Latest Takeover Rumour. The Moores / Noell one

[BoysInBlue]

Reporting on it aba a decade too late

Very true, but as @meagher94 posted, there's a definite whiff of 'We can criticise these now (and rightly so) because they're on their way out and won't have any influence any more'.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Who ever it will be i think it is fair to say that stagnation will stop on its tracks. And that Should give good vibes to everybody imho

 

[Milk]

@The Esk's piece is up on the Home Page now at

https://www.grandoldteam.com/2016/01/02/musings-possible-takeover/

Plainly it's not for me to suggest that those of you with active social media should share it or whatever people call it, but all debate is good.

OK read the piece (although it took a bit of doing to get passed the pic of Moores ........ no one, apart from Trump D. or Wogan T. should be allowed hair that strange).

Problem we have is father time and the clock is ticking ever faster.
Bill must sell now & Earl and Woods are happy to take their vastly inflated profits as it was only an investment vehicle for them.

The deal on the table stinks of Hicks/Gillette with a whiff of Glazers

 

[mlyons]

OK read the piece (although it took a bit of doing to get passed the pic of Moores ........ no one, apart from Trump D. or Wogan T. should be allowed hair that strange).

Problem we have is father time and the clock is ticking ever faster.
Bill must sell now & Earl and Woods are happy to take their vastly inflated profits as it was only an investment vehicle for them.

The deal on the table stinks of Hicks/Gillette with a whiff of Glazers

We don't have any idea what the deal on the table is, though. We know who a couple of the investors are and we know an approximation of the selling price. Everything else is pure speculation.

 

[Milk]

We don't have any idea what the deal on the table is, though. We know who a couple of the investors are and we know an approximation of the selling price. Everything else is pure speculation.

Times were reporting a club valuation of £350m and an offer price of £200m (or sufficient to buy out the 3 major shareholders as they don't need the others on board to control the club).

 

[micknick]

As long as we don't go tits up....that's acceptable IMO.

Like villa, where no one else buys them and then they put an almost complete stop on spending. Ok mate

 

[mlyons]

Times were reporting a club valuation of £350m and an offer price of £200m (or sufficient to buy out the 3 major shareholders as they don't need the others on board to control the club).

All that tells us is a price, though (and it's only a guess at that). No one has any concrete information on how the deal would be financed, who the other investors are, or what the consortium actually plans for the club after any sale goes through. It's all been speculation based on the little dribs and drabs we know about Moores and Noelle.

 

[kenada_blue]

Like villa, where no one else buys them and then they put an almost complete stop on spending. Ok mate

End of the day mate he's been "looking" for investment for over a decade. Right or wrong to find the "perfect" owners will take us another decade if ever

So we either go with someone who'll treat us like a business, which is the opposite to now. Or we carry on and let Palace, West Ham, RS, Spurs etc over-take us financially.

Villa are now being used as the new Portsmouth, who were the new Leeds...the same old horror stories for people worried about a change that we desperately need.

Or we can just stagnate

 

[hibbo'sclass]

Not just Kenwright mate, without Jon Woods vote, a takeover would be very hard to push through. Earl would presumably only be interested in the money, but you would hope both Woods and Kenwright would see the bigger picture.[/Q

Not just Kenwright mate, without Jon Woods vote, a takeover would be very hard to push through. Earl would presumably only be interested in the money, but you would hope both Woods and Kenwright would see the bigger picture.

Granted, but my point was that BK is the only shareholder who can stop it on their own.

 

[Woolly Blue]

Granted, but my point was that BK is the only shareholder who can stop it on their own.

Ah, fair point

*sits at back of class and looks sheepish

This period of exclusivity is going to seem like an eternity. Roll on Februray !

 

[vagant59]

So, to summarise: Everton are moving to San Diego?

Evening games will be more pleasant in the winter months.

Going to be pushing it to get to the match after work

 

[Efcjake]

Just read @The Esk's post on the home page, great write up and sums up exactly my main concern for whoever our next ownership is.

 

[Dario Terracotta]

Going to be pushing it to get to the match after work

Flights by Happy Als?lol

 

[tmgc]

Flights by Happy Als?lol

Please be aware, the snorting of beak is not allowed till the seatbelt lights go off.

 

[Efcjake]

Debt in itself isn't necessarily a bad thing though. In an ideal world, any funding would come 100% from an injection of equity, but a mixture of equity and debt would be fine so long as the debt was affordable to us as a club. Whether the debt's affordable or not is down to how much is taken on and the interest rate charged.

If a VC consortium take on too much debt,then they risk running the club into the ground and losing any appreciation of capital, which would mean they'd be nothing more than a glorified Barclays loan round our necks.

The devil's in the detail really, which is why it's over to Kenwright and Woods to go over these guys business plan with a fine toothcomb. They won't want to be remembered as the guys who sold Everton to a set of sharks, so lets hope their toothcombs aren't missing any teeth !

I've been enjoying my Christmas holidays and took a few days off from football since Stoke so I haven't been keeping up with takeover talk.

The point you have made here is exactly the same concern some have over the large interest payments we are making for the club's outstanding debts. We are now in a position thanks to the TV deal to be able to comfortably finance that debt, but at the time when it was taken on we were seeing a lot of the club's expenses being related to financing that long-term debt. I would hate to see us get out of this situation only to find us in the same situation under new ownership.

As you read in @The Esk's post, the Glazers leveraged the value of the club to secure enough capital to purchase the club. That's not necessarily bad, but the amount of capital required and the interest payments required to secure that have definitely hurt the club. While they have experienced unquestionable growth, how much bigger could they be if they weren't spending so much on interest payments which are not adding value to the club. Not to even consider how much of the added costs of financing have been passed down onto the supporters going to the match.