Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
dylanisabaddog

20 bids for Chelsea

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

No. Although there are Government sanctions, the Government is not running the club. The sale will be checked to make sure that Abramovich doesn't benefit. 

I thought DCMS had oversight - and a veto?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Well b back said:

The pitch I believe is owned by the supporters and is not part of the deal.

Thanks for that, I had no idea! Stamford Bridge is effectively owned by 15,000 supporters who have given the club a 200 year lease for pennies. 

That makes the price being quoted absolutely extraordinary. Why on earth would you pay £3bn for a business which makes a £150m loss every year, doesn't own the premises it operates in and whose only asset is staff on short term contracts. The only conclusion I can draw is that the people with the money think the European Super League will be here some time soon 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Son Ova Gunn said:

I think this shows that it’s possible to make an offer subject to due diligence (such as a auction type environment) but not that it’s impossible that somebody would like to look at the business before deciding what their interest is. Both scenarios can exist no?.. just think the notion of the fans would hear from the press about any enquiry needs challenging as while it’s very likely a committed buyer would go public if any block was encountered, it’s nowhere near a certain as made out.

Yes - I think that offers could be made for City subject to due diligence. As discussed elsewhere any offer would have to reported to shareholders. I can't think of good reason why an interested party would not go public about the offer if were very interested in the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Thanks for that, I had no idea! Stamford Bridge is effectively owned by 15,000 supporters who have given the club a 200 year lease for pennies. 

That makes the price being quoted absolutely extraordinary. Why on earth would you pay £3bn for a business which makes a £150m loss every year, doesn't own the premises it operates in and whose only asset is staff on short term contracts. The only conclusion I can draw is that the people with the money think the European Super League will be here some time soon 

They had this on the "Price of Football" the other day. Ken Bates sold 1 square metre of the pitch to loads of different investors years ago to protect the club. It makes it far harder for owners to sell the ground to another business that they own thus protecting any investments that they make. I suspect some of our rather credulous posters on here don't know about this type of thing. 🙁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Badger said:

I thought DCMS had oversight - and a veto?

I don't think they can veto something just because they don't like it very much. And if they do say 'no' that decision can be challenged in the courts. I suspect they'll be tempted to help the sale as Chelsea has become an annoying side issue for them. 

I originally posted because I was shocked at the number of potential buyers and I'm now astonished because of the stadium issue. Chelsea is little different from Ipswich in that respect. 

Some of the interested parties have little or no knowledge of the club or English football in general. They would only buy if they thought they could make a profit and the only way they can make a profit is the formation of a European Super League. 

 

Edited by dylanisabaddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I suspect they'll be tempted to help the sale as Chelsea has become an annoying side issue for them. 

Yes I have always thought this. Two adjoining parliamentary constituencies have Conservative majorities of less that 700 and others would be classed as marginal. I think that they would like a quick and positive resolution to the issue and one that is as advantageous to Chelsea as possible.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I don't think they can veto something just because they don't like it very much. And if they do say 'no' that decision can be challenged in the courts. I suspect they'll be tempted to help the sale as Chelsea has become an annoying side issue for them. 

I originally posted because I was shocked at the number of potential buyers and I'm now astonished because of the stadium issue. Chelsea is little different from Ipswich in that respect. 

Some of the interested parties have little or no knowledge of the club or English football in general. They would only buy if they thought they could make a profit and the only way they can make a profit is the formation of a European Super League. 

 

If tomorrow Delia announced Norwich City was for sale I would expect the number of immediate expressions of interest would quickly reach double figures.

Edited by PurpleCanary
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 17/03/2022 at 09:36, daly said:

Is Master Tom brokering a deal on behalf of the English consortium for Chelsea with Galway Roast

Galway Roast is on special offer in our local lidl. Get the feeling that company won't be sponsoring/ buying  much anytime soon. Maybe I should try a bag...it may be delicious,  then again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 17/03/2022 at 13:16, Jim Smith said:

especially as we would be available for less than 3% of the price they want for Chelsea

How do you arrive at a figure of less than 100 million Jim? At that price you could buy it and break it up and sell all the assets (over a two-year period for the parachute money) and make a huge profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are - thankfully - not like Chelsea and DS/MJW will not be selling anytime soon. Thankfully we are immune from the chase for money that has infected the top of the game and are pursuing a self-sustaining mode of operation - making use of the money that is in the system to produce a consistently competitive team at championship level.  Only two seasons in the last eleven have we not been either in the premier league or at the top end of the championship - and the previous season to that eleven years we won League 1. So 12 years of success overall, with a financial situation in the middle of that that would have finished off many clubs. Yes the PL seasons have been difficult - this one most of all - but if we go down and Dean Smith is able to do what Farke did, then we are on course for more success and another tilt at the PL.

