interest. Doreah asks what Viserys Targaryen had said about dragons and Daenerys reports that he claimed they ate meat. Doreah wonders if he gave specifics and Daenerys says that Viserys knew nothing. Daenerys holds her palm out for the dragon and then returns it to a wicker cage on a horse's back. Up ahead the silver horse that was her wedding present from Khal Drogo suddenly keels over. A warrior rushes to the horse's side and Ser Jorah Mormont strides forward to join him. Daenerys runs from the cages to be with her dying horse. She looks at Jorah who grimly shakes his head. She laments her inability to protect her people from starvation and asks if the desert ever ends. Jorah admits that he has never been this far East before but asserts that everything ends. Daenerys asks if he is sure there is no other way and he states the dangers that lie in the other directions. He believes that her dragons will make her a target to other Dothraki khalasars and even the Lhazareen. He says that her people are too weak to defend her and that she must be their strength. She responds "As you are mine." She calls her bloodriders Rakharo, Aggo and Kovarro and sends them ahead on the last of their horses to search the land ahead.[1]
She approaches Rakharo and tells him that he is her last hope. He promises that he will not fail her and she says that he never has. He looks at the sun and says that it is a bad time to start. She stands back as the riders depart before gazing up at the comet.[1]
The Night Lands
In the Red Waste, Daenerys and her khalasar sit listlessly in the oppressive heat as they wait for the scouts to return. Ser Jorah Mormont notices a horse approaching and rouses Daenerys. The mount is riderless and covered in bright red war paint. Jorah notices blood dripping from a saddlebag and opens it to find the head of Rakharo, his severed braid stuffed in with it. Jorah warns Daenerys not to look, but she insists, saying that Rakharo was blood of her blood. She asks Jorah who killed Rakharo and he tells her that it must have been one of the other Dothraki khalasars, suggesting Khal Pono or Khal Jhaqo. He tells Daenerys that her rivals do not like the idea of a woman leading a khalasar. Daenerys vows that they will like it less when she is done with them. Irri approaches and kneels by the saddle bag, sobbing that they have killed Rakharo's soul. Daenerys tries to reassure her that the soul cannot be killed. Irri is distraught because she believes that the mutilation of Rakharo's body will prevent him from joining his ancestors in the night lands. Daenerys promises that they will build him a funeral pyre and that he will ride with his ancestors. Irri's wails resonate across the desolate land.[2]
Garden of Bones
Kovarro returns to Daenerys in the midst of the Red Waste. She notices that he has changed mounts and he reveals that he was given a new horse by the Thirteen, the elders of the great city of Qarth. He reports that on hearing of her dragons the Thirteen have invited Daenerys to the city. He adds that it lies on the coast three days ride away. Daenerys asks Ser Jorah Mormont what he knows of Qarth and he tells her that the desert around it is known as the Garden of Bones because it is littered with the remains of travellers who have been refused entry to the city.[3]
Daenerys and her ragged khalasar reach the gates of Qarth. They are met by a company of spearmen. Daenerys looks to Ser Jorah and questions the lack of welcome. He says that she might do the same if she heard that a Dothraki horde was approaching her city. She looks at her people and says that they are no horde. A party of dignitaries emerge behind the spearmen. One of the nobles steps forward and she begins to introduce herself. He cuts her off to say that he knows who she is. She asks his name and he says that foreigners find it too difficult to pronounce. He says that he is simply a trader of spices and introduces the rest of his part as the Thirteen, the rulers "of the greatest city that ever was or will be." Daenerys claims to have heard of the beauty of the city but mispronounces the name and is corrected by the merchant. He asks to see her dragons and she asks to be admitted first. He says that the more sceptical members of the Thirteen do not believe in the existence of the dragons. Daenerys says that she is not a liar. He unctuously claims to believe her but says that his opinion is of little value. Daenerys says that guests are afforded respect where she comes from. He suggests that she return to where she has come from and turns away. Daenerys steps forward and reminds them of their promise to receive her. He says that they have received her already. She says that they will die if refused entry and he claims that they will regret her death but that Qarth did not achieve greatness by allowing Dothraki savages through its gates.[3]
The Thirteen turn back to their city. Ser Jorah warns Daenerys to be careful. She steps forward and the spearmen present their arms. She calls to the Thirteen and they turn back to her. She says that when her dragons are grown they will lay waste to armies and burn cities to the ground and threatens to burn them first if they are turned away. The spice merchant says that she is a true Targaryen. Xaro Xhoan Daxos says it is unbecoming for them to fear a little girl. He says that they can let a few Dothraki through the gates without endangering the city and points out that he arrived in Qarth as a savage from the summer isles. He invokes a custom called Sumai to vouch for them and allow them entry to the city. The gates are opened and Daenerys leads her people into the city with Xaro at her side.[3]
The Ghost of Harrenhal
Daenerys and Doreah lean on a stone balcony in Xaro Xhoan Daxos's manse in Qarth. Drogon is perched on the edge of the balcony with a lump of raw meat between them. Daenerys instructs Drogon to breathe flame on the meat by saying Dracarys, the old Valyrian word for Dragon fire. Drogon does as she commands, charring the meat. Doreah and Daenerys watch the dragon gleefully as he feasts on the cooked morsel. Daenerys says that Drogon will be able to feed himself from now on. Doreah reaches for another lump of meat but Daenerys instructs her to let Drogon sleep. Doreah holds out her hand to help the dragon back into his wooden cage and he climbs onto it. Daenerys tells her handmaiden that the dragon loves her.[4]
Daenerys joins Irri by her bed and Irri describes the repairs she has made to Daenerys's clothes. Daenerys thanks Irri, calling her friend. Doreah picks up a dress from the bed and asks if Daenerys has seen it. She tells her Xaro had it made for her and reports hearing that he is the wealthiest man in Qarth. Irri concurs with her fellow handmaiden. Doreah adds that Qarth is the richest city in Essos. Daenerys recalls her gift from Illyrio Mopatis, saying that the last time a rich man gave her a gown it was because he intended to sell her into marriage with Khal Drogo. Irri offers a Dothraki prayer for Drogo to ride forever in the night lands. Daenerys tells Doreah that they know nothing about their host and suggests that men often speak about other men when they are happy, suggesting that Doreah seduce some of Xaro's fellow citizens to obtain more information. Doreah says that Daenerys would look like a real princess in Xaro's dress and Irri objects to the title, correcting Doreah that Daenerys is a Khaleesi. Irri breaks the ensuing awkward silence by encouraging Daenerys to wear the dress as a guest's courtesy to Xaro.[4]
Daenerys consorts with the people of Qarth in the garden's of Xaro's home. Several of her khalasar are also present. Daenerys speaks with the Silk King and his female companion. Doreah is ingratiating herself with several of the men present as planned. The woman recommends the night markets to Daenerys, comparing it favourably to the markets of Meereen and offers to accompany her there. Daenerys is distracted by Jorah Mormont, Kovarro and Malakho gathering around a bejewelled golden peacock statue. She asks Ser Jorah what they are doing and he reports that they are discussing stealing the statue. Malakho thinks that it is too heavy but Kovarro believes that they can parcel out the weight by prying out the jewels and chopping up the soft gold. Daenerys admonishes her bloodrider to show more respect for their host. He says that he will wait until they leave and she cautions him not to steal from the man who saved them from the Red Waste. Kovarro and Malakho walk off. Kovarro takes a goblet from a passing servant, emptying the liquid from it.[4]
Daenerys remarks to Jorah that her brother Viserys Targaryen used to say that the only thing the Dothraki were good at was taking things that better men had built. Jorah responds that they are also good at killing those better men. Daenerys says that she intends to be a different kind of queen.[4]
Pyat Pree approaches Daenerys and welcomes her on behalf of the Warlocks of Qarth. He reaches for her hand and offers a demonstration of their power. He gives her a green jewel and asks her to look deeply into it. He says that she might see herself within its many facets. An identical copy of Pyat Pree seemingly appears from nowhere across the garden. It speaks with his voice, saying that you might see yourself more than once. The first Pyat Pree invites her to the House of the Undying should she grow tired of Xaro's baubles and trinkets. The onlookers applaud as he departs.[4]
Xaro pushes through the crowd and apologizes. He says that he was bound by custom to invite Pyat Pree because he is a member of the Thirteen. Daenerys asks what the House of the Undying is and Xaro dismisses it as the dusty library of the warlocks. He says that they drink shade of the evening there and that it turns their lips blue and their minds soft. He says that they are so addled that they actually believe that their parlour tricks are magic.[4]
Xaro walks with Daenerys through his gardens. His party is winding down as night falls. He asks her how long Jorah has been in love with her, calling him a manservant. Daenerys says that Jorah is her adviser and friend and is not in love with her. Xaro says that he can almost always tell what men want. Daenerys wonders if he has the same skill with women and he ruefully says that they are much more complicated. He asks what Daenerys wants and she states her ambition to cross the Narrow Sea and take back the Iron Throne. Xaro asks why and Daenerys cites her promise to her khalasar. Xaro laughs and wonders if she wants to conquer the seven kingdoms for the Dothraki. She asserts that the Iron Throne is hers by right and that she will take it. Xaro says that she is a conqueror. Daenerys wonders how he obtained his wealth, comparing his success to her ambition. She concludes that he is also a conqueror, albeit one with less ambition. He reveals that he is a self made man and arrived in Qarth with nothing. Daenerys asks what Xaro wants and why he bled for her at the gates of the city.[4]
Xaro shows her to a Valyrian stone vault door below his mansion. He says that he has offered locksmiths and thieves their weight in gold to open the door and all have failed. He says that the only thing that opens the door is the key that he wears around his neck. Daenerys wonders what is inside and he only laughs enigmatically. She wonders if he plans to give her all of his wealth and what she must do for it. He says that she can have half and that she only needs to marry him. She laughs at the unromantic proposal and he says that he has married once for love but lost his wife. He says that he came from nothing but has the wealth to fulfil her ambitions and that their children will be princes and princesses. He says that he has more ambition than she realized. He tells her that the time is right and informs her of the death of King Robert Baratheon.[4]
