Looks Like Michael Foulger IS Selling To The Yanks.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

3 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Succeeded in what?

Foulger indicated he wanted to sell up, they have found potential buyers for his shares.

If it goes ahead and works out, I agree it will be a job well done. Nothing has been done yet.

I for one will applaud them on completion and improvement in the club as a result.

Would be good if they can now get us some fit and ready players for our up and coming campaign.

could be a any of the above 

also could be Foulger told the board he wanted to sell needed some money etc 

Delia and MWJ didn't want to buy or could not afford his shares 

so he found the Americans who were interested and is selling his share to them 

The Americans might want to work with Delia with no takeover no investment in club 

or they might invest money in the club for shares etc at a later date 

i very much doubt they will invest money into club without Delia and MWJ doing so as well why should they without getting something back in return 

my personal view is once they are in with Foulgers shares they will be in full control within a year or two 

 

 

[A Load of Squit 5,164]

33 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Succeeded in what?

Foulger indicated he wanted to sell up, they have found potential buyers for his shares.

If it goes ahead and works out, I agree it will be a job well done. Nothing has been done yet.

I for one will applaud them on completion and improvement in the club as a result.

Would be good if they can now get us some fit and ready players for our up and coming campaign.

They succeeded in finding someone suitable,  all the others fell at the first.

We are lucky to have them.

[yellowrider120 762]

50 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Not just on this thread. Not just today. Ever since it's been rumoured 🙂

 

 

Can't credit the club - even though the club have been directly involved in it.

It's taking so long because Smith and Jones are a 'problem' - as opposed to taking care of due diligence.

Go look at the other threads, plenty of posters citing "Delia will block any proposed interest", how she wouldn't even "entertain the idea of other investment", how she "actively discourages" investment etc etc.

In fact, it's been going on years.

And even now...

Ah, the club is spinning it all! And let's do our best to try and avoid giving credit to the executive team, god forbid fans of the club do that! They may, may deserve it and really begrudgingly we might have to give it! (Or just avoid posting for a few weeks).

Reality is we don't even know if these new potential investors / board members / owners are going to be of any real benefit to the club, but you can bet had the deal not gone through they'd have been the guys to take us to the next level. Let's presume they come in and we don't get promoted this season, I wonder how long until they were the wrong people...

Football fans, hindsight genius.

May surprise you that I don't entirely disagree with the thrust of your comments here! In fact I heaved a sigh of relief that you had not found a Yellow Rider quote to set your blood boiling on this matter and we both know there have been several! However, rather than attacking fellow posters who simply have a different view, it seems you cannot bring yourself to accept that on this issue they have very right to voice such view. When you consider comments from DS (below) how can you possibly not give even a cursory acknowledgement of their position? These comments were not mine or any other poster you have listed but from your favourite person herself.

 

However, delve deeper, and Smith confirmed they intend to pass their majority shareholding to their nephew in the future.

“The supporters will be very disappointed to hear that. But no way will we sell. We don’t even listen to any enquiries,” she said. “Our nephew, Tom, is now a board director. He’s 35. He’s a very good board director. He’s a very passionate Norwich City supporter and he will be the recipient of our shares.”

IF DS / MWJ have now changed their stance on this matter then (much as I don't like her) I will welcome that wholeheartedly. I hope the tone of my post is conciliatory. Here's hoping that you can respond likewise.    

 

 

 

 

   

[BigFish 1,987]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

To claim that is 'obvious' feels like a stretch to me.

It could be the case but there have been examples of people buying minority stakes in football clubs and not eventually taking over- I believe Palace have had two such investors in recent years. 

Pretty obvious to everyone who pays any intention to these things. That is not to say it will be successful, just that is the clear intention. Foulger would struggle to get any kind of decent price for his shares otherwise. A premium price, for a minority stake in a non-traded, non-dividend paying organisation from a buyer with no previous interest in the club.

