Jump to content
Pete Raven

EXCLUSIVE: US tycoons in Norwich City investment talks

Recommended Posts

Just now, Virtual reality said:

Hadn’t actually thought about that but yeah he must be incredibly confident that this has potential to come off to have hinted it

Although we are all assuming this is what he was hinting at. There is a chance, albeit small, that he was referring to something different.

Share this post


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

Although we are all assuming this is what he was hinting at. There is a chance, albeit small, that he was referring to something different.

I just hope that Tom gets the credit he deserves if this gets done. 

Edited by Duncan Edwards
  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

Although we are all assuming this is what he was hinting at. There is a chance, albeit small, that he was referring to something different.

It was surely this - they must have been in talks for a bit and there were half a dozen of the guys over for the match v Spuds.

Share this post


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

But this is the part I don't understand Purple - I thought that they were able to sell the new "just in case a good offer comes along" shares (might not be the right technical term 😉) without obtaining shareholders formal approval?

Badger, they can sell some or all of the new shares because they have already had formal approval. All I am saying is that there are circumstances under which minority shareholders might see the value of their shares reduced if S&J accepted a low price, either for their shares or for the new shares. That possibility doesn't invalidate the existing formal approval.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Although we are all assuming this is what he was hinting at. There is a chance, albeit small, that he was referring to something different.

And there’s my bubble burst 🤣🤣🤣

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

And there’s my bubble burst 🤣🤣🤣

 

8 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

It was surely this - they must have been in talks for a bit and there were half a dozen of the guys over for the match v Spuds.

Hey, let's be honest it most likely is the investment talks he was referring to.

But just imagine after all this, nothing happens and the announcement is a swimming pool

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


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

Parma, yes, I suspect so, and yes, but the latter shouldn't be a surprise - if it happens. The truth is Delia said a long time ago they would be prepared to give the club away for nothing if the right offer came along. But it didn't fit some narratives and fixed positions. That said, with any foregoing of their asset gains there are potentially some problems to be overcome in terms of an adverse knock-on effect on the other shareholders. 

I pointed this out only yesterday and was shouted down by some posters on here. It’s always been the case that they have had the ability to facilitate investment/a takeover if they are good to their word. If they do sell for a reduced profit then fair play to them - that will be a very praiseworthy thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's easy to get stuck in the "little old Norwich" mentality and then wonder why anyone would be interested. Demographics: Population of England 55m, 20 Premier League clubs, that's 2.75m each if you discount dilution by the EFL clubs. Draw a line between us and our nearest Premier League neighbours and you've got well over 2m (Norfolk alone is 900,000 and growing) with only one other (League 1) club inside that zone. Expand the stadium and I really feel we could really become a sustainable mid Premier League club. Maybe the Americans can see this too. Can they also see global exposure for TCW/Crescent that would come via the Premier League, something the Brewers could never achieve? So for a modest outlay (maybe £50m on the stadium, £100m on the squad and whatever Delia wants - not much if she thinks you're OK) they could get a self sustaining Premier League club with all the benefits that would bring. I can see why they would find us attractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Therein lies the answer. I suspect that the offer will be for them to own slightly less than Smith and Jones which would give them less than 30%.  I've always thought they would want to remain the biggest shareholders. I should add I have no knowledge of their affairs at all but that is simply the impression I've got from the last few years of statements on the matter. 

Thats never gonna happen    these people will want total control    the deal will be more like if they are ok then in a year or so they can buy out everything

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't Webber hint at a couple of things that would surprise and excite us? Assuming this is the first, what do we think the 2nd would be? With this new investment will we finally be getting that new City Stand? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Interesting with the falling pound there is going to be a large number of US investors snapping up football teams/companies/anything.

But seems like only two ways to make money.

1)  Get in the prep and sell after picking up a bargain club in the champs.  Risky as need to be there for a few seasons in a row.

2)  Get promoted and the owners can vote to remove relegation/reduce size.  A scenario so lucrative for the big six that getting mates to buy the smaller teams and vote against their own interests could be a possibility for up front cash/compo.

So unless there is some form of sports business intra company tax deduction type thingy I don't see the allure outside of options 1 or 2.

Anyhow fingers crossed it all works out and its for the best.
 

Edited by Fromage Frais

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Didn't Webber hint at a couple of things that would surprise and excite us? Assuming this is the first, what do we think the 2nd would be? With this new investment will we finally be getting that new City Stand? 

Does anyone think webber has been building a club that someone would want to take over?   the training ground and the academy are very appealing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The Real Buh said:

image.thumb.png.3e89133e93b4d153c19fe8c3a91e93ca.png

And baseball is so far ahead of golf it wasn’t even worth putting on there

They've missed women's beach volleyball off that list!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imagine, all this about Webber and Zoe having too much control, being out for themselves and getting called a c*nt by our fans for signing the wrong players all whilst he'd been working relentlessly to source investment for our club.

Imagine...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Didn't Webber hint at a couple of things that would surprise and excite us? Assuming this is the first, what do we think the 2nd would be? With this new investment will we finally be getting that new City Stand? 

Pretty sure they have always said they would only increase our capacity if we stayed in the top flight for a few seasons, but if this new investments goes through and given we have sold our season tickets and are still selling out most our home games.. Now would be a good time, more so to get the fans on board too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Didn't Webber hint at a couple of things that would surprise and excite us? Assuming this is the first, what do we think the 2nd would be? With this new investment will we finally be getting that new City Stand? 

