Jump to content
Pete Raven

EXCLUSIVE: US tycoons in Norwich City investment talks

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, BigFish said:

Probably just as well, KC, because the only thing that those on this board, the Archant journos and the Twitterati know for a fact is the square root of **** all. Some Americans came to a game, they like owning sports clubs & they have access to money.

If it was me I would be looking for a method of clearing up the share register and sweeping up the deceased, the small holdings and the dormant trust........that would be a new company, probably private rather than public. Thank took Kroenke best part of a decade at Arsenal, so don't hold your breath.

I don’t know the details of Kroenke’s takeover and why it took so long, but I thought it was because there were two or three or more different shareholders with substantial - but not majority - holdings that he needed to buy, and encountered if not outright resistance then certainly reluctance over several years. Whereas with NCFC Attanasio or whoever only has to convince S&J, either to sell him their majority stake or to unlock the 1m new shares.

Share this post


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

So as we stand, this exciting news we were told by Webber is that we need to sell before we can buy!

The initial excitement of the US link in reality, is no new money or chance of a takeover, Foulger not selling his shares and the additional shares available won’t be sold as it will devalue the holding and strength of the current majority share holders?

 

I think the exciting news was never anything to do with this. It was the Partnership with the Brazilian club and something else possibly even the signing of Hayden if that was sufficiently advanced it looked like a done deal.

I doubt Webber would have been hinting about the investment being imminent if it was still being negotiated, isn't going to be a real investment in the club anyway and likely might come to nothing. I suspect that the pinkun did think that was what he was referring to which is why they rushed ahead to get the story out while it was still an exclusive.

If the pinkun hadn't got wind of it and in the end the investment comes to nothing we would probably have never known about it and the club still telling us there is no interest from anyone tu buy Norwich.... Who knows

Edited by CanaryCuddles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I don’t know the details of Kroenke’s takeover and why it took so long, but I thought it was because there were two or three or more different shareholders with substantial - but not majority - holdings that he needed to buy, and encountered if not outright resistance then certainly reluctance over several years. Whereas with NCFC Attanasio or whoever only has to convince S&J, either to sell him their majority stake or to unlock the 1m new shares.

Sorry if I’m being a little simple! As Normal Some Will Say! 😂 But didn’t we get told that if a serious investment was made it would be put to the fans by Delia? Or am I missing what was said? Might well be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Indy said:

Sorry if I’m being a little simple! As Normal Some Will Say! 😂 But didn’t we get told that if a serious investment was made it would be put to the fans by Delia? Or am I missing what was said? Might well be wrong.

Indy, she did say that, albeit with a lack of practical detail. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

I'm definitely liking this silence. As @PurpleCanary said, it demonstrates professionalism and seriousness on both sides. Even in a worst case scenario and nothing happens at all (which I guess is unlikely, but the key word there is guess), neither party is keen on playing games in public and grandstanding.

I mentioned this some days back. When Cullum went public that summer with his supposed offer of £24m it was during the transfer window, and immediately scuppered at least one deal, with the agent for the player saying we could obviously afford higher wages. In vain did the club say there was no £24m.

News of the talks with Attanasio has come out, but is is all very vague. There is no mention of a deal yet and certainly no screaming headline with a massive £ figure in it. It could be that Cullumgate experience has prompted the club to agree with Attanasio to delay any positive hard news until more transfer deals are done.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

What I do know is that Nora's Ghost was just being childish, making stuff up. What I have stated is correct.... It could still go t1ts up, as many deals do, that's business....not necessarily because of Delia's sensitive toes.

Delia will be entirely to blame if this falls through. She has a massive back catalogue of failure, on and off the pitch. Principally, downgrading what used to be a top flight club.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I mentioned this some days back. When Cullum went public that summer with his supposed offer of £24m it was during the transfer window, and immediately scuppered at least one deal, with the agent for the player saying we could obviously afford higher wages. In vain did the club say there was no £24m.

News of the talks with Attanasio has come out, but is is all very vague. There is no mention of a deal yet and certainly no screaming headline with a massive £ figure in it. It could be that Cullumgate experience has prompted the club to agree with Attanasio to delay any positive hard news until more transfer deals are done.

