Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Feedthewolf

Club announce General Meeting for February 13

Recommended Posts

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

I would now expect smaller shareholders to get a sweetheart return. Good politics. 

The terms of ‘exceptional circumstances’ for the next sale will be - I predict - just vague enough to allow de-facto ‘anyone I choose at any point I choose’. Though the language - superficially - will be as far from that as it can plausibly be. 

At that point the equity gain will become clear to all. Delia will have a free conscience and Attanasio will have had a pleasing contextually  free-hit with a  far fatter upside than was ever necessary. 

Though none will (want to) believe that now. 

Parma  

 

Do you not believe it possible that the equity could be (already have been) invested into the club through the debt already accrued by investing in the squad?

Mr A pays off the loan to acquire the club, but the club requires further investment to return to on field success. If he tries to 'cash out' then the club holds little value. It's in his interests to make it successful. His success is linked to ours.

In the future no one will want to buy the club unless they are planning to gain from that, presumably by increasing the value through success on the pitch. I don't see how the club loses here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

..and how much of the equity gain rolls over?…who benefits?…who cashes in on the next sale?…..is the re-financing also another form of de-facto equity gain?

My fear was always that Delia and Michael - out of fear of breaking the promise not to ‘profiteer’ from their ownership - simply hand the gain to somebody smiling, plausible and messianic….

Is the sporting and financial wheel come full circle again?

Parma 

This has been going on a long time and I think we know bits of what has been going on and bits about what is going on and nothing about what will be going on. When we know it all there will be a clear picture.

But this is not a normal sale where the owner finds a buyer and that is the transaction. Neither is it a Robert Chase "the right man made the right offer". This is complicated where so many people need to be considered. Michael Foulger I assume is already happy.

I am still trying to understand the relevance of the share issues and what they may mean to the various parties involved. If there is a "normal football club sale" this certainly won't be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Petriix said:

Do you not believe it possible that the equity could be (already have been) invested into the club through the debt already accrued by investing in the squad?

Mr A pays off the loan to acquire the club, but the club requires further investment to return to on field success. If he tries to 'cash out' then the club holds little value. It's in his interests to make it successful. His success is linked to ours.

In the future no one will want to buy the club unless they are planning to gain from that, presumably by increasing the value through success on the pitch. I don't see how the club loses here. 

See ‘Mark Attanasio’ thread for explanation.

Parma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There seem to be an awful lot of assumptions being made but people are probably right in assuming that this is part of an overall take over strategy. However, it could also quite simply be that the club is in a mess financially and it's not just Anastasio that's putting his hand in his pocket. 

Share this post


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

There seem to be an awful lot of assumptions being made but people are probably right in assuming that this is part of an overall take over strategy. However, it could also quite simply be that the club is in a mess financially and it's not just Anastasio that's putting his hand in his pocket. 

Yes. There is only one certainty. That the aim, or one of the aims, is to raise money for the club. How much depends on the price and the number sold. However there is a strong likelihood that unless the idea is for S&J to buy some or all of the shares (which I doubt) then after more than two decades they will cease to be majority owners. That might only be symbolic, or it might presage a change of ownership.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes. There is only one certainty. That the aim, or one of the aims, is to raise money for the club. How much depends on the price and the number sold. However there is a strong likelihood that unless the idea is for S&J to buy some or all of the shares (which I doubt) then after more than two decades they will cease to be majority owners. That might only be symbolic, or it might presage a change of ownership.

Whilst S&J have consistently said they aren't doing it for money it would still be very strange to effectively hand over a huge sum of money to a total stranger. I would therefore guess that this is one of a series of pre-arranged transactions and is possibly designed to dig the club out of a hole.  There also seems to be a bit of a firesale of fringe players at the moment which may just be common sense and a new manager, but may also point to an underlying financial problem. 

I certainly wouldn't assume that Anastasio is going to take up the whole share issue but we will obviously find out in time. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Whilst S&J have consistently said they aren't doing it for money it would still be very strange to effectively hand over a huge sum of money to a total stranger. I would therefore guess that this is one of a series of pre-arranged transactions and is possibly designed to dig the club out of a hole.  There also seems to be a bit of a firesale of fringe players at the moment which may just be common sense and a new manager, but may also point to an underlying financial problem. 

I certainly wouldn't assume that Anastasio is going to take up the whole share issue but we will obviously find out in time. 

 

Could it be that the club banked on selling Aarons by now and that not happening has hastened "plan B"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

See ‘Mark Attanasio’ thread for explanation.