The elephabt in the room is the relegations that keep happening, but despite how we all feel right now, if we get a good season next season, we will all start to get our mojo back.

The Premier League - as must be obvious to everyone - is a thankless place to be. It is barely a sport anymore - TOTALLY geared up for clubs with massive resources.  Even clubs who are way richer than us are struggling to make inroads at the top. Newcastle might - but what have they done? Sold out to just about the most unethical owners you could imagine.

No, you can keep your money - give me an ethical and community based club with family values and a footballing structure that offers quality young players a clear route through to the first team such that we can compete with richer clubs who try and buy their way to success. I'll have that over any of the super rich clubs in the top two leagues.

H'ambition?  Yes. Ambitious to be a club that stays true to its roots.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Genuine question for those who are not in the “sell the club/find an investor camp.”

What would your reaction be if it turned out that the current owners have been economical with the truth and have been resisting/deterring potential investors/new owners? Just interested to know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Genuine question for those who are not in the “sell the club/find an investor camp.”

What would your reaction be if it turned out that the current owners have been economical with the truth and have been resisting/deterring potential investors/new owners? Just interested to know.

I don't think that there is anyone who would resist new finance coming into the club by form of new equity (giving the club money) so you are creating a false dichotomy.

The "camps" as you refer to them are those who think that they is a queue of people ready to gift us tens of millions and those who think that this is unlikely.

Again, as I'm sure that you know, if a formal offer comes in for the club it has to notify the shareholders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Genuine question for those who are not in the “sell the club/find an investor camp.”

What would your reaction be if it turned out that the current owners have been economical with the truth and have been resisting/deterring potential investors/new owners? Just interested to know.

I do like a 'when did you stop beating your wife' question.

Is there a one camp that says “sell the club/find an investor.”. Would we need to sell the club if we find an investor?

If the club gets sold does the buyer have to invest in the club or can they just buy it? If they buy the club and don't invest in it would they then have to sell it immediately if they don't get an investor?

What would your reaction be?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a perfectly simple question. What if it became apparent that “we don’t even listen to offers” (whether through sale of unissued equity or the sale of their shares) was true or indeed that they had put off potential investors/buyers when approached?

would that change your views on the owners?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Badger said:

I don't think that there is anyone who would resist new finance coming into the club by form of new equity (giving the club money) so you are creating a false dichotomy.

The "camps" as you refer to them are those who think that they is a queue of people ready to gift us tens of millions and those who think that this is unlikely.

Again, as I'm sure that you know, if a formal offer comes in for the club it has to notify the shareholders. 

All quite correct but any new investment would take the Smith Jones shareholdings below 50% unless of course they were buying non voting shares. I think it's always been obvious that no one is going to hand over a significant chunk of money without having control of the club. So we are in a position where Smith and Jones have to sell for things to change and I don't see that happening in the near future. 

As regards Jim's comment regarding the claims there has been no interest, I think we need to read those statements very carefully. I take them to mean that there has been no interest based on the terms laid out by Smith and Jones which is very different from 'there has been no interest'.

With Smith and Jones standing on 51% they are effectively asking people to give them money to increase the value of their shares in exchange for absolutely nothing. 

As things stand an interested party would probably have to fork out around £100m to buy the Smith Jones shares along with a further amount to buy out other shareholders who decided to take the offer. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I think the same offer has to be made to all shareholders. 

We really need another £50m to bring the ground up to Premier League standard and God knows how much to create a team capable of surviving in the Premier League. I'd guess around £200m initially. 

So we're looking for someone with around £400m to improve the current situation. Oh well, never mind. 