Daenerys returns to her bed chamber and seeks the counsel of Ser Jorah. He warns against attempting to take the Iron Throne with a bought army. She is eager to seize the opportunity of striking while the Seven Kingdoms are weakened by civil war. Jorah asserts that she will need support from within her Kingdom in order to win her throne. Jorah warns against accepting the reports of Xaro at face value given their brief association. Daenerys says that they must strike now or spend the rest of their lives rotting away at the edge of the world. Jorah warns that rich men always expect a return on their investment and will believe that they own Daenerys if she takes their ships and soldiers. He says that moving carefully is the harder way but the right way. Daenerys reminds him that if she had exercised the caution that he advised outside the gates of Qarth then they would all have died in the Garden of Bones. Jorah cautions not to consider the opportunity that has presented itself as the last she will ever have. Daenerys warns him not to speak to her like a child. Jorah says that he only wants to see Daenerys on the Iron Throne. She asks why and he describes how he sees her. He says that although she denies it she has a gentle heart and he believes she would be a great ruler; feared, respected and loved. He explains that the marriage of capability and a valid claim is so rare that it should not be squandered. He says that he sometimes looks at her and cannot believe she is real.[4]
His honest admission of his feelings creates an awkward atmosphere. Daenerys asks for his counsel as her adviser and he says that she should find her own way back. He explains that she needs just a single ship and can win the allies that she needs in Westeros. She wonders how she will find a ship and he answers that he will find it for her saying that it will be a good ship with an honest captain. Daenerys says that she looks forward to meeting him. He bows to her and leaves her alone.[4]
The Old Gods and the New
Daenerys paces in a courtyard of the Spice King's mansion. Kovarro stands guard for his impatient Khaleesi. She complains about being made to wait and Xaro Xhoan Daxos tells her that the Spice King is the second wealthiest man in Qarth and makes everyone wait. He says that she could have avoided the embarrassment by marrying him, the wealthiest man in Qarth. Daenerys says that she already has a husband and Xaro counters that she is too young to mourn Khal Drogo forever. He adds that she is also far too beautiful. Daenerys says that Xaro is too smart to think that she will succumb to flattery. He says that he has travelled far and met many women, none of whom were immune to flattery.[5]
The Spice King descends the stairs and loudly greets Daenerys as the mother of dragons. He asks for forgiveness, blaming his terrible dreams for his lateness. He says that he could not sleep until the sun was shining and the birds were singing. He says that he can see Daenerys true beauty now that the Red Waste has been washed from her and flippantly apologizes for his behaviour at the gates of Qarth. He goes on to say that she has the silver hair of a true Targaryen. He then tells Xaro that Daenerys is too lovely for him because he is a glorified dock worker. Xaro agrees and then points out that the Spice King's grandfather was a lowly pepper salesman and married far above his status. The Spice King says that every lady alive was lovelier and higher born than his grandfather. His entourage laugh at the exchange and Daenerys clears her throat to regain her host's attention. The Spice King wonders if his servants failed to offer Daenerys refreshment and threatens to have them flogged.[5]
Daenerys thanks him for being a gracious host and directs the discussion to her purpose by saying that there is no servant alive who can bring her what she wants. The Spice King says that Daenerys has a talent for drama and asks what she wants, calling her a "Little Princess." She says that she wants her birthright, the Seven Kingdoms of Westeros. The Spice King says that he is no better than a servant in that case because he cannot give her what he does not have. She elucidates that she wants the use of his ships to reach Westeros. He sarcastically says that he needs his ships to move spices from port to port. Daenerys offers to triple any investment he makes in her retaking the Iron Throne. He objects to her saying retake because she has not sat the throne before. She counters that she did not come to argue grammar. He says that she has come to take his ships and offers to explain his position, again calling her "Little Princess." He says that he applies logic to his business investments and sees her as a poor proposition because she lacks an army or support in Westeros. Daenerys insists that the people will rise to fight for their rightful queen. He counters that he will not make an investment based on wishes and dreams. He asks her to excuse him but she halts him by asking if he knows Illyrio Mopatis, the Magister of Pentos. The Spice King says that Illyrio is a shrewd man. Daenerys tells him that Illyrio gave her the dragon eggs that she hatched by walking into a fire, based on her dreams. She says that she is no ordinary woman because her dreams come true. He says that he admires her passion but trusts in logic. He dismisses her as a little princess and she asserts her heritage and vows to take what is hers. He says that she might but not with his ships.[5]
Xaro and Daenerys walk through the gardens of his home while Kovarro trails behind them. Daenerys describes her difficulty securing support from the merchants of Qarth. Along with the Spice King, the Copper King and the Silk King have also refused her. The Silk King fears upsetting House Lannister and the Copper King offered an indecent proposal in exchange for a single ship. She says that she is no whore. Xaro tells her that he came to Qarth with nothing and worked hand to mouth on the docks before attaining his fortune. He asks her if she believes the path from poverty to wealth is always pure and honourable. He says that he has done things righteous men would condemn but has no regrets. He opens the door to a courtyard and Daenerys steps through to discover four of his guards dead on the ground. Xaro calls for his men to bar the gates and sound the alarm. Daenerys rushes to her apartments and Kovarro draws his arakh as he follows her. Malakho and another Dothraki guard enter the courtyard. Daenerys passes two dead Dothraki warriors on the stairs. She enters her room to find her dragons gone and Irri dead on the ground. She calls out for her dragons.[5]
A Man Without Honor
Daenerys walks through the gardens of the mansion of her host Xaro Xhoan Daxos. He tells her that he has demanded a meeting of the Thirteen to investigate the theft of her dragons, asserting that one of them was responsible or knows who was. Daenerys points out that Xaro is one of the Thirteen. Malakho stands guard outside her apartment. Xaro says that he would have taken the dragons if he had wanted them and claims that they mean nothing to him alone. Daenerys is halted by his dismissiveness and says that they are more valuable than anything in the world. Xaro grips the key he wears about his neck and asks if she would like to look in his vault to see what they could buy him that he cannot already afford. He promises that they will get the dragons back. Daenerys objects to his use of the collective and questions why he would help her to get them back. Xaro insists that he feels responsible because the dragons were stolen from his home, while she was under his protection. He fears that the crime will make him appear weak and says that he depends on his reputation. He says that if people call him a liar then his word will be worth nothing and that he cannot let the theft happen to her under his roof. Daenerys counters that it has already happened. He begins to talk about his past but she cuts him off and leaves him standing on the steps.[6]
Daeneryes paces in front of her empty dragon cages in her apartment. Ser Jorah Mormont enters and she greets him. He says that he returned as soon as he heard what had happened. He asks if she knows anything and she shakes her head and reports the death of Irri. Jorah begins to praise Irri but Daenerys interrupts him to say that Irri died alone because she was not able to protect her. Jorah asks about Doreah and Daenerys says that they have been unable to find her and assumes that she is also dead. Daenerys says that she has led her people out of the Red Waste and into the slaughter house. Jorah laments not being with her and Daenerys consoles him that he had left to find her a ship. He says that his place is by her side and that he should not have left her alone with the Qartheen, adding that they are not to be trusted. Daenerys wonders who she should trust. She says that she has only known one other Targaryen and that her brother Viserys would have allowed a thousand men rape her to get his crown. She says that most of the Dothraki turned against her when Drogo fell ill. Jorah insists that her people are in Westeros. She retorts that most of them do not know that she is alive and expresses doubts about their desire for her return. She says that Viserys believed that he would be welcomed and he was a fool. Jorah says that she is not her brother and asks her to trust him. She seizes on his request, wondering if he wants her to trust only him. She says that she no longer needs or wants trust. He approaches and places a hand on her shoulder, beginning to say that she is too young for her feelings. She interrupts to warn him that he is too familiar and he steps back. He asks her forgiveness. He says that no-one can survive in their world without help and asks her to tell him how to help her. She orders him to find her dragons.[6]
Xaro hosts a council of the Thirteen inside his home. Daenerys stands before Xaro while the rest of the Thirteen sit behind a long curved table. Kovarro stands guard behind Daenerys while white cloaked servants attend to the guests. The Spice King complains about being summoned from his own residence and being called a thief. Xaro says that no-one has called him that and the Spice King angrily asks who Daenerys is to accuse them. Daenerys pleads that the dragons are her children and says that she is begging for their help. The Silk King reminds Daenerys that it is not long since she threatened them at the gates of the city. Daenerys warns that the dragons will die without her. The Spice King says that their death is for the best because of the death and misery they would cause when fully grown. He says that if he knew where they were he would not say.[6]
The warlock Pyat Pree calls him cruel, saying that Daenerys is right and should be reunited with her babies. He offers his assistance and Daenerys wonders how he will help. He says that he will take her to the House of the Undying where he has put the dragons. Daenerys is astounded, and asks him to repeat that he has them. He says that when he learned she was coming to the city he made an arrangement with the King of Qarth. The rest of the Thirteen laugh, assuming that he is joking because the city has no king. The warlock adds that the King of Qarth procured them for him. Daenerys incredulously asserts that there is no King of Qarth.[6]
