So who are our new owners then? Board looking for new investors p14

At the same time Charlton Athletic seek £20 million Killian Mbappe gets £50+ million in back pay!

Football is crazy!

AhyFKABartram said:

Been expecting this 

Why ? Just a random guess or "insider knowledge" ?

Airman Brown said:

Two points - the market in football clubs, particularly English ones, moves as well as the status of a club.  Secondly, this has always been a speculative business venture in which the investors will look to safeguard and recoup their investment when the opportunity arises. This doesn’t mean that their agenda can’t be aligned with ours as fans at any given time, but they are not primarily involved because they want to own a club for the fun of it, even if they do enjoy that. Equally they are wealthy enough to take the gamble in the first place. 

The original widespread assumption was that they wanted to flip the club for profit. I don’t think that all needs to happen at once for that to be correct. This looks like good business for the owners if they can do it. The club needs further investment, whether we stay up or not, so whether you see it as repayment or funds for that it makes sense. 

But these are two different things.

If the current owners are potentially selling some of their existing shares, so they get back a part of their initial investment, then that's their money to do with as they please. The club wont necessarily see a penny of that.

If it's the club potentially issuing new shares then that's maybe up to £20milion in the kitty to go and spunk - sorry, I meant "invest" - on new players.

Obviously I hope its the latter, and that seems to be the assumption other people have made. But I'm just asking why people are so confident that's the case, based on one cryptic tweet.

Stu_of_Kunming said:

Off_it said:

Airman Brown said:

Two points - the market in football clubs, particularly English ones, moves as well as the status of a club.  Secondly, this has always been a speculative business venture in which the investors will look to safeguard and recoup their investment when the opportunity arises. This doesn’t mean that their agenda can’t be aligned with ours as fans at any given time, but they are not primarily involved because they want to own a club for the fun of it, even if they do enjoy that. Equally they are wealthy enough to take the gamble in the first place. 

The original widespread assumption was that they wanted to flip the club for profit. I don’t think that all needs to happen at once for that to be correct. This looks like good business for the owners if they can do it. The club needs further investment, whether we stay up or not, so whether you see it as repayment or funds for that it makes sense. 

But these are two different things.

If the current owners are potentially selling some of their existing shares, so they get back a part of their initial investment, then that's their money to do with as they please. The club wont necessarily see a penny of that.

If it's the club potentially issuing new shares then that's maybe up to £20milion in the kitty to go and spunk - sorry, I meant "invest" - on new players.

Obviously I hope it’s the latter, and that seems to be the assumption other people have made. But I'm just asking why people are so confident that's the case, based on one cryptic tweet.

Hopefully because the investment is a lot more attractive if you know your money is going straight into improving the club. 

But that depends on exactly what's being offered. That's my point. We don't know. Unless someone does and they're not saying?

Off_it said:

Airman Brown said:

Two points - the market in football clubs, particularly English ones, moves as well as the status of a club.  Secondly, this has always been a speculative business venture in which the investors will look to safeguard and recoup their investment when the opportunity arises. This doesn’t mean that their agenda can’t be aligned with ours as fans at any given time, but they are not primarily involved because they want to own a club for the fun of it, even if they do enjoy that. Equally they are wealthy enough to take the gamble in the first place. 

The original widespread assumption was that they wanted to flip the club for profit. I don’t think that all needs to happen at once for that to be correct. This looks like good business for the owners if they can do it. The club needs further investment, whether we stay up or not, so whether you see it as repayment or funds for that it makes sense. 

But these are two different things.

If the current owners are potentially selling some of their existing shares, so they get back a part of their initial investment, then that's their money to do with as they please. The club wont necessarily see a penny of that.

If it's the club potentially issuing new shares then that's maybe up to £20milion in the kitty to go and spunk - sorry, I meant "invest" - on new players.

Obviously I hope its the latter, and that seems to be the assumption other people have made. But I'm just asking why people are so confident that's the case, based on one cryptic tweet.

They are two different mechanisms, I agree, but regardless additional money will have to go into the club every year or it will go bust. The only other way of funding the operating loss is to sell players, but that is counter-productive on the pitch and ultimately in terms of revenue, and is unlikely to be feasible.

Crispywood said:

Listening to the Cawley podcast it doesn’t sound like they’re doing it to provide an extra 20m in transfer funds 

Even if it was available it couldn't all be used on transfer fees. There is a salary cap of 70% of turnover.

Gribbo said:

J BLOCK said:

Crispywood said:

Listening to the Cawley podcast it doesn’t sound like they’re doing it to provide an extra 20m in transfer funds 

What did it say 

"...we're not doing it to provide an extra 20m in transfer funds"



😉

And even if they were they would be stupid to say so, and this lot have tried very hard to give the impression money is hard to come by.  I don't blame them, it's what I would do with my £1.50.

Good piece with Matt Slater about all this over on Rich's Substack. All sounds quite positive from what Matt has said. 

Isn't most of Millwalls recent stuff based off selling Zian Flemming and Roman Esse for big money? 

MarcusH26 said:

Isn't most of Millwalls recent stuff based off selling Zian Flemming and Roman Esse for big money? 

Yes. And 8 million for Tanganga, who we signed on a free. It’s the model we have to follow. It’s worked well so far, as long as we keep getting the recruitment right. Which we should do as the network and model we have there at the moment is superb. Can’t fault it. 

MillwallFan said:

MarcusH26 said:

Isn't most of Millwalls recent stuff based off selling Zian Flemming and Roman Esse for big money? 

Yes. And 8 million for Tanganga, who we signed on a free. It’s the model we have to follow. It’s worked well so far, as long as we keep getting the recruitment right. Which we should do as the network and model we have there at the moment is superb. Can’t fault it. 

You wait til the fruits of gallen’s labour starts to filter through - you’ll have plenty of capable players but there’ll never be fit 

SoundAsa£ said:

billysboots said:

AIG Just become largest shareholder in Salford. Lots of change 

Who or what is AIG?

They were Man Utd shirt sponsor for several years. Think Beckham sold his Salford stake to them a few years back, they must have just bought someone else out. 

sam3110 said:

Cal McNair

Is that a guess?