Q&A: Man Utd power struggle

Magnier is one of the richest and most influential men in Ireland

Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson is at war with the club's biggest shareholders John Magnier and JP McManus.

The pair own more than 25% of the club and are demanding more of a say over how it is run - in particular the length of the new contract being offered to Sir Alex.

BBC News Online looks at whether the two investors have the power to oust the management if they don't get their way.

---

Exactly how much power does owning 25% of a public company give you?

Enough to trigger an extraordinary general meeting (EGM), including a vote of no confidence in the board, which Mr Magnier and Mr McManus are threatening to do.

But because they do not have a director on the board, their power is limitled.

Could they stage a coup and oust the board at United?

They are more likely to try to force an independent investigation into transfer dealings at the club.

It all depends on the attitude of the other shareholders.

For a motion at an EGM to be successful, Mr Magnier and Mr McManus would need to get 50% of the polling vote.

They own 25.49% and would expect to be backed in any vote by Dermot Desmond, who owns just under 3% of the club, and Harry Dobson, the Scottish mining tycoon, who owns 6.5%.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers owner, Malcolm Glazer, who has 14.31% would not vote on any such motion, according to City sources.

That would leave their company Cubic Expression close to a simple majority.

Why not install a director on the board to push for an independent investigation instead?

Because, analysts argue, they would have to prove to other shareholders and board members that they were acting in the best interests of the club.

Many suspect that Mr Magnier's motivation for his recent moves is personal - he has had a very public falling out with Sir Alex Ferguson over stud rights for Rock of Gibraltar, a racehorse co-owned by Sir Alex and Mr Magnier's wife.

"There is a lot of animosity revolving around Rock of Gibraltar which has spilled over into the corporate relationship between the large shareholders, like Magnier and McManus, about the way United has been run," said Henk Potts of Barclays Stockbrokers.

"You have some very powerful figures, who are used to getting their own way.

"They are ruthless and they employ their financial firepower to get the results they want."

Will ordinary fans have any say?

PLC chairman Sir Roy Gardner has said he has responsibility to all shareholders, not just the big ones such as Cubic Expression.

Ferguson has fallen out spectacularly with Magnier

Shareholders United, which represents small shareholders in the club, holds about 17% of the stock.

But they have issued a statement in support of Sir Alex, who is, after all, the most successful manager in the club's history.

"Sir Alex is undoubtedly one of the club's and the company's best assets," Shareholders United spokesman Oliver Houston has said.

"It would be a disgrace if personal score-settling, bullying and dirty tricks were allowed to win the day."

What if Mr Magnier and Mr McManus don't get enough backing for a confidence vote?

They could still make life very difficult for the Man Utd board.

They will no doubt continue to demand an investigation by independent auditors to look at all financial aspects of the club, particularly the use of agents and transfer fees.

Why don't they just mount a takeover bid for the club?

Their company Cubic Expression's stake in United is not far below the 30% threshold at which Takeover Panel regulations require investors to make an offer to all other shareholders.

At that point, the Takeover Panel rules control of the company has changed, and the other shareholders must be given the option to sell.

But Mr Magnier and Mr McManus insist they have bought their stake as an investment only and are not interested in a takeover.

Some say their motive is to hold a large enough stake to block a takeover by another bidder.

Other City sources argue that a takeover attempt is the only logical conclusion because, at present, Cubic neither controls the club nor has the potential to make much profit in the near future by selling its stake.