Farhad Moshiri

[duncs pigeon]

Ok... so you don't like bill or mosh ... or koeman... or Walsh.... or baines.... or Barry... or jags.... lukaku is leaving... oh you don't rate Morgan ... barkley?

What do you like exactly?

I doubt he will answer you mate. Ive asked him simalar questions before without reply. Hes WUM imo.

 

[Nymzee]

** Reality check**
The options and attendant charges are still live at 21 March according to the companies registry at gov.im

We don't know the triggering clauses, or when the expiration date is - could be years off.

The documents were delivered by an escrow agent. Inference is, the money is there.

The options cannot take BHHL to 75%.

The 49.9% holding was probably to circumvent a change in ownership which would have had ramifications re the Pru. Fact that the charge wasn't satisfied until early Oct may well mean that 6 months notice was required to avoid penalties.

Like Fordstam loan to Chelsea, the 80mil loan cannot stay on the BS forever (PL rules I believe) the most likely outcome being a share issue.

The loan could not reasonably be expected to be paid out before other liabilities if the future of the business looked in doubt. This would set up a preferential treatment scenario.

If you want to know anything more about any of the above, vault me.

Was like reading hieroglyphics trying to understand that.

 

[banno]

** Reality check**
The options and attendant charges are still live at 21 March according to the companies registry at gov.im

We don't know the triggering clauses, or when the expiration date is - could be years off.

The documents were delivered by an escrow agent. Inference is, the money is there.

The options cannot take BHHL to 75%.

The 49.9% holding was probably to circumvent a change in ownership which would have had ramifications re the Pru. Fact that the charge wasn't satisfied until early Oct may well mean that 6 months notice was required to avoid penalties.

Like Fordstam loan to Chelsea, the 80mil loan cannot stay on the BS forever (PL rules I believe) the most likely outcome being a share issue.

The loan could not reasonably be expected to be paid out before other liabilities if the future of the business looked in doubt. This would set up a preferential treatment scenario.

If you want to know anything more about any of the above, vault me.

Looks a good post....but whoosh...well over my head.

 

[MrGrumpy]

Dave, for pity sake... calling Farhad Moshiri a no mark owner is bang out of order in my opinion.

We've been down this road so many times it's getting ever more tedious.

He's financed the disposal of a failed managerial regime...
He's financed the acquisition of a new manager and DoF...
He's cleared the clubs bank debts...
He's financed a number of player acquisitions...
He's financed the re-decoration of Goodison that everybody seems to enjoy looking at...
He's overseen the freezing and in some cases reduction in ticket prices...
He's behind the re-energising of a fan base...
He's re-structuring the club on the commercial front...
He's attracted new sponsorship...
He's been at the heart of negotiating and procuring the perfect site for a new stadium...
He's structured a deal that will see external finance responsible for the construction of said stadium, leaving his own personal fortune available for squad strengthening - this isn't me speculating, it's a widely held belief...
He's rubber-stamped the future of Goodison as a Legacy Project rather than taking an easy £6-10 million from a housing developer or supermarket chain...

If all of this and no doubt more qualifies Farhad Moshiri as a no mark owner in your eyes, then maybe you need to pay a visit to an optician for a serious optical examination.

Enjoy your weekend.

Fantastic post

 

[Tramps_mate]

the blokes chucked £80m of his OWN coin in our club to clear someone elses debt off and people are scoffing at it...

He chucked in £80 million of the money Usmanov gave him for shares in Arsenal the Usmanov gave him?

 

[ashwuk76]

He chucked in £80 million of the money Usmanov gave him for shares in Arsenal the Usmanov gave him?

So if you have me 20 quid and I give it to someone else... does that mean it's your 20 quid I've