Brighton and Hove Albion Holdings Ltd

[Garage_Doors]

Why would someone want to pump that sort of money in but still want to remain anonymous, thats the bit i don't understand.

I know the values are not comparable but like Abramovich or Ashby, a football club is a play thing and when things go right they get the kudos of having a successful club, adulation of the fans and the highs that go with it, that i get.

But when you pump money into a club like Brighton, however much we love them the the glory opportunities are limited, so why would anyone do it anonymously ?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Shouldn't that be 'tranche' not 'trench'?................

Ooops! - certainly should. We're restoring an 18th century cottage at the moment and just popped home for some lunch - brain is getting a bit muddled with foundations (or lack of) and deliveries of P300 concrete.

 

[Garage_Doors]

The loan notes can be traded as with shares. The loanor COULD sell them to someone else.

Could they be won, or in our case lost in a poker game ?

 

[Buzzer]

does this mean come 1/1/24 were f***ed?

No. Unless someone like archer buys the loan notes. You could repay it, the director could convert them to shares or issue new loan notes.

If the rate of return is attractive enough then the loan might never be repaid.

So if the stadium company failed to pay back a Director of the football company then the stadium compnay would fold in it's existing form ? (although presumably a Leeds type scenario might happen?)

That would be up to the loanor. They could renegotiate the loan or wind up the company.

EDIT (Just seen the post above) - so effectively in 2023 the loaner would either be paid back or would probably become the majority shareholder of the stadium company?

Yes.




And one last thing. My guess is that this was done to plug a huge hole in the funding. Not quite but near a last resort.

 

[Gritt23]

Why would someone want to pump that sort of money in but still want to remain anonymous, thats the bit i don't understand.

I know the values are not comparable but like Abramovich or Ashby, a football club is a play thing and when things go right they get the kudos of having a successful club, adulation of the fans and the highs that go with it, that i get.

But when you pump money into a club like Brighton, however much we love them the the glory opportunities are limited, so why would anyone do it anonymously ?

If and when it happens, there is no reason why they would do it anonomously. No-one has bought them yet (and may never do) which is why we don't have a name today.

 

[Buzzer]

Could they be won, or in our case lost in a poker game ?

Yes but gambling debts are unenforceable in English law. It's up to the gambler to honour the gambling debt or not

 

[les dynam]

i find it strange that we still don't really know much about tony bloom. i don't recall reading anything much about him at all? as the person (possibly) paying for our new home out of his own pocket, plus gifting us the funds we need to survive until then, he must be a proper albion fan like us? so surely somebody knows him from school or the goldstone or is mates with a mate of his? i know about his family connections to the club, but what about his?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Dick Knight stated at the Fans' Forum last August that the initial £20M loan note facility had nothing to do with Falmer funding.

In addition, BHA Holdings Ltd increased its nominal share capital from 20M to 50M to (£1 shares) in May 2008; approximately 9.5M shares have been issued to date.

 

[Knotty]

Why would someone want to pump that sort of money in but still want to remain anonymous, thats the bit i don't understand.

I know the values are not comparable but like Abramovich or Ashby, a football club is a play thing and when things go right they get the kudos of having a successful club, adulation of the fans and the highs that go with it, that i get.

But when you pump money into a club like Brighton, however much we love them the the glory opportunities are limited, so why would anyone do it anonymously ?

If I had that sort of money to put into the club I would certainly want to do it anonymously. My 'reward' would be whatever success the money might bring to the club. I couldn't care less about acclaim from the fans or personal 'glory'.

However I think it would be very difficult for anyone putting that money in to remain anonymous.

 

[SI 4 BHA]

i find it strange that we still don't really know much about tony bloom. i don't recall reading anything much about him at all? as the person (possibly) paying for our new home out of his own pocket, plus gifting us the funds we need to survive until then, he must be a proper albion fan like us? so surely somebody knows him from school or the goldstone or is mates with a mate of his? i know about his family connections to the club, but what about his?

That's a good question. I'm pretty sure it was said a couple of months ago the Tony Bloom was prepared to cover any hole in the Falmer funding and I guess these loan notes are something to do with this. I'm sure we are all grateful to him for funding the club at the moment, but just how much is he worth? How rich do you need to be to be able to say something like, "here's £20m or more, don't worry about it, I don't really need the money at the moment, just try and pay me back in 15 years time".

Just what does Tony B hope to get out of this, I know he's obviously a fan, but doesn't he live in Australia and so rarely comes to a game and apparently, he doesn't want to be on the Board. I'm glad he's prepared to fund us at the moment, but it would be nice to know a bit more about him and what his long term ambitions for the club are.

 

[The Large One]

Dick Knight stated at the Fans' Forum last August that the initial £20M loan note facility had nothing to do with Falmer funding.

In addition, BHA Holdings Ltd increased its nominal share capital from 20M to 50M to (£1 shares) in May 2008; approximately 9.5M shares have been issued to date.

Buzzer, yourself and others have explained stuff very well - cheers, guys - and in a way even this financial/legal spastic (moi) could understand.

However, what does your post there mean?

 

[Giraffe]

Very simply it is there to reflect the expected investment of Tony Bloom. This has been done now as more than likely the bank funding has not been put in place or is not necessary.

Dick Knight sells himself very well. Tony Bloom doesn't and why should he. He is a very generous man who is effectively giving a large sum of money to ensure we all a very nice stadium in two years time and a football team of worth to support. The fact he at the moment does not seek public glorification for this is to say the least very creditable.

This, in short though is good news, as without Tony Bloom the financing for Falmer would be well and truly screwed like most other developments in the UK right now.

