| Private Equity 18:59 - Mar 22 with 2560 views | greymonkey |
Am I the only one that is concerned with it being private equity investment? Their approach is typically short term and to extract as much money from their investment as possible without much thought for longer term success and sustainability. |  | | |  |
| Private Equity on 19:03 - Mar 22 with 2504 views | stonojnr |
No you are not, I think it's right to welcome the investment but to do so cautiously and see from their actions they take what happens next. | | | |
| Private Equity on 19:10 - Mar 22 with 2445 views | le2blue |
To get the returns they want they have to make the club successful. With the controlling interest of a pension fund who’ve so far shown to be very competent in their investment and mgmt it’s a win win. |  | | |
| Private Equity on 19:15 - Mar 22 with 2395 views | Illinoisblue |
Likely true but as with the pension fund, they’re going to have to invest in us make money. Interesting times ahead. |  |
| |
| Private Equity on 19:26 - Mar 22 with 2307 views | MK1 |
In the short term, they will invest to try and make us successful. A mid table Premier League club at worst. They will then cash out and hopefully the next owners will be in it for the long haul. We are finally, after 2 decades of decline, on the right path for future success. |  | | |
| Private Equity on 19:56 - Mar 22 with 2150 views | FrimleyBlue |
No.
It's not a majority share.
They need the club to succeed so will support it.
There will be others wanting a piece.
The only thing I don't wanna see anytime soon is org losing the majority share. |  |
| |
| Private Equity on 20:05 - Mar 22 with 2077 views | Leaky |
That Elephant man's going to have a rightelt down |  | | |
| Private Equity on 20:17 - Mar 22 with 1992 views | bluevein |
It is a terrible decision. | | | |
| Private Equity on 20:30 - Mar 22 with 1930 views | DJR |
You are not alone. Private equity doesn't have a great track record when it comes to the privatised water companies, and investments often involve huge amounts of debt taken on.
Admittedly, we are dealing in this case with a football club, which is a different type of beast, but I suppose the bottom line is that they are not investing because they have any love for the club.
Of course, the same was true of the pension fund, but there appeared to be an element of stability and long-termism with that investment, coupled with the romanticism of it being a firefighters' pension scheme.
Now that they only have 50% of the club, I can see them selling off some or all of the remaining stake in the not too distant future, with us becoming a commodity to buy and sell, and with investors from who knows where. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Private Equity on 20:30 - Mar 22 with 1916 views | Illinoisblue |
| Private Equity on 20:17 - Mar 22 by bluevein |
It is a terrible decision. |
Nothing like some positivity! | |
| |
| Private Equity on 21:15 - Mar 22 with 1845 views | BloomBlue |
Nope, they need to be successful to make money and that's what drives private equity firms. To do that they need the club in the Prem, which means they will do everything they can to get us there - great news
However...
Once we are promoted they won't give a flying f#ck who they sell to.
Although hopefully it will a Saudi, Qatari type mob with a bottomless pit of oil money. |  | | |
| Private Equity on 21:34 - Mar 22 with 1803 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
Gone are the days a local wealthy family benefactor can afford to run a club. Now it’s either investors (be that individual or institutional), or billionaires laundering their cash/sportswashing.
We had an owner who supposedly had the best interest of the club at heart, however he oversaw us falling into the third tier, deterioration of our academy, saw our infrastructure (from the stadium down to our scouting network) fall apart. Crowds disappeared and we were left competing with clubs like Wycombe. So the lesson here is whilst PE only have one aim (ROI) alternative models of ownership were bl00dy awful.
Unless there is a wholesale change to the English game and a move to the German style model that’s not going to change. Just enjoy it while you can - these are special times!! [Post edited 23 Mar 8:03]
| | | |
| Private Equity on 21:44 - Mar 22 with 1759 views | cressi |
Think we all need to think where we have been under Evans the likes of
Rory Fallon , Giles Coke etc. This football club is going the right way grab it with both hands. | | | |
| Private Equity on 08:08 - Mar 23 with 1383 views | ibbleobble |
Raising capital while our stock is high is a smart move especially given the private equity firm could recoup a lot of this on promotion to ease any pressure with stakeholders / shareholders. Seems like a smart move for all concerned but we’re all guessing as no-one is privy to the terms. | | | |
| Private Equity on 08:16 - Mar 23 with 1355 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Private Equity on 20:30 - Mar 22 by DJR |
You are not alone. Private equity doesn't have a great track record when it comes to the privatised water companies, and investments often involve huge amounts of debt taken on.
Admittedly, we are dealing in this case with a football club, which is a different type of beast, but I suppose the bottom line is that they are not investing because they have any love for the club.
Of course, the same was true of the pension fund, but there appeared to be an element of stability and long-termism with that investment, coupled with the romanticism of it being a firefighters' pension scheme.
Now that they only have 50% of the club, I can see them selling off some or all of the remaining stake in the not too distant future, with us becoming a commodity to buy and sell, and with investors from who knows where. |
It's a very real concern (so will probably be dismissed) and there is a slight whiff of a 'just bought my council house' thinking in the reactions of some. But what can you do! Still as long as Jack is alright......for now. |  |
| |
| Private Equity on 08:20 - Mar 23 with 1346 views | StokieBlue |
How is it any different to an investment by a pension fund?
