Latest Takeover Rumour. The Moores / Noell one

[billytoffee]

I'm fairly neutral on the whole thing. I'm just as excited about a takeover as I am worried.
It is usually the unknown aspects of changes that generates the most angst. But if we didn't embrace change we would still live in caves and crap in the woods.

The one thing that will severely irritate my plums however is if our new owner (s) insist on referring to us as a SOCCER team!

 

[davek]

'Berto on TalkSport a few minutes ago saying he hopes BK stays on another hundred years, but that if he hands over the reins it'll be for the right reasons and not cash considerations and that the future is a bright one.

In short: revealed nothing.

 

[Julius Geezer]

Bobby just guaranteed a very bright future and only good things from Bill or whoever is in charge

Heard that , he was speaking in code but sounds like he knows what's going on and must've been told good things !

 

[oldblue]

I'm clearly a novice at these matters, and smarter people than me have provided us with excellent breakdowns of the situation...but...even to a humble Antipodean like myself, it's obvious that if you buy in order to sell for profit, then you need to invest.

If we take the selling price as an example, as far as I'm aware, it has been 200 million for quite some time. Is that just an aberration or is it indicative of owners who have failed to realise the potential of their asset? If it was 200 million 4 years ago, imagine what it would be worth with some investment in infrastructure?

Perhaps this is what the Americans see. If it's worth that with "classic" infrastructure, imagine what it's worth with some careful investment.

Don't totally understand how this works with football but suppose people are worried there's profit to be made without investment. It's pretty unique business wise in that it has a fanbase whose interest in the club is very different from shareholders.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

lol your not wrong there I suppose, was under an immense dosage of codeine and insomnia when I wrote the original post, I was just freaking out over the massive amounts of money coming in now that will alert the most calculating cold-eyed capitalists, where a quick turnover of ownership can reap massive profits, no need whatsoever to achieve anything on the pitch, your £200 million sale price can be clawed back practically in one season so even relegation is not a deterrent to minimal investment in the squad. Bill and co. are kind of old school when compared to the new breed, Martin Shkreli for instance....

View attachment 17950

Nailed it. Dem yanks will invest in a new stadium and infrastructure then sell us of in a few years time for a massive profit. We should be under no illusions as to what will happen - Given the stupid amount of money flying around, PL clubs are now valuable commodities to be bought and sold at will.

Just don't expect anything more...Business is business

 

[chazzle_dazzle]

There is a rumour Kenwright is holding back 30% of his shares and will hand them over for nothing on competition of a new stadium.

Everything inside me says this is a load of bollocks (not saying you said it mate) - however I think if that did happen it would probably show Kenwright was looking for the best deal for the club.

 

[Pabbers]

Nailed it. Dem yanks will invest in a new stadium and infrastructure then sell us of in a few years time for a massive profit. We should be under no illusions as to what will happen - Given the stupid amount of money flying around, PL clubs are now valuable commodities to be bought and sold at will.

Just don't expect anything more...Business is business

I would take that, no messing.

 

[quasi modo]

You can't please some blues.

 

[Pabbers]

There is a rumour Kenwright is holding back 30% of his shares and will hand them over for nothing on competition of a new stadium.

He doesn't own 30%

 

[royalbalou]

He doesn't own 30%

Think he said 30% of 'his' shares

 

[Logans run]

This may not make a difference but somewhere in the middle of this @The Esk did switch from 200 million pounds to 200 million dollars... only mentioning it in case it does.

It does make some difference £200m = $288m, $200m=£138m
These are very different and I would say the latter is probably correct
Now that could mean that the overall deal may be valued @ £200m, which would then include debt or could be initial ground improvements or that the buyout is just £138m and a walk away from debt or the individual liabilities I would guess the latter again would be correct .
If so both parties would have a good deal, however, how that effects us only time will tell.

 

[TheHumbleEgg]

I see, interesting.

Can't imagine anybody investing 200m capital into something though in an expanding market and not wanting to make it work.

Cue forward 12 months, Barkley, Lukaku and Stones gone for 140m and the TV money being siphoned off for the next 5 years.....Everton that!

Made me shudder that did...

 

[orchard]

He doesn't own 30%

That's not what he said mate

 

[Pabbers]

Think he said 30% of 'his' shares

AH, I get it...daft moment!!!

 

[blueblue]

He doesn't own 30%

He said 30% of his shareholding, not 30% of the shareholding..I think.