 

[Gritt23]

However, what does your post there mean?

That's the number of shares we are allowed to issue. But of course as you issue more shares this dilutes the current holdings.

We can therefore issue a total of 50m, £1 shares. At present we have issued 9.5m. So, Dick Knight currently owns 1,602,500 shares, which as a % of 9.5m is 16.87%.

We still have a further 40.5m £1 shares that we can issue, but if a Richard Branson comes forward and we choose to raise some capital by selling him 10m £1 shares, we would have raised £10m, but the likes of Dick Knight would see their % holding drop, as he would now own 1,602,500 shares out of a total issued of 19.5m, therefore he would have an 8.22% holding, albeit of a company that has a greater financial standing due to the capital inject of selling those shares.

So that the shareholders know how much their holding could diminish as a result of issuing shares, a company has to have this "nominal share capital" set up, even if it has not all been issued.

 

[Bry Nylon]

And one last thing. My guess is that this was done to plug a huge hole in the funding. Not quite but near a last resort.

*gulp*

 

[The Large One]

Very simply it is there to reflect the expected investment of Tony Bloom. This has been done now as more than likely the bank funding has not been put in place or is not necessary.

Dick Knight sells himself very well. Tony Bloom doesn't and why should he. He is a very generous man who is effectively giving a large sum of money to ensure we all a very nice stadium in two years time and a football team of worth to support. The fact he at the moment does not seek public glorification for this is to say the least very creditable.

This, in short though is good news, as without Tony Bloom the financing for Falmer would be well and truly screwed like most other developments in the UK right now.

ASSUMING it's Tony Bloom.

It probably is, but someone on here did mention that another shareholder also has a few quid. Maybe it's both.

 

[Buzzer]

The £20m existing loan notes are to cover existing loans from directors and others. It formalises repayment terms and rates of interest.

The club have issued 9.5m shares to date. They were legally able to issue up to 20m. They've increased that to 50m. I'm guessing that it's so that they could either raise money from a rights issue (offer new shares to investors) or pave the way for a loan/share conversion.

No new shares have at this point been issued. Merely created

 

[The Large One]

That's the number of shares we are allowed to issue. But of course as you issue more shares this dilutes the current holdings.

We can therefore issue a total of 50m, £1 shares. At present we have issued 9.5m. So, Dick Knight currently owns 1,602,500 shares, which as a % of 9.5m is 16.87%.

We still have a further 40.5m £1 shares that we can issue, but if a Richard Branson comes forward and we choose to raise some capital by selling him 10m £1 shares, we would have raised £10m, but the likes of Dick Knight would see their % holding drop, as he would now own 1,602,500 shares out of a total issued of 19.5m, therefore he would have an 8.22% holding, albeit of a company that has a greater financial standing due to the capital inject of selling those shares.

So that the shareholders know how much their holding could diminish as a result of issuing shares, a company has to have this "nominal share capital" set up, even if it has not all been issued.

The £20m existing loan notes are to cover existing loans from directors and others. It formalises repayment terms and rates of interest.

The club have issued 9.5m shares to date. They were legally able to issue up to 20m. They've increased that to 50m. I'm guessing that it's so that they could either raise money from a rights issue (offer new shares to investors) or pave the way for a loan/share conversion.

No new shares have at this point been issued. Merely created

Cheers, gents.

 

[Gritt23]

And one last thing. My guess is that this was done to plug a huge hole in the funding. Not quite but near a last resort.

For what it's worth, I disagree with that. Until the loan notes are purchased by someone, it doesn't plug any hole whatsoever. I think it's merely a case of putting in place all the options for a new investor, should that time arrive.

If they want to buy shares, we could either sell them existing shares, either from existing shareholders, or we could issue new shares.

Also, if they want to inject money as a loan, and not change the holdings (remember we still refuse to have a majority shareholder over 49.9%) then we have the formal process in place to issue these loan notes.

I don't think it's a last resort at all, I think it's about planning. As and when the opportunity arises, we can now move very quickly to bring the person on board.

 

[Uter]

For what it's worth, I disagree with that. Until the loan notes are purchased by someone, it doesn't plug any hole whatsoever. I think it's merely a case of putting in place all the options for a new investor, should that time arrive.

If they want to buy shares, we could either sell them existing shares, either from existing shareholders, or we could issue new shares.

Also, if they want to inject money as a loan, and not change the holdings (remember we still refuse to have a majority shareholder over 49.9%) then we have the formal process in place to issue these loan notes.

I don't think it's a last resort at all, I think it's about planning. As and when the opportunity arises, we can now move very quickly to bring the person on board.

Cheers for making this all a bit easier to understand for idiots like me.

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

Would a company go to the expense and bother of doing this just "in case" someone comes along who wants them? OK so presumably it isn't a massive time consuming job, so surely they would only do this if they thought there was a reasonable chance of a new investor.

If someone suddenly comes out of the woodwork, how long would it take to do? Presumably one Board meeting and a vote and then the paperwork to Companies house.

My point is, why would they do this unless there was a reasonable possibility that it would be needed, something more likely than "just in case".

I can't see why Tony Bloom would want loan notes, he presumably trusts the club and the Board and in any case the security that they give him actually isn't worth a lot.

So it follows that this could - could - be part of the process in bringing a large investor.

If - if - Mr Moneybags is in discussions with the club maybe that's the reason they have done this now, as part of the process of bringing in a large new investor. The club have to make this public knowledge to comply with company legislation although they may have preferred to keep it under wraps until any deal is done.

The more I think about this, the more it seems to me at least a possibility that the big investor we all want is at least talking to the club.

Could this actually turn out to be the best ever news?