Mark Attanasio

[PurpleCanary 5,586]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

1) It seems crystal clear from the last entry in the Annual Report that the Foulger share transaction took place in September. In that event if for any reason they are seeking to run down the 12 month clock that would appear to rule out any fund injection before this transfer window aside from the unlikely,  and surely impracticable, whitewash waiver option?

2)Not sure that any solution that results in minorities receiving a lesser offer than Foulger could be seen as valid in the context of our Club and hopefully within the spirit of the Takeover Panel?

3)The public statements emanating from the Club could surely have been better and have included details of the reference to the Takeover Panel if that is indeed what has occurred?

4) Also wouldn't have been better PR for Attanasio to simply have picked up residual shares from the defunct Trust etc. to support his place on the Board and for Foulger to have simply have announced a willingness to transfer his shares but then wait on the Takeover procedure alongside other minorities?

1) My belief is that the delay in Attanasio buying the new Ordinary shares is not - or certainly was not originally - motivated by a desire to run down the clock beyond 12 months. I think there is a very different reason for the delay, although it is possible because of the time that has unexpectedly expired since last autumn that thoughts have now turned to running down the clock if that would be advantageous.

As to the whitewash waiver I am not certain in general terms why you think that unlikely and impracticable. They can be approved by the Takeover Panel and then voted through by the minority shareholders. I am sure that happens.

As for Attanasio wanting a waiver, which I believe is the case, he would have to make the argument for that, and if approved then be equally persuasive with the minorities. His chances of success in those attempts would probably depend on a convincing explanation for his unwillingness to spend the unknowable amount extra money, given that some small shareholders would presumably want to sell up.

Any conditions that seemed to disadvantage the minorities would probably not help him. My view, for what it is worth, is that the club/Attanasio may have been overly optimistic in their expectations as to the ease of getting a waiver. So in this case your "unlikely" assessment may have some validity.

2) If Foulger gets a better deal than the remaining minorities then he will have done well. That is capitalism, which we all love, don't we?

3) Possibly, but I suspect most shareholders would either not be interested, or would demand more information than Attanasio and the club wanted to give.

4) Foulger wanted to sell, and he controlled nearly 100,000 shares. I have no idea whether the defunct trust trustees wanted or want to sell their lesser number.

[Soldier on 168]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

1) My belief is that the delay in Attanasio buying the new Ordinary shares is not - or certainly was not originally - motivated by a desire to run down the clock beyond 12 months. I think there is a very different reason for the delay, although it is possible because of the time that has unexpectedly expired since last autumn that thoughts have now turned to running down the clock if that would be advantageous.

As to the whitewash waiver I am not certain in general terms why you think that unlikely and impracticable. They can be approved by the Takeover Panel and then voted through by the minority shareholders. I am sure that happens.

As for Attanasio wanting a waiver, which I believe is the case, he would have to make the argument for that, and if approved then be equally persuasive with the minorities. His chances of success in those attempts would probably depend on a convincing explanation for his unwillingness to spend the unknowable amount extra money, given that some small shareholders would presumably want to sell up.

Any conditions that seemed to disadvantage the minorities would probably not help him. My view, for what it is worth, is that the club/Attanasio may have been overly optimistic in their expectations as to the ease of getting a waiver. So in this case your "unlikely" assessment may have some validity.

2) If Foulger gets a better deal than the remaining minorities then he will have done well. That is capitalism, which we all love, don't we?

3) Possibly, but I suspect most shareholders would either not be interested, or would demand more information than Attanasio and the club wanted to give.

4) Foulger wanted to sell, and he controlled nearly 100,000 shares. I have no idea whether the defunct trust trustees wanted or want to sell their lesser number.

FWIW touched on again by Connor in the q and a and he simply said it’s going to plan but with the body that deals with share transactions in football for their assessment ?!

[PurpleCanary 5,586]

11 minutes ago, Soldier on said:

FWIW touched on again by Connor in the q and a and he simply said it’s going to plan but with the body that deals with share transactions in football for their assessment ?!

Despite paying for the privilege for some reason I can't now get into the Q&A sessions, which were usually interesting. Everything else but not those.🤩

It hasn't really gone to plan, because I am sure this delay was not part of the plan. Southwell probably means the Takeover Panel, which certainly has been examining the proposal by the club and Attanasio, although of course it doesn't just look at football deals.

[Soldier on 168]

8 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Despite paying for the privilege for some reason I can't now get into the Q&A sessions, which were usually interesting. Everything else but not those.🤩

It hasn't really gone to plan, because I am sure this delay was not part of the plan. Southwell probably means the Takeover Panel, which certainly has been examining the proposal by the club and Attanasio, although of course it doesn't just look at football deals.

