Serious takeover talk

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
Zidane said:
A loan?

That's not investment. It's a loan. As described by the meaning of the word 'loan'.

If we wanted a loan we could of just gone back to SBC.
Click to expand...

Agree with this mind, I'm very sceptical. If they take, let's say 40% of the club and also provide a loan that's one thing. If they aren't actually taking any shares at all at present and are simply going to become a creditor with a vague "maybe we'll take a share later" that is very concerning. What if Donald and co can't get us promoted (not exactly an outlandish suggestion)? Do they take the stadium? Could they, in theory, get control of assets and flog them for housing?

Not saying I think any of the above is likely, but I'd feel a **** load more secure if they actually bought into the club as well as loaning money. I realise many will just want them involved and I'll get accused of being a negative bastard but as you say this doesn't sound on the face of it any different to going to SBC. So they want to make decisions (wanting some of Donalds mates gone) and in return all we are guaranteed is a secured loan (no doubt with interest). I really hope I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here because this sounds very different to what was suggested. People may moan but I'd be interested to hear @Kittenmittons take on it!
 
  • Like
Reactions: West Winger
Nads said:
It all suggests to me the ‘investors’ want everything done their way on their terms.

That’s a positive. Means for once in my lifetime we have folk running the club who have the first ****ing idea what that means and takes.

A ‘loan’ v assets is a smart way of protecting yourself when maybe the dream you were sold wasn’t actually in place.

If they then take over, the club owes them, and they own the debt and credit. It’s standard business practice nowadays.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the explanation Nads. I know sod all about business deals!!
 
Chunksafc said:
Could be secured against future success? If we **** up and don't get promoted they take more shares?
Click to expand...

No, it will be very similar to Ashley by sounds of it. Hopefully not with an external loan party (a la SBC)

His funding is via a loan to newcastle (so was Short's to us for a long time) and it is secured against the club and it's assets. If the club can't pay, it doesn't matter, but what it does allow is for him to take money out in any year, regardless of profit/loss as he is technically a creditor of the club.

Ironically, it would be a reverse of SD's position, but certainly more altruistic and 'club first' in practice than SD's method, as it involves putting a lump sum down up front and then recovering it when the club starts making money again. It's far more in keeping with the spirit of an investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ginnanson, CoolerKing33, Hawyatt Earp and 3 others
Short had around 100m+ loan into SAFC at one point, he capitalised that debt (effectively wrote it off) for the good of the club. Ashley is still owed about 120m by the Mags when he sells, he gets that regardless of price. Donald is in the opposite position where no deal is good for him unless it makes a profit because otherwise he owes the club money that he hasn't yet paid it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nads
Dorset said:
Thanks for the explanation Nads. I know sod all about business deals!!
Click to expand...

You will, no doubt, have seen them owner converted his debt to shares’.

This is basically what they’d likely do if they took ownership of the club.

For all that we know the potential of the club, and for all that clearly they see it, or they wouldn’t have been at the table to start with, the facts remain that there’s no guarantees around promotion and it looks like they can see, and are excited by the possibilities, but are also realistic enough to know there’s no given.

That’s smart, and that’s what Short didn’t have.

Did I read they are involved in an NFL club? Cos that’s a massive positive if I’ve not got wrong end of the stick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoolerKing33, sheepman and Dorset
Nads said:
Did I read they are involved in an NFL club? Cos that’s a massive positive if I’ve not got wrong end of the stick.
Click to expand...

Not that I'm aware of (and I definitely would be as that's my job), unless they're minority shareholders.

They do have a stake in UFC though.
 
Nads said:
You will, no doubt, have seen them owner converted his debt to shares’.

This is basically what they’d likely do if they took ownership of the club.

For all that we know the potential of the club, and for all that clearly they see it, or they wouldn’t have been at the table to start with, the facts remain that there’s no guarantees around promotion and it looks like they can see, and are excited by the possibilities, but are also realistic enough to know there’s no given.

That’s smart, and that’s what Short didn’t have.

Did I read they are involved in an NFL club? Cos that’s a massive positive if I’ve not got wrong end of the stick.
Click to expand...
Miami marlins baseball team as an investor through msd I think
 
West Winger said:
They’ve done similar at the Miami Marlins in America where they loaned a sum but expected a fixed rate of return. If this is true then short term it is good as it means we have some money at last. Longer term I’m not sure because what happens if we don’t go up? Would we still be tied to the repayments?