Edited July 26, 2022 by BigFish

[hogesar 9,673]

32 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

May surprise you that I don't entirely disagree with the thrust of your comments here! In fact I heaved a sigh of relief that you had not found a Yellow Rider quote to set your blood boiling on this matter and we both know there have been several! However, rather than attacking fellow posters who simply have a different view, it seems you cannot bring yourself to accept that on this issue they have very right to voice such view. When you consider comments from DS (below) how can you possibly not give even a cursory acknowledgement of their position? These comments were not mine or any other poster you have listed but from your favourite person herself.

 

However, delve deeper, and Smith confirmed they intend to pass their majority shareholding to their nephew in the future.

“The supporters will be very disappointed to hear that. But no way will we sell. We don’t even listen to any enquiries,” she said. “Our nephew, Tom, is now a board director. He’s 35. He’s a very good board director. He’s a very passionate Norwich City supporter and he will be the recipient of our shares.”

IF DS / MWJ have now changed their stance on this matter then (much as I don't like her) I will welcome that wholeheartedly. I hope the tone of my post is conciliatory. Here's hoping that you can respond likewise.    

 

I was disappointed when those comments were made, and said so at the time. But she's since revisited that 3 or 4 times in subsequent interviews. When they first changed their mind on it I don't konw.

So, what I find odd is people focus on that old, old quote and treat it as gospel but then each subsequent interview gets ignored.

[shefcanary 2,408]

I wonder how many of the 1.5million shares available for sale by the club are being negotiated over at the moment by Attanasio et al. I'd say 100,000. Anyone go higher?

[Jim Smith 2,317]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

I was disappointed when those comments were made, and said so at the time. But she's since revisited that 3 or 4 times in subsequent interviews. When they first changed their mind on it I don't konw.

So, what I find odd is people focus on that old, old quote and treat it as gospel but then each subsequent interview gets ignored.

All I am saying is that there is actually no evidence that they have changed their mind.The point I made is that they have subsequently said that they are open to investment in the club, not that they are open to selling or indeed any form of investment that sees them lose their majority stake. And why wouldn't they be open to someone else putting money into the club (although in this case presumably the money goes to Foulger) and benefitting their asset if they still retain control over it?

As I have also said, I hope the purchase of Foulger's shares is the start of a longer relationship that may, in time, see a level of trust evolve and ultimately change their stance that sees some serious investment in the club itself. I certainly would be surprised if the Americans were prepared to spend much money on a minority stake without some prospect of increasing it in the future. I hope the unissued shares could form part of that. But there remains zero evidence that this deal marks some sort of shift in the stance of the owners. In fact, until this week, the only media article purporting to quote sources from the club on the american interest (although who knows who they are) had expressly stated that the owners wished to retain their majority stake. You will note also that in the video he describes it as the "sale of those shares" and NOT as investment. 

[essex canary 496]

2 hours ago, hogesar said:

I was disappointed when those comments were made, and said so at the time. But she's since revisited that 3 or 4 times in subsequent interviews. When they first changed their mind on it I don't konw.

So, what I find odd is people focus on that old, old quote and treat it as gospel but then each subsequent interview gets ignored.

One thing Delia said in one recent interview is she is prone to making statements without thinking carefully or words to that effect. Therefore which subsequent interviews are we supposed to believe.

The 2016 quote is Johnsonian in nature and isn't contradicted by any visible evidence at least until 2 days ago.

Edited July 26, 2022 by essex canary

[norfolkngood 1,087]

3 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

All I am saying is that there is actually no evidence that they have changed their mind.The point I made is that they have subsequently said that they are open to investment in the club, not that they are open to selling or indeed any form of investment that sees them lose their majority stake. And why wouldn't they be open to someone else putting money into the club (although in this case presumably the money goes to Foulger) and benefitting their asset if they still retain control over it?