Xaro stands and says that there is now. He admits to being the other party in the warlock's arrangement. He admonishes the rest of the Thirteen for their close mindedness and isolationism. He asserts a need for Qarth to change if it is to truly become the greatest city that ever was or will be. He says that he will open Qarth to the world as he forced it to open itself to him. Pyat Pree stands and circles around the table to stand behind Xaro as he speaks while Daenerys backs away from him slowly. The Spice King says that Xaro's ambition is inspiring but that he is an overreaching upstart. He gestures towards the warlock while saying that an alliance with a charlatan and three small dragons do not make Xaro a king. Xaro repeats the insults, saying that empires have been built by less than an upstart and a charlatan. Xaro says that those on the margins often come to control the centre while those on the centre make room for them willingly or otherwise. He steps back while the warlock moves in front of him. Pyat Pree proclaims that Daenerys will be reunited with her children and will give them her love while they thrive by her side. He pauses and the servants step forward behind the seated dignitaries with knives in hand. As he says "forever" the servants slit the throats of the eleven seated members of the Thirteen. Daenerys looks on in horror as she realizes that every servant has Pyat Pree's likeness. Kovarro shields her as she flees from the room.[6]
She climbs the stairs only to be met with another likeness of the warlock in the building entrance hall. Kovarro stands between them with his arakh raised. Jorah steps into the room and stabs the copy through the chest. The warlock looks down at the blade and then back at Daenerys before saying that a mother should be with her children. Jorah wrenches free his blade but all that falls to the ground is a pile of clothes. Another copy of Pyat Pree enters from the stairs and asks Daenerys where she will run. He says that her dragons are waiting for her in the House of the Undying and urges her to come and see them. Jorah takes Daenerys by the hand to lead her outside.[6]
The Prince of Winterfell
Daenerys, Ser Jorah Mormont and Kovarro take refuge in a disused courtyard in the city of Qarth. Jorah warns Daenerys to stay away from a barred doorway because Xaro Xhoan Daxos and the warlocks will be looking for them. He reports finding a suitable ship with a good captain and says that it is sailing for Astapor the next day. Daenerys balks at the suggestion and Jorah says that they cannot stay in Qarth. Daenerys refuses to leave without her dragons, referring to them as her children. Jorah says that they are not truly her children and that dragons can never be children. Daenerys is hurt and angrily tells him to go to Astapor and safety, turning away from him. Jorah says that he would die for her and will never abandon her. He asserts that he is sworn to protect and serve her. She tells him to do so by taking her to the House of the Undying. Jorah warns against doing what Pyat Pree wants, fearing a trap. He says that the warlocks magic is strong. Daenerys reminds him of her own magic; hatching the dragons by stepping into the funeral pyre of Drogo while the witch Mirri Maz Duur burned alive. Jorah says that he will remember until his last breath, even after forgetting his mother's face. Daenerys caresses his cheek and reminds him that she cannot have children of her own, she believes that the dragons are the only children she will ever have. She asks him to take her to them.[7]
Valar Morghulis
Daenerys, Ser Jorah Mormont and Kovarro ascend the steps to the House of the Undying in Qarth. Kovarro tells his Khaleesi that the place is a house of ghosts, adding the common Dothraki phrase "It is known." The imposing stone tower has no windows, only spikes. Kovarro notes the absence of guards and Jorah tells him that the warlocks kill with sorcery, not steel. Daenerys defiantly says "let them try."[8]
She leads her guards within the walls to the base of the tower. There appears to be no door and she asks if it is a riddle. She circles the tower and Jorah trails behind her. Motioning to Kovarro to stay by the entrance. The curvature of the tower takes her out of his sight for a moment. He continues after her and finds himself back by Kovarro. They realize that she has gone and Jorah screams her title to no avail.[8]
Daenerys finds herself on a landing in a dark, stone, spiral staircase lit by torches. She takes one to light her way. She can hear Jorah shouting to her but cannot see him. She calls to the warlocks, accusing them of trying to frighten her with magic tricks. She says that she is there if they want her and asks if they are afraid of a little girl. She hears the calls of her dragons up the stairs and heads in the direction of the sound.[8]
She follows the screeching to a closed door. As she opens the door the sound ends abruptly. She steps through into a round room with many doors around its walls. In the centre of the room is a bare stone pedestal. As she steps over a metal grate in the floor and approaches the doors she begins to hear the dragons again. She chooses a door where the sound is louder.[8]
Impossibly, the door leads her into the Iron Throne room of King's Landing. The room is deserted and the floor is covered by a layer of snow. The roof above her has been ruined, exposing the room to the wintery conditions. She walks down from the gallery and leaves her torch on the floor. She climbs the steps to the throne itself. She reaches out a hand to touch it but is halted when she hears her dragons again. She pulls her hand back and exits the room via the door behind the throne which should lead to the small council chamber.[8]
Instead Daenerys finds herself emerging north of the wall, from the Castle Black tunnel. The gate clanks and screeches as it opens. She walks out into a thick blizzard and hugs her arms across her body, still dressed for the hot weather of Qarth. Through the white haze she catches a glimpse of a black shape. She forges on through the snow towards it. The shape resolves into the tent she once shared with her husband Khal Drogo.[8]
She pushes aside a canvas flap and steps inside the extended entrance. The light shifts; suddenly she is surrounded by a warm glow. She walks to the middle of the tent and is shocked to find Drogo sat there, holding a baby boy. He greets her as the "Moon of [his] life." She says that she is experiencing dark magic, like the magic that separated them. She suggests that she might be dead and unaware of it and asks if they are meeting again in the Night Lands. Drogo responds that he might have refused to enter the Night Lands without her, telling the Great Stallion to "go fuck himself" and returning to wait for her. She smiles and says that it sounds like something he would do. Their child, Rhaego murmurs and she bends down to touch his head. Drogo suggests that it could be a dream that either of them is having and admits that he does not know. He calls the mystery a question "for wise men with skinny arms." He says that she is the moon of his life, and that is all he knows and all he needs to know. He says that if he is dreaming he will kill the man that tries to wake him. She holds his head next to hers. She then tearfully repeats what Mirri Maz Duur told her when she asked when Drogo would be as he was, realizing that none of this is real. She leaves the tent and the vision of the family she lost.[8]
She finds herself back in the round room with many doors. She is met by her dragons chained to the pedestal in the centre of the room. They respond to her presence and she reaches a hand towards them. She is startled when Pyat Pree speaks from the shadows behind her, saying that the dragons missed their mother and want to be with her.[8]
Another Pyat Pree copy asks Daenerys if she wants to be with them, from the opposite side of the room. The first copy asserts that they will be together. They speak alternate phrases, saying that their power returned when the dragons were born. They tell Daenerys that their power is strongest in the presence of the dragons and that the dragons are strongest when they are with her. A third copy asserts that she will be with the dragons for the coming winter, summer and thousands upon thousands of seasons thereafter. Daenerys realizes that her wrists are manacled and chained. The copies pull the chains taught at the edge of the room, wrenching her arms up and away from her. They tell her that they will be with her until time comes to an end.[8]
When she is secured in place, the copies disappear and the real Pyat Pree welcomes her to her new home. She replies that her true home is across the sea where her people are waiting. He counters that they will be waiting a long time. She looks back at the trio of tiny dragons behind her and he bends down to share her view. She turns her head back to stare at him defiantly and then speaks the command "Dracarys." Drogon coughs smoke and Pyat Pree looks at him and then backs away. Daenerys waits and the dragon tries again, this time projecting a jet of flame which sets the warlock's left arm alight. He flails the flaming limb uselessly. The other dragons join Drogon in breathing fire at the sorcerer. He screams in pain and terror and crumples to the ground, a charred dead husk. Daenerys looks at her children as Drogon turns his breath on the chains that bind him; they similarly blacken and crumble. Daenerys turns her head back as the clinking of falling chains fills the room.[8]
Free from the tower, Daenerys goes to confront Xaro Xhoan Daxos for his treachery and reunite with her people. She finds him sleeping soundly next to Doreah. He is awoken by Kovarro yanking the vault key from around his neck with the point of an Arakh. Daenerys stands at the foot of the bed, holding her dragons and surrounded by the people of her khalasar. She has put back on her pauldron and Drogon is perched on the shoulder pad while Viserion and Rhaegal nestle in her arms.[8]
Doreah begs for mercy and says that Xaro told her that Daenerys would never leave Qarth alive. Daenerys only instructs them to come with her. Xaro throws off the sheets and Jorah draws his sword, pointing it at the would be king.[8]
Kovarro uses Xaro's key to unlock the Valyrian Stone vault. The door is adorned by a leaf pattern in its centre with a wolf to the left and a lion to the right. Jorah helps the bloodrider to pull back the heavy door. Daenerys steps to the threshold and realizes that it is empty. She thanks Xaro for the lesson that he has taught her. She nods to Malakho who pushes Xaro into the vault. Xaro protests that he is the King of Qarth and can now truly help her. Doreah repeats her pleas for mercy. Daenerys is unmoved and watches Jorah seal them inside the vault. He hands her the key.[8]
Daenerys and her people return to Xaro's hall. Jorah says that Xaro's fortune was all a lie. Daenerys counters that his possession look real enough to her as she empties out a golden dish. She asks if it is enough to buy a ship. Jorah nods and says that they can afford a small one. He calls to the Dothraki to take all the gold and jewels. Daenerys carries her dragons out of the room as her people hurry to prepare for their journey.[8]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 "The North Remembers"
- ↑ "The Night Lands"
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 "Garden of Bones"
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 "The Ghost of Harrenhal"
- ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 "The Old Gods and the New"
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 "A Man Without Honor"
- ↑ "The Prince of Winterfell"
- ↑ 8.00 8.01 8.02 8.03 8.04 8.05 8.06 8.07 8.08 8.09 8.10 8.11 8.12 8.13 "Valar Morghulis"


text:
What is fair to one person may not be fair to another. How can students become aware of injustice—at school, in your community, and in this world— and dig deeper to discover how they can transform injustice to justice?
