Question re: Bloom getting his money back

[El Presidente]

Whilst agreeing with you your point 1 isn't strictly true. The stadium facilities are available for hire (my wife's been to a function there) and the shop is open, as is Dick's. I appreciate that the income from these isn't anything like a match day - but then even on match days most of the income (from STH sales which make up the bulk of the crowd) has already been banked whether the 'customer' turns up or not. I do believe expanding the non-match day stadium income is one of TB's priorities.

Fair comment, but as you say the numbers involved are not great, but better than nothing.

 

[Was not Was]

That does seem odd. They could have covered the roof with solar panels.

I'm pretty sure this has been answered: that it's important for the pitch that light is able to come through the stadium roof - and you can't have (semi-) transparent solar panels.

It does seem like a missed opportunity, though.

 

[El Presidente]

Although holdings have been diluted, it's hard to say whether this has actually disadvantaged any of those shareholders. I would guess some voting powers have been lost, but the total value of the non-controlling interests' holdings may be the same, or more or less than before. It all depends on what the market value of those shares now is and how desperate (if at all) TB is to buy then out.

Market value is surely zero, given the size of the debts which exceed the value of the stadium.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Fair comment, but as you say the numbers involved are not great, but better than nothing.

How many concerts are the club allowed to put on each year? The Emirates, Ricoh, Wembley all make a lot of income from concerts.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Market value is surely zero, given the size of the debts which exceed the value of the stadium.

Indeed. I wasn't suggesting that the long-term small shareholders can sell their shares at a market value; I was suggesting that TB might make a generous gesture and repay their earlier generosity, by buying them out at a premium price.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

I'm pretty sure this has been answered: that it's important for the pitch that light is able to come through the stadium roof - and you can't have (semi-) transparent solar panels.

It does seem like a missed opportunity, though.

I'm sure these are part of the structure that are not designed to be transparent that could have served this purpose. I need to look at an overhead shot of the completed stadium to answer this though.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Found one...



The White area at the South end of the stadium represents a large expanse of roughly South facing space that could have been covered in photovoltaic cells without affecting the light getting to the pitch. I'm sure solar tech is now able to provide flat coverings of cells without the need for those square blocks you see on houses nowadays.

 

[Brovion]

Found one...

View attachment 47340

The White area at the South end of the stadium represents a large expanse of roughly South facing space that could have been covered in photovoltaic cells without affecting the light getting to the pitch. I'm sure solar tech is now able to provide flat coverings of cells without the need for those square blocks you see on houses nowadays.

As a complete aside to this thread I NEVER get bored of seeing pictures like that! Still can't believe it's ours. (Well Tony Bloom's. Thought I'd better add that to make this post not totally irrelevant!)

 

[El Presidente]

Indeed. I wasn't suggesting that the long-term small shareholders can sell their shares at a market value; I was suggesting that TB might make a generous gesture and repay their earlier generosity, by buying them out at a premium price.

Do they want to be bought out? Is it still a case of Team DK v Team TB at war at the Albion behind the scenes?

 

[El Presidente]

Found one...

View attachment 47340

The White area at the South end of the stadium represents a large expanse of roughly South facing space that could have been covered in photovoltaic cells without affecting the light getting to the pitch. I'm sure solar tech is now able to provide flat coverings of cells without the need for those square blocks you see on houses nowadays.

Does anyone think that from above, the stadium looks a bit like a ladies naughty bits, albeit painted blue and white.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Does anyone think that from above, the stadium looks a bit like a ladies naughty bits, albeit painted blue and white.

a big lady.

 

[tinycowboy]

Market value is surely zero, given the size of the debts which exceed the value of the stadium.

In all honesty you would think so, but then again, the current NAV needn't be the same as MV - all depends on what tint your spectacles have re the future.

Indeed. I wasn't suggesting that the long-term small shareholders can sell their shares at a market value; I was suggesting that TB might make a generous gesture and repay their earlier generosity, by buying them out at a premium price.

Up to him, of course - he himself paid £1 per share in September 2012, although this was par value - not an indicator of value, just a legal minimum. I don't know if there was ever a time in recent history that a BHA share had any real value, but, as you say, people put their hands in their pockets regardless and helped save/support/run the club. We'll have to see...

 

[KZNSeagull]

Does anyone think that from above, the stadium looks a bit like a ladies naughty bits, albeit painted blue and white.

This one is wearing an ill-fitting g-string:

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It is rather ironic that each of the clubs you mentioned as not having people queuing up to buy has been sold in recent times to mostly foreign investors.

This is my point.

 

[El Presidente]

This is my point.

I think you needed a :Whoosh: smilie at the end of that post HT!

 

[Creaky]

I don't want to be rude but that is garbage.

Issuing shares or converting debt to equity is a balance sheet movement. It has no impact on profits.

Of course it is a balance sheet movement!!!

It isn't losses per se that makes a company insolvent - it is the difference between assets and liabilities.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Some are on personal/institutional vanity projects (Chelsea/City/Fulham under Al Fayed) and can afford to incur current and future losses with impunity.

Some are in it with the intention of making a quick buck (Most who have owned Pompey).

Some see the TV millions and also believe that the clubs are not smart enough at maximising revenue (United/Liverpool)..

This is a fair suggestion for the big clubs (which I deliberately left out of my list)....but in my opinion your argument does not hold for the numerous also rans I concentrated on in my list. I simply do not believe all these investors are on a vanity trip or playing a massive real-life game of Football Manager. Where's the vanity in owning Bournemouth or Leicester? It's not just happening in the UK either. The bottom line is I do not know the true reasons, and neither do you. We can only guess. But, I think the theory I suggest has some merit. Maybe someone with investment experience of such matters can chip in?

 

[Creaky]

Market value is surely zero, given the size of the debts which exceed the value of the stadium.

Market value is the price someone is willing to pay for the shares - How much would they be worth if small amounts were made available for fans to purchase?

 

[Titanic]

Of course it is a balance sheet movement!!!

It isn't losses per se that makes a company insolvent - it is the difference between assets and liabilities.

@El Presidente Do you know anything about sucking eggs?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

How many concerts are the club allowed to put on each year? The Emirates, Ricoh, Wembley all make a lot of income from concerts.

I tend to agree. I do not think the stadium is worthless. It can host a few concerts and conferences on a daily basis. It has value beyond football.