Parma

I don't think you've answered the specific question: you suggest the equity either ends up in Delia's pocket or Attanasio's, I think there's a third possibility that it ends up invested in the club. Persuade me that I'm wrong... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Petriix said:

I don't think you've answered the specific question: you suggest the equity either ends up in Delia's pocket or Attanasio's, I think there's a third possibility that it ends up invested in the club. Persuade me that I'm wrong... 

If Delia was to seek to buy the same well maintained house now as she would otherwise have sought to buy in 1996 in would cost her 4 times as much. If she was to seek to buy the same caravan probably only a small fraction of the 1996 price.

The question must then come down to how much value has been added or subtracted to the Club's value in the past 26 years.

The Smith and Jones family could simply decide to retain their shares forever.

 

Edited by essex canary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, shefcanary said:

It mainly depends if his C Preference shares are converted to ordinary as part of thos allotment and the timing of the conversion. 

If they are converted before the allocation, with 619,000 shares issued plus the 10% on conversion, the value per share he has paid for his £10m is £160 (or thereabouts). This will be the maximum cost per share he has paid. If after the allotment, the value per share will be less, c.£120. Whether that is the maximum paid per share is again a moot point as I don't think anyone on here knows how much per share he paid Foulger. That could be the maximum.

Whatever, the value of the club is still as set by the preference share holding creation as far as we know, which was £100m. 

Agreed there are just too many unknowns.

Just intrigued by your belief that D&M will actively seek to sell their shares to MA. Is there any pressing reason to do that? If they simply level up their share ownership with him, they could simply let him run the show, be the sleeping partner, kick any tax issues or any of these thoughts about them making a profit into the long grass.

Why wouldn't they do that albeit that maybe the trigger issue could scupper it somewhat depending on how that worked out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Petriix said:

I don't think you've answered the specific question: you suggest the equity either ends up in Delia's pocket or Attanasio's, I think there's a third possibility that it ends up invested in the club. Persuade me that I'm wrong... 

You may be right, but given Attanasio's previous MO at the Brewers I think this ranks a long third outcome. My bet is on Smith &Jones initially, Attanasio will have to work gard to ensure his equity stake rises.

But I know no more than you. 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mr.Carrow said:

Could it be that the club banked on selling Aarons by now and that not happening has hastened "plan B"?

Getting Cantwell and Hugill off the wage bill must be saving £40,000 a week at least ?

Share this post


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

If Delia was to seek to buy the same well maintained house now as she would otherwise have sought to buy in 1996 in would cost her 4 times as much. If she was to seek to buy the same caravan probably only a small fraction of the 1996 price.

The question must then come down to how much value has been added or subtracted to the Club's value in the past 26 years.

The Smith and Jones family could simply decide to retain their shares forever.

 

Is Wynnie allowed a tent in the garden?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Just intrigued by your belief that D&M will actively seek to sell their shares to MA. Is there any pressing reason to do that? If they simply level up their share ownership with him, they could simply let him run the show, be the sleeping partner, kick any tax issues or any of these thoughts about them making a profit into the long grass.

Why wouldn't they do that albeit that maybe the trigger issue could scupper it somewhat depending on how that worked out?

I think this latest managerial merry go round has probably used up the last of their energies, the apparent change in the current financial strategy, together with a favourable view of the cut of Attanasio's jib, makes them comfortable now is the right time to exit. They will do well to avoid a Nadhim Zahawi tax problem, retaining some shareholding will do this and still gives Nephew Tom some form of involvement. 

But I may have missed the mood music altogether. 🤷‍♂️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear with me, I'm thinking out loud herd:

I want to hold a part of NCFC, even if my holding has zero influence or power

So, Attanasio buys 30% then buys all remaining shares EXCEPT ANY EXISTING SHAREHOLDER THAT WANTS TO CAN KEEP A SINGLE SHARE?

Attanasio will hold a majority but fans will still own part of the club. (Not much difference to today's reality)

Aside from the cost of administering this set-up, is there any reason why it cannot happen?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

Bear with me, I'm thinking out loud herd:

I want to hold a part of NCFC, even if my holding has zero influence or power

So, Attanasio buys 30% then buys all remaining shares EXCEPT ANY EXISTING SHAREHOLDER THAT WANTS TO CAN KEEP A SINGLE SHARE?

Attanasio will hold a majority but fans will still own part of the club. (Not much difference to today's reality)

Aside from the cost of administering this set-up, is there any reason why it cannot happen?

In that scenario you can keep all your shares. All Attanasio can do is offer to buy. If you don't want to sell he cannot force you. If he gets to 90 percent then he can if he wants forcibly buy all your shares. Which he might or might not want to do. But this is all getting ahead of the meeting on February 13 when there are still very few hard facts to go on.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

In that scenario you can keep all your shares. All Attanasio can do is offer to buy. If you don't want to sell he cannot force you. If he gets to 90 percent then he can if he wants forcibly buy all your shares. Which he might or might not want to do. But this is all getting ahead of the meeting on February 13 when there are still very few hard facts to go on.

