Attanasio = red herring

[essex canary 505]

56 minutes ago, GMF said:

Personally, I think that is misleading, not least because the club is a public limited company, which is exactly what the Takeover Code is for. Being a football club makes no difference. Just a personal view, of course.

The comment may be fair relative to other football clubs but not in the historical context of NCFC given that the Directors of 2002 signed up as a plc and therefore need to honour that in solving the issue. 

Maybe the Club would have had some mileage if they could explain that in practice the shareholding initiative works more like a mutual organisation?  Unfortunately though the way they have run it doesn't support that. If they really want to extend it for another 6 years maybe that could be part of the kind of solution @PurpleCanary proposes?

 

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

12 minutes ago, essex canary said:

...and we pay £700k a year for this service as opposed to only just over £100k 21 years ago.

Leaving inflation aside... 

If I am right that it is the proposal itself that is the problem then she can hardly be blamed for that. The proposal comes from Attanasio. 

 

[GMF 756]

35 minutes ago, essex canary said:

The comment may be fair relative to other football clubs but not in the historical context of NCFC given that the Directors of 2002 signed up as a plc and therefore need to honour that in solving the issue. 

Maybe the Club would have had some mileage if they could explain that in practice the shareholding initiative works more like a mutual organisation?  Unfortunately though the way they have run it doesn't support that. If they really want to extend it for another 6 years maybe that could be part of the kind of solution @PurpleCanary proposes?

 

The Club is a public limited company, so the takeover code applies. It really doesn’t matter what its trade is, nor the fact that it’s not traded on a quoted stock exchange or any other authorised trading platform, they have to be treated with regards to the code. 

If, as @PurpleCanary has alluded to, the club was proposing to follow the usual course of action, this would have been done and dusted weeks ago.

The panel isn’t really concerned about the circumstances behind the club being converted to a PLC back in 2002, nor how it’s now being run on a day to day basis. They are focusing on the proposal to issue the new shares and, more importantly, the context of that proposal its implementations for all minority shareholders.

It really is that simple. Whatever views D&M might have in regards to share prices, as mentioned elsewhere, is, respectively, misguided.

[BigFish 1,988]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

Indeed, the only challenge for valuing a Football club to other businesses is the real difference! If you look at the books and forecasts of say NCFC how can you assign a real valuation? This is why I am still very cautious with this process, it’s really down to what the current owners set as their asking price and the buyers willing to pay for their % or full takeover. How can any body really place a valuation on minority shareholders when the reality will be the agreed price between the major players.

just my understanding of this entire process and one which will change due to performance and sales!

 

34 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Leaving inflation aside... 

If I am right that it is the proposal itself that is the problem then she can hardly be blamed for that. The proposal comes from Attanasio. 

 

The point of the TP is that minority shareholders are treated equably, nothing more or nothing less. So it is designed to enable them to sell up at the highest available value. The major protagonists will set this value should the transaction get done. The idea that posters are attempting to blame Mrs W for anything is fanciful. She is a functionary, not a protagonist. This is between MA, S & J.

[essex canary 505]

11 minutes ago, BigFish said:

 

The point of the TP is that minority shareholders are treated equably, nothing more or nothing less. So it is designed to enable them to sell up at the highest available value. The major protagonists will set this value should the transaction get done. The idea that posters are attempting to blame Mrs W for anything is fanciful. She is a functionary, not a protagonist. This is between MA, S & J.

Fair enough. It is a team game. Just that team NCFC needs to perform better both on and off fhe pitch.

[norfolkngood 1,087]

i have a feeling This is going to end like the DOF Job 

Wait months only to find MA is buying shares for someone else and to advise Delia on a another Take over but that will take another 2 years until the other person will invest 

[wcorkcanary 4,337]

1 hour ago, essex canary said:

Fair enough. It is a team game. Just that team NCFC needs to perform better both on and off fhe pitch.

Ye gods, is that a touch of  reality  dawning on Ethics? 

[Soldier on 162]

In layman’s terms is there any reason why Attanasio or Delia would want a waiver on buying minority shareholdings.

how much of a financial burden/undertaking would this be likely to be ????

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

9 minutes ago, Soldier on said:

In layman’s terms is there any reason why Attanasio or Delia would want a waiver on buying minority shareholdings.

how much of a financial burden/undertaking would this be likely to be ????

Delia is not in a position to need a waiver. She acquired her majority shareholder long before the company became a plc, so this 30 per cent rule didn't apply then, as it does now to Attanasio.

If he buys the nearly 200,000 new shares that will very roughly, for the sake of this round-figure argument, take him to 310,000 shares out of 810,000. 

So he would have to make an offer for the remaining 500,000, although that figure includes S&J's 320,000, and my assumption is they don't want to sell - yet.