Curriculum & Resources
This Visual Learning lesson will get your students thinking about their relationship with nature, and how development affects wild animals.
With final exams under way, many students and teachers are undoubtedly getting little sleep. And, what's the buzz about bees? The following teaching resources dive into the science and psychology of the importance of sleep, and why bees are critical to our food supply.
Heifer International is renowned for giving animals as a sustainable source of food and income to those in need—changing lives forever. Its resources educate and energize people of all ages, empowering them to help others and build a better world.
Street artist JR brings art to improbable places, creating projects that force us to really see each other.
Roots & Shoots animal community service-learning curriculum offers lessons plans, sample campaigns, and resources for K-12 teachers. Access free, downloadable classrooms tools including lessons on hope, endangered species, and multiple intelligences.
This Visual Learning lesson will get your students thinking about where their water comes from, and the effectiveness (or not) of public demonstrations.
Poets.org has poems galore for the poetry lover and tips to coax the reluctant teen to try a poem or two. TeachKind's free resources teach students how to respect and co-exist with animals in their communities.
Wendell Berry's poem, "Wild Geese" paints a colorful image of Earth's bounty, inspiring the beloved poet and farmer to be thankful that all we need is around us. Do your students second that notion?
YES! asked Jane Goodall to tell us what we can do in our everyday lives to care for the animals we love.
The documentary "Waiting for Superman" has stirred up conversation and debate about one of our nation's biggest concerns—the state of public education. A follow-up campaign is under way to fix education. NOT Waiting for Superman, initiated by Rethinking Schools, says the film got the message all wrong.
There are few things that motivate young people more than to be told that something can't be done. High school student Ashe Jaafaru reads "It Couldn't Be Done", a poem by Edgar Albert Guest.
Meet six students who started the New Year tracking their trash, taking record-breaking showers, battling the bus system, and learning that green is the color for all seasons.
If we made children our top priority, would we create a better world? The Centre for Child Honouring and Voices [Education Project] are helping create peaceful, sustainable societies.
With this YES! lesson plan, try to truly understand an image, its message, and why it's interesting (or not). In this case it's all about peace.


text:
First Looks: Buffalo MiniStation Plus – Head Of The Herd
Buffalo, one of the pioneers of USB 3.0 external storage, now offers the MiniStation Plus portable hard drive. It features a blazing fast USB 3.0 interface and a suite of performance enhancers, making it the head of Buffalo's herd.
Filter Products by Brand
Subscribe to HWZ Here!
Subscribe now to receive latest tech news, articles and promotions straight to your inbox!
By signing up, you indicate that you have read and agreed to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.


text:
UTSA Athletics Marketing
UTSA Athletics Marketing's primary goal is to promote and increase support for all UTSA athletics programs and our student-athletes. The marketing focal point is on the development of sponsorships, programming and advertising opportunities that engage our teams, university and community; to promote the Roadrunners brand on campus; create a home-field advantage with an exciting yet respectful game day atmosphere; strive to maintain a positive public image and continue our work as the external affairs department to reach out to San Antonio as a whole and develop Roadrunners fans throughout the city and South Texas.
Corporate, Community Relations, Marketing, Promotions & Ticketing Staff
Internship & volunteer opportunities
Roadrunners Sports Network
RSN, in conjunction with Quarter Moon Productions, produces "UTSA Football Insider," which airs on FOX Sports Southwest and Comcast Sports Net Houston during the regular season. For sponsorship opportunities for "UTSA Football Insider," please contact RSN Executive Director Jim Goodman at firstname.lastname@example.com or (210) 458-5026.
Learfield Sports/Roadrunners Sports Properties
When you join the Roadrunners team as a corporate sponsor, you become affiliated with a university as solid in its athletics as in its academics. Tabbed as "the rising star of Texas," UTSA is en route to becoming the nation's next Tier One University. As an athletics sponsor, you have the ability to target specific groups and demographics, including a population of nearly 30,000 students and more than 3,500 faculty and staff members, as well as plenty of loyal fans throughout the San Antonio area and the Lone Star State.
By partnering with an athletics department committed to excellence, you can be assured that your sponsorship will effectively endorse, advertise and market your company not only locally, but also regionally and nationally. Known for its involvement in hosting NCAA Championship events, UTSA, along with San Antonio, has hosted three Men's Final Fours, two Women's Final Fours, a pair of Women's Volleyball Championships and a total of 14 NCAA Championship events since 1997.
If you are interested in becoming a sponsor for UTSA Athletics, contact Bobby Jordan at firstname.lastname@example.com or (210) 458-6243.
About Learfield Sports
How to become a UTSA Athletics corporate partner
IMG Learfield Ticket Solutions
UTSA toppled South Florida's start-up program inaugural game attendance record with 56,743 fans at the Alamodome on Sept. 3, 2011, and it was a larger crowd than several programs from Bowl Championship Series conferences. In fact, it ranked 23rd among all NCAA Division I schools on the opening weekend of play.
The Roadrunners drew a total of 213,126 fans in their six home games for an average of 35,521 and that broke the previous NCAA start-up program record of 33,038 set by South Florida in 1997.
IMG Learfield sold more than 10,000 group tickets for the inaugural 2011 season, which translated to more than $150,000 in revenue, and it has added more than 2,000 new season ticket holders the past two years on top of the 12,000 from UTSA's first campaign. To date, IMG Learfield has generated nearly $3 million in ticket sales to go along with more than $2 million in donations to the Roadrunner Athletic Fund.
The evolution of Rowdy The Roadrunner


text:
Pear-White Pepper Tiramisu
- 1 firm pear (such as Anjou or Bartlett), peeled and thinly sliced
- 1/2 cup pear juice or nectar
- 1/2 cup pear brandy
- 1/4 cup granulated sugar
- 1 teaspoon fresh lemon juice
- 1/8 teaspoon kosher salt
- 2 8 -ounce containers mascarpone cheese
- 1 1/2 cups cold heavy cream
- 3/4 cup confectioners' sugar
- 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
- 1/2 teaspoon finely ground white pepper
- 27 soft ladyfingers
Toss the pear, pear juice, brandy, granulated sugar, lemon juice and salt in a medium bowl. Cover with plastic wrap; set aside.
Beat the mascarpone, heavy cream, confectioners' sugar, vanilla and white pepper in a stand mixer fitted with the paddle attachment (or in a large bowl with a hand mixer) on medium-low speed until combined, about 1 minute. Increase the mixer speed to medium high and beat until light and fluffy, 1 to 2 more minutes (do not overbeat).
Line a 9-by-5-inch loaf pan with plastic wrap, leaving a 2-inch overhang on all sides. Arrange 9 ladyfingers in the bottom of the pan in a single layer. Top with half of the pears and drizzle with 3 tablespoons of the pear liquid. Spread 1 cup of the mascarpone mixture over the pears. Repeat with 9 more ladyfingers, the remaining pears, 3 tablespoons of the pear liquid and 1 cup mascarpone mixture. Top with the remaining 9 ladyfingers and drizzle with 3 tablespoons of the pear liquid. Cover with plastic wrap and refrigerate at least 8 hours or overnight. (Transfer the remaining mascarpone mixture to an airtight container and refrigerate until ready to serve.)
To serve, let the reserved mascarpone mixture come to room temperature. Lift the tiramisu out of the pan using the plastic wrap and invert onto a platter; remove the plastic wrap. Cover the top and sides with the remaining mascarpone mixture.
Photograph by Johnny Miller
Recipe courtesy of Food Network Magazine


text:
Thursday, 19 January 2012
Why England's richest club doesn't have any money...
48 comments:
Great read Anders, I have a question for you and it's not to do with this. Is there any recent evidence that United receive £25.4m from Nike, because in 2006 the docs where based on the US dollar and exchange rates from back then. Is there any docs from 2011 to prove that we receive £25.4m and not £23.3m like the papers are suggesting? Thanks
- 19 January 2012 at 16:01
- andersred said...
That's easy Mark, the Nike contract is denominated in sterling so there isn't an issue. In the bond prospectus the club say:
"we have modest transactional currency exposure against the US dollar relating to commercial
revenue from certain sponsors"
- 19 January 2012 at 16:10
Hi Anders,
I am a LFC fan, but greatly enjoy your blogs & financial insights (not necessarily your footballing ones.. :)) God knows we had to deal with probably much worse isses during the G & H era. However, what do Utd fans think of Ferguson not standing up to the Glazers? I know he is still successful and winning trophies, but he has never said one bad word against the Glazers. Is it a case of protecting his legacy, or that Ferguson is thinking better the devil you know. If it was not for Rafa, I doubt G & H would have been flushed out that easily, or that early into their reign. Cheers.
- 19 January 2012 at 16:22
Makes my heart bleed to say it but maybe we should hire some of our 'friends' from L4 0TH to kick start the Fuck Off Glazers movement. Duncan and the rest of MUST mean so well, but have succeeded in the square root of fuck all.
The scousers had Hicks And Gillett fucked off in no time.
- 19 January 2012 at 16:41
The Scousers had nothing to do with it, it was RBS and the British courts that seized control of Liverpool.
- 19 January 2012 at 16:57
SAF said that we have never talked to Sneider, why is he important. Who said that we couldnnn't afford him?
And, he is not worth it, he had only ONE world class season and that's it.
Nasri, as far as I know our bid was never accepted, so we never talked to him. And that's good, he actually had only HALF of a WORLD CLASS season, and that's it.
He isn't even playing well for City.
I do understand some of the arguments, but some are just there to make your point look stronger, espeacaly the way you "play" with the numbers.
Do not understand me wrong. Your knowledge is huge, and most of the things you say are correct, but very often you are not objective on the matter and you only concentrate on the bad things, without write of possible good things that can come out of this situation.
