EXCLUSIVE: US tycoons in Norwich City investment talks

[king canary 7,681]

9 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Foulger I would imagine if the story is correct.

I guess having these guys on board and working alongside the current owners is a positive step, particularly if they are being given some assurances about their ability to buy further tranches of shares if its all working well. It's just not as exciting or potentially meaningful as a take over or change of control is it.

Undoubtedly Foulger if it's true.

Would be very odd to try and credit the majority shareholders for trying to sell someone else's shares, unless I'm missing something.

Edited May 31, 2022 by king canary
typo

[Jim Smith 2,349]

Hopefully it may be something like this:

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2021/nov/26/daniel-kretinsky-agrees-option-for-full-takeover-of-west-ham

[Yellow and Green 335]

13 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Looking for a crumb of comfort imo.

The latest leak has left me feeling massively underwhelmed.

Whilst I have supported Delia throughout the ups and downs, I'm also slightly disappointed by this line. 

I suppose it's them being sensibly cautious - getting to know them properly, over a long period of time before selling - but it does also whiff of 'I actually quite like the limelight' from Delia. 

Hopefully Attenasio will step up his investments once he gets to know the club/league/sport a bit better.

[Jim Smith 2,349]

5 minutes ago, king canary said:

Undoubtedly Foulger is its true.

Would be very odd to try and credit the majority shareholders for trying to sell someone else's shares, unless I'm missing something.

Well I think it wold depend if they are facilitating it by making it part of a possible wider deal (such as the West Ham deal I have posted about). I would give them some credit if this is part of a staged process whereby the Americans are being given assurances that they can acquire further shares over time and eventually a majority holding.

[Badger 2,413]

9 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

I guess having these guys on board and working alongside the current owners is a positive step, particularly if they are being given some assurances about their ability to buy further tranches of shares if its all working well. It's just not as exciting or potentially meaningful as a take over or change of control is it.

If Attansio brings all the new ideas that some on here have told us will enable us to significantly increase revenue, I don't see what difference it will make?

He is only worth $700 million, so he was never going to be a sugar daddy.

[king canary 7,681]

The other angle of course (and I'll admit as I'm keen for change I've kind of leapt to the other side) is that the new investors haven't been any noise or suggestion that they want to buy Delia & MWJ's shares or acquire extra shares. They may want a smaller stake for now or they may have no interest in becoming majority shareholders/full owners. They may only be interested in increasing their shareholding until we've spent a couple of consecutive seasons in the top flight.

Lots of unknowns.  

[king canary 7,681]

Just now, Badger said:

If Attansio brings all the new ideas that some on here have told us will enable us to significantly increase revenue, I don't see what difference it will make?

He is only worth $700 million, so he was never going to be a sugar daddy.

Yeah I don't think he needs to be a Sugar Daddy- I think it was @Jim Smith who said that if they have the capital to allow us to do things like be a little more adventurous on the wage bill (not even more spending necessarily but maybe less punitive relegation wage drops) and remove the need to sell a player like Emi to give us a competitive transfer budget it could make all the difference. We don't suddenly need to doing a Newcastle. 

[PurpleCanary 5,592]

37 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Interesting if true. It would not per se put money into the club but would almost certainly lead to Attanasio having at least one place on the board, possibly putting some money into the club by way of loans etc, and and probably being the first step in a takeover.

I make Foulger’s holding to be 15.9 per cent rather than 18 per cent, but there may be a family wrinkle there. Anyway, gratified to see posters coming over all depressed, in the style of Marvin the Paranoid Android.

I do not believe Attanasio would be going to so much trouble, with a seven-man delegation etc, if all he ever intended to do - and all he thought he would ever be allowed to do - would be to buy some shares that put zero pounds into the club and perhaps have a board member who could always be outvoted…

[littleyellowbirdie 2,605]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

The other angle of course (and I'll admit as I'm keen for change I've kind of leapt to the other side) is that the new investors haven't been any noise or suggestion that they want to buy Delia & MWJ's shares or acquire extra shares. They may want a smaller stake for now or they may have no interest in becoming majority shareholders/full owners. They may only be interested in increasing their shareholding until we've spent a couple of consecutive seasons in the top flight.

Lots of unknowns.  

Also, it might be a bit of hedging on Attanasio's front, building a relationship at the start of a championship season with a view to jumping in deeper on promotion, complete with capital injection to make a serious go of it. I find it hard to imagine that someone like that would simply grab an existing minority stake for the hell of it. 

[Badger 2,413]

1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

I make Foulger’s holding to be 15.9 per cent rather than 18 per cent, but there may be a family wrinkle there. Anyway, gratified to see posters coming over all depressed, in the style of Marvin the Paranoid Android.