So a potential 180,000 shares. But many minority shareholders would not want to sell. And who knows what the price would be. But, again just for argument's sake, if Attanasio had to buy 100,00 at £50 a share that would be £5m. At £100, £10m.

 

[Indy 3,315]

2 hours ago, GMF said:

It really is that simple. Whatever views D&M might have in regards to share prices, as mentioned elsewhere, is, respectively, misguided.

That’s not strictly true though is it? As no matter what the panel might set the value to be, if the two parties don’t agree, they’re not forced to buy or sell at that price! It’s only if it’s set and agreed by all parties that it moves on! 

[Soldier on 162]

50 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Delia is not in a position to need a waiver. She acquired her majority shareholder long before the company became a plc, so this 30 per cent rule didn't apply then, as it does now to Attanasio.

If he buys the nearly 200,000 new shares that will very roughly, for the sake of this round-figure argument, take him to 310,000 shares out of 810,000. 

So he would have to make an offer for the remaining 500,000, although that figure includes S&J's 320,000, and my assumption is they don't want to sell - yet.

So a potential 180,000 shares. But many minority shareholders would not want to sell. And who knows what the price would be. But, again just for argument's sake, if Attanasio had to buy 100,00 at £50 a share that would be £5m. At £100, £10m.

 

Doesn’t seem enough for him to worry about given the potential gains he can make if he were to make us an established top 26 team and flip the business again later down the line ?

[essex canary 505]

58 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Delia is not in a position to need a waiver. She acquired her majority shareholder long before the company became a plc, so this 30 per cent rule didn't apply then, as it does now to Attanasio.

If he buys the nearly 200,000 new shares that will very roughly, for the sake of this round-figure argument, take him to 310,000 shares out of 810,000. 

So he would have to make an offer for the remaining 500,000, although that figure includes S&J's 320,000, and my assumption is they don't want to sell - yet.

So a potential 180,000 shares. But many minority shareholders would not want to sell. And who knows what the price would be. But, again just for argument's sake, if Attanasio had to buy 100,00 at £50 a share that would be £5m. At £100, £10m.

 

@GMFhas quoted at 160,000 minorities which implies MA at around 130,000 currently. Of the new shares just wondered whether he could buy in 2 tranches at differential prices? For example firstly just enough to get over the 30% threshold potentially at the sane price he paid MF or Another to solidify the offer price to minorities. Then the remainder for new capital injection at a much higher price. Would be a good mechanism providing of course that MF was paid a very modest price.

[Midlands Yellow 4,071]

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Delia is not in a position to need a waiver. She acquired her majority shareholder long before the company became a plc, so this 30 per cent rule didn't apply then, as it does now to Attanasio.

If he buys the nearly 200,000 new shares that will very roughly, for the sake of this round-figure argument, take him to 310,000 shares out of 810,000. 

So he would have to make an offer for the remaining 500,000, although that figure includes S&J's 320,000, and my assumption is they don't want to sell - yet.

So a potential 180,000 shares. But many minority shareholders would not want to sell. And who knows what the price would be. But, again just for argument's sake, if Attanasio had to buy 100,00 at £50 a share that would be £5m. At £100, £10m.

 

I’m aiming to retire in the next five years, do you think a full takeover will be over the line by then? 

[PurpleCanary 5,580]

4 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I’m aiming to retire in the next five years, do you think a full takeover will be over the line by then? 

I do know S&j and Attanasio are factoring that into their discussions...😍

[nutty nigel 7,607]

So what do people intend to do with their shares?

Are you hoping to sell for a decent price?

Or are you hoping to keep hold of that little bit of the club that has brought you so much joy?

 

Edited July 13, 2023 by nutty nigel
💛⚽💚

[ncfcstar 292]

54 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

So what do people intend to do with their shares?

Are you hoping to sell for a decent price?

Or are you hoping to keep hold of that little bit of the club that has brought you so much joy?

 

I would imagine that if things go to plan that choice will be made by Attanasio as he will likely take the club into private ownership.

[Soldier on 162]

But others purple etc seem adamant he doesn’t want to buy minority holdings out at this junction ?

I can’t see why not unless Delia and Michael are adamant that they should have equal shareholdings.

[ncfcstar 292]

1 minute ago, Soldier on said:

But others purple etc seem adamant he doesn’t want to buy minority holdings out at this junction ?

I can’t see why not unless Delia and Michael are adamant that they should have equal shareholdings.

Yes, to clarify I was talking about a few years down the line.  This waiver issue needs to be resolved first to allow Attanasio a real share of power at boardroom level.

[nutty nigel 7,607]

16 minutes ago, ncfcstar said:

I would imagine that if things go to plan that choice will be made by Attanasio as he will likely take the club into private ownership.