As I have also said, I hope the purchase of Foulger's shares is the start of a longer relationship that may, in time, see a level of trust evolve and ultimately change their stance that sees some serious investment in the club itself. I certainly would be surprised if the Americans were prepared to spend much money on a minority stake without some prospect of increasing it in the future. I hope the unissued shares could form part of that. But there remains zero evidence that this deal marks some sort of shift in the stance of the owners. In fact, until this week, the only media article purporting to quote sources from the club on the american interest (although who knows who they are) had expressly stated that the owners wished to retain their majority stake. You will note also that in the video he describes it as the "sale of those shares" and NOT as investment. 

i Agree thats exactly how i see it 

my thoughts are though if say the Americans have 13/15 % they will have more potential money to invest than the Majority share holders ,

This is where the Americans if they so wish and not saying they will could put more pressure of Delia and MWJ than they would every get with a foulger type with less money / wealth than themselves 

i do not know how it will work or how will it look to Fans if the Americans announce we are willing to put 30 million in the club but the majority shareholders are not willing to put in any money 

Not saying that is what will happen but Delia now has someone with far more wealth than she has and possibly willing to spend more in the club than she can or willing to 

of course that might already been discussed and agreed but will be interesting to see how this plays out 

[GMF 744]

4 hours ago, shefcanary said:

I wonder how many of the 1.5million shares available for sale by the club are being negotiated over at the moment by Attanasio et al. I'd say 100,000. Anyone go higher?

1.5 million? The option is for 1 million 😉

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

5 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

All I am saying is that there is actually no evidence that they have changed their mind.The point I made is that they have subsequently said that they are open to investment in the club, not that they are open to selling or indeed any form of investment that sees them lose their majority stake. 

 

I am not aware that at any time recently when talking about investment that Delia has specified only minority investment. Investment can be minority or majority. 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

5 hours ago, essex canary said:

One thing Delia said in one recent interview is she is prone to making statements without thinking carefully or words to that effect. Therefore which subsequent interviews are we supposed to believe.

The 2016 quote is Johnsonian in nature and isn't contradicted by any visible evidence at least until 2 days ago.

Johnsonian in nature translates as something that is a blatant lie. 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

6 hours ago, shefcanary said:

I wonder how many of the 1.5million shares available for sale by the club are being negotiated over at the moment by Attanasio et al. I'd say 100,000. Anyone go higher?

Shef, one million shares, I think. But how much he is willing to spend on shares surely depends on how much he will put towards expanding the capacity of the main stand...🤩

[corbs 147]

“Serious investment “ in the club itself! So Delia-and Michael’s previous loans were not serious investments? Serious even to stabilise the club, or in truth, save our club. Just because by todays inflated standards the amount was very modest, doesn’t detract from its crucial and sustaining nature at the time. 

[SwearyCanary 1,179]

Tbf even in the unlikely event the new Shareholders don’t invest a penny they’re still an international market gateway and have shown a huge ability to grow the commercial value of a sports team. Surely this is worth as much or more than a cash injection long term. Having a truly integrated board member with their main body of work in the richest nation in the world where sports investment is colossally bigger than we have ever seen as a club means good news. No it won’t make us Chelsea or the big 6, but it will make us ‘more than safe’ 

[Jack Flash 13]

Not sure if it's been said elsewhere but I think the most important person in this potential transaction is Tom Smith. Delia and Michael have expressed their intention to pass on to him their shares in due course, so Tom is key to the future and long term relationship with our new American friends. Do we know what his views are or indeed his intentions as the present "owner in waiting". As for me, a lifetime supporter of over 60 years, I am excited by the possibilities here, and willing to wait on developments. The football world is full  of failed takeover/investment cases and I am OK with D & M (&T) taking time to get it right for us and our Club.

[dylanisabaddog 4,921]

This deal is for 16% of the shares in the club. That 16% is pretty much worthless unless they have an option to buy more. It's also taking an awfully long time suggesting there is more to this than a straightforward transfer of a 16% holding. 

By the way, current football club values suggest that those shares are worth around £20m to £30m. I've no idea what Smith and Jones are worth but sort of investment is probably beyond them, particularly as it doesn't produce a short term income flow. 

[yellowrider120 762]

14 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

This deal is for 16% of the shares in the club. That 16% is pretty much worthless unless they have an option to buy more. It's also taking an awfully long time suggesting there is more to this than a straightforward transfer of a 16% holding. 

