Looks Like Michael Foulger IS Selling To The Yanks.

[Pockthorpe 539]

8 hours ago, yellowrider120 said:

Innocent question here but how did those fans up in Edinburgh get to hear about this session in the hotel and get invited? The club had not gone public before with an announcement of an event as far as I know.

 

48 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

Well there are many Ipswich fans of a somewhat more elderly vintage who will tell you that the then Chairman John Cobbold  'politely declined' Ms Smith's offer to invest in ITFC. I have no idea whatsover whether that is / was true but they're all liars as well then are they?  

Oh dear . You’re having a mare today aren’t you .

Seems like there’s loads of stuff you don’t know about , but you can’t help yourself. 

[CDMullins 445]

Let's hope they bring Ted Lasso with them!

[GMF 756]

24 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

It is worth bearing in mind that although Foulger's tranche of shares is the largest of the minority holdings, at 98,200, there are others that are sizeable. The old Jimmy Jones stake, at 23,000, the Sharman stake, at 10,000, and RG Carter's, at 7,500. they could be used to build up a minority holding, and even one approaching the 30 per cent mark although again without putting money into the club.

22.56% combined. Thereafter it gets a lot trickier, unless the option is used. That’s where I think we’ll end up. 😉

[hogesar 9,732]

1 hour ago, yellowrider120 said:

Well there are many Ipswich fans of a somewhat more elderly vintage who will tell you that the then Chairman John Cobbold  'politely declined' Ms Smith's offer to invest in ITFC. I have no idea whatsover whether that is / was true but they're all liars as well then are they?  

Yes.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

2 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

It is worth bearing in mind that although Foulger's tranche of shares is the largest of the minority holdings, at 98,200, there are others that are sizeable. The old Jimmy Jones stake, at 23,000, the Sharman stake, at 10,000, and RG Carter's, at 7,500. they could be used to build up a minority holding, and even one approaching the 30 per cent mark although again without putting money into the club.

Chase still owns a few too doesn't it? I'm sure it was four figures.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

2 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

It is worth bearing in mind that although Foulger's tranche of shares is the largest of the minority holdings, at 98,200, there are others that are sizeable. The old Jimmy Jones stake, at 23,000, the Sharman stake, at 10,000, and RG Carter's, at 7,500. they could be used to build up a minority holding, and even one approaching the 30 per cent mark although again without putting money into the club.

Don't forget Essex Canary, he's looking for an exit! 

[wcorkcanary 4,337]

8 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Don't forget Essex Canary, he's looking for an exit! 

He'll get his in the mopping up of irrelevant minor shareholders. Or maybe they'll realise that there's a man who , despite his rather miniscule 0.16% , is the real power broker in English football and offer him and his descendants a seat in the board....and of course, the plane.😇

Edited July 25, 2022 by wcorkcanary
Get out clause emoji attached 😜

[Badger 2,412]

12 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Or alternatively the reason time is being taken is that both sides are keen to get a deal sorted out properly. What ought to worry you, Jim, is that the only person who has liked your post is komakino - the one ‘fan’ whose hatred of Smith and Jones is greater than your perpetual negativism.

I was pleased to note, however, that he has cottoned on to the fact that buying shares off an existing shareholder does not equate to new investment. For years he used to say that every time this happened at other clubs that they had received "new investment" and using it as an example of how easy it was to get investors to gift the club money. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

4 minutes ago, Badger said:

I was pleased to note, however, that he has cottoned on to the fact that buying shares off an existing shareholder does not equate to new investment. For years he used to say that every time this happened at other clubs that they had received "new investment" and using it as an example of how easy it was to get investors to gift the club money. 

Nobody seems to be acknowledging that this also applies if somebody buys the shares of Delia and MWJ, and yet the same people who call for them to sell up are the ones who are criticising the Foulger deal. 

[Badger 2,412]

1 minute ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Nobody seems to be acknowledging that this also applies if somebody buys the shares of Delia and MWJ, and yet the same people who call for them to sell up are the ones who are criticising the Foulger deal. 