That being the case...

What do people hope to get for their shares?

What they paid for them?

More than they paid for them?

Or couldn't care less and just relieved that the ownership has gone to a different continent

Edited July 13, 2023 by nutty nigel

[Indy 3,315]

32 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

That being the case...

What do people hope to get for their shares?

What they paid for them?

More than they paid for them?

Or couldn't care less and just relieved that the ownership has gone to a different continent

Surely it’s what’s best for the club, as I’ve said previously, these shares were bought as a help to the club at the time! If you bought to make money that’s a bit off in my opinion.

If it meant that MA could or would put more money into the club instead of peoples pockets then I’d be happy with just breaking even if that was possible as should Delia & MWJ. Reality is fans first business second!

Let’s be honest MWJ & Delia have had a great ride for their minimal investment over the 28 years. Now is a great chance to let the club have a chance to gamble on moving forwards under new stewardship.

But that’s just my opinion.

[nutty nigel 7,607]

It's a fair opinion @Indy but I'm not getting those vibes from some of the shareholders posting on here.

[Badger 2,412]

3 hours ago, Soldier on said:

Doesn’t seem enough for him to worry about given the potential gains he can make if he were to make us an established top 26 team and flip the business again later down the line ?

I'm not sure how great the potential gains would be - what would you envisage? (Did you mean Top 26?) The other thing  that he would have to consider costs that he accrued in achieving this aim. If profit from sale is the main aim, I would argue that 

1. He bought the wrong club - bigger potential gains could be found elsewhere - like Ipswich last year.

2. With this as an aim, he would probably be better off spending nothing and waiting for eventual promotion that will come at some stage.

[Midlands Yellow 4,071]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

Surely it’s what’s best for the club, as I’ve said previously, these shares were bought as a help to the club at the time! If you bought to make money that’s a bit off in my opinion.

If it meant that MA could or would put more money into the club instead of peoples pockets then I’d be happy with just breaking even if that was possible as should Delia & MWJ. Reality is fans first business second!

Let’s be honest MWJ & Delia have had a great ride for their minimal investment over the 28 years. Now is a great chance to let the club have a chance to gamble on moving forwards under new stewardship.

But that’s just my opinion.

Absolutely this, people only see what they’ve given but good Lord they’ve had their money’s worth. The bar bill and air miles alone must easily be on par with the initial loan. 

[TheBaldOne66 697]

Birmingham have today had their deal with Americans completed and ratified by the EFL in far less time than the Attanasio thing, which really makes me wonder what the hell is actually going on with this so called deal with Attanasio as it’s not a full takeover like Birminghams is!

[nutty nigel 7,607]

Perhaps our current minority shareholders could offer Marky Mark their shares foc to encourage the majority shareholders to do the same. 

Give our club to the USA!

Glory glory hallelujah...

God Bless America

Edited July 13, 2023 by nutty nigel
🇺🇲💛⚽💚🇺🇲

[Soldier on 162]

48 minutes ago, TheBaldOne66 said:

Birmingham have today had their deal with Americans completed and ratified by the EFL in far less time than the Attanasio thing, which really makes me wonder what the hell is actually going on with this so called deal with Attanasio as it’s not a full takeover like Birminghams is!

Not a PLC is it ?

[shefcanary 2,446]

I will retain my shares for as long as possible. Not bothered what I get for them if I have to sell. But if Purps is right there will be no compulsion to sell for quite a while, maybe not until Feb 2030. 🤷‍♂️

[Soldier on 162]

5 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I will retain my shares for as long as possible. Not bothered what I get for them if I have to sell. But if Purps is right there will be no compulsion to sell for quite a while, maybe not until Feb 2030. 🤷‍♂️

Delia and Michael will be nearly 90 by then ?!

[nutty nigel 7,607]

11 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

I will retain my shares for as long as possible. Not bothered what I get for them if I have to sell. But if Purps is right there will be no compulsion to sell for quite a while, maybe not until Feb 2030. 🤷‍♂️

Perhaps we could resurrect the 'City Kitty' and shareholders could give that anything they get for their shares.

Those without shares could probably sell some possessions and do the same to encourage the minority and majority shareholders. 

[GMF 756]

6 hours ago, Indy said:

That’s not strictly true though is it? As no matter what the panel might set the value to be, if the two parties don’t agree, they’re not forced to buy or sell at that price! It’s only if it’s set and agreed by all parties that it moves on! 

The panel doesn’t set the price. They look at all the deals for consideration in the previous year, together with the proposed price of the new issue shares.

Yes, the latter is determined by the executive officers / directors, but, it’s the highest price paid / to be paid, which determines the offer price to minorities, always assuming they follow the standard procedures for a takeover situation.