Mark Attanasio

[GMF 747]

1 hour ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

Things will become clear. Minority shareholders will be favoured in the end. 

Parma 

A shareholder agreement that was full of confidentiality clauses (understandable to a degree) near silence throughout the entire process (unsurprising, given the proposal), a commitment to a lock-step agreement for three years, and an overseas owner who’s said very little so far.

Something has to change in due course, but there’s zero undertakings to that effect, certainly for the moment.

Lots being taken in good faith, without any evidence to support it.

Edited September 29, 2023 by GMF

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

3 hours ago, Soldier on said:

They could be privvy to additional information that means they have full confidence shareholders interests are being protected moving forwards.

I deliberately used the phrase ‘in the here and now’. Shareholders can only go on what they know from the official documents they have been given. And on that basis particularly those who would like to sell up, or at the least believe it should be an option for others, know that which ever way they vote they will be voting directly against having that chance. They cannot possibly rely on the hope that there might be beneficial treatment in the future.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

3 hours ago, GMF said:

Are they really @PurpleCanary, all they are doing is insisting that shareholders are given the right to vote on the proposals, which is exactly what is happening. The bigger question is around the way it’s been pitched to shareholders by the club. All unnecessary, avoidable, and, in my opinion, contemptuous towards shareholders.

I stand by what I said GMF. Yes, the club has handled this badly but the Takeover Panel could have intervened and done more than simply draw the line at the club’s request to be allowed a Q&A.

[GMF 747]

1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

I deliberately used the phrase ‘in the here and now’. Shareholders can only go on what they know from the official documents they have been given. And on that basis particularly those who would like to sell up, or at the least believe it should be an option for others, know that which ever way they vote they will be voting directly against having that chance. They cannot possibly rely on the hope that there might be beneficial treatment in the future.

On the face of it, this may seem to be the case, however, the only way to keep that prospect alive is to vote against the waiver.

There will almost certainly be a revised equity proposal forthcoming, and whilst it is accepted that won’t guarantee some form of offer, it is in MA’s interests to increase his voting equity, rather than being reliant no-voting shares and loans. 

[GMF 747]

52 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I stand by what I said GMF. Yes, the club has handled this badly but the Takeover Panel could have intervened and done more than simply draw the line at the club’s request to be allowed a Q&A.

I’ve never had any involvement with the Takeover Panel, so it’s impossible for me to know whether they could be that categoric, as you’ve implying.

They clearly have to deal with each case on its merits and they can certainly grant a waiver in circumstances where shareholders are facing a wipeout - I think we are agreed on that.

In other circumstances, where the offeror’s proposal is for a waiver, it is my understanding that all they can insist upon is a shareholders vote on the proposed waiver, as is the case here.

That’s not going as far as you’re suggesting they can, but I honestly don’t know for sure.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

i hope MA is not in charge of contracts here ! i just googled his baseball team highest paid player !!

 

Christian Yelich, whose base salary will once again be $26 million after signing his nine-year, $215 million extension in March 2020, accounts for just over one-fifth of the Brewers' entire payroll this season (20.25%). He is deferring $4 million every year through 2028

[Soldier on 160]

I expect over time that may be one area he makes us more competitive I.e more willing and able to pay higher wages in places.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

1 hour ago, GMF said:

I’ve never had any involvement with the Takeover Panel, so it’s impossible for me to know whether they could be that categoric, as you’ve implying.

They clearly have to deal with each case on its merits and they can certainly grant a waiver in circumstances where shareholders are facing a wipeout - I think we are agreed on that.

In other circumstances, where the offeror’s proposal is for a waiver, it is my understanding that all they can insist upon is a shareholders vote on the proposed waiver, as is the case here.

That’s not going as far as you’re suggesting they can, but I honestly don’t know for sure.

GMF, no I don’t know for sure either. The Panel had more than 40 proposals to consider last year. Presumably some were when a company badly needed saving, in which case, as you say, a waiver is pretty much a given, so the white knight can spend as much money as needed keeping the company afloat. 

Whether otherwise all the Panel can do is insist on a vote I don’t know, but I rather doubt it. I would think the company would have to make a bit of a case.

it seems clear, given the U-turn on Tom Smith, that the Panel will reconsider a decision when faced with new evidence, and perhaps if it gets a powerful argument it hadn’t considered. And since it zapped the notion of a Q&A it is willing to limit how much a company can argue its case.

[GMF 747]

@PurpleCanary I strongly suspect that the issue of an independent director is more matter of fact, than the financial status of a company subject to a takeover, especially as we now know that the said company has already received £31m debt financing from the offeror, plus £10m preference shares funds. In that context the waters start muddying somewhat.

[GMF 747]

@PurpleCanary and, another thing, I remain overly sceptical about the suggestion that the TP ruled against a Q&A, or FAQ type document. I’m saying no more than that…

[Soldier on 160]

Seismic day for the club tomorrow or a case of oops back to the drawing board ??!!!