Edited by dylanisabaddog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

So we are in a position where Smith and Jones have to sell for things to change and I don't see that happening in the near future. 

May I tentatively suggest that they would not have to sell but see that sufficient new equity were created to give the new owner a majority shareholding = obviously how much this would be would depend upon the real valuation of the club (not the nominal one).

If the club were valued at £150 million it could issue enough share and price them at such a level that a new owner would have to put in £200 million in new equity. The Smith's would retain their major shareholder status the club would have new money almost guaranteed to go towards club improvement. This would be a "golden scenario," which I think would please everyone.

The only downside to this is that there is very little chance of it happening. Which leaves us with Plan B sell to "an investor," who can buy his shares, transfer the ground and training ground to other companies s/he owns and borrow against the club a bid to make us "big time." 

It would please fans (at first) and probably fail (wouldn't be able to borrow enough) but at least the investor would be safe with the clubs fixed assets neatly tucked away in a separate company and the debt in the club's name, not his/ hers.

I suppose the choice of scenario depends upon how likely you think it is that a new shareholder just wants to give us tens of millions as opposed to make money from his/ her investment. Most on here seem to think that there are plenty of people want to give us money: but most often this is based on a misunderstanding on what has gone on at other clubs. 

If only Tony Bloom were a Norwich fan? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Badger said:

May I tentatively suggest that they would not have to sell but see that sufficient new equity were created to give the new owner a majority shareholding = obviously how much this would be would depend upon the real valuation of the club (not the nominal one).

If the club were valued at £150 million it could issue enough share and price them at such a level that a new owner would have to put in £200 million in new equity. The Smith's would retain their major shareholder status the club would have new money almost guaranteed to go towards club improvement. This would be a "golden scenario," which I think would please everyone.

The only downside to this is that there is very little chance of it happening. Which leaves us with Plan B sell to "an investor," who can buy his shares, transfer the ground and training ground to other companies s/he owns and borrow against the club a bid to make us "big time." 

It would please fans (at first) and probably fail (wouldn't be able to borrow enough) but at least the investor would be safe with the clubs fixed assets neatly tucked away in a separate company and the debt in the club's name, not his/ hers.

I suppose the choice of scenario depends upon how likely you think it is that a new shareholder just wants to give us tens of millions as opposed to make money from his/ her investment. Most on here seem to think that there are plenty of people want to give us money: but most often this is based on a misunderstanding on what has gone on at other clubs. 

If only Tony Bloom were a Norwich fan? 

 

I don’t disagree with the above, we have discussed this before and agreed it as the optimal scenario but of course Delia and MWJ would have to agree to it as majority shareholders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

It’s a perfectly simple question. What if it became apparent that “we don’t even listen to offers” (whether through sale of unissued equity or the sale of their shares) was true or indeed that they had put off potential investors/buyers when approached?

would that change your views on the owners?

I'll give my answer when your hypothetical becomes an actual situation, until then no-one needs to waste any time considering it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 17/03/2022 at 10:33, hogesar said:

I don't really think so, no. These potential buyers have appeared because the media is publicising it, as are Chelsea. And it's a firesale, so there's always going to be interested parties at this point.

Abramovic has apparently received countless offers during the time he owned the club, because it's Chelsea. The locality, the global powerhouse, Champions League etc, it's only 1 of 4 clubs in the UK you can buy with that amount of credential. It's in the top 10 in the world.

Again, if there was any serious interest in our club we'd have heard about it. If a billionaire wants something, they don't meekly hide away and move on just because Delia Smith said "No, sorry". 

It's been done to death on different threads but we aren't an investment opportunity so we either need a billionaire Norwich fan (who i'd welcome with open arms) or we need someone who wants the club as more of a brand enhancement tool. Unfortunately, we're quite unfashionable in that respect and there'd be plenty of better options, likely at better prices due to mis-managed finances at other clubs.

This.

Chelsea may play the same sport but they are in a different planet.

Norwich is a lovely club with a great fan base and outperforms its size.

It has low prestige outside the UK and limited upside potential.

