Why try to sell % of your club when the market is depressed? Glaizers are right to hold on. The debt is around £300M
Its been pulled? Wasnt aware of that. Just had a quick look on the usual forums and news sites and seen nothing about it. Got a link?
Read it now. Seems like a very sensible move and of course their is no rush for them. Unlike the Liverpool saga the Glazers can do it all at their pace and to who they want to.
Neither do you to be honest - FSG is also a private company and registered in Delaware, the same "ultra secret" location that the Glazers have chosen to register. In fact, the New York Times recently sold its stake in FSG for a price that values the whole entity (Red Sox, Liverpool, 80% of NESN and 50% of Rousch Racing) at just $1.5 billion, so that implies everything is not financially rosy in your garden given that Forbes values Liverpool at $550 million, the Red Sox at $900 million and NESN at over $1 billion. A minimum 40% discount to fair value may imply the NYT knows something we don't... As for the news that the flotation has been pulled, this was reported by Reuters to have come from "a source". Which is journalist speak for "we heard a rumour". Reuters rumours may be more concrete than those in the Daily Mail, but until the club makes an announcement I wouldn't put my house (or even my daughter's doll house) on it
Well yeh the AP link I read said an un-named source who didnt want to be known as the club do not discuss financial matters with the press................hmmmmmmmmmmmm.
The New York Times had to sell it's stake because it was running into it's own financial difficulties, nothing to do with FSG. It's also sold off most of the rest of it's stakes in various other enterprises.
I think the Liverpool owners would trade places with the Glazers at the drop of a hat but the Glazers wouldnt go the other way.
But they have sold them, makes no odds if they were first or last to be sold, they have decided they are not an asset worth keeping.
It wasn't just "a source". If you check Bloomberg they have a quote from the Sigapore Exhchange that they have put a suspension on the floatation due to possible structural problems. As for the club making a comment then you are probably waiting for chickens to vote for Christmas
FAIL http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&sour...gc.r_pw.&fp=d3e0bc56fb107ae4&biw=1224&bih=815 take your pick
I must admit that, for Swarbs, this was a very lame attempt to deflect attention form their own predicament. The Singapore floatation was limited to fiancial sector investors and also was for Class B (non-voting) shares. It was never a 'fans' floatation. Such a floatation would be more than merely problematic in London as any investment in it could be easily challenged by shareholders. Bloomberg suggests that discussions have been takeing place between the London and Singapore exchanges as to the legal validity of the fundamentals of the floatation. I am merely guessing here but that would probably centre around the size of the floatation, the use to which the funds would be used and the nature of the share issue. After all a 25% issue with no voting rights would under old UK legislation have been considered as a fraud on a minority.
Not finance and management theory again. How dull. What about some science again? Or even football You're all commenting on what is mostly unknown information, apart from those in the know.
I will. I'll take the Bloomberg explanation any day. If you don't know what you're talking about - keep stum!
Oh and you do... just looked on Bloomberg and I find nothing on what you have said, so show is a link
Bloomber quote 19/9 "The lack of sustained earnings may repel investors, said Lee King Fuei, a Singapore-based fund manager at Schroders Plc, which oversaw $323 billion as of June 30. “Institutional investors are unlikely to be interested, while retail investors will be the ones sucked in by the branding and marketing,” he said. “The lack of voting rights is just a kick in the teeth.” same day "BOC International Ltd., CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets, CIMB Group Holdings Bhd. and DBS Group Holdings Ltd. (DBS) as co-lead arrangers for the offering, state that they are in close discussions as to the legality of the offering with the Singapore authorities. But that these talks can be facilitated as the offer is currently suspended" So yes I do try to keep informed.
You said "It wasn't just "a source". If you check Bloomberg they have a quote from the Sigapore Exhchange that they have put a suspension on the floatation due to possible structural problems." That is not structural problems, that just means the big boys will note take the risk.