Sorry for my bad english.
- 19 January 2012 at 17:15
Nasri was all set to come to Utd and had a longstanding verbal agreement with Fergie which he reneged on last minute when city offered a bigger wage- he tried to use it as a bargaining tool to up his wage, and it backfired- he broke his word (never good) and we weren't prepared to pay so much to- as you highlight, a good if not outstanding player
- 19 January 2012 at 17:29
But Arsenal did not accept our bit, because City offered more and one thing should be clear, even without the Glazers and with this commercial succes, we would not be able to compete with City.
Yes, Nasri is a good player, but nothing special. He is not worth the money.
- 19 January 2012 at 17:56
Agreed. And I think if cleverley had not been injured we would not even be having this discussion as a cost benefit analysis in my book and probably in the owners and SAF's opinions would be cleverley is a much better value for money spent than WS.
- 19 January 2012 at 18:18
Possibly a dumb question - but my experience with LBOs is that there is always an exit strategy - and it's normally not more than 10 years from purchase time. Do you have any sense from the actions of the Glazers if there is anything to that?
For example, if they keep buying back bonds, eventually our interest payments should be quite manageable, and we'd still be a very profitable, cash-generating business. At that stage we could afford to not only line the Floridian Leprechaun's pockets, but also compete on wages and transfer fees again. Essentially, they'd create a sustainable model, rather than milking United for 10 years and then selling it to the highest bidder.
I just can't tell which road they're going down really. Coupled with the recent sacking of majority of the Buc's staff, I do wonder if they even have long term plans...
- 19 January 2012 at 18:21
Hey Hmmm, Anders said that United would have £470m without the Glazers, and the "commercial success" they've been responsible for has been exaggerated. We probably would actually be able to spend more than City, that's how much the Glazers have taken out of the club.
- 19 January 2012 at 18:24
As far as I know, even he admitet that the number is to high.
As far as I know it is closser to 270mio (which is HUGE, no question about that), but it's not almost 500mio.
Also some of the commercial success has nothing to do with the Glazers, i do agree, but some actually has (they have a different aproach to it and it's working really well.
And no, we would not be able to spend more thatn City, because the people who are spending are multibillioners, there is no way of us competing with them under current rules.
- 19 January 2012 at 18:39
Fine article, anders.
But should we be surprised? We are merely looking at classic LBO behaviour.
Ignoring cash retained, the club has paid out 63% of surplus cash on interest and debt repayments since the takeover; equivalent to 73% of the total pre-exceptional EBITDA made since the buy-out.
In contrast the PLC Paid out 73% of its cash profits (EBITDA) on inward investment (players and stadium) from 1992 to close; an amount equivalent to 34% of cash profits was paid out in dividends and corp. tax- this latter percentage is slightly lower for the last 6 yr plc period).
Different priorities.
The plan to withdraw 95m in carveouts to deal with the piks has been replaced with a plan to withdraw an equivalent amount(90+m) to deal with the bond. In the context of am impending IPO, the bond issue was an expensive waste of money.
Manchester United have the option to relax the 50% wages/turnover ratio; it is a self imposed restriction and the ratio is the best around (with the one-time exception of Real). The argument against doing so is that inflating wages for some will mean inflating wages for all. This isn't always the case; replacing two modest earners with higher (and better) earners leads to a rebasing of salaries- it doen't follow that all existing players will suddenly demand more. Paying a current high earner such as Rooney even more could have an inflationary impact.
The Glazers are trying to sell to market the idea that a 50% ratio isn't a restriction, that we can remain competitive under such an imposition; and that the EBITDA mutipliers underpinning their valuation (and hence the IPO strike price) is fair. If FFP bites it might be true but it's not a certainty.
What impact would a rebased 10% rise in salary have on valuation? On 2010-2011 figures, the wages/turnover ratio would go slghtly north of 50% (to 51%), the EBITDA (assuming no immediate positive impact) would drop by 14% to around 95m from 110m and firm valuation (assuming an unchanged mutiplier of 14) would drop by about 200m. In an IPO situation, considerably more equity would need to be sold to bring in the desired amount of proceeds.
Pre-IPO, The glazers will be keeping that wages/turnover ratio south of 50%.
- 19 January 2012 at 19:53
So if the club is so skint, why are they moving SAF salary to the highest in britain. Surely not required.
Also, 60m for 7years of PLC vs club earnings at the time. Vs 450 vs current earnings. Seems like we need a number adjusted to inflation to have a clue.
Not a Glazer fan, but entire scale of footballing costs has skyrocketed since PLC days. I don't recall anyone being in love with that ownership model either.
- 19 January 2012 at 19:57
Anders, your colourful chart showing cash movements is stated to be from June 2010 until Sept 2012.
Surely, you meant until Sept 2011?
That said, you should give credit to the Glazers for the way they have succeeded in ramping up commercial revenues in the last few years - and have continued to do in the first quarter of the present year's set of accounts.
At this rate of progress, we are on the verge of overtaking Bayern Munich, Real Madrid and Barcelona in the next few years!
- 19 January 2012 at 20:35
Why do you continue to spread the myth that the Glazers have affected us on the pitch? Were we paying the highest wages before they came? No. Were we bending over when Roy Keane wanted a pay rise putting him in line with some of the best players elsewhere? No. Were we buying Zidane, Ronaldinho, Figo etc before the Glazers? No. Before the Glazers, were we implementing a wage structure under what other clubs of our stature were implementing? Yes. Before the Glazers, were we having to rely on creating our own world class players by buying youth and producing from our youth and reserves? Yes. Before the Glazers, when it came to purchasing the best players in the world, were we almost entirely limited to British players as either we couldn't afford those not from "The Isles" or they just didn't want to come? Yes.
The funniest thing is you act like missing out on a guy who has a pretty poor injury record and has only been fit for 3 more games than Cleverley all season can not even remotely be seen as a positive. At the end of the day this club has been run as a business long before the Glazers and will almost certainly continue to be long after they go. Its not great, its not fun but its reality, and trying to act like anything has changed from a footballing point of view due to them is silly.
I for one am at least thankful that the club is being run by proper businessmen who understand the complete picture, unlike Arsenal's shareholders who conned the fans into thinking they were doing anything other than simply building value in their shares, or L'pool's owners who think football works entirely on statistics, or City who just think throwing money at it is the answer.
I wonder when the realisation will hit, that the clubs that seem to have the best balance between ambition and business acumen are Manchester United, Spurs and seemingly Newcastle United, all clubs run by incredibly successful businessmen.
- 19 January 2012 at 22:45
- andersred said...
To Anonymous at 22.45
You raise some important issues which I will respond to in full tomorrow, but there is one simple point worth making. You may think Ashley is an incredibly successful businessman, but he differs in one big way from the Glazers. He has invested £140m in cash into the club he owns (that excludes the purchase price, that figure is pure investment). The Glazers have invested zero in United...
I suspect if you don't know that you don't understand much about football finance.
- 19 January 2012 at 23:09
You invest when investment is needed. Ashley invested with the intention of making money, which is the ultimate goal for everyone else. The Glazers have been able to do so without investing their own and unlike Ashley, without crippling the club based on bad decisions.
And to be fair there's really no such thing as football finance any more. We like to con ourselves that football is somehow different from any other business, but unless you're City and have no fans, success breeds success (winning = money = more TV revenue = more fans = more merchandise sold = more money = more profit. Imagine how many on the fence fans jumped onto Swansea at the weekend, and how many more of their games Sky will look to show live now?). Just like any other business, to become successful you have to invest the right amounts at the right times in the right ways to realise potential opportunities. Just replace typical business opportunities for something like weaker rival teams chasing CL spots for example and you've got your football based "business opportunity". Just like any investment there is a lot of risk, but no more so than normal, especially because you can easily analyse your rivals, view all of their moves and plan an approach so to speak.
As fans with little understanding of business we have created this new rule that if someone isn't investing their own money then they don't know football and are bleeding the club dry. This just simply isn't the case as the Glazers have shown and as is seen in the business world day in, day out. As long as its legal, where the money comes from is never the problem, its always the people managing it. Again as a United fan I go back to the fact that before the Glazers we never bought the best or paid the best and this remains the case. Fergie said its easier for him to buy players now and from a purely logistical and business stand point we know that that part is correct, as it is just a simply phone call. The question is only ever regarding whether he has the money he wants. Well we can simply go back to a former chief executive for his views on Fergie with money, so putting him on a leash isn't new and seemingly isn't wrong.
People then look to use our midfield as an example of our lack of money and completely ignore the fact that the midfield was replaced between 2006-2008 with Carrick, Hargreaves and Anderson. All 3 were vital in our last CL win, two have been key to multiple PL title wins and were it not for injuries, we would've seen at least two of them as regular starters throughout the last 5-6 years. Our best midfielders this season have been Cleverley, Anderson and Carrick, so two of the 3. People say we're still reliant on Giggs and Scholes, but we started the season with Cleverley and Anderson and will hopefully progress with Carrick, Cleverley and Anderson as the season continues, with Jones fitting in as a midfielder (I've never seen him as a defender) and then Scholes, Giggs, Pogba etc bringing up the rear. There is no immediate need for a midfielder, we just need our current midfielders players to become available.
- 19 January 2012 at 23:48
Hi Anders - on a slightly leftfield note, have United paid any corporation tax since 2005, or has it been completely offset against debt?
- 20 January 2012 at 00:10
- Physician average salary said...
- This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
- 20 January 2012 at 07:39
Hi Anders, a few questions / points:
1. Should you not analyse cash positions y-o-y rather than a 15 month period - where was cash June 11 - apples with apples? £151m? Or perhaps look at Sept 2010 to Sept 2011 to iron out quarterly variances in income or transfer spend.