TBH nobody really has a clue about what is going on other than what was confirmed yesterday - I don't see any basis, other than uninformed assumption, to criticise the deal as yet.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

3 minutes ago, Badger said:

TBH nobody really has a clue about what is going on other than what was confirmed yesterday - I don't see any basis, other than uninformed assumption, to criticise the deal as yet.

Me neither, it could be followed by an initial cash injection / a loan facility of some sort, then a sort of "more will follow if we think the club is going in the right direction and can increase our stake" sort of arrangement. 

[wcorkcanary 4,337]

15 minutes ago, Badger said:

uninformed assumption

Great phrase. Hats off to you Sir.

[FenwayFrank 2,467]

8 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Chase still owns a few too doesn't it? I'm sure it was four figures.

Is he still alive ?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

16 minutes ago, FenwayFrank said:

Is he still alive ?

Yep! 

Owns a large portfolio of student properties.

I used to see him down St Benedicts a fair but up until about 8-10 years ago, he had something to do with one of those high interest loan / cheque cashing places.

Edited July 25, 2022 by TeemuVanBasten

[Capt. Pants 4,276]

The sale of Foulger's shares doesn't equate to an investment in the club at the moment. However, does the purchase of those shares means as of now Attanasio gets a seat on the board? I would assume not unless he invests in the club, but I'm not clued up on these things. 

Additionally I would assume that in order for the current majority shareholders to relinquish their shares they would insist on a further investment in the club, is that correct?

I'm hoping that Attanasio wouldn't have even bothered with Foulger's shares unless there was a pretty clear roadmap regarding how he moves forward from here.

[TIL 1010 4,788]

11 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

It is worth bearing in mind that although Foulger's tranche of shares is the largest of the minority holdings, at 98,200, there are others that are sizeable. The old Jimmy Jones stake, at 23,000, the Sharman stake, at 10,000, and RG Carter's, at 7,500. they could be used to build up a minority holding, and even one approaching the 30 per cent mark although again without putting money into the club.

Maybe Archant with 3,500 shares might be tempted.

[yellowrider120 782]

12 hours ago, nutty nigel said:

So that makes two of you who are prepared to believe binner bollox rather than Norwich supporters. I take it this "offer" was before 1969?

When did you say the binners would be marching past us....

Perhaps you should learn to actually read a post before replying to it!! 

[TIL 1010 4,788]

13 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

At present, this is a transfer of a minority shareholding from one party to another; it doesn't make any difference to the club in terms of finances or in terms of day to day running, so arguably keeping it low key is appropriate; making a fanfare of it would be more reason to raise eyebrows.

A minority shareholding being sold between two parties is their business and for them to make the appropriate announcement not a third party as appears to be the case.

Edited July 25, 2022 by TIL 1010

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

13 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

It is worth bearing in mind that although Foulger's tranche of shares is the largest of the minority holdings, at 98,200, there are others that are sizeable. The old Jimmy Jones stake, at 23,000, the Sharman stake, at 10,000, and RG Carter's, at 7,500. they could be used to build up a minority holding, and even one approaching the 30 per cent mark although again without putting money into the club.

 

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.

[yellowrider120 782]

14 hours ago, Pockthorpe said:

 

Oh dear . You’re having a mare today aren’t you .

Seems like there’s loads of stuff you don’t know about , but you can’t help yourself. 

Thank you for your polite response. Would you mind awfully if I deleted you from my Christmas Card list? Stamps are so expensive these days!

[norfolkngood 1,087]

1 hour ago, 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.

Thanks Purple 

as we know Foulger is selling his shares to the Americans and he can sell to whom he wishes i wonder what Delia thinks of this ?

i wonder what her personal views are she is happy and gets along with Americans ?

after all the deal is nothing to do with her it is a private deal that might be the start of a takeover that Delia might not want ?

Of course Delia might well of worked with Foulger to find a buyer so is really happy with new investors

so many questions that will come out once the dust settles 

 

 

[essex canary 504]

1 hour ago, 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.

Seems a sensible analysis as surely they will go for the new shares with the Foulger purchase as goodwill. Anything else looks too complicated.