That seems to have gone well and they still control the majority stake so perhaps best to wait and see than guessing about things.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Private Equity on 08:27 - Mar 23 with 1297 views | RadioOrwell |
| Private Equity on 20:17 - Mar 22 by bluevein |
It is a terrible decision. |
Thanks for the superb analysis which is particularly interesting coming from someone with decades of experience in Private Equity firms.
We're lucky to have your insight. |  | | |
| Private Equity on 08:38 - Mar 23 with 1239 views | StokieBlue |
I am aware of that, however the motivations for buying are the same (also both your links are behind paywalls and the NY Times one is about PE firms that hold a controlling stake so it's a different situation).
Town were a speculative punt by the pension fund using the money they put aside for risky investments (and that section of a fund isn't hugely different from private equity) and they were hopeful of a good return which they hade made. There will be little differences in the motivations of the private equity fund. They will seek to recoup their investment and make profit in the same way.
We don't have loads of assets to strip and they won't have the majority stake to do that anyway. In fact it looks like the investment is going to go towards increasing our assets rather than looking to asset strip.
It may end up being bad in the longer term but to just assume it's bad without any actual evidence isn't ideal. Whilst they don't have a controlling stake they can't engage in many of the practices outlined in your articles.
In the end it's hard to see what people expect the options to be - is this any worse than being controlled by an authoritarian government or rich individual who changes things on a whim? Those seem to be the other two options when it comes to club ownership these days.
SB [Post edited 23 Mar 8:39]
| |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Private Equity on 08:48 - Mar 23 with 1193 views | DJR |
| Private Equity on 08:38 - Mar 23 by StokieBlue |
I am aware of that, however the motivations for buying are the same (also both your links are behind paywalls and the NY Times one is about PE firms that hold a controlling stake so it's a different situation).
Town were a speculative punt by the pension fund using the money they put aside for risky investments (and that section of a fund isn't hugely different from private equity) and they were hopeful of a good return which they hade made. There will be little differences in the motivations of the private equity fund. They will seek to recoup their investment and make profit in the same way.
We don't have loads of assets to strip and they won't have the majority stake to do that anyway. In fact it looks like the investment is going to go towards increasing our assets rather than looking to asset strip.
It may end up being bad in the longer term but to just assume it's bad without any actual evidence isn't ideal. Whilst they don't have a controlling stake they can't engage in many of the practices outlined in your articles.
In the end it's hard to see what people expect the options to be - is this any worse than being controlled by an authoritarian government or rich individual who changes things on a whim? Those seem to be the other two options when it comes to club ownership these days.
SB [Post edited 23 Mar 8:39]
|
Sorry about the paywalls. I was able to access each first time so thought it might be the case for others.
I suppose I am just a cynic when it comes to private equity, and maybe in due course we will end up controlled by private equity if ORG wants to further dilute its stake, but I am happy to see how things go.
As it is, I am no financial expert, but I just felt there needed to be some counterbalance to much of the comments on TWTD which seemed so enthusiastic about an investment described as "up to" £105 million. | | | |
| Private Equity on 11:29 - Mar 23 with 1005 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Private Equity on 08:38 - Mar 23 by StokieBlue |
I am aware of that, however the motivations for buying are the same (also both your links are behind paywalls and the NY Times one is about PE firms that hold a controlling stake so it's a different situation).
Town were a speculative punt by the pension fund using the money they put aside for risky investments (and that section of a fund isn't hugely different from private equity) and they were hopeful of a good return which they hade made. There will be little differences in the motivations of the private equity fund. They will seek to recoup their investment and make profit in the same way.
We don't have loads of assets to strip and they won't have the majority stake to do that anyway. In fact it looks like the investment is going to go towards increasing our assets rather than looking to asset strip.
It may end up being bad in the longer term but to just assume it's bad without any actual evidence isn't ideal. Whilst they don't have a controlling stake they can't engage in many of the practices outlined in your articles.
In the end it's hard to see what people expect the options to be - is this any worse than being controlled by an authoritarian government or rich individual who changes things on a whim? Those seem to be the other two options when it comes to club ownership these days.
SB [Post edited 23 Mar 8:39]
|
Asset stripping only works if your assets are worth more than your investment. In this instance I very much doubt that’s the case. This is why it’s important the Council continues to own some of the land. I don’t see this as being any more risky than Evans given the state he left the club in.
Most of the clubs who’ve been in serious financial difficulty are people like Reading (possibly Blackburn soon, Wednesday had points deductions and a whip round to pay a tax bill). All clubs owned by individual rather than institutional investors. Of course there are risks but the alternatives aren’t any better… | | | |
| Private Equity on 18:08 - Mar 23 with 790 views | Marcus |
Not finding much with some digging. They formed 9 June 22. No public portfolio of assets... |  |
| |
| Private Equity on 18:28 - Mar 23 with 742 views | nrb1985 |
Wildly inaccurate.
Private equity is typically long term investment with most fund structures being 8-10 years, usually with the option to add another 2 if the manager deems it appropriate.
Separately, where does building a new Cobbold stand, category 1 academy status and modernizing the training ground fit into “not much thought for longer term success or sustainability”? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