[essex canary 496]

53 minutes ago, Soldier on said:

Seismic day for the club tomorrow or a case of oops back to the drawing board ??!!!

Indeed. The Canaries Trust vote could be a crucial factor. As a member it would be good to know exactly where that is going albeit that the signs are encouraging.

[TIL 1010 4,748]

3 hours ago, essex canary said:

Indeed. The Canaries Trust vote could be a crucial factor. As a member it would be good to know exactly where that is going albeit that the signs are encouraging.

As a member i would have thought an e-mail to them rather than the use of a social media platform would have been the best course of action.

Edited October 1, 2023 by TIL 1010

[Browno 36]

They have changed their bio on Twitter today.

[GMF 747]

22 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

As a member i would have thought an e-mail to them rather than the use of a social media platform would have been the best course of action.

Is that a rhetorical question? (Winks)

[Monty13 2,235]

On 29/09/2023 at 17:01, Soldier on said:

I expect over time that may be one area he makes us more competitive I.e more willing and able to pay higher wages in places.

I genuinely think it’s our biggest issue with ever progressing as a PL side.

The whole we can’t afford (insert sum) for one player argument is so flawed. We seem to have been burnt and just psychologically scarred from some high profile flops in our past.

Some players are just worth much more than their team mates. The player budget is a total budget and should be used accordingly.

There was suggestions last PL season we failed to meet wage valuations and lost out on key players only to pay nearly the same amounts for lower targets.

When money is tight how you use it and the value you get for it becomes so important. Sometimes it just makes sense to spend more in one area.

[Monty13 2,235]

On 29/09/2023 at 16:42, norfolkngood said:

i hope MA is not in charge of contracts here ! i just googled his baseball team highest paid player !!

 

Christian Yelich, whose base salary will once again be $26 million after signing his nine-year, $215 million extension in March 2020, accounts for just over one-fifth of the Brewers' entire payroll this season (20.25%). He is deferring $4 million every year through 2028

I mean I hope we start to do a similar thing (although 20% seems excessive!).

My baseball knowledge is almost nonexistent but looking into it Yelich is an absolute stand out star player.

It’s not like us having Pukki and paying a bit more than the rest a week for him, it’s more equivalent with us paying a huge chunk of our wage budget for a genuine PL star (if such a thing was even possible). 

[NewNestCarrow 191]

On 29/09/2023 at 16:42, norfolkngood said:

i hope MA is not in charge of contracts here ! i just googled his baseball team highest paid player !!

 

Christian Yelich, whose base salary will once again be $26 million after signing his nine-year, $215 million extension in March 2020, accounts for just over one-fifth of the Brewers' entire payroll this season (20.25%). He is deferring $4 million every year through 2028

The Brewers made an (est) PROFIT of USD 22m in 2022.

So

1) it doesn't really matter what they pay Yelich (or any player, really)

and

2)  Attanasio will not have contributed a dime towards this!

The expectation that Attanasio is going to be our Jack Walker or Roman Abramovich is entirely without foundation, indeed the evidence from the US is that owners  of sports clus are primarily interested in making their investment more attractive for the inevitable sale, at minimal cost to themselves.

[Capt. Pants 4,237]

56 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I mean I hope we start to do a similar thing (although 20% seems excessive!).

My baseball knowledge is almost nonexistent but looking into it Yelich is an absolute stand out star player.

It’s not like us having Pukki and paying a bit more than the rest a week for him, it’s more equivalent with us paying a huge chunk of our wage budget for a genuine PL star (if such a thing was even possible). 

I know sod all about baseball either but he's now 31 so he'll be 37 when his 9 year contract extension expires. A whole different ballgame and I guess they don't have to run far.

At least MA will be used to seeing large numbers in the salary outgoings.

 

[Soldier on 160]

3 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

The Brewers made an (est) PROFIT of USD 22m in 2022.

So

1) it doesn't really matter what they pay Yelich (or any player, really)

and

2)  Attanasio will not have contributed a dime towards this!

The expectation that Attanasio is going to be our Jack Walker or Roman Abramovich is entirely without foundation, indeed the evidence from the US is that owners  of sports clus are primarily interested in making their investment more attractive for the inevitable sale, at minimal cost to themselves.

 

3 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

The Brewers made an (est) PROFIT of USD 22m in 2022.

So

1) it doesn't really matter what they pay Yelich (or any player, really)

and

2)  Attanasio will not have contributed a dime towards this!

The expectation that Attanasio is going to be our Jack Walker or Roman Abramovich is entirely without foundation, indeed the evidence from the US is that owners  of sports clus are primarily interested in making their investment more attractive for the inevitable sale, at minimal cost to themselves.

To achieve these aims he will be focused on improving the business though and he has had an interest in the brewers for 18 years so not a flash in the pan. Pretty sure he spent plenty on training facilities etc during his tenure ?