One thing Nobody has Mentioned that crossed my mind was the Americans might be looking into investing / buying Shares in a club 

they were guests of ours but it does not mean we are the only club they were looking at 

i do not know but once they have had a look at the club and spoke to Foulger they might think with D& M it is to hard for a complete take over 

until the ink is dry it really is 2+2 =18 % 

Share this post


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

One thing Nobody has Mentioned that crossed my mind was the Americans might be looking into investing / buying Shares in a club 

they were guests of ours but it does not mean we are the only club they were looking at 

i do not know but once they have had a look at the club and spoke to Foulger they might think with D& M it is to hard for a complete take over 

until the ink is dry it really is 2+2 =18 % 

I'm keeping an open mind, but many fans are already convinced that some sort of deal is being done and that could lead to disappointment for many if nothing comes of it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 09/06/2022 at 22:44, PurpleCanary said:

I don’t know the details of Kroenke’s takeover and why it took so long, but I thought it was because there were two or three or more different shareholders with substantial - but not majority - holdings that he needed to buy, and encountered if not outright resistance then certainly reluctance over several years. Whereas with NCFC Attanasio or whoever only has to convince S&J, either to sell him their majority stake or to unlock the 1m new shares.

Kroenke developed a technical link-up with Arsenal and his Colorado Rapids and in April 2007 bought a minority 9.9% stake in Arsenal Holdings plc via a vehicle called KSE UK inc. This stake grew via further minority purchases to 12.19%. The Arsenal board were resistant at this point before using Kroenke as a counterweight to a rival bidder Alisher Usmanov. Through this he got a seat on the board in June 2008, and he extended his holding to the magic 29.9%. In April 2011, the holding increased to 62.89% via buying out major stakeholders Danny Fiszman and Lady Nina Bracewell-Smith, and he made an offer for the rest of the club as required. It was only in August 2018 that Alisher Usmanov gave up and accepted an offer which took him past 90% and allowed Kroenke to clean out the remaining small shareholders and take the club private.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BigFish said:

Kroenke developed a technical link-up with Arsenal and his Colorado Rapids and in April 2007 bought a minority 9.9% stake in Arsenal Holdings plc via a vehicle called KSE UK inc. This stake grew via further minority purchases to 12.19%. The Arsenal board were resistant at this point before using Kroenke as a counterweight to a rival bidder Alisher Usmanov. Through this he got a seat on the board in June 2008, and he extended his holding to the magic 29.9%. In April 2011, the holding increased to 62.89% via buying out major stakeholders Danny Fiszman and Lady Nina Bracewell-Smith, and he made an offer for the rest of the club as required. It was only in August 2018 that Alisher Usmanov gave up and accepted an offer which took him past 90% and allowed Kroenke to clean out the remaining small shareholders and take the club private.

 

Thanks for the detail, BF. In broad terms then not really comparable to the situation with NCFC, where Attanasio or whoever would only need to convince S&J to sell to have a majority, or through them to get the board to unlock the new shares. I can't see it being the kind of long-running battle of attrition Kroenke went through to overcome reluctance or even outright antagonism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Thanks for the detail, BF. In broad terms then not really comparable to the situation with NCFC, where Attanasio or whoever would only need to convince S&J to sell to have a majority, or through them to get the board to unlock the new shares. I can't see it being the kind of long-running battle of attrition Kroenke went through to overcome reluctance or even outright antagonism.

For me @PurpleCanary, these event pretty much put to bed two of the myths that have become received wisdom amongst certain sectors of the support. They largely prove that determined investors will have strategies to overcome resistance from the board, it is not actually necessary to put clubs "up for sale" to encourage them and they will invest in minority stakes without control to these ends. I don't agree it is only about persuading S&J or unlocking the new shares that have become the new red herring. These type of investors are after pretty much total control e.g. not a majority, but getting to 90% so they can legally clean out the small investors. This would go some way to explaining conversations with Foulger as a more long term assessment of possible mechanisms for this, rather than his exit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/06/2022 at 12:08, Big Vince said:

Delia will be entirely to blame if this falls through. She has a massive back catalogue of failure, on and off the pitch. Principally, downgrading what used to be a top flight club.