2. Not sure it is fair to compare plc years with current financial structure. As you know the cost of equity and debt are massively different not directly comparable and also you do not account for the tax shield or indeed the lack of one in the place years so a higher tax charge would have been paid? The club was also valued differently through those periods. If we are realistic and swapped out debt for equity, how much would it cost in equity return / dividends adding in more corporate tax for a more accurate view?
3. Bond buy backs make sense and reduce debt which is what fans want too, and in the long run puts the club on a better financial footing to use cash flow for players later; however the question remains as to what team will we have left by this time given the model is predicated on CL and top 3-4 in the league every year - more importantly we would like trophies please!
4. I dont think Sneidjer was right for us anyway, we need to be patient, the summer will bring a different view... listen to the manager rather than doubting his relationship with the board.
5. Where is net leverage now? And if required can the club not re-issue bonds if they need more cash for players? I think players are more equity type risk vs. debt to buy the club, so the gnomes should be forking out but they won't.
- 20 January 2012 at 09:55
- Atutupoyoyo said...
Great read as ever Anders. Many thanks
- 20 January 2012 at 11:03
- andersred said...
Just on this Ashley point, he may have turned Newcastle around (thanks to finally finding a good manager) but he's attempted to sell the club several times and told the Sunday Times in 2010:
"It has been catastrophic for everybody. I've lost my money and I've made terrible decisions. Now I want to sell it as soon as I can ... advisers will be appointed shortly."
- 20 January 2012 at 13:18
- andersred said...
Thanks for all the comments.
I'd like to make it clear that this piece is not some kind of winge about Nasri or Sneijder or any other player. Fergie clearly wanted one of those two over the summer (see the Bob Cass controversy) and it is also clear that money was the reason nothing happened. I wanted to explain a bit about how the club is managed and that essentially means on a very unusual value maximising strategy not seen at other clubs.
I'd encourage everyone to read the comment by Jim at 19.53 on 19th Jan. Jim explains why to maximise value before an IPO the club is being held at wages/turnover level way below our main competitors, including other profitable ones....
On the Plc dividend the person who considered the comparison out of date should consider what dividends the Plc would have gone on paying if there had been no takeover. At a 10% growth rate since 2005 the dividend would almost have tripled and the total cost over the last six years? £63m. The comparison is perfectly valid.
To the person who asked about SAF's salary, of course they'll pay him whatever he asks. He's the thing that makes the budget work (just). Thank God we have him...
The chart should have said Sep 2011 NOT 2012, now corrected. I used that 15 month period to show the post bond issue movement in cash, to do that properly I need to add the March to June 2010 cash flow which I'll do when I get the chance..
I don't dispute the club's commercial success, but a) that success is required to pay thei interest etc b) the Plc were pretty good at it too (the Nike deal signed in 2000 is still bigger than Liverpool's new kit deal) and c) what's the point if the money is not available? We should be a football club not advertising hoardings..
Can I just reiterate to the Mike Ashley fan that where Newcastle, Spurs, Real, Barca Milan, Cardiff, Arbroath, etc, etc differ from United is that profits are reinvested in those clubs. It is ONLY at United where artificial restrictions are placed on the use of club funds. It is ONLY at United that more is spent on bond buy backs than transfers. We are uniquely fucked over by our owners.
Football is NOT a normal business. It has leagues and associations that impose rules, it restricts the number of branches (i.e. stadiums) to one per team and it doesn't allow takeovers! Almost every professional football club in Europe operates de jure or de facto as a non profit organisation. As I say, Real make €50m profit and spend it. The only club trying to be a business, maximising value for shareholders not just sporting glory is United, at a cost of higher ticket prices AND under investment.
- 20 January 2012 at 15:38
Hi Andy. Yet another cracking report.
Two things, Now that the club holds approx £88m worth of notes where is the dividend going for these? Back into club or is it on on a first class flight to Forida?
We haven't heard much about the First Allied company for awhile, do you know how that is holding up in the current climate, and the strains of the financial implictions which were due to kick in with the mortgage terms set to expire last year?
(another) Andy
- 20 January 2012 at 16:28
Do you know how the Glazer's businesses are doing? Last I read United was the only profitable one they had as the finance collapse was wrecking their Mall business through various things (no one wants to spend money, no one has money, they can't get money). This was leading them to snatch money from United to do other stuff because it's the only consistent cashflow they have?
Be thankful we're not Bucks fans though. They're having a worse time of it than we are *and* they suck and will keep sucking.
- 21 January 2012 at 05:01
"The Glazers have invested zero in United..."
I don't think that this is true. If memory serves, didn't they put £272 million of equity into the initial transaction? And, more recently, put another £249 million in to allow the PIKs to be paid off? That seems to add up to a £521 million equity investment. I know you have a theory about where they got the funds for more recent investment but, whatever the source, the equity investment was made.
- 23 January 2012 at 22:40
"At a 10% growth rate since 2005 the dividend would almost have tripled and the total cost over the last six years? £63m. The comparison is perfectly valid."
This is disingenuous in the extreme. You know enough about United's financials to know that, pre the equity sale by Edwards (and pre FRS 10) United paid a dividend of about 22% of PAT. From 2000 onwards the total dividend tracked very closely to 35% of PAT (98.4% correlation). The "ordinary" component of the dividend tracked "sustainable" PAT - calculated from prior experience of "Profit from player sales" (about £2.2 million). When profit from player sales exceeded that expectation - in 2002 and 2003 - a "special" dividend was paid. Over the two years the special dividends amounted to 34% of the "excess" profit. To blandly claim the dividends grew at 10% per annum flies in the face of what we observe. (And, of course, starting your growth from the incomplete dividend of 2005 just amplifies the effect.) I know that those awkward green and gold glasses you wear must make it difficult to see what is in front of you at times, but this is rather ridiculous.
For the record, dividend growth rates from 1997 to 2004 were: 19.23%, 9.68%, 5.88%, 5.56%, 5.26%, 55.0%, 29.03% and -33.75%.
- 23 January 2012 at 23:27
Technically yes but neither equity injection provided funds for the club's own use.
272m was used (along with the proceeds from debt issuance) to pay plc shareholders £3 a share. No money was retained in the club for investment, growth or expansion purposes.
£249m was invested in RFJV to repay the PIK- their own debt. Again money in was matched by money out, nought was retained.
- 23 January 2012 at 23:31
- andersred said...
Anonymous @ 23.27
Calculating "what if" dividends clearly involves assumptions. I took 10% CAGR because that was a) the long run growth rate in ordinary dividends from 92-05 AND also b) the unlevered (i.e. EBITDA) profit growth since 2004 (note not 2005 as that was very depressed year). For the 2005 base I did NOT use the interim only, I calculated a "what if" final based on the interim growth rate vs. 04!
I ignored the special dividends because by their nature they are highly variable. They total a poxy £6.5m over the whole life of the plc and only 20% of the total dividend payments from 02-05 when the club started paying them. Even if we assume an ongoing 20% uplift from "specials" since 05, that would only add £12m to the dividend bill.
You can see all the figures including the projections in this spreadsheet:
- 24 January 2012 at 11:03
To the last, I would also add that 2002 and 2003 saw a tax adjustment(reduction) of 7m- this was as a result of the club not utilising its full capital allowance in previous years. The club specifically mentions this as factoring into the special dividend award.
The total special dividend was 2.5p per share (1p in 2002 and 1.5p in 2003). The combined cost was approx .025*263m or 6.6m. Less than the tax rebate.
Worth mentioning that tax and dividends are not independent; both will be impacted by reinvestment plans- the more the club reinvests, the smaller the tax
and dividend bill. And both are contingent on operating performance: a bad year is not punished by excessive dividend and tax payments. Those in receipt of interest under an LBO situation aren't so accommodating. Pay up your dues regardless.
- 24 January 2012 at 13:18
LSD_eindhoven and Andersred
"The Board has reviewed its dividend policy to ensure that shareholders benefit directly from the team's success on the pitch in any season and disposal profits from players..."
"Also, as a result of the high level of profit from player disposals and a lower tax charge, the Board is proposing a special
dividend of 1.00 pence per share."
The two quotations from the 2002 Annual are pretty unambiguous about the Board's intention to change their dividend policy going forward and, in particular, to distribute part of the profit from player disposals. Any model that doesn't reflect this is going to be flawed.
- 24 January 2012 at 19:39
- andersred said...
OK. I'll play along. There were two special dividends in 02 and 03 totaling £6.5m. In those two years the profit on player sales was £30.3m so 21% was distributed in special dividends.
If we make the heroic assumption that 21% of ALL profits on player sales from 2005-2011 had been paid out in special dividends (and I think that is very aggressive as cash requirements for investment always ranked first, see LSD's comments re: tax above), £30.4m of the £144.6m of cumulative profits would have been paid.
Add that £30.4m to the £62.7m (10% CAGR from 2005 inc a final dividend) and you get £93.1m in "what if" dividends.
That is still derisory (19% in fact)compared to the actual interest, debt repayment, fees etc that the Glazers have cost the club.
And as I say, that's taking an unrealistic formulaic payout ratio on player sale profits ignoring the historic pattern of real payments.
- 24 January 2012 at 20:39
And in the following year (Annual Report 2003, page 4) the board stated:
"....As a result the Board recommends a special dividend of 1.5p per share based on the excellent operating result and the tax provision release.....No part of this dividend is dependent on this year's player trading profits, since the Board intends that cash generated from these sales will be reinvested in the playing squad, to help maintain the playing success."
Pretty definitive, I would have thought.
Only 2 special dividends were paid in two years were the club received tax reductions greater than the combined cost of the special dividends.
It is not remiss to also note that the club published an adjusted EPS figure where they removed player trading (amortisation and player profit) so that shareholders could get a better look at the underlying performance of the business.
