[cite]Posted By: Red_Pete[/cite]God, there are some right optimists on the 606 board aren't there? Well, we can all dream I guess.
I agree with the last comment about Villa being the benchmark for any team being taken over. They're only spending money when they need to, still trying to bring their own young players through, and slowly building the club up and improving the squad each season. When it looked like Zabeel were going to take over, that's the way I was hoping they'd want to take us forward. Pumping millions into the club and trying to buy success within a few seasons isn't the way to do it.
Someone probably lifted that from here. It was mentioned last night in passing that there were three potential buyers / consortia but I can't believe that to be true.
Difficult to say what the price is. We can estimate the tangible assets but the intangible assets such as the "good will", reputation and crucially league membership are harder to guess.
In the end the club is worth what someone is prepared to pay for it.
[cite]Posted By: Valley McMoist[/cite]Someone probably lifted that from here. It was mentioned last night in passing that there were three potential buyers / consortia but I can't believe that to be true.
Only true if it was said that the takeover was "close" : - )
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Difficult to say what the price is. We can estimate the tangible assets but the intangible assets such as the "good will", reputation and crucially league membership are harder to guess.
In the end the club is worth what someone is prepared to pay for it.
[cite]Posted By: Valley McMoist[/cite]Someone probably lifted that from here. It was mentioned last night in passing that there were three potential buyers / consortia but I can't believe that to be true.
Only true if it was said that the takeover was "close" : - )
Of course thats true but to me its more interesting to see the other side of the deal and at what price are our (all/some of) Directors prepared to sell at. And if there is a set amount of money on the table how much will be for new investment in the club.
Existing Directors are fans. New investors are less likely to be so. How much 'goodwill' is there in giving it away at a knockdown price so that new money is available to the club.
And also will the bondholders and shareholders see a proportionate right down in their investment.
As a shareholder I have a minor interest in the latter but at some stage if it goes through we will be receiving a letter recommending the offer at a set price by our CAFC Plc Chair. That may be an interesting letter as it could involve a significant write off in share value by comparison to this years season ticket price reductions.
I was surprised to see in the accounts that some 20% of shares are owned by 'others' than the named directors. I dont know if that may be significant in terms of determining the majority needed.
I would very much expect that the new Consortia will hold all the shares and would not offer existing fans an alternative share offer.
As much as I welcome a takeover it will be a disappointment to lose both share value and the token investment which has given that additional contact with the club. So mixed emotions all round. And probably similar to most of the Directors.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
He's basically be the whole world in profit. He could write the loss of his soul down against tax at more or less whatever value he wanted to, although auditors may query any valuation put on something that is so intangible, and may indeed not exist.
Comments
I agree with the last comment about Villa being the benchmark for any team being taken over. They're only spending money when they need to, still trying to bring their own young players through, and slowly building the club up and improving the squad each season. When it looked like Zabeel were going to take over, that's the way I was hoping they'd want to take us forward. Pumping millions into the club and trying to buy success within a few seasons isn't the way to do it.
Slightly different to the current situation at CAFC (PLC).
Randy Lerner does appear to be more of a long term investor.
Sounds like a schoolboy with testosterone overdrive .......
In the end the club is worth what someone is prepared to pay for it.
Only true if it was said that the takeover was "close" : - )
Of course thats true but to me its more interesting to see the other side of the deal and at what price are our (all/some of) Directors prepared to sell at. And if there is a set amount of money on the table how much will be for new investment in the club.
Existing Directors are fans. New investors are less likely to be so. How much 'goodwill' is there in giving it away at a knockdown price so that new money is available to the club.
And also will the bondholders and shareholders see a proportionate right down in their investment.
As a shareholder I have a minor interest in the latter but at some stage if it goes through we will be receiving a letter recommending the offer at a set price by our CAFC Plc Chair. That may be an interesting letter as it could involve a significant write off in share value by comparison to this years season ticket price reductions.
I was surprised to see in the accounts that some 20% of shares are owned by 'others' than the named directors. I dont know if that may be significant in terms of determining the majority needed.
I would very much expect that the new Consortia will hold all the shares and would not offer existing fans an alternative share offer.
As much as I welcome a takeover it will be a disappointment to lose both share value and the token investment which has given that additional contact with the club. So mixed emotions all round. And probably similar to most of the Directors.