Have you tried accessing via the subscriber exclusive tab and not the homepage ?

[BigFish 1,988]

16 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

As to the whitewash waiver I am not certain in general terms why you think that unlikely and impracticable. They can be approved by the Takeover Panel and then voted through by the minority shareholders. I am sure that happens.

I remain unpersuaded by the idea of a waiver, @PurpleCanary my friend. You are the only person I have heard discussing this and I cannot see any advantage to MA. This would need a vote, and defining the electorate is problematic. As I understand it, the TC makes no reference to minorities - instead it refers to uninvolved shareholders. From this I think various arguments can be made such as all shareholders are involved as the issue dilutes their shareholding so no one can vote or only MA is involved as these are new shares, S&J can vote and the the majority is certain (whether for or against). In any case the time to ask for the mandate was when the new shares were issued, not at some undetermined time in the future. This mechanism is designed for the transfer of existing shares, not the creation of new ones. This presents issues that would have been obvious before this vehicle to get new money into the club was thought of, unless some blunder was made.

In addition, the question remains why would MA want a minority stake. I can see that S&J might want to retain control, but nothing for him. He will know what he wants to pay and what price he is willing to go to. S&J will know what their ideal selling price is and what is their minimum. For the size of NCFC as a comapny the structure and number of shareholders is disportionate. This may be causing football governance and legal work leading to the delay. Equally there could have been a change of heart on behalf of one of the parties. Unlikely, because I think that would leak into the public realm. Possibly, all is in hand and everything is progressing as planned. These things often take time e.g., Arsenal took 10 years to sort their shareholding.

[PurpleCanary 5,586]

23 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Despite paying for the privilege for some reason I can't now get into the Q&A sessions, which were usually interesting. Everything else but not those.🤩

It hasn't really gone to plan, because I am sure this delay was not part of the plan. Southwell probably means the Takeover Panel, which certainly has been examining the proposal by the club and Attanasio, although of course it doesn't just look at football deals.

Thanks Soldier On. That worked, although it hasn't in the past. Anyway this was what Southwell said:

"My understanding is that it is with various bodies that look at shares in football - and is in the queue for being looked at by those responsible within the game. 

"The nature of that means if a crisis club comes along - Wigan, for example - they get pushed to the top of the queue. Plus I think there are still a few bits to iron out before we get an announcement. But that is expected at some point over the summer. It's complex and long - but it's going to plan." 

Edited June 17, 2023 by PurpleCanary

[NewNestCarrow 203]

I'm reluctant to add more ill-informed and pointless speculation to this fine thread, but Attanasio has taken on a new project

 

Let's not kid ourselves that Mark is the one actually doing the work on the NCFC Share deal, but this may have an impact. 

[TIL 1010 4,801]

7 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

I'm reluctant to add more ill-informed and pointless speculation to this fine thread

 

Spoilsport.

[shefcanary 2,466]

Foulger's resignation f4om the board formally filed at Companies House yesterday. No sign of a replacement. 

[GMF 757]

8 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Foulger's resignation f4om the board formally filed at Companies House yesterday. No sign of a replacement. 

The Club has to have a minimum of four and a maximum of eight directors. There’s no immediate need for a replacement, but I suspect that one will be incoming, probably by way of a vote at a general meeting.

[essex canary 507]

On 17/06/2023 at 16:31, TIL 1010 said:

Spoilsport.

Absolutely. He only has 1 post for every 100 of yours.

[TIL 1010 4,801]

8 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Absolutely. He only has 1 post for every 100 of yours.

I did have a 12 year start on him in joining the forum and my average is therefore under 5 posts a day. Your problem with that is exactly ?

[PurpleCanary 5,586]

53 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Foulger's resignation f4om the board formally filed at Companies House yesterday. No sign of a replacement. 

Wasn't Attanasio in effect the replacement for Foulger?

[Mengo 825]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Wasn't Attanasio in effect the replacement for Foulger?

Yes.

 

Foulger, who is departing the City board after over 25 years on the club's board, is set to become an honorary club vice president when he relinquishes his role at the end of the season. 

EOS

Edited July 1, 2023 by Mengo

[Soldier on 168]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Wasn't Attanasio in effect the replacement for Foulger?

Any details of the other minority shareholdings acquired ?

[PurpleCanary 5,586]

1 hour ago, Soldier on said:

Any details of the other minority shareholdings acquired ?

I haven't looked.