If you can construct an alternate dividend profile (predicated on prior trends) from 2006 onwards then go ahead. Put forth your methodology and your assumptions and I'll be happy to take a look.
- 24 January 2012 at 20:54
My underlying concern with your analysis is that you seem to want your cake and ha'penny.
Commercial revenue under the PLC showed no growth from 1999 (or 2001 if it makes you happier) through 2004. Given that the commercial office consisted of two men and a dog (without the dog) located in Manchester, that's not really unexpected. The Chairman's statement in the 2004 annual makes it clear that leveraging the Nike and Vodaphone contracts was effectively the limit of their commercial ambitions. If those revenues remain flat other than the Nike step-ups and, ultimately, a renegotiated Vodaphone (or substitute) contract, it's likely that Commercial revenues from 2006 on would have been in aggregate between £120 and £130 million below the level we have seen.
If the company continued in it's plodding way, I suspect that your estimate of total dividends in the low £60 millions would be correct. However, if they achieved growth in revenues commensurate with what we have seen, an estimate of a little shy of £100 million would be closer to the mark.
If the PLC didn't raise ticket prices to the extent that the Glazers have, match day revenues would be substantially lower. The issue (which I haven't seen you address) is how much lower?
The Board made it clear in 2004 that they would continue to closely monitor the club's transfer activities and that a wage bill below 50% of revenues was their target. Given the reduction in Commercial and Matchday revenues that we seem to be assuming, that would impose a stricter limit on transfer spending than we have seen. In turn that could well have limited Fergie's ability to recover from the failed team building of 2001-2004 (We got the three R's - even including them, the average tenure at United for that group was just over 4 years - without them it is substantially lower. Compare that to the 2005-2008 group whose average tenure is already close to 5 years and of whom 11 out of 18 are still with us.) Without a team rebuild, there is no reason to suppose that, for example, we would have reached 3 CL finals or won 4 Premierships in the next six years. And that, of course, would have reduced Media revenues significantly and Matchday to a lesser extent, further restricting transfer spending.
So the question becomes, do you have a convincing model whereby the PLC would be able to achieve the same level of revenue growth as we have observed? And a secondary question is, could it be done without what you describe as "Glazer costs". Without this model it seems pointless to discuss how much of the EBITDA is being eaten up by interest payments, etc. and how much more would be available if we were a PLC.
For what it's worth my estimate of the extra cash available if we were still a PLC is in the £0 to £25 million range if the company had kept plodding. Unfortunately I get there by assuming the same transfers and staff costs as actually happened - which for most of the period would breach the 50% rule. So, in reality we would probably be worse off.
At the other end of the scale would be the PLC achieving the same revenues as the Glazers. In that case the extra cash seems to be in the order of £100 million.
All this ignores the overhang of future debt paydown - although a partial IPO would remove this and transfer the extra costs embedded in the debt directly to the Glazers (through the extra dilution that would result). All in all that would seem to be a happy ending.
- 24 January 2012 at 21:02
Equity injection
You're quite right that none of the equity funding was used within the club. The difference between our case and the Ashley/Newcastle case is that Newcastle's ambition exceeds their reach - without equity funding for operations they would be unable to achieve their objectives (even with it it's problematical). United have exhibited no need for a similar boost in operating cash. On the pitch we've had what is arguably the best six year period in our history - while still throwing off substantial excess cash. Our current team, despite the epidemic of injuries, is performing admirably. (I don't take the loss in Basel, starting without our first four choices in central midfield and losing our best defender as the match progressed, as a sign of squad decline. Few teams would have been competitive under those circumstances.) We're still in the FA Cup, the Europa League is upcoming, and in our domestic league you have to go back to 1907/08 to find a United team that had scored more goals at this point in the season (makes you wonder what we would do with a little more creativity). (In the Premier League era, only two United teams have had more points after 22 games and only three have had better goal differences.)
I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that we simply didn't need a cash injection and it's absence says nothing about the magnitude of the Glazers' investment. It is what it is.
- 24 January 2012 at 21:23
"My underlying concern with your analysis is that" it is more than slightly retarded.
The plc tops the football money league for 8 years prior to the GLazers, is recognised widely as the best run club around, creates the greatest brand in football, has plans to leverage the global brand, monetise the fan base, recognises that sponsorship is high margin and high growth and the way forward, recognises-by actually conducting research- that the club has huge name recognition in asia etc, implements plans to increase name recognition still further, and the value of the brand still further... and then decides to sit on its arse and pet its dog instead. Fuck sake, get a grip.
The PLC produced 16% pa growth in revenue and EBITDA since inception. But somehow you think that with the arrival of the sugar daddied clubs, the plc would sit back and not repond. Fuck sake, get a grip.
The only one assuming 0% growth in commercial revenue is you. Only you.
If the club wanted to retain its wages/turnover ratio at 50% (and it would) then it would need to be as agressive commercially as the Glazers. Are you suggesting that only the Glazers could produce a commerical plan involving geographic and sector spreading? That somehow the Glazers and only the Glazers could raise our commercial income to a level that the alternative plc couldn't reach? That their plan was so exceptional that not even a consultation with leading marketing firms couldn't unlock their secret? Please give me and the few brain cells that constitute your intellect a break.
But, of course you are not quite sure- so you go from one extreme to the other: Under your nonsensical downside scenario, the club might be, what, 20m better off in terms of costs but would have violated the 50% wage/turnover ratio. You do know that short of a sugar daddy or an equity injection, under your scenario the club would have gone into administration! It would be technically incapable of paying its own running costs. Have you really thought this through or are you simply putting to page whatever thought enters your skull without reason? Fuck sake, get a grip.
On the other hand, had the club under the plc produced like revenues, you figure, based no doubt on a wonderful but regretfully undisclosed analysis, that the club might be 100m to the good. How is that then? Ignoring opportunity costs, the RF accounts reveal over 420+m in owner related cash costs to date. You have dividends at 100m (without disclosing your workings) so I can only assume that corporation tax in your model is north of 40%. Strange, as Corporation tax has actually decreased during the Glazer reign. You probably need to have a rethink.
Yours sincerely
- 24 January 2012 at 23:03
Many thanks for your kind words. I admire your faith in the ability of an entrenched management to change. Of course a worst case scenario is no more likely to happen than a best case scenario - which makes this about as likely as Andy's model. I'll address a couple of your points.
This is repetition, but worth the emphasis - Commercial had exhibited no growth for a 6 year period, the Chairman's statement clearly indicated the board's view of it's future potential and it was a two man office in Manchester. I actually assumed a low level of growth, incorporated the Nike step-ups and even gave them credit for improving the Vodaphone contract by £5 million a year when it was renegotiated. While you might be right about their getting religion, given their prior performance it would have required a significant paradigm change of a type that is rare without a change in the management team.
It's more relevant to look at growth rates post the implementation of FRS10 - i.e. from 1999 (or 1998 for which adjusted figures are available). From 1999-2005, Revenue growth was 7.7% pa and EBITDA was 1.7% pa. (Adjusting for the 1 month less Commercial revenue in the 2005 figures give 8.0% and 3.1% respectively.) I'm sure that you will agree that 7 years is sufficient to provide a performance baseline.
Abramovich took over Chelsea in June 2003. Up to the time of the United takeover (almost 2 years) there had been no commercial response of the kind you suggest. Perhaps we were just lying in wait?
There would be no danger of administration under this scenario. I believe that aggregate EBITDA would have been about £130 million below the £507 million that has actually been achieved (through 2012Q1) - still quite substantial.
It's not very hard to build a pro-forma set of financials if you assume the same level of revenues that were actually achieved. There is enough information in the accounts to make a pretty good stab at the tax liability (actually using the appropriate statutory rates). Dividends, of course, are always going to be controversial - I continued to use the 35% of PAT that had been the de facto standard for the 5 years prior to the takeover. I'm sure you would want to try something different. (2009 is obviously a problem for dividend estimation. It's unlikely that the full 35% would have been paid. However, if you do the work, you find that there would be considerable need for dividend smoothing in the two subsequent years which would eat up anything held back in 2009.)
Under that scenario, aggregate taxes are around £127 million and aggregate dividends £98 million.
The (approximately) £100 million is the free cash flow that is generated. Essentially it represents the difference in cash flow terms between the two financing strategies. That is between the dividends and taxation on the one hand, and the interest and issue related cash costs on the other. The purchased bonds have not, to this point, been retired and as such don't really affect the asset situation (although they will reduce the net interest paid).
Obviously I don't believe the worst case scenario that I proposed but, equally, I don't believe Andy's best case scenario. As I said in the post you took such exception to, without a convincing model of how the PLC would achieve that level of revenues (particularly given the implicit assumption that ticket prices would be substantially lower) the debate needs to be recast.
- 26 January 2012 at 02:08
- RichCole said...
Great blog as always
Still some Luddites out there refusing to believe that the Glazers have not sucked the life force out of club. I struggle to see how people can fail to see them for the financial parasites that they are.
Half a billion pounds has walked out of the club without a single asset or investment in the future of the club. Instead it has simply been paid as part of a debt incurred to line the Glazer pockets. No other club is in our predicament - Arsenal incurred the debt to build a state of the art stadium, Mike Ashley, for good or for ill, has written off NUFC debts until he recoups the money at the point of sale, and Liverpool have wiped their debt from their balance sheet.
Fans have felt the full force of the aggressive ticket price increases whilst seeing the squad gradually weakened since 2008 as the Glazers attempt to maximise profit using the talents of SAF to maintain sufficient revenue until such time as they can issue an IPO in Asia.
- 30 January 2012 at 21:17
As ever, the confusion between the obscene financial shenanigans that have been brought into United from the world of spivvery, and how this supposedly restricts Ferguson's ability to build and grow his squad is in full effect in this blog.