Ah OK. Was confusing the 30% threshold with the 90% .

Notwithstanding, if someone gets to 90% I would like the option of keeping a single share.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignorance or optimism……..

the cheaper MA can purchase a controlling share of NCFC, the more ££ he has left for the stadium expansion / player purchases / wage bill etc. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/01/2023 at 15:25, MrBunce said:

All this likely indicates Mr Attanasio's intention to purchase the club and bring to an end fan ownership of Norwich City

Seeing it stated in such bald terms really brought a lump to my throat. It really is "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em," isn't it?

My intuition is that as US squillionaires go, we've found a good one. But it will be the end of this club trying to do things different and, as such, a sad day.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Seeing it stated in such bald terms really brought a lump to my throat. It really is "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em," isn't it?

My intuition is that as US squillionaires go, we've found a good one. But it will be the end of this club trying to do things different and, as such, a sad day.

If Attanasio gets to 30 per cent, as seems likely, it is then officially treated as him having launched a takeover bid, even if that is not his intention, or it is his intention but for whatever reason he doesn't then go on to achieve a majority holding.

Yes, this probably the end of an era, but I would suggest there is a halfway house between our virtuous self-funding pauperism and obscene squillionaire-funded overspendng.

Attanasio is very rich, except actually he really isn't by the standards of the world he is buying into! And he presumably will carry on owning the Milwaukee Brewers. So we end up being semi-virtuous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes, this probably the end of an era, but I would suggest there is a halfway house between our virtuous self-funding pauperism and obscene squillionaire-funded overspendng.

Yes, that's exactly my intuition too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

Bear with me, I'm thinking out loud herd:

I want to hold a part of NCFC, even if my holding has zero influence or power

So, Attanasio buys 30% then buys all remaining shares EXCEPT ANY EXISTING SHAREHOLDER THAT WANTS TO CAN KEEP A SINGLE SHARE?

Attanasio will hold a majority but fans will still own part of the club. (Not much difference to today's reality)

Aside from the cost of administering this set-up, is there any reason why it cannot happen?

The relevant questions must be:

1. Is it feasible at minimal cost? At present the shareholdings aren't included in the Club's one login system and nearly 7,000 mailings have been sent out to furnish meetings with minimal attendance as required by law under the current set-up.

2. Wouldn't a collective representative Supporters Trust arrangement be preferable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 27/01/2023 at 19:32, MrBunce said:

 

@BigFish Yes the cash would add to the value of the club. Take a simple example, say a company is worth £100 with 100 shares (£1 per share) and you allot 10 new shares for £10, the new company is worth £110 with 110 shares (still £1 per share). Of course, is the value really £100? What if you allot 10 shares for £9 or £11? As you can see it can become complicated.

That brings us to the fundamental question in this. What value do the key players (S,J & MA) all put on a profitless non-dividend paying company. It would seem it is pretty much up to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/01/2023 at 08:30, PurpleCanary said:

Yes. There is only one certainty. That the aim, or one of the aims, is to raise money for the club. How much depends on the price and the number sold. However there is a strong likelihood that unless the idea is for S&J to buy some or all of the shares (which I doubt) then after more than two decades they will cease to be majority owners. That might only be symbolic, or it might presage a change of ownership.

It would be surprising if S&J progressed this without some legal protection for the value of their shareholding

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

The relevant questions must be:

1. Is it feasible at minimal cost? At present the shareholdings aren't included in the Club's one login system and nearly 7,000 mailings have been sent out to furnish meetings with minimal attendance as required by law under the current set-up.

2. Wouldn't a collective representative Supporters Trust arrangement be preferable?

Isn't this the sort of set up the binners have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Isn't this the sort of set up the binners have?

I really don't know. Is it relevant either way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, essex canary said:

I really don't know. Is it relevant either way?

Just trying to work out what you meant by representative supporters trust?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just for further consideration, assuming the general meeting approves the proposal, there’s still the proposed conversion of the C-preference shares, which, because they have to be done to be 10% on a fully diluted basis, would mean the addition of a further 90,158 ordinary shares to MA. At this point he would become the largest shareholder, his stake increasing to at least 382,670 shares, or 42.44% of the revised total.

Assuming no change to D&M’s shareholding in the interim period, their holding would diminish to 36.29% in overall terms.

Or, to put it another way, if MA had already, or intended at any point in the future, acquired D&M’s shares, the combined holding would be a minimum of 78.74% - probably higher, as he’s already acquired a number of other minority (as yet undisclosed) interests.

  • Like 1

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...