By the way, current football club values suggest that those shares are worth around £20m to £30m. I've no idea what Smith and Jones are worth but sort of investment is probably beyond them, particularly as it doesn't produce a short term income flow. 

Agreed. For what it's worth I believe we are now probably well into the 'beginning of the end' of the Smith reign. Any look at those frankly awful TV pictures of their faces last season would show that they seemed bored out of their minds and disinterested. Old Father Time has rapidly caught up with DS (as it does with us all eventually) and I think she has now accepted that a changing of the guard and a genuine opening up of the club to outside investment / ownership is a serious option. There are those on this forum who insist that she has always been open to these possibilities whilst others put forward a case to the contrary. Like many have speculated, I think the 16% or so Foulger holding and a seat on the Board will come with the option to increase the shareholding with a view to potentially assume control. My timescale for all this would be 12-24 months but I would never be surprised if the cards fell into place sooner. Indeed, the stuff going on with the 'new' / second tier stand could see spades in the ground much sooner than many think. No longer is this dependent on 'three successive seasons in the PL' when McNally hinted at development. DS will want to leave a legacy and a tangible sign of that would be ground development.        

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

50 minutes ago, Jack Flash said:

Not sure if it's been said elsewhere but I think the most important person in this potential transaction is Tom Smith. Delia and Michael have expressed their intention to pass on to him their shares in due course, so Tom is key to the future and long term relationship with our new American friends. Do we know what his views are or indeed his intentions as the present "owner in waiting". As for me, a lifetime supporter of over 60 years, I am excited by the possibilities here, and willing to wait on developments. The football world is full  of failed takeover/investment cases and I am OK with D & M (&T) taking time to get it right for us and our Club.

The original plan was that those shares would give Tom Smith control of the club. If the US deal goes through it is likely to end up with Attanasio buying enough new shares to give him majority-ownership control. But I would be surprised if Smith then left the board. From what one has gleaned about Attanasio he is keen on heritage and links with the community.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

15 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

Agreed. For what it's worth I believe we are now probably well into the 'beginning of the end' of the Smith reign. Any look at those frankly awful TV pictures of their faces last season would show that they seemed bored out of their minds and disinterested. Old Father Time has rapidly caught up with DS (as it does with us all eventually) and I think she has now accepted that a changing of the guard and a genuine opening up of the club to outside investment / ownership is a serious option. There are those on this forum who insist that she has always been open to these possibilities whilst others put forward a case to the contrary. Like many have speculated, I think the 16% or so Foulger holding and a seat on the Board will come with the option to increase the shareholding with a view to potentially assume control. My timescale for all this would be 12-24 months but I would never be surprised if the cards fell into place sooner. Indeed, the stuff going on with the 'new' / second tier stand could see spades in the ground much sooner than many think. No longer is this dependent on 'three successive seasons in the PL' when McNally hinted at development. DS will want to leave a legacy and a tangible sign of that would be ground development.        

I agree with that.

[Bert 236]

I wonder where all of this will leave Nepotism Tom.

I suspect the Americans will want a few seats on the board 

[essex canary 496]

13 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Johnsonian in nature translates as something that is a blatant lie. 

 

Not what I meant. Just that there is a contradiction between making a decision in favour of your own relations or kind whilst observing that supporters for whom you are acting as "guardians' won't like it and apparently she doesn't like inheritance or perhaps only selectively. 

A' double standard' would be more accurate.

Edited July 27, 2022 by essex canary

[horsefly 4,300]

31 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

For what it's worth I believe we are now probably well into the 'beginning of the end' of the Smith reign. Any look at those frankly awful TV pictures of their faces last season would show that they seemed bored out of their minds and disinterested.

Not quite sure how you managed to deduce such information from "those frankly awful TV pictures". Either way, I suspect you mean uninterested not "disinterested". 

[yellowrider120 762]

45 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Not quite sure how you managed to deduce such information from "those frankly awful TV pictures". Either way, I suspect you mean uninterested not "disinterested". 

indeed - thank you for the correction!