Nah they're upgrading soccerbot and installing an artificial climbing wall in the gym at Colney....Stu's Leaving Legacy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

However, the Canaries have stressed that any investment would not lead to a change in the status of Delia Smith and Michael Wynn Jones as joint majority shareholders   from itv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cautious optimism reigns in my house.

Just been out and stroked a black cat.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I think it's easy to get stuck in the "little old Norwich" mentality and then wonder why anyone would be interested. Demographics: Population of England 55m, 20 Premier League clubs, that's 2.75m each if you discount dilution by the EFL clubs. Draw a line between us and our nearest Premier League neighbours and you've got well over 2m (Norfolk alone is 900,000 and growing) with only one other (League 1) club inside that zone. Expand the stadium and I really feel we could really become a sustainable mid Premier League club. Maybe the Americans can see this too. Can they also see global exposure for TCW/Crescent that would come via the Premier League, something the Brewers could never achieve? So for a modest outlay (maybe £50m on the stadium, £100m on the squad and whatever Delia wants - not much if she thinks you're OK) they could get a self sustaining Premier League club with all the benefits that would bring. I can see why they would find us attractive.

I actually think that it'll be more about the global brand.

The issue about the way you work out the average is that it dismisses EFL clubs, confuses England with EFL/Premier League when Wales is also part of the football structure, and generally, ignores population densities and actual geography.

For example, it might be we can go some distance before reaching another club at the same level as us, but you go more than 50mils, for example, and you are half way to London, at which point you start competing with the likes of Watford, Spurs, Arsenal, West Ham etc.

Then you have to consider the following:
 image.png.ad2680d1dd14acbe06851fc2c51c970e.png

So whilst averaging it out all seems great, it really isn't as simple as that. Yes, those people are, perhaps, within a good range of the club in terms of encouraging them to support Norwich, but it really isn't as simple as that.

What might be simpler, and more beneficial, is growing the international support base... Now, if you already own the Milwaukee Brewers, you already have an audience in the US. You already have a Brewers audience worldwide. Arguably that would be simpler than growing our support in England/UK. That said, stadium expansion will no doubt be considered. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mastoola said:

However, the Canaries have stressed that any investment would not lead to a change in the status of Delia Smith and Michael Wynn Jones as joint majority shareholders   from itv

Yet. That's the key. Look at Kroenke at Arsenal. A good example of invest first, take over later when board members are more assured. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Yet. That's the key. Look at Kroenke at Arsenal. A good example of invest first, take over later when board members are more assured. 

Bit confused how this would work. If they only own 53% of the shares but would remain majority shareholders it would mean these investors taking a very small stake initially surely?

Unless they would initially be buying out a smaller shareholder like Foulger?

Edited by king canary
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Imagine, all this about Webber and Zoe having too much control, being out for themselves and getting called a c*nt by our fans for signing the wrong players all whilst he'd been working relentlessly to source investment for our club.

Imagine...

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

Bit confused how this would work. If they only own 53% of the shares but would remain majority shareholders it would mean these investors taking a very small stake initially surely?

Kroenke amassed something like 12% of shares in Arsenal a good year or so before taking them over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Badger, they can sell some or all of the new shares because they have already had formal approval. All I am saying is that there are circumstances under which minority shareholders might see the value of their shares reduced if S&J accepted a low price, either for their shares or for the new shares. That possibility doesn't invalidate the existing formal approval.

Trouble is the minority investors accepted this risk by the consent they gave to the issue of those additional 1 million shares in the past.  Effectively at that point all shareholders should have discounted the value of their shares by the impact of this.  Granted no-one knew then what those new shares would be issued at, but also no-one knew at that time what their old shares were actually worth.  So you are currently faced with an unknown reduction against an unknown value. However if anything this transaction would probably add value anyway, as we potentially have more chance of competing in the EPL should we get there again. 🤷

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ricardo said:

Cautious optimism reigns in my house.

Just been out and stroked a black cat.

Paws for thought....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mastoola said:

However, the Canaries have stressed that any investment would not lead to a change in the status of Delia Smith and Michael Wynn Jones as joint majority shareholders   from itv

And just like that, my optimism takes a nosedive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

And just like that, my optimism takes a nosedive.

Why? Most people seem to agree this would potentially be the perfect balance. 

Edited by hogesar
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Bit confused how this would work. If they only own 53% of the shares but would remain majority shareholders it would mean these investors taking a very small stake initially surely?

Unless they would initially be buying out a smaller shareholder like Foulger?

I was about to crunch some numbers to make that point. The Kroenke analogy doesn't work because it would in our case turn S&J's holding into a minority one. And buying out Foulger would not put money into the club.

Share this post


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

However, the Canaries have stressed that any investment would not lead to a change in the status of Delia Smith and Michael Wynn Jones as joint majority shareholders   from itv

If that is true from Smith & Jones current 53.3% to lowest majority holding of 50.1% is the allotment of only 3.3% of issued shares, roughly an issue of only 18,000 shares.  Given that at best current shares are worth c.£150 that suggests a total investment of only £2.7m.  Can't see this being the deal myself, there must be more to it than this whixh makes it a far more complicated deal!  

Edited by shefcanary
Between acts at gig, my maths did a leap of drunkenness!

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...