Coley wrote:
Ownership, but the money would be there to pay off debts, Your share would be based on the 100 million valuation the club currently has, i would guess.
Comes off as desperate to me. And why would Straumur give up ownership for payments on debts. Seemed to me they allowed debt payments to be part of Gullivan's 50% takeover, expecting cold hard cash for the last 50%. Least that is the impression I got.
By Tariq Panja
Feb. 5 (Bloomberg) -- English Premier League soccer team
West Ham plans to raise as much as 40 million pounds ($62.8
million) by the end of the season in an effort to reduce debts.
David Sullivan and David Gold, the businessmen who took
control last month after buying 50 percent of the London club
for 52.5 million pounds, say West Ham owes around 100 million
pounds.
The fund-raising bid in exchange for equity isn’t because
of any pressure from the team’s creditors, said Graham Shore,
managing director of Shore Capital, the firm hired to find
investors.
“They want to run a club which has a stronger financial
position and to take steps to deal with that before they have
any problems,” he said. “There’s no pressure. The club has
committed financial facilities but it’s just more comfortable to
do it with a lower level of debt.”
West Ham’s management team is trying to secure a move to
become a tenant of London’s new Olympic stadium, being built to
host the 2012 Games. That would afford the club the chance to draw more fans that it currently does at 35,000-seat Upton Park.
A decision has yet to be made over the future use of the
Olympic stadium, which may be scaled-down from its original
capacity of 80,000 to remain a track and field venue.
“David Sullivan has a vision for West Ham as being a place
where people who want to go and watch Premier League football at
a more affordable price will be able to go and watch it,” Shore
said. “It could turn the club into a very attractive financial
proposition.”
Coming Months
According to a report by accountant Deloitte LLP, the
Hammers had the seventh-highest revenue in the Premier League.
The team’s future prospects may be defined by its performance
over the coming months.
West Ham is 15th in the Premier League, clear of the final
relegation place because of its superior goal difference. The
club would lose millions in television revenue should it be
demoted to the second-tier Championship.
The new owners have brought in strikers Benni McCarthy and Mido last week, while preventing the sale of top players to help
meet creditor demands.
sw3hammer wrote:They want to run a club which has a stronger financial position. There’s no pressure. The club has
committed financial facilities but it’s just more comfortable to do it with a lower level of debt.
David Sullivan has a vision for West Ham as being a place where people who want to go and watch Premier League football at
a more affordable price will be able to go and watch it.
Show me the money Mr. Sullivan, as this sounds like you aren't willing to invest any of your money, just other people's for a bit of advertising and probably, sadly, the naming rights to either our current ground or the new stadium. 2 multi-millionaires who have so far only put around £20,000,000 into the club, maybe even less, and yet they are already looking for others to stop them having to put any more in, before they look to buy the other half of the club at a knocked down price, after the club easily survives in the Premier League this season.
Minimal risk, maximum return, West Ham stagnate. The way it has always been and forever will be. Perhaps the Birmingham City fans were correct to warn us of this! Big promises (More investment, £8m to spend in January, £100k a week on a forward), followed by very little action (Looking for outside investment, £2.5m spent in January, £1k a week on a forward).
What twaddle..."this sounds like...." talk about trying to put a negative spin on their words. Why not shut up and judge them on what they do rather that what you think they might do!!
Love the way fans think they have a right to demand tens of millions - or hundreds of millions even - of someone else's money to pursue the dreams they personally (as a fan) have. It's laughable
Three weeks ago WHU was on a fast train to nowhere. Now there looks to be some emerging stability. We're lucky we aren't shooting down the divisions and in administration. We may yet get relegated, but we look more likely to survive and stabalise in the Prem. We may even prosper if we get the Olympic Stadium
Meanwhile some people express themselves as 'deeply worried' because the co-owners aren't investing huge sums opf their own money. God save us.......
If you're going to buy half a club (or a whole one), why wouldn't you want it at a knock down price? I certainly wouldn't want to give anything more to the Icelanders than I would have to. As for putting £20m (or whatever) in - that's a relatively large amount compared to our previous owners. Stagnation was better than the alternative, which was adminisration and relegation. If they can sort the club out (and God knows it needs it) then that is fine by me.
They've been clear from day one they would seek additional investment .Their track record at Birmingham from an investors perspective is excellent , and they could use their money to fund a few players .
By now they will know what a massive rebuilding job we have ahead . A stronger balance sheet makes their job easier .
Good decision. Don't know how anyone can slate Gullivan -- especially looking at Pompey's situation. I just think we are amazingly lucky to have got owners who clearly have the long term interests of the club at heart.
Side of Ham wrote:Has MacGill been merked or what?
I can only think of Horace who can match a first 8 posts with such a transparent agenda. Dux clearly has nothing to do all day now. He'll be calling out Chuck D in no time.