I’m a natural pessimist when it comes to taking risks like. :emoticon-0102-bigsm
Click to expand...
The MSD loan to the Marlins is interesting. Its a clever way of potentially taking over the club on the cheap.
They have loaned them $175m with a fixed repayment in full plus interest in 3 years time
If they cant repay then they must repay MSD with equity in the club

No idea if this is the kind of deal they have done but

Sounds win win from the clubs point of view. But potentially not for SD.
If we are successful we just pay back the loan (unlikely we do this in full)). If we are not we get rich american owners or part owners. (or a mixture of both)

Sounds like a good way of getting money in now from the investors without them actually taking over straight away.
They maintain a healthy interest we have some cash to kick us on, they potentially come on board later.

The Marlins deal was MSD it looks like these chaps are doing individually but the process still makes sense.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoz...-to-short-the-marlins-and-jeter/#7ab4ad3438b6
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peterleeyacker, West Winger, Dorset and 1 other person
I reckon it would be a secured convertible loan at a fairly low interest rate, something like 2-3% rolled-up (added to the loan rather than payable as cash). So it doesn't add to cash outgoings, low interest expense isn't too crippling on the losses, and when FPP are ready to take over the loan + interest gets converted into shares. If it goes belly up, SD has to give up his share of the club and FPP get full control (or he has to pay them back). If it works, FPP have the option to buy SD out at the increased share value. Just a hunch!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BumbleBee, Hawyatt Earp and Dorset
Nads said:
You will, no doubt, have seen them owner converted his debt to shares’.

This is basically what they’d likely do if they took ownership of the club.

For all that we know the potential of the club, and for all that clearly they see it, or they wouldn’t have been at the table to start with, the facts remain that there’s no guarantees around promotion and it looks like they can see, and are excited by the possibilities, but are also realistic enough to know there’s no given.

That’s smart, and that’s what Short didn’t have.

Did I read they are involved in an NFL club? Cos that’s a massive positive if I’ve not got wrong end of the stick.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they have the Miami ???? In the states
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nads
sheepman said:
The MSD loan to the Marlins is interesting. Its a clever way of potentially taking over the club on the cheap.
They have loaned them $175m with a fixed repayment in full plus interest in 3 years time
If they cant repay then they must repay MSD with equity in the club

No idea if this is the kind of deal they have done but

Sounds win win from the clubs point of view. But potentially not for SD.
If we are successful we just pay back the loan (unlikely we do this in full)). If we are not we get rich american owners or part owners. (or a mixture of both)

Sounds like a good way of getting money in now from the investors without them actually taking over straight away.
They maintain a healthy interest we have some cash to kick us on, they potentially come on board later.

The Marlins deal was MSD it looks like these chaps are doing individually but the process still makes sense.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoz...-to-short-the-marlins-and-jeter/#7ab4ad3438b6
Click to expand...

Interesting. And absolutely a smart way of investing. Minimal risk but you’re likely to win on whichever outcome.

Dolphins is the Miami NFL team, of course I knew that, just had the wrong sport.
 
The only thing with this is trying not to get carried away and assume it's on yet. So much misinformation out there, most of it it passed on in good faith. I prefer it when there's more circumstantial evidence to back it up, so going to keep my head 50/50 for now.

If they do come on board on the basis stated, it's absolutely good news for us. The convertible debt is not an issue, and it gets us working as a proper club again.

I do worry that Parkinson came on though, if they're serious about all of this. Donald could have gone for a much better candidate, and I am a bit unsure why he wouldn't if he was confident of doing the deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T_Bone
Guinness Guzzler said:
Agree with this mind, I'm very sceptical. If they take, let's say 40% of the club and also provide a loan that's one thing. If they aren't actually taking any shares at all at present and are simply going to become a creditor with a vague "maybe we'll take a share later" that is very concerning. What if Donald and co can't get us promoted (not exactly an outlandish suggestion)? Do they take the stadium? Could they, in theory, get control of assets and flog them for housing?

Not saying I think any of the above is likely, but I'd feel a **** load more secure if they actually bought into the club as well as loaning money. I realise many will just want them involved and I'll get accused of being a negative bastard but as you say this doesn't sound on the face of it any different to going to SBC. So they want to make decisions (wanting some of Donalds mates gone) and in return all we are guaranteed is a secured loan (no doubt with interest). I really hope I'm getting the wrong end of the stick here because this sounds very different to what was suggested. People may moan but I'd be interested to hear @Kittenmittons take on it!
Click to expand...

It could be that the loan is intended to be converted into equity at some point in the future,at which point its' need for security will no longer exist.That makes it different from SBC.
I agree with you it sounds very risky,but unless and until we know the terms of the agreement,we're not to know. The risk I suppose will be if we fail to get promoted.....which will presumably be required in order to secure the further investment.....what contingencies are in place to cover that eventuality?
I'm guessing though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: badgerbill and Guinness Guzzler
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back