Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Who's your money on in the takeover 'battle'?

Status
Not open for further replies.
jazzy said:
I'm totally confused by the reference to an " all equity bid" as this usually means that the buying company give shares in their own company to the seller for their equity stake.

Not sure
A. How that would work for Moshiri and
B. How that benefits Everton ( we would still have the various creditors).

Be more than grateful for someone to explain.
Click to expand...
It just means they aren't borrowing anything to fund the acquisition. Most bidders generally finance acquisitions through a mixture of debt (maybe 60/70% of the overall cost) and equity (i.e. there own cash). All equity bids provide more certainty from a seller perspective as there are less parties to get on board and happy with everything (i.e. there aren't a bid syndicate of lenders scrutinizing everything as well) and the deal can therefore move more quickly. Also, just because a bid is initially all equity funded that doesn't mean the purchases won't refinance their equity by putting in a debt package post completion and repaying part of their original equity investment.
 
Neiler said:
I'm open minded on all the bids, because to be honest very little detail is known.

If these lads want to come in and put 400 mill into the club - without a plan for the debt then that is a worry, if the plan is to recapitalise the club and pay some of the debt then im open minded. If they come in and throw in 400 mill and have no plan for the debt then thats a worry. The specifics aren't known, so im open minded. But i just wouldn't be seduced by the figure. If something is to good to be true it usually is.

The debt and finishing the stadium are the two most important things, the debt is costing us about 1.15 million a week to manage in interest - it badly needs paying or it badly needs restructuring. Sugar daddying 400 mill into the club in equity, is appealing but it isn't a priority unless its used on finishing the stadium and paying debt. As i said im open minded, maybe they will pay down the debt without restructuring but that hasn't been said yet and because of that why not. If they restructure or pay the debt and also put 400 mill into the club, im in. But its not clear, so ill be keeping my power dry.

The only plan ive seen, in terms of a restructure, is Bell and Downings, sure it will be at about 10% but it will be over a longer period of time similar to what Spurs did with their ground - it will eventually go the way of our Bear Sterns/Prudential deal, when inflation kicks in.

Im looking at three things really, the plan for the debt, the remaining financing of the stadium and the competency of who is coming in. The Bell/Downing plan - we take some medicine - but is concrete in terms of debt repayment. I think both bring something in terms of competency in infrastructure/facility/property management and with a Labour government coming in their is pathway for public funding surrounding the Northern docks as the well invest in public spending. They also have competently in terms finance, running and developing successful company's and exploiting commercial markets. This we know.

MSP strike me as short term investors and while they have some of the above - we need a long term strategy - i think they protect their investment - they aren't here for the long term.

Textor - i never thought realisitic - i think hes trying to drum up interest in his palace stake.

The lad at Roma - i dont see as realisitic either as i think Uefa will shortly crack down on Multi clubs, so its not clever.

The Manoukian bid, doesnt add up to me - the all equity thing as above, needs clarity, id be concerned if they were pumpoing 400 mill into the club if it wasnt to repay debt, maybe it is - but we dont know, so i wouldnt be suduced by it, until we had clarity. Very little is known, about the people involved and finiding concrete information is difficult. They have no track record in terms of being involved in something lile this - so diffiicult to know hats skills they birng. Much is unfown.

Im open minded on all of the above, what we know at the moment is gaurded, ive a leaning toward Bell and Downing - based purely on the realisim of thier bid on what we know. Its clear theri is a PR game going on, wheather it be the Michael Dell thing or All Equity Bids. But much more detail is needed.

There seems to be a figure of 350 mill - 400 mill at play across both bids. This is curious to me - its obviously a magic number for someting. Maybe its settling MSP, the stadium and capaital. But it does seem to the majoc number.

Anyway more will break im sure and we all prob change our minds, again as the week goes on, ultimately we want the best deal for the club, id like it quickly though.
Click to expand...
Excellent summary.

It's impossible, or should be impossible, to give a preference for any of the parties based on the paucity of information about their offers to Moshiri and proposals for running Everton.

If pushed , I agree with you that the only bid that gives some certainty and clarity is that of Bell and Downing but like others I have concerns about their judgement if Esk is close to them and if they have been misleading about Dells involvement.
 
Neiler said:
I'm open minded on all the bids, because to be honest very little detail is known.