I do not believe Attanasio would be going to so much trouble, with a seven-man delegation etc, if all he ever intended to do - and all he thought he would ever be allowed to do - would be to buy some shares that put zero pounds into the club and perhaps have a board member who could always be outvoted…

Several US investor have bought minority stakes in clubs - Palace for a start.

[king canary 7,681]

8 minutes ago, Badger said:

Several US investor have bought minority stakes in clubs - Palace for a start.

Yes but those have generally come with some investment into the club also.

[Badger 2,413]

6 minutes ago, king canary said:

Yeah I don't think he needs to be a Sugar Daddy- I think it was @Jim Smith who said that if they have the capital to allow us to do things like be a little more adventurous on the wage bill (not even more spending necessarily but maybe less punitive relegation wage drops) and remove the need to sell a player like Emi to give us a competitive transfer budget it could make all the difference. We don't suddenly need to doing a Newcastle. 

I read the thread on the thoughts of the Brewer's fans and got the impression that he is pretty sensible with his money.

I don't think that we can expect him to significantly change our wage budget, which isn't really much of an issue anyway as a newly promoted club. TBH, we could easily have done the same anyway, we could easily get the credit from banks, it's just that we deemed it wise not to. This is obviously sensible for financial reasons and also makes it a bit easier to move "flops" on - if they are wages that no one else will go near, it's virtually impossible to "cut and run." (e.g Naismith)

[Badger 2,413]

1 minute ago, king canary said:

Yes but those have generally come with some investment into the club also.

Not as far as I know. Certainly, the Palace "investments" that we have heard of in the past were just one "investor" buying the shares of another - similar to what is alleged about Foulger's shares in the Athletic.

What they have done, however, is give some money in director's loans at low rates of interest, which could be useful but which has to be paid back.

(This information is up-to-date to the 19-20 financial year, Palace's 20-21 accounts are not out for another month.)

[The Real Buh 3,486]

25 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

TMI.

What do you think about the takeover?

I think delias past her sell by date, we need new and significant investment and I can’t see much wrong with these guys apart from the cultural differences.

If you want a premier league team we are a pretty good bet tbf. Our shortcomings are very obvious as a club that punches above its weight, spends way more time in the top league than our expenditure warrants and needs to be able to compete particularly on wages to stand any chance of establishment. 
 

There’s no hidden skeletons in closets or anything in our end. It’s all public and well known what we need. No massive debt. Loyal fanbase. Unique location (could be negative or positive depending on what your goals are as an investor, mainly a negative though) no massive image problem or anything (ślqgging off Billy Gilmour aside, crime of the century)

I don’t know anything about finance or investment or anything but I do know about dealing with people from all different countries and Americans are pretty simple to deal with. These guys are capitalists but they want it as a bit of a plaything as well, which is fair enough. 
 

All that being said though is like to hear from them at some point. We really don’t know what’s on the table. Are they wanting a takeover and being offered a minority share? Are they happy with that as long as it’s with an aim to take full control?

all speculation. But Delia as a majority shareholder? That’s done. This season has killed it forever and I think she and the rest of the leadership team know it. It’s not a tenable situation anymore.

[GMF 757]

22 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I make Foulger’s holding to be 15.9 per cent rather than 18 per cent, but there may be a family wrinkle there. Anyway, gratified to see posters coming over all depressed, in the style of Marvin the Paranoid Android.

I do not believe Attanasio would be going to so much trouble, with a seven-man delegation etc, if all he ever intended to do - and all he thought he would ever be allowed to do - would be to buy some shares that put zero pounds into the club and perhaps have a board member who could always be outvoted…

It's just under 16%, as you say, unless they’ve already provisionally lined up a deal to acquire other shares too - time will tell.

Thinking about this further, it fits the (historic) narrative with the Turners. Yes, we all know how that ended, but this somehow feels different.

Cautiously optimism, is my current view, based upon the limited information available.

[baldy09 162]

Sounds like the board having second thoughts or just plain making it difficult for new investment - could be reading it wrong. If it suddenly collapses the outcry will be loud ? 

[king canary 7,681]

10 minutes ago, Badger said:

Not as far as I know. Certainly, the Palace "investments" that we have heard of in the past were just one "investor" buying the shares of another - similar to what is alleged about Foulger's shares in the Athletic.

What they have done, however, is give some money in director's loans at low rates of interest, which could be useful but which has to be paid back.

(This information is up-to-date to the 19-20 financial year, Palace's 20-21 accounts are not out for another month.)

A quote from a Sky Sports article about their latest US investor...

Crystal Palace have announced new investment in the club from American businessman John Textor.

Textor, the founder and chief executive of virtual entertainment company Facebank, joins chairman Steve Parish and fellow joint-owners Josh Harris and David Blitzer as the fourth director on the club's board.

 

Parish said the investment has given new Palace manager Patrick Vieira funds to spend in the transfer window ahead of the new Premier League season, with Michael Olise, Marc Guehi and Joachim Andersen joining for undisclosed fees

 

"We have been looking for the right investment for the right investor for a while, both to progress the club and deal with the significant financial challenges of the past 18 months due to COVID," Parish said.

"I'm delighted that search led us to John, who has invested significant sums, helping to facilitate the rejuvenation of the squad, bolster the balance sheet and enable the club to finalise the Academy. We all look forward to working with John, who has a strong passion for football and a growing knowledge and affinity to Crystal Palace."

[king canary 7,681]

7 minutes ago, GMF said:

It's just under 16%, as you say, unless they’ve already provisionally lined up a deal to acquire other shares too - time will tell.

Thinking about this further, it fits the (historic) narrative with the Turners. Yes, we all know how that ended, but this somehow feels different.

Cautiously optimism, is my current view, based upon the limited information available.

Did the Turners actually buy shares? I just remember talk of a £2m loan. 

[Canary Wundaboy 1,360]

The seal is broken now, they can’t put the genie back in the bottle. For years those of us who’ve cried out for new investment have been ridiculed with “who would want to invest in Norwich?!”, we’re “too remote” and “not fashionable”, or “not financially attractive for investment”. Now a potential investor has been very publicly outed and even if the club try and play it down, the fans know that people are out there who will be looking at us as an opportunity, and the fans want more than our current owners can provide. The fanbase is more ambitious than our current ownership can fulfill.

[Mutley 79]

This is all a little deflating if true - that they are only interested in purchasing Michael Foulgers shares - that would mean no cash injection unless they are willing to inject significant sums without having the final say on matters. However, if it is on the lines of the new investment at West Ham and there is a cast iron agreement to buy out the major shareholders or purchase new shares making them the majority shareholders in say a years time it would make a lot of sense. It gives them an understanding on the running of the club from being represented on the board and what is required to assist us towards becoming an established Premier club. 

[hogesar 9,776]

The wanting to take Foulgers % isn't conjecture from The Athletic, it's 100% accurate.

It's also seen as their first venture into English football, a starting point and building a relationship with D & M. Apparently.

9 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

The seal is broken now, they can’t put the genie back in the bottle. For years those of us who’ve cried out for new investment have been ridiculed with “who would want to invest in Norwich?!”, we’re “too remote” and “not fashionable”, or “not financially attractive for investment”. Now a potential investor has been very publicly outed and even if the club try and play it down, the fans know that people are out there who will be looking at us as an opportunity, and the fans want more than our current owners can provide. The fanbase is more ambitious than our current ownership can fulfill.

This is an interesting take.

That we've had one individual show significant interest in the past 10 years, of which we don't know if we chased down, harried or their personal / commercial reasons for potentially investing, indicates there is suddenly a queue of people looking at us as an opportunity is certainly pushing the boundaries of massive assumption.

To claim the fanbase is more ambitious than our current ownership is also rubbish, since it's under the current ownership that potentially this investment has been found. Had the fans gone and found the investment for the club you might have a point. The fans painted on an old duvet instead.

[shefcanary 2,496]

Catching up having been doing other things.  I always thought that Attanasio's offer would be based on a fixed budgeted figure initially, flushing out how much of a share of the club it could buy him.  It may well be true that now Foulger is looking for an exit (rumours on here that his farms are now in administration so he needs some cash). 

However if it was just Foulger selling to Attanasio, then there would be little need for all the welcome etc. that has been taking place; it would be purely a person to person sale, as it only gets them a seventh of the club.   

So I am minded that the negotiations are currently still around what the fixed sum Attanasio has in mind is going to get him, in terms of shares and Board level control, whilst setting out a pathway for eventual full takeover.  This is in accord with Smith & Jones earlier public discourse where they intimated they would be more welcome for someone to come on board in a smaller way, that both parties got to know each other better and that if things were still working Smith & jones would be happy to sell up. 

So Foulger's shares plus a little of the new shares; I estimated before c.20,000 being issued would still leave Smith & jones with just over 50% and controlling shares, with maybe a convertible loan on top and a couple of seats on the Board to complete the package.  Purely conjecture on my part, but a total investment from Attanasio's point of view of $20-30million? 

Not quite the complete change of picture we first thought, I won't hide my disappointment at that but I still think Attanasio's presence on the Board will see a step change in how the club attacks the next season.

[ricardo 7,416]

16 minutes ago, king canary said:

A quote from a Sky Sports article about their latest US investor...

Crystal Palace have announced new investment in the club from American businessman John Textor.

Textor, the founder and chief executive of virtual entertainment company Facebank, joins chairman Steve Parish and fellow joint-owners Josh Harris and David Blitzer as the fourth director on the club's board.

 

Parish said the investment has given new Palace manager Patrick Vieira funds to spend in the transfer window ahead of the new Premier League season, with Michael Olise, Marc Guehi and Joachim Andersen joining for undisclosed fees

 

"We have been looking for the right investment for the right investor for a while, both to progress the club and deal with the significant financial challenges of the past 18 months due to COVID," Parish said.

"I'm delighted that search led us to John, who has invested significant sums, helping to facilitate the rejuvenation of the squad, bolster the balance sheet and enable the club to finalise the Academy. We all look forward to working with John, who has a strong passion for football and a growing knowledge and affinity to Crystal Palace."

This seems to be a world away from what appears to be happening at CR. Buying Foulgers shares won't so much as refurbish the burger van. I'm not surprised they are a bit miffed if the Athletic's story is in anyway accurate because expectations have been raised that have little prospect of being brought to fruition. 

I was cautiously optimistic yesterday, today, not so much.

 

[The Real Buh 3,486]

10 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

The seal is broken now, they can’t put the genie back in the bottle. For years those of us who’ve cried out for new investment have been ridiculed with “who would want to invest in Norwich?!”, we’re “too remote” and “not fashionable”, or “not financially attractive for investment”. Now a potential investor has been very publicly outed and even if the club try and play it down, the fans know that people are out there who will be looking at us as an opportunity, and the fans want more than our current owners can provide. The fanbase is more ambitious than our current ownership can fulfill.

I would argue that all the things you mentioned about “not fashionable” etc are in fact true, that’s why people are rolling over to invest in a dump like Crystal Palace. The “London Factor” is definitely strong and I’d argue we are in its shadow.

I think it’s our punching up to the premier league but not having the ability to make it stick that’s attracted attention. It’s been so many times now and the core reasoning of lack of financial competitiveness is so evident that it’s can’t be not seen.

[Capt. Pants 4,300]

Hypothetically I guess there's nothing to stop another investor coming in for D&Ms 53%? 

It seems strange to me that one shareholder (Foulger) is set to gain financially with no apparent benefit to the club.

I guess there must be a lot of detail or a commitment on Attanasio's part to bridge that 53%. Otherwise a lot of effort (and risk) to be a minority shareholder.

 

[Ren 75]

1 minute ago, The Real Buh said:

I would argue that all the things you mentioned about “not fashionable” etc are in fact true, that’s why people are rolling over to invest in a dump like Crystal Palace. The “London Factor” is definitely strong and I’d argue we are in its shadow.

I think it’s our punching up to the premier league but not having the ability to make it stick that’s attracted attention. It’s been so many times now and the core reasoning of lack of financial competitiveness is so evident that it’s can’t be not seen.

I just don't buy into that location argument one jot.  Look how many other clubs outside of London have changed hands in the football league and even outside - its most of them! 

[dylanisabaddog 5,031]

1 hour ago, ricardo said:

I become more disappointed by the minute if the "they want to retain a 53% holding", has any credence. Sugar daddies will always want more certainty than a peck on the cheek today and if they behave nicely, a view of the bedroom tomorrow. 

Post of the year 😂

[king canary 7,681]

Just now, ricardo said:

This seems to be a world away from what appears to be happening at CR. Buying Foulgers shares won't so much as refurbish the burger van. I'm not surprised they are a bit miffed if the Athletic's story is in anyway accurate because expectations have been raised that have little prospect of being brought to fruition. 

I was cautiously optimistic yesterday, today, not so much.

 

Well we don't really know do we? This investor in Palace bought 18% which is about the same stake as Foulger's shares and has since increased that stake.  

[Bert 236]

I wonder if the American geezer will push the boat out further and buyout the canaries trust 

[dylanisabaddog 5,031]

1 hour ago, Badger said:

Yes, I like going to Birmingham - although the road works in the centre have been a nightmare for years (hopefully finished now)! I'm going to Manchester this year though.

Enjoy it, but don't expect Edgbaston which I think is the closest you'll get to a football atmosphere in a cricket ground. Or perhaps I just went on a good day.