The money to be made is buy cheap > get promoted > sell

Ironically the most likely Prem buyer may well be a USA based mate of another clubs owner as that premier league vote could one day be used to form a breakaway premier league or join a super league.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2011/oct/17/foreign-owners-premier-league-relegation

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/premier-league-big-six-rebel-against-owners-charter-3s07763p3



Imagine one vote needed so the glaziers get their mate to buy Norwich (if in prem again) and then condemn Norwich to never being in the premier league again.

In effect buying Norwich/el al for 100 million to add a billion $ each to the value of the top 5




 

Edited by Fromage Frais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

All quite correct but any new investment would take the Smith Jones shareholdings below 50% unless of course they were buying non voting shares. I think it's always been obvious that no one is going to hand over a significant chunk of money without having control of the club. So we are in a position where Smith and Jones have to sell for things to change and I don't see that happening in the near future. 

As regards Jim's comment regarding the claims there has been no interest, I think we need to read those statements very carefully. I take them to mean that there has been no interest based on the terms laid out by Smith and Jones which is very different from 'there has been no interest'.

With Smith and Jones standing on 51% they are effectively asking people to give them money to increase the value of their shares in exchange for absolutely nothing. 

As things stand an interested party would probably have to fork out around £100m to buy the Smith Jones shares along with a further amount to buy out other shareholders who decided to take the offer. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I think the same offer has to be made to all shareholders. 

We really need another £50m to bring the ground up to Premier League standard and God knows how much to create a team capable of surviving in the Premier League. I'd guess around £200m initially. 

So we're looking for someone with around £400m to improve the current situation. Oh well, never mind. 

I think the price for derby is in the 20-30 million £ zone

I dont see anyone paying near 100m

Inflation, and recession on the way anyhow so maybe more folk will be as "poor" as we are once the interest rates filter through on all those debts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Fromage Frais said:

I think the price for derby is in the 20-30 million £ zone

I dont see anyone paying near 100m

Inflation, and recession on the way anyhow so maybe more folk will be as "poor" as we are once the interest rates filter through on all those debts

The Derby price doesn't include the stadium and includes taking on the debts so not comparable. Bear in mind that Ipswich went for £30m with no assets at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

The Derby price doesn't include the stadium and includes taking on the debts so not comparable. Bear in mind that Ipswich went for £30m with no assets at all. 

A fair point.

"A back-and-forth followed between Boro and the EFL last summer, with the club’s solicitors asserting last July that the sale of Pride Park had not been at Fair Market Value.

The club commissioned their own independent valuation which suggested a fee of £22.7m would have been “more realistic”."

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/58m-difference-middlesbrough-derby-valuations-18835544

So realistically circa 30 million and another 20-30 million for the stadium. 50 - 60 million + certain debts as in administration .

Still not getting to 100million

I feel it is very comparable as a similar sized club in the championship.

We also have a whole squad rebuild next year though I admit we probably have a few more saleable assets.

That is probably why there is little interest we are not a bargain and there are no guarantees of promotion either so why bother.

If Derby was not applicable or a bargain... why is Mike Ashley et all thinking hey Derby have debts and no stadium lets buy Norwich instead... which he could do easily.  

Unless you are a premium top club football looks like the kind of market where unless you are cheap/motivated/distressed it is hard to get a deal done.


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

I think the price for derby is in the 20-30 million £ zone

Whoever gets Derby will get it for nothing. It's all about how much of Derby's debts they are prepared to pay. 

They owe much more than the 20 to 30 million you quote. £27 million to HMRC alone - at the moment, the administrators are trying to get HMRC to take a haircut.

The main point, however, is that it is not a comparative purchase for valuation purposes. Whoever gets Derby, will get a bargain, because the administrators don't have any choice but to get rid of it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

The club commissioned their own independent valuation which suggested a fee of £22.7m would have been “more realistic”."

This evaluation, is the one that Middlesbrough's "independent" valuers put on it. Given that we are told it would cost us 30 million just a build a new stand at Carrow road it seems suspicious low to me.😀

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Badger said:

Whoever gets Derby will get it for nothing. It's all about how much of Derby's debts they are prepared to pay. 

They owe much more than the 20 to 30 million you quote. £27 million to HMRC alone - at the moment, the administrators are trying to get HMRC to take a haircut.

The main point, however, is that it is not a comparative purchase for valuation purposes. Whoever gets Derby, will get a bargain, because the administrators don't have any choice but to get rid of it.