Maybe Delia could put it to the vote as to whether the Club should have 1.6 million shares issued or only 0.6 million? Could be a more resounding result than Brexit.

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

6 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

Thanks Purple 

as we know Foulger is selling his shares to the Americans and he can sell to whom he wishes i wonder what Delia thinks of this ?

i wonder what her personal views are she is happy and gets along with Americans ?

after all the deal is nothing to do with her it is a private deal that might be the start of a takeover that Delia might not want ?

Of course Delia might well of worked with Foulger to find a buyer so is really happy with new investors

so many questions that will come out once the dust settles 

 

 

Norfolkngood, the way this has come about is rather odd, as I understand it, but that is indeed where we now are. As to what Delia thinks, I have reason to believe that she has for some time now been actively open to the idea of outside investment, so in general terms I am not surprised by this. I never thought the Nephew Plan was set in stone.

Whether this particular potential deal/would-be buyer gets her approval I don't know, but the signs are that it/he does. Certainly that ostentatious parading of the Milwaukee Seven at Carrow Road would not have happened if she was against the deal, and nor would the weekend comments confirming that talks were going on.

[Jim Smith 2,339]

6 hours ago, Badger said:

I was pleased to note, however, that he has cottoned on to the fact that buying shares off an existing shareholder does not equate to new investment. For years he used to say that every time this happened at other clubs that they had received "new investment" and using it as an example of how easy it was to get investors to gift the club money. 

No, no i didn't. I may have said that other clubs have managed to find new owners. I've always understood that the only way to put money into the club was either an owner investing their own wealth in the facilities/playing staff or the issuing of the new shares. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

6 hours ago, Badger said:

I was pleased to note, however, that he has cottoned on to the fact that buying shares off an existing shareholder does not equate to new investment. For years he used to say that every time this happened at other clubs that they had received "new investment" and using it as an example of how easy it was to get investors to gift the club money. 

What is beyond doubt, is the Americans are interested enough to come here, have not dismissed the idea of investment and are still at the table. What is beyond doubt is they have successfully built "small" sporting brands into more successful brands in the US and have substantial funds in which to invest into other sporting ventures.

If this does not happen why do you think that would be?

I am hoping it does lead to more investment, as this club really needs it to have any hope of breaking through the current limits of our achievement.

 

[A Load of Squit 5,215]

52 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

No, no i didn't. I may have said that other clubs have managed to find new owners. I've always understood that the only way to put money into the club was either an owner investing their own wealth in the facilities/playing staff or the issuing of the new shares. 

I don't think it's the only way, Man Utd, Burnley, Barcelona etc. have found alternatives. Leveraging debt, selling future rights, selling the ground have all been tried.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

No, no i didn't. I may have said that other clubs have managed to find new owners. I've always understood that the only way to put money into the club was either an owner investing their own wealth in the facilities/playing staff or the issuing of the new shares. 

Loans from directors is typically how money is put into a club. So it's recorded as a debt.

[sgncfc 1,253]

We also don't know whether there is a current shareholders agreement in force which might deal with specific requirements regarding the transfers of share blocks, rights etc. It might be that every shareholder above a certain number has to be pre-approved; or an existing shareholder has pre-emptive rights to any shares available etc. There are loads of potential issues we wouldn't know about which might be part of their discussions.

However - what I find particularly interesting is the constant reference to "investment" even from the official channels. A transfer of shares isn't investment, as many have pointed out. It would seem sensible not to announce any investment until we have completed our transfer business.

[essex canary 504]

The maths here is that leaving aside the Trusts there are around 175,000 shares in the hands of minority shareholders. In addition to Foulger's shares they would need almost exactly half of that, being 87,000 to reach the 30% threshold. In that sense it could be a kind of vote in that S&J could say to them go and hoover up 87,000 shares. As GMF stated this looks a bit painful but a form of democracy in action.

[chicken 2,642]

21 hours ago, essex canary said:

Would be good to know who has replaced Stephan as Chairperson of the Aiudit Committee.

Nothing to do with this thread at this point. Perhaps we aught to get someone else at the next Q&A to ask if Essex Canary can be told of every little detail of the clubs behind the scenes goings on...