[shefcanary 2,408]

On 27/07/2022 at 08:10, PurpleCanary said:

Shef, one million shares, I think. But how much he is willing to spend on shares surely depends on how much he will put towards expanding the capacity of the main stand...🤩

Current visiting my daughter down under - always struggle with translating currencies! 😉 [PS - I know its shares not £'s, just joking]

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

On 25/07/2022 at 13:16, PurpleCanary said:

 

Thanks for the replies and the reactions. I get the impression there is some potential movement with the various minority holdings, but confusingly perhaps with more than one would-be buyer and so not all aimed in the same direction with the one purpose. The picture may clear up by the end of August.

Apart from those holdings mentioned (these are figures from about a month ago) the Turners have 5,000 shares, Archant as was do indeed have 3,500, and there are what look like personal holdings in the three and four thousand range. There is also the Canaries Trust but I assume they would be looking to increase their stake rather than sell up.

The one certainty now seems to be that the initial move by the Americans, unless this all falls through, is to buy Foulger’s holding. This does not put money into the club but in my view would entitle Attanasio to have at least one seat on the board, and I am sure he would take that.

Whether Attanasio would be in the market to buy some or all of these other minority holdings is a question. One could play around with the numbers to get him to or close to the 30 per mark at which he would have to make an offer for all of them.

But it is hard to see what the point would be in doing it that way round. At some stage the plan surely has to involve buying some or all of the 1m new shares that can be made available, to provide money for the club. That then would almost certainly breach the 30 per cent mark and so precipitate an offer for all the existing shares.

Hardly a difficult prediction to make but later confirmed by Sam Jeffrey. I think there is a board meeting due some time in August so that may well see the first appearance (in person or Via Zoom) of whoever is the first US director.

[Badger 2,405]

On 26/07/2022 at 20:56, norfolkngood said:

 

i do not know how it will work or how will it look to Fans if the Americans announce we are willing to put 30 million in the club but the majority shareholders are not willing to put in any money 

Not saying that is what will happen but Delia now has someone with far more wealth than she has and possibly willing to spend more in the club than she can or willing to 

 

It's the sort of thing that happens all the time. Most owners shareholders don't give money to the club but make director's loans. Sometimes these are at favourable rates or zero interest at other times they charge a healthy premium. Gold and Sullivan were charging West Ham 8% when interest rates were about 2%! Sometimes these loans are later converted into equity.

[BigFish 1,987]

45 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Hardly a difficult prediction to make but later confirmed by Sam Jeffrey. I think there is a board meeting due some time in August so that may well see the first appearance (in person or Via Zoom) of whoever is the first US director.

The lack of governance that @shefcanary constantly points out means it doesn't really matter whether there is a board meeting or not, this will develop commercially or not at its own sweet pace. Whatever you do don't raise expectations, otherwise if there is no American in August at the BM it will be down the S&J bad faith according to those on here.

Edited July 28, 2022 by BigFish

[norfolkngood 1,087]

2 hours ago, Badger said:

It's the sort of thing that happens all the time. Most owners shareholders don't give money to the club but make director's loans. Sometimes these are at favourable rates or zero interest at other times they charge a healthy premium. Gold and Sullivan were charging West Ham 8% when interest rates were about 2%! Sometimes these loans are later converted into equity.

yes you are right 

i was just pointing out how strange it is that someone with 16 % has far more than the person with Majority shareholding 

So can invest / loan a lot more into the club if they want to 

so we could end up with  the party with 16 % maybe want to invest but the majority  shareholders do not want to invest or can not afford to invest anymore of their money and want a self funded model so i doubt they would want and loans with interest to be paid 

that is when i think the pressure for MWJ and Delia to sell to the Americans might come from the fans 

 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

4 hours ago, BigFish said:

The lack of governance that @shefcanary constantly points out means it doesn't really matter whether there is a board meeting or not, this will develop commercially or not at its own sweet pace. Whatever you do don't raise expectations, otherwise if there is no American in August at the BM it will be down the S&J bad faith according to those on here.

True, but with some posters a prediction that the club would go bankrupt, with every director jailed for money laundering, would be regarded as optimistic and raising expectations...