777 Partners / Whatever the hell you like

Revised Polling options on who wants a 777 takeover

  • Total voters
    676
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheAlmightyFloater said:
Would he though if MSP own 50%+1?
He's then free to sell the rest of his shares to the next highest bidder knowing there's no PL test to become the 2nd biggest shareholder.
And the club's value would increase if MSP can right the ship and fund the stadium so he might get more for half his shares than MSP paid for the 50%+1.
Click to expand...

The PL test applies for shareholders above 25%, directors and/or individuals who exert influence over the club's operations (I'm quoting from memory).

It supersedes any private arrangement.
 

TheAlmightyFloater said:
Would he though if MSP own 50%+1?
He's then free to sell the rest of his shares to the next highest bidder knowing there's no PL test to become the 2nd biggest shareholder.
And the club's value would increase if MSP can right the ship and fund the stadium so he might get more for half his shares than MSP paid for the 50%+1.
Click to expand...
But he'd still own 49% of the massive debt too and have to take on more when 777's 20m per month ceases. If he was asking too much for all of the club surely he'd ask too much for 49%, a mess either way mate. Too much debt involved now I fear for any easy way forward.
 
Neiler said:
This and i think its ok to take pride in owning our own home and being masters of how its used as an asset. If we needed a loan in the future what are we using as security - god knows we have mortgaged everything at Goodison.

However - the key thing is the revenue, we're giving away 100 years of potential revenue streams - regardless of what match day terms we come to (if any).
Click to expand...
Even in the short term, selling the stadium is a bad idea. The new rules limit spending as a percentage of revenue. What this means is that an owner who wanted to spend would be far less able to do so in an arrangement where we lease, rather than own and service debt.

We can't sell and then invest some of the proceeds in the squad, because it's a one-year shot in the arm. We would still have to deal with wages and amortization in future years, and we would be unable to do it under the rules.

Owning BMD may not be a path to profitability, but it's the only one to a competitive squad. It's worth realizing that a prospective owner under the new rules will recognize that it's OK to take paper losses servicing debt if the value of the underlying asset, the club, appreciates more rapidly. The investment pays off in the end, provided it's spent more wisely than Moshiri's.

Selling BMD to service the debt would be a strategic disaster. The only reasons to do it are  extremis and for a short-term owner to make a quick buck. Either way, it would be terrible for our competitive position.
 
pfim said:
The PL test applies for shareholders above 25%, directors and/or individuals who exert influence over the club's operations (I'm quoting from memory).

It supersedes any private arrangement.
Click to expand...
I did not know that - thank you!

Did MSP have to go through the PL test originally? Or was their interest vetoed by RMF before it progressed that far?

If so they'll probably sail through given that the PL approved 777.
 

TheAlmightyFloater said:
I did not know that - thank you!

Did MSP have to go through the PL test originally? Or was their interest vetoed by RMF before it progressed that far?

If so they'll probably sail through given that the PL approved 777.
Click to expand...

I don't believe they made it that far, but again just from memory.

They'll likely face some of the same hurdles that 777 is now, but to me they are better known operators and don't have the fleas that 777 has. It feels as if they commit to the club, that means they're sure they'll pass.
 
Street end man said:
But he'd still own 49% of the massive debt too and have to take on more when 777's 20m per month ceases. If he was asking too much for all of the club surely he'd ask too much for 49%, a mess either way mate. Too much debt involved now I fear for any easy way forward.
Click to expand...

A minority stake in a business is worth far less than a majority. Even by 1%. If MSP take over, it's only good for Moshiri if he can't get that price elsewhere (through 777 or someone else).
 
It took Ratcliffe 3 months to be fully cleared by the Prem for his stake in Man Utd.

Have to think that any other party taking ownership of Everton from this point would be jumping through hoops for the bulk of the transfer window.
 

pfim said:
A minority stake in a business is worth far less than a majority. Even by 1%. If MSP take over, it's only good for Moshiri if he can't get that price elsewhere (through 777 or someone else).
Click to expand...
I'd certainly love to know the true financial status of the club and all the parties involved. I still fear the debt is higher than what the club is worth.....especially if the massive monthly borrowing needs to continue at the rate it has been.
 
Street end man said:
The thing is though, since they threw their 150+m in the clubs debts have become enormous. Do they really want part of that or like Moshiri just want their money back? It is so complicated now this far in.
Click to expand...

Didn't 777 loan money off MSP though? Or have I read some of the stuff going around wrong?

If I'm right though, the main reasons they'll likely take charge is:

- Calling in their loans could force out Moshiri and their loans become actual stake in the club
- The situation of 777 not being able to fund forces Moshiri to lower his asking price which will make us a better prospect for other investors and buyers

I am by no means clued up financially though so that could all be a load of sh!te
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top