Everton in middle-east takeover?

Is this anything but an investment to get in and benefit from the new tv deal? I find it hard to imagine that anyone would buy less than the majority of the shares and then give the majority shareholders his open purse. Will there be any investment beyond what was already planned anyway (financed by the tv deal)?
 
I really hope they're not in Sheikh Mansour's league. It's bad enough with the new TV deals giving other clubs more cash. I just want us to fucking dominate, fuck competition, I'd love nothing more in football than City smashing everyone and winning at least the double every season.
 
waspish said:
Around 1.2 billion once he builds them a stadium for 400m and a few players it'll be half gone
Click to expand...

Jazzman said:
Is this anything but an investment to get in and benefit from the new tv deal? I find it hard to imagine that anyone would buy less than the majority of the shares and then give the majority shareholders his open purse. Will there be any investment beyond what was already planned anyway (financed by the tv deal)?
Click to expand...

I can't see he'll be putting huge amounts in and, if he does, I think it could well be loans. Here's why.

It's not quite clear at the moment but normally, as I've said, anyone buying 30% or more of a listed company's shares has to make the same offer to all shareholders, as per the Takeover Code (which is a statutory instrument so has legal force). Everton are a private company but it is possible to buy and sell their shares, which means they should be subject to the Takeover Code in theory. So he either has to buy up to 29.9% or make an offer to all shareholders. But let's assume that they're not subject to it, so his 49.9% stake is seemingly all he wants or is being allowed.

He's bought those shares off the existing holders, so the money has gone to them rather than into the club. If he invests money into Everton, he can either do that as equity, by having new shares issued, or as debt, which involves a loan. So when John Wardle was our major shareholder, he had 29.9% of the shares, as he didn't want to have to mount a full takeover (as we were a listed company). So any further investment was via loans, which were about £22m between him and David Makin. Had he taken any more shares, he'd have gone over that 30% threshold.

Now let's assume, for ease of illustration, that Everton have 1m shares and he's bought 499,000 of those, giving him 49.9%. and other shareholders have 501,000 (50.1%). If he inject capital, they have to issue him more shares. So let's say he puts in £100m and they issue him with 100,000 shares. He'll then have 599,000 (54.45%) and the others will still have 501,000 (45.55%). So the latter shareholding will be what's known as diluted (i.e. they have a smaller share of the company than they did before). However if he's put money in, then the company should be worth more. So they've got a smaller percentage of something with a larger value. But why would anyone want to enrich other shareholders who'd put nothing in? It's basically giving half your money away.

To illustrate this, let's say that if Everton were worth £400m before he put his £100m they'd be worth £500m after. So he's paid £200m for his 50% original stake, put in another £100m and now, having put in £300m he has 54.45% of something worth £500m, which is £272.3m. Whereas the other shareholders also had a stake worth £200m, haven't put in any money but now their stake is worth £227.7m. But if he puts in a loan of £100m, then his shares are worth £250m (half of £500m) but he's also owed £100m, meaning he's still £100m better off than the other shareholders in theory.

So that's why I think any investment will be in the form of loans.
 
If he loans them the money to build a new 60k Stadium, if I was a Everton fan that would be a good investment for the future of the club.
 
waspish said:
If he loans them the money to build a new 60k Stadium, if I was a Everton fan that would be a good investment for the future of the club.
Click to expand...
In theory you're right but they couldn't fill the one they've got for the semi-final so not much chance of filling a bigger one. And like Liverpool's Main Stand extension, the loan would have to be repaid which means less for fees and wages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.