 

 


Every business that folds, every factory that shutters more often than not results in creditors loosing money or agreeing to pennies in the £.  They will take a haircut as DCFC dont have the liquidation value better something then nothing.

Prices paid are made on the margin so in essence it is interesting to see how much Derby are worth in a fire sale.

Norwich is not for sale so Delia can say 100 - 300 million + 

I respect your points but i feel it is comparable as its one of the closest clubs to our size and will give an indication of the demand out there. 
 

12 minutes ago, Badger said:

This evaluation, is the one that Middlesbrough's "independent" valuers put on it. Given that we are told it would cost us 30 million just a build a new stand at Carrow road it seems suspicious low to me.😀

I can spend 10 million on a bronze statue of Mr Blobby ..... does not mean anyone is going to pay 10 million for it.

Carrow road value for Norwich = xx million

Carrow Road value no Norwich City = demolition and development which is substantial but not same league.

 

Edited by Fromage Frais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fromage Frais said:

I respect your points but i feel it is comparable as its one of the closest clubs to our size and will give an indication of the demand out there. 

It's all a matter of opinion anyway FF, as there is a definitive way of even determining what a fair price should be let alone what it might go for in the market. 

However, FWIW, I'm not sure that Derby are a good comparison.

1. They are almost certain to be relegated, so we are talking about a League One club.

2. They do not own their ground or training facilities, although this could change if Mel Morris is prepared to gift them to the new owners.

3. It is a forced sale. It's liquidation or accept the best offer as you alluded to above. The administrators and creditors don't really have any push back. Shareholders would only be in the same situation if they were desperate to sell and given our solvency this won't be the case.

4. Derby hardly have any players in contract after the end of the season. Realistically, the value of our squad must be at least £50 million more than theirs.

5. We are guaranteed about £100 million in parachute payments over the next two years.

Basically, whoever gets Derby will get a real bargain. I can see a very sound investment case there and I'm not at all surprised that Ashley is interested. Buying distressed companies is a bit of a speciality of his. 

Other recent sales that are relevant? Burnley sold last year for a reported £200 million. Ipswich town, groundless and without a proper training ground plus an inferior and much less valuable squad sold for £40 million.

If you are interested in this stuff, I would strongly recommend the Price of Football podcast (and his book). 👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i can not see Delia selling 

Our elderly ownerS do not need the money ,

it would not change their lives if they sold it they have more than enough money to live the same for the rest of their lives 

i saw someone post on here that Delia said she was leaving it to a charity ?

i personally think it will be left to Tom with clauses 

if a charity had it they would sell to the highest bidder to make as much money for the Charity 

so that would go against Delia's wishes as anybody could buy it 

I Do agree with purple though if put up for sale it would have plenty of interest 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

Galway Roast is on special offer in our local lidl. Get the feeling that company won't be sponsoring/ buying  much anytime soon. Maybe I should try a bag...it may be delicious,  then again...

I spotted it in Lidl too & had a little wry smile!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 19/03/2022 at 16:41, Badger said:

This evaluation, is the one that Middlesbrough's "independent" valuers put on it. Given that we are told it would cost us 30 million just a build a new stand at Carrow road it seems suspicious low to me.😀

Interesting ... From this it looks like Middleborough not that far out

Derby County: Frustrated buyers say £22M price tag for Pride Park forced cost of deal above £50M.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10657199/Derby-County-Frustrated-buyers-say-22M-price-tag-Pride-Park-forced-cost-deal-50M.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fromage Frais said:

Interesting ... From this it looks like Middleborough not that far out

Derby County: Frustrated buyers say £22M price tag for Pride Park forced cost of deal above £50M.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-10657199/Derby-County-Frustrated-buyers-say-22M-price-tag-Pride-Park-forced-cost-deal-50M.html

The article says that Pride park is valued at £80 million and that Morris is offering it at a "knock down" price of £22 million.

"Morris insist Pride Park is available at a knock-down price, since it has been valued at more than £80M and is widely considered to be of Premier League standard."

The £80 million may be high, I don't know, but the £22 million certainly seems low. It's all part of the game as everyone wants to get the best deal that they can. Based on the article the taxpayers have been "turned over."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...