Just to be clear, United and player wages has always been an uneasy relationship. If it were true that the only reason United didn't sign Scheijder was because of his wage demands then it wouldn't be particularly remarkable in the context of the club's transfer market history. Hey, if you think the financial shenanigans are obscene then you must surely think that Schneijder's supposed wage demands are too, right?
Let's be clear here, despite some claiming the midfield is weak and dreaming up reasons why it hasn't been strengthened, the reality seems to be that there's a couple of good kids coming through (esp. Cleverley) and there's a few targets that are fairly open secrets as well. A couple of seasons back Fergie bought 3 midfielders to add to Carrick's £18m capture. There is zero evidence that he couldn't do so again - IF HE WANTED TO.
In the summer he bought a keeper, the versatile Jones, and a left winger. Personally I believed (and would argue that the way it's panned out backs me up) he should've bought a full-back as well, but hey ho, I'm not the mnanager.
- 31 January 2012 at 15:58
"Fans have felt the full force of the aggressive ticket price increases whilst seeing the squad gradually weakened since 2008 as the Glazers attempt to maximise profit using the talents of SAF to maintain sufficient revenue until such time as they can issue an IPO in Asia."
Below are the cheapest and most expensive season ticket prices for United in particular years. The figures in parentheses are the percentage increases in the prices over the previous 7 years.
1984-85 £75, £88
1990-91 £135, £153 (95.7%, 86.6%)
1997-98 £247, £361 (83.0%, 135.9%)
2004-05 £390, £551 (57.9%, 52.6%)
2011-12 £532, £950 (36.4%, 72.4%)
These time periods are the last 7 years of the Edwards regime, the first 7 years of the PLC, the last 7 years of the PLC, and the first 7 years of the Glazers. (Anders has said that the weighted average price increase under the Glazers has been 55% - I'm not going to doubt him on that.) What the data make clear is that increases under the Glazers have been much less than the last 7 years of the Edwards regime or the first 7 of the PLC, and have been pretty much in line with the increases in the last 7 years of the PLC. (Of note is that the lowest ticket prices have increased far more slowly under the Glazers than in the previous periods.) Of course the hated requirement to buy tickets for Cup games makes a difference here, although the extent of the difference depends on the likelihood of season ticket holders going to those games whether they were forced to pay or not.
As far as squad strength is concerned, since 2008 we've got to 2 CL finals and won the Premiership twice. In the current season our League record is one of our best ever - after 22 games we had the third most points we've had at that point in the Premiership era, the second best goal difference over the same span, and to find a United team that has scored more goals in their first 22 games you have to go back to the 1907-08 season (well over 100 years). And all this in the face of the worst injury epidemic that I can remember for any team, let alone United.
On the financial side, we've spent almost £165 million on players since 2008 while faced with a payroll that has grown by 98.9% since 2004. (The total payroll was £318 million greater over the Glazers' first 6 years than over the PLC's last 6 years.)
I'm not suggesting that all is rosy in the garden - I'd be a lot happier with the debt gone. But the fact remains that the Glazers have continued to invest in the team, and our on-field performance has been good. (I'm not denying that we've had disappointments this year - the CL was particularly hurtful - but looking at the impact of injuries as we've gone through the season the setbacks have not been outrageous.) Our failure to buy any of the transfer muppets' flavours of the month continues to outrage Anders and his ilk, but SAF seems happy with the squad and the teams performance in general seems to support him.
- 1 February 2012 at 03:24
You can't defend the cup ticket scheme, even if it's also true that ST holders probably would've taken up most of their tickets - one way or another - as usual anyway.
Interesting to see those price rises presented in 7 year blocks like that. Just remind me though, wasn't there already a price hike or series of price hikes in the offing before the takeover actually happened? Basically the path was smoothed before the deal was done, and that hike distorts the picture iirc. Haven't got the figures to hand so if anyone can confirm or deny it would be helpful, cheers.
- 1 February 2012 at 14:31
I've got ticket prices from 1960 to 2011/12 (some more reliable than others), but I'm missing 2001/02, 2002/03 and 2003/04. So, unfortunately, I don't have the price path for the years immediately before the takeover. If anyone has those prices, I'd be grateful if they would share them.
- 2 February 2012 at 07:45
Can somebody settle something for me? A blue of my acquaintance (bl00dy facebook) tells me that United pay rent to City for Carrington as they own the freehold for the land which they bought back in 1998. Utter rubbish from our blue friends?
- 2 February 2012 at 11:07
Anons@ 1st Feb
Regarding ticket pricing:
There are 2 key issues:
1) use of ticket monies
2) affordability
In relation to 1 the plc spent an amount equivalent 75% of its cash profits (ebitda) on expansion of facilities and squad investment over its lifetime. For the period 1998 to 2005, the amount is c. 70% of cash profits. Durin the Glazer period, an amount equivalent to 75% of cash profits has been spent on debt interest and debt repayments and funding for the expension in 2006/2007 was in situ- the cash in bank position at YE 2005 was 65m. The Glazers of course purchased this prefunding as part of the takeover yet they still raised ticket prices considerably in the first 3 years post takeover.
During the plc years, ticket pricing hikes tracked periods of expansion and greater internal investment.
2)The plc had a waiting list. Pricing policy was set below an achievable "market price"; prices were therefore more affordable for a greater number of fans. Post takeover, the Glazers burned excess demand and made prices less affordable for fans in general. The move to a market based price (and the assumption that the process was inherently "fair") has been used by Glazerites to justify price increases as though the Glazers were themselves powerless in the face of market supply\demand dynamics. The plc, of course, somehow managed to hold fast against powerful market pressures.
Bring points 1 and 2 together, the glazers priced to maximise the return from current facilities and by implication demonstrated that further expansion of OT (the south stand) was not a part of their medium term plans. To achieve full utilisation following an expansion of the south stand, the Glazers would need to lower prices and\or scrap the ACS. In their model, the net revenue increase wouldn't justify such a capital outlay (100m to 150m) especially when you add on the negative revenue impact during the construction phase.
Such a redevelopment of the south stand could be justified under a pricing policy that had spare capacity on the affordability side and didn't have the dreadful ACS.
- 2 February 2012 at 15:43
The point was that plans were in place for a large - larger than usual - price hike in tickets before the takeover actually happened.
People often want to revise the nature of the previous ownership and also to separate it from the current finance industry spivvery model. But the fact is that the previous model was made up of many shareholders who ultimately sold out voluntarily to the Glazers.
It is a fair point to say that the Glazers have "burned excess demand" so that new tickets are taken up these days by mainly oot dickheads rather than local lads. But at the same time it is also a fact that other than splashing the cash around in the transfer market like a bunch of no-mark wannabes - and long-standing south stand expansion plans notwithstanding - there hasn't been that much spending on infrastructure necessary since 2005.
Again, this is the situation from which the previous ownership model both attracted the takeover and facilitated it.
- 7 February 2012 at 01:26
- Tacconi said...
Hi Anders, allways nice reading your very informed comments.
I was wondering the £59m in dividend compared to the £480m in glazernomic.
To really compare them, won´t you have to take inflation and the size of turnover into account?
And if so, do you have some calculation for that?
Keep up the good work
- 19 February 2012 at 15:36
- vectorobk said...
Great Content.I have appreciate with getting lot of good and reliable information with your post.......
Thanks for sharing such kind of nice and wonderful collection......again, beautiful :) I love reading your posts. They make me happy .
- 15 December 2012 at 06:52


text:
Great Gifts for All Kinds of Moms
The celebration of Easter takes place around the world, but few cultures refer to the holiday by that name. Early Christians called the celebration of Christ's resurrection "Pesach," the Hebrew word for Passover; today, most languages use a variation of that name: "Pesach" in French, "Pâques" in Spanish, "Pasqua" in Italian, "Pashkë" in Albanian and "Pask" in Swedish.
Our English word, Easter, comes from a stranger source: a pagan fertility goddess named Eostre (also known as Astarte or Oster). The festival of Eostre always took place around the spring equinox; so early Christian missionaries in Europe gradually melded the festival's name, timing, and some of its symbols, into the Christian celebration.
"The missionaries adapted a tremendous amount of the cultures from where they were doing their work into the faith, in large part to make people feel comfortable," says Ace Collins, author of Stories Behind the Traditions and Songs of Easter. "Eventually, the Christian celebration took the place of the pagan festival."
From colored eggs to chocolate eggs to egg hunts, nothing says "Easter" like the incredible edible. Yet our modern take on collecting, dying, and decorating eggs comes from a tradition dating back thousands of years, long before the time of Jesus Christ.
Many ancient cultures, including the Greeks and Egyptians, saw eggs as a sign of fertility and new life; they used eggs in religious rituals and hung them in pagan temples for mystical purposes, says Martha Zimmerman in her book Celebrating the Christian Year.
Later, as Christian missionaries observed community members hunting for eggs in spring, they began using the food as a tool to describe Christ's new birth in resurrection. "They would dye the eggs based on what colors meant to the church: yellow for resurrection, blue for love, red for the blood of Christ. Or, they would paint various scenes from the Bible on eggs and hide them; the child who found the egg would come back and tell the story painted on that egg," says Collins.
More games with eggs soon followed — egg rolls and egg relays — mostly as a way to draw children into an otherwise serious religious celebration. Closer to home, the tradition continues: The White House Egg Roll will celebrate its 135th anniversary this year.
DIY Father's Day Gifts


text:
full size
Product Details
The Crosby shirt is designed with an athletic build in mind. Like our other dress shirts, it's woven with 120s threads by some of the best mills in the world—only the Crosby is cut with wider arms and a bigger body because we believe that while 18" biceps might be hard to come by, a great dress shirt shouldn't be.
Size & Fit Details