If these lads want to come in and put 400 mill into the club - without a plan for the debt then that is a worry, if the plan is to recapitalise the club and pay some of the debt then im open minded. If they come in and throw in 400 mill and have no plan for the debt then thats a worry. The specifics aren't known, so im open minded. But i just wouldn't be seduced by the figure. If something is to good to be true it usually is.
Click to expand...

I'm confused sorry mate, so will just interrupt here.

Clearly someone isn't going to buy the club, without a plan for the debt. They'll need to demonstrate that to become owners, anyway.

Let's keep it as simple as we can.

Manoukian's bid is an all equity one.

The others' bid will borrow and put that extra debt on the club/the stadium.

I'm sure all will restructure debt, but if you're talking worry - Manoukian not making that debt even bigger should ease it considerably.
 

jazzy said:
I'm totally confused by the reference to an " all equity bid" as this usually means that the buying company give shares in their own company to the seller for their equity stake.

Not sure
A. How that would work for Moshiri and
B. How that benefits Everton ( we would still have the various creditors).

Be more than grateful for someone to explain.
Click to expand...
Our main lender creditors would almost certainly have to be paid off as a result of any sale regardless of how it is funded because they will all have change of control clauses in their loan documents which allow them to demand repayment if the controlling shareholder of Everton changes. All equity in this context just means the buyer doesn't need to borrower to fund the purchase price and repayment of all of the Everton debt. It's the same as a buyer of a house being a "cash" buyer rather than one that requires a mortgage. I'm an M&A finance lawyer BTW.
 
jazzy said:
Excellent summary.

It's impossible, or should be impossible, to give a preference for any of the parties based on the paucity of information about their offers to Moshiri and proposals for running Everton.

If pushed , I agree with you that the only bid that gives some certainty and clarity is that of Bell and Downing but like others I have concerns about their judgement if Esk is close to them and if they have been misleading about Dells involvement.
Click to expand...

What certainty and clarity have they give? Other than name the lender and like tweets?

We shouldn't expect certainty/clarity at this stage anyway - we'll only get a general idea.
 
Kevsleftpeg said:
It just means they aren't borrowing anything to fund the acquisition. Most bidders generally finance acquisitions through a mixture of debt (maybe 60/70% of the overall cost) and equity (i.e. there own cash). All equity bids provide more certainty from a seller perspective as there are less parties to get on board and happy with everything (i.e. there aren't a bid syndicate of lenders scrutinizing everything as well) and the deal can therefore move more quickly. Also, just because a bid is initially all equity funded that doesn't mean the purchases won't refinance their equity by putting in a debt package post completion and repaying part of their original equity investment.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that - makes sense.

Always worth remembering that once in control, I assume whatever owners can go full-Moshiri and leverage a load of debt again.

To be fair to the PL - that is why they are asking for proof of what will happen in the medium term.
 
GrandOldTeam said:
Well, it's their bid?

An all-equity bid. A bid the smart arses all told us wouldn't happen.

Compared to;




So while we don't know what the plans are for existing debt - the headline is Vatche Manoukian's bid wouldn't add even more debt on top. Debt which would have big interest rates going to Dell.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone say an all equity bid is impossible? Whether or not that is viable is purely about the financial situation of the buyer and has nothing to do with the
Target. An all equity bid is also no guarantee that the owners don't intend to saddle the club with debt two months later. That happens all the time on leveraged buy outs. It just means the buyers have sufficient cash to finance the acquisition in short term. Almost all investors will load on debt because it is much cheaper than equity and magnifies their returns on investment.
 

Neiler said:
I'm open minded on all the bids, because to be honest very little detail is known.

If these lads want to come in and put 400 mill into the club - without a plan for the debt then that is a worry, if the plan is to recapitalise the club and pay some of the debt then im open minded. If they come in and throw in 400 mill and have no plan for the debt then thats a worry. The specifics aren't known, so im open minded. But i just wouldn't be seduced by the figure. If something is to good to be true it usually is.

The debt and finishing the stadium are the two most important things, the debt is costing us about 1.15 million a week to manage in interest - it badly needs paying or it badly needs restructuring. Sugar daddying 400 mill into the club in equity, is appealing but it isn't a priority unless its used on finishing the stadium and paying debt. As i said im open minded, maybe they will pay down the debt without restructuring but that hasn't been said yet and because of that why not. If they restructure or pay the debt and also put 400 mill into the club, im in. But its not clear, so ill be keeping my power dry.