[GMF 757]

6 hours ago, Soldier on said:

Any details of the other minority shareholdings acquired ?

No, not yet.

 The annual confirmation statement, from last October, didn’t include any information on that.

 I have pointed out to the Club that both the Premier League and the EFL have a requirement for all clubs to disclose upon their website (accessible from the home page) details of any share ownerships over ten percent. The Club last updated their information in June 2022. I could add more, but will leave it there for now.

[Soldier on 168]

6 minutes ago, GMF said:

No, not yet.

 The annual confirmation statement, from last October, didn’t include any information on that.

 I have pointed out to the Club that both the Premier League and the EFL have a requirement for all clubs to disclose upon their website (accessible from the home page) details of any share ownerships over ten percent. The Club last updated their information in June 2022. I could add more, but will leave it there for now.

As in the club got back to you but you’d rather not divulge what was said at this time ??

[GMF 757]

1 hour ago, Soldier on said:

As in the club got back to you but you’d rather not divulge what was said at this time ??

Correct. I’ve been hoping for a while now for further clarification, which was promised at the time of my discussion on the issue.

[Soldier on 168]

So still waiting ??

[GMF 757]

18 minutes ago, Soldier on said:

So still waiting ??

Looks like it…

[Soldier on 168]

Poor from the club. Chase them up ?

[norfolkngood 1,091]

i have not been keeping track of this as it is so long winded affair !!

so are we waiting for MA to take over the 13 % of foulger ( which i thought already had happened when he bought them)

or is MA trying for complete take over ? 

or is MA just trying to buy more shares ? 

[CANARYKING 644]

2 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

i have not been keeping track of this as it is so long winded affair !!

so are we waiting for MA to take over the 13 % of foulger ( which i thought already had happened when he bought them)

or is MA trying for complete take over ? 

or is MA just trying to buy more shares ? 

or has MA said **** this I’m going back home 

[Davidlingfield 63]

35 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

i have not been keeping track of this as it is so long winded affair !!

so are we waiting for MA to take over the 13 % of foulger ( which i thought already had happened when he bought them)

or is MA trying for complete take over ? 

or is MA just trying to buy more shares ? 

It’s going through legals.

End result is that D&M and Attansio will own equal amount of shares at c45% each.

[PurpleCanary 5,586]

9 hours ago, Davidlingfield said:

It’s going through legals.

End result is that D&M and Attansio will own equal amount of shares at c45% each.

I suspect it is now being looked at from a regulatory point of view rather than a strictly legal one, and whether it is going through, in the sense of moving forward, is a serious question.

The club told shareholders at their meeting on February 13 that it expected everything to be sorted out in two weeks or so. We are about the enter the twentieth week, with Zoe Webber saying only that the hope is for some progress in the weeks to come.

Such a delay, with that uncertain prediction as to when there will be a resolution, looks more likely to be caused by perhaps unforeseen regulatory questions than predictable legal ones.

My maths suggests that the aim in the short- to medium-term is for Attanasio and Smith and Jones to have very close to equality at 40 per cent rather 45 per cent. For S&J to get to 45 per cent of the increased total they would have to acquire some more shares, and while that is possible I would be very surprised if it is the intention.

As it stands, unless there are more share dealings and/or the creation of extra new shares, it is mathematically impossible for both to get to 45 per cent. Further on, though, the smart money is that the end result is Attanasio becoming the owner.

Edited July 2, 2023 by PurpleCanary

[Taiwan Canary 145]

For those interested, an excellent article about ownership with several points which are particularly pertinent to Norwich fans. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2023/jul/01/football-clubs-communities-fans-owners?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

[Big Vince 319]

7 hours ago, norfolkngood said:

i have not been keeping track of this as it is so long winded affair !!

so are we waiting for MA to take over the 13 % of foulger ( which i thought already had happened when he bought them)

or is MA trying for complete take over ? 

or is MA just trying to buy more shares ? 

Counting the number of angels dancing on the end of a pin is pertinent.

Edited July 2, 2023 by Big Vince

[essex canary 507]

11 hours ago, GMF said:

Looks like it…

Michael Foulger 13%. Isnt that Sarah Foulger?

That would explain MF's £3 milion as per Michael Bailey and as @shefcanary and I have always maintained.

Is SF interest to be sold? Perhaps what they are aiming for is 40:30:20:10? 

if MA is maintained slightly under 30 they could park the Takeover Code. Still need a Protocol and plan of action as to where they take it from there.

[Soldier on 168]

Presuming he is buying these shares though that takes him over 30% doesn’t it?