[NewNestCarrow 191]

25 minutes ago, Soldier on said:

 

To achieve these aims he will be focused on improving the business though and he has had an interest in the brewers for 18 years so not a flash in the pan. Pretty sure he spent plenty on training facilities etc during his tenure ?

The Brewers signed a 25-year lease and committed a maximum of $63m for renovations of the Spring Training complex, but the City of Phoenix made an immediate $10m contribution and will hand over $60.6m to operate it ($1.4m p.a with an annual 4% increase.)

Again, nothing coming out of Attanasio's pocket.

 

[essex canary 496]

3 hours ago, TIL 1010 said:

As a member i would have thought an e-mail to them rather than the use of a social media platform would have been the best course of action.

Now you want more emails?

The whole supporter base maybe interested in how the largest voting unit representing perhaps 2% of the supporter base is going to vote?

It would be good if the other 98% paid the fees. Then again why not treat it as a shop window exercise?

[NewNestCarrow 191]

22 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

The Brewers signed a 25-year lease and committed a maximum of $63m for renovations of the Spring Training complex, but the City of Phoenix made an immediate $10m contribution and will hand over $60.6m to operate it ($1.4m p.a with an annual 4% increase.)

Again, nothing coming out of Attanasio's pocket.

 

It would appear that the state of Arizona also contributed around $5.7m towards costs of the renovation.

 

 

[TIL 1010 4,748]

4 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Now you want more emails?

The whole supporter base maybe interested in how the largest voting unit representing perhaps 2% of the supporter base is going to vote?

It would be good if the other 98% paid the fees. Then again why not treat it as a shop window exercise?

As i suspected my reference to you and e-mails was a whoooosh moment.

As for largest voting unit do we know for sure yet whether it is one vote per shareholder or X votes in relation to number of shares held and as for the figure of 2% of the supporter base is that an assumption or factual ?

[Monty13 2,235]

2 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

I know sod all about baseball either but he's now 31 so he'll be 37 when his 9 year contract extension expires. A whole different ballgame and I guess they don't have to run far.

At least MA will be used to seeing large numbers in the salary outgoings.

 

It’s like far less energetic cricket so guessing he’ll be fine 😂 

Edited October 1, 2023 by Monty13

[essex canary 496]

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

As i suspected my reference to you and e-mails was a whoooosh moment.

As for largest voting unit do we know for sure yet whether it is one vote per shareholder or X votes in relation to number of shares held and as for the figure of 2% of the supporter base is that an assumption or factual ?

I note that @PurpleCanary stated that the Club's handling of this is amateurish but your suggestion that 24 hours before the vote they don't know the basis of it takes that judgement to a whole higher level.

I am struggling to find the definition of a 'poll' in any of the papers received which is amateurish in itself. Nonetheless I have it in writing from a member of the Club's SMT that it is on the basis of X votes in relation to number of shares held. The 2002 Share Offer Document confirms that definition. Therefore any objective vote must take place on that basis to avoid accusations of corruption. The Canaries Trust position is relevant in that, unlike the previous 2 votes, under the prescribed method they hold around 5% of the available votes which is likely to increase substantially in practice when abstentions are accounted for.

If you have any knowledge of professional administrative process I am sure you can appreciate that my 'whoosh' moments and/or assertions concerning the Canary Trust's portion of the supporter base pale into relative insignificance  

  

Edited October 1, 2023 by essex canary

[GMF 747]

@essex canary the voting procedures are as defined within the Companies Act 2006, as amended.

I suspect that there’s been some canvassing of opinions amongst the friendly AD’s, as you’d probably expect, so this isn’t likely to be down to just one party. (Winks) 

[essex canary 496]

37 minutes ago, GMF said:

@essex canary the voting procedures are as defined within the Companies Act 2006, as amended.

I suspect that there’s been some canvassing of opinions amongst the friendly AD’s, as you’d probably expect, so this isn’t likely to be down to just one party. (Winks) 

Collectively the AD's have about 4 times the voting power of the Trust. Then again, unlike the Trust, those votes are individual in nature. Everyone is entitled to swap notes. Then again watch out for the House of Lords style old boys networks.

To my knowledge the Trust treats all it's members equally in relation to it's Terms and Conditions which is why I am happy to be a member. Frankly I believe the Football Club should insist on that for all affiliated supporter groups. Then again we know they prefer to compromise that for a petty financial consideration of their own making.

Edited October 2, 2023 by essex canary

[Soldier on 160]

Wonder how soon post 1800 we will hear the outcome ?

[king canary 7,609]

17 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

The Brewers signed a 25-year lease and committed a maximum of $63m for renovations of the Spring Training complex, but the City of Phoenix made an immediate $10m contribution and will hand over $60.6m to operate it ($1.4m p.a with an annual 4% increase.)

Again, nothing coming out of Attanasio's pocket.

 

This is, for reasons I've never understood, the norm in America. Tax payers end up shelling out for billion dollar sports franchises stadiums and training facilities.

It can be a concern though that American owners may not realise that won't happen in the UK.