The only plan ive seen, in terms of a restructure, is Bell and Downings, sure it will be at about 10% but it will be over a longer period of time similar to what Spurs did with their ground - it will eventually go the way of our Bear Sterns/Prudential deal, when inflation kicks in.

Im looking at three things really, the plan for the debt, the remaining financing of the stadium and the competency of who is coming in. The Bell/Downing plan - we take some medicine - but is concrete in terms of debt repayment. I think both bring something in terms of competency in infrastructure/facility/property management and with a Labour government coming in there is a pathway for public funding surrounding the Northern docks as the will invest in public spending. They also have competency in terms finance, running and developing successful company's and exploiting commercial markets. This we know.

MSP strike me as short term investors and while they have some of the above - we need a long term strategy - i think their protect is to protect and get a return on their investment - they aren't here for the long term.

Textor - i never thought realistic - i think he's trying to drum up interest in his Palace stake.

The lad at Roma - i dont see as realistic either as i think Uefa will shortly crack down on Multi clubs, so its not clever.

The Manoukian bid, doesn't add up to me - the all equity thing as above, needs clarity, id be concerned if they were pumping 400 mill into the club if it wasn't to repay debt, maybe it is - but we dont know, so i wouldn't be seduced by it, until we had clarity. Very little is known, about the people involved and finding concrete information is difficult. They have no track record in terms of being involved in something like this - so difficult to know what skills they bring. Much is unknown.

Im open minded on all of the above, what we know at the moment is guarded, ive a leaning toward Bell and Downing - based purely on the realism of their bid on what we know. Its clear their is a PR game going on, whether it be the Michael Dell thing or All Equity Bids. But much more detail is needed.

There seems to be a magic figure of 350 mill - 400 mill at play across both bids. This is curious to me - its obviously a magic number for something. Maybe its settling MSP, the stadium and capital. But it does seem to the magic number.

Anyway more will break I'm sure and we will all prob change our minds again - as the week goes on, ultimately we want the best deal for the club, id like it quickly though.
Click to expand...
They claim to have a long term strategy ready to put in place for the club. Think we need to see all the groups plans tbh
 
GrandOldTeam said:
I'm confused sorry mate, so will just interrupt here.

Clearly someone isn't going to buy the club, without a plan for the debt. They'll need to demonstrate that to become owners, anyway.

Let's keep it as simple as we can.

Manoukian's bid is an all equity one.

The others' bid will borrow and put that extra debt on the club/the stadium.

I'm sure all will restructure debt, but if you're talking worry - Manoukian not making that debt even bigger should ease it considerably.
Click to expand...

Depends whether the figures being banded about for the takeover (eg the £400m all equity, or the £350m loan from MSD) are all going to Moshiri, with the debt being separate, or whether some (potentially even large) portion of that figure is going towards the debt. If it's the latter, then (while yes the all equity option is still preferable) the other bids don't necessarily mean OTHER debt - that debt could well be part of the restructuring.

I'd be astonished if Moshiri walked away with as much as £400m in his pocket tbh, given the state of things.

As you said in your next post, expecting clarity at this point is overly optimistic.
 
GrandOldTeam said:
I'm confused sorry mate, so will just interrupt here.

Clearly someone isn't going to buy the club, without a plan for the debt. They'll need to demonstrate that to become owners, anyway.

Let's keep it as simple as we can.

Manoukian's bid is an all equity one.

The others' bid will borrow and put that extra debt on the club/the stadium.

I'm sure all will restructure debt, but if you're talking worry - Manoukian not making that debt even bigger should ease it considerably.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Only Bell and Downing have briefed what the plan is.

The rest of the bidders seem to be getting out through leaks (probably at Everton) to firm up interest from others.

Everyone will have some kind of a plan for the debt. Bell and Downing conform they will INCREASE the overall debt, but they have a long term strategic lender.

Honestly, I'm happy with Bell/Downing, MSP or Manouklan and his sickness techbros.

All three are clearly smart operators. Hopefully we'll get some clarity in the week ahead.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top