It will take years for some of Delia's loyal parasites to drop off and find new host to feed on.

Share this post


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

For me @PurpleCanary, these event pretty much put to bed two of the myths that have become received wisdom amongst certain sectors of the support. They largely prove that determined investors will have strategies to overcome resistance from the board, it is not actually necessary to put clubs "up for sale" to encourage them and they will invest in minority stakes without control to these ends. I don't agree it is only about persuading S&J or unlocking the new shares that have become the new red herring. These type of investors are after pretty much total control e.g. not a majority, but getting to 90% so they can legally clean out the small investors. This would go some way to explaining conversations with Foulger as a more long term assessment of possible mechanisms for this, rather than his exit.

BF, thanks for the reply. I totally agree with your first point, about how it is hardly necessary to put a For Sale sign outside the club.

As to control, I have had time to do some research on Kroenke and Arsenal in particular, including an FT piece from 2011 and a long report on the implications of him taking 100 per cent share ownership. From that it seems Kroenke had two reasons for taking the company private with 100 per cent ownership.

There was a long history at Arsenal of significant and well-organised activism against the owners of the club. At one AGM there was even a show-of-hands floor vote not to re-select a couple of directors. That was overturned when proxies etc were counted, but symbolic of the strength of anti-establishment feeling.

So 100 per ownership means Kroenke no longer has to have AGMs with stroppy fans shouting at him. But his other immediate action was to delist Arsenal from the stock market.

How does this relate to NCFC? There certainly has been significant anti-club activism, back when Chase was in charge, but nothing since. That is not to say it might not erupt in the future. But the club has never been listed, so that doesn’t apply.

So does Attanasio (let’s assume it might or would be him) need 90 per ownership so he can get to 100 per cent? Does he need that total control, or would he have quite as much control as he needed with a lesser shareholding?

At this point I have to make a few guesses/assumptions but…

As far as I can tell the NCFC switch from private to a plc came at the normal AGM in November 1999. I can find no mention of any rules on this in the club’s articles, so I am assuming that decision needed only a 51 per cent vote of shareholders.

If that is the case, or even perhaps if it needs, say, a 60 per cent vote, then presumably the reversal back to being private can be done again with a simple or not that substantial majority.

Bear in mind this is not a major decision such as delisting. I am not sure of all the implications but the one that springs to mind is that the club would no longer be subject to the rules of the Takeover Code.

If Attanasio wants to in effect do away with AGMs, then I can see the necessity of 100 per cent. But S&J control the club with only 53 per cent, which means they can always win a vote at an AGM , and although it is one person, one vote in the boardroom they could always sack recalcitrant directors and bring in stooges if need be, since again they control the AGM vote.

There is a neatness about 100 per cent which might appeal to Attanasio, and the Milwaukee Brewers is a private company, which I think in US terms is defined as not being listed, but I don’t see the necessity in our case. I believe he could have all the control he needs with less.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

EDP still reporting that it Foulger's shares.

"American businessman Mark Attanasio is understood to be in advanced talks to buy shares from Michael Foulger, who has the second-largest stake in the club at present."

https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/ncfc-canaries-norfolk-family-connection-to-prospective-investors-9032704

I’d guess secretly, many on here hope this deal collapses. I personally can’t wait for it to succeed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I’d guess secretly, many on here hope this deal collapses. I personally can’t wait for it to succeed. 

I would be surprised if anyone wants it to go wrong, I just want to know what he wants to get out of it, (I assume that it is cash, but it is not always), and how is he proposing to do it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I’d guess secretly, many on here hope this deal collapses. I personally can’t wait for it to succeed. 

I don't see why? If it as reported (Foulger's shares) it brings a new eye and possibly new expertise to the club it seems at worst neutral and more likely a positive thing. Personally I hope that is more than that as TIL has suggested. If it injects new capital into the club it is a good thing AND new expertise it has the potential to be doubly good.

We don't know much about the new owners, but all that has been reported suggests that they are experienced and responsible sports club owners who will run the club sensibly without taking on great debt. Obviously, we know nothing of the deal yet, but at this stage it shows potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Badger said:

EDP still reporting that it Foulger's shares.

"American businessman Mark Attanasio is understood to be in advanced talks to buy shares from Michael Foulger, who has the second-largest stake in the club at present."

https://www.edp24.co.uk/sport/norwich-city/ncfc-canaries-norfolk-family-connection-to-prospective-investors-9032704

They reiterated this line on today’s Q&A as being their understanding, but added that they were aware of rumours to the contrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect Attanasio is worth more than $700M since his baseball team is worth $1B more than he paid for it in 2005. He has the money to fund this on his own. I suspect he’s worth $700M plus $1.28B if he shifted the Brewers, which I doubt he would want or need to do.

American owners cant buy a mid-lower tier team in the States now without spending Billions. The Dollar to Sterling rate is very good right now and it would cost about $1B less to buy the 21-23 best team in England than the 32nd best team in any sport in US. For instance when MLS adds its 30th team there is a fee of $325M just for the rights. No stadium, staff, or players. Just the right to start a team from nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/06/2022 at 00:12, PurpleCanary said:

Indy, she did say that, albeit with a lack of practical detail. 

When things get “put to the fans” in the past , it is usually a done deal with little scope in the choice . “We are going to change our badge (said to a small sample of “representatives” ) which of these would you prefer ? “

In reality any idea that a change of ownership would go to some sort of ballot is not practical . 

That’s before you even begin to explain what fans are considering! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

When things get “put to the fans” in the past , it is usually a done deal with little scope in the choice . “We are going to change our badge (said to a small sample of “representatives” ) which of these would you prefer ? “

In reality any idea that a change of ownership would go to some sort of ballot is not practical . 

That’s before you even begin to explain what fans are considering! 

 

Besides the answer could be 52:48 the wrong way round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Graham Paddons Beard said:

In reality any idea that a change of ownership would go to some sort of ballot is not practical . 

 

I would have thought it was pretty simple. They have the addresses of all shareholders, season ticket holders and members. It can be done using an independent scrutineer as is the case with TU ballots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

They reiterated this line on today’s Q&A as being their understanding, but added that they were aware of rumours to the contrary.

Aha! So they do read this forum!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Aha! So they do read this forum!

Yes, I wondered that! But I suspect the answer would be that these contrary rumours - in effect that Foulger is not selling - have also appeared in the Twittersphere and other such places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes, I wondered that! But I suspect the answer would be that these contrary rumours - in effect that Foulger is not selling - have also appeared in the Twittersphere and other such places.

We all know who the real sources are though.

 

ED6BB33F-2CA6-423B-951F-5942AD1D18B9.gif

Share this post


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

I would have thought it was pretty simple. They have the addresses of all shareholders, season ticket holders and members. It can be done using an independent scrutineer as is the case with TU ballots.

I don't think the shareholders and season ticket holders are recorded on the same database. That could be a little challenging.

How about member members as opposed to shareholder members?

Edited by essex canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Badger said:

I would have thought it was pretty simple. They have the addresses of all shareholders, season ticket holders and members. It can be done using an independent scrutineer as is the case with TU ballots.

There is 0.0000001 % chance of that happening . The cost would be extraordinary. 

And why that population ? Who says which people should be asked ? Who defines a fan? Someone who went regularly 5 years ago but moved away ? 
 

If fans are asked it will be a representative sample at best . 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phillips' departure, despite the public story, is intriguing by the timing of the announcement.  If it was decided before the start of negotiations with Attanasio why wait until now to go public?  I'm sorry,  but I'm not buying it. However what it says about wassgornorn I'm struggling to come up with an answer, other than every directors spot on the Board is needed as part of the deal?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Phillips' departure, despite the public story, is intriguing by the timing of the announcement.  If it was decided before the start of negotiations with Attanasio why wait until now to go public?  I'm sorry,  but I'm not buying it. However what it says about wassgornorn I'm struggling to come up with an answer, other than every directors spot on the Board is needed as part of the deal?  

It is all moot now, shef. Apparently Attanasio has decided to buy the England cricket team instead…

  • Haha 1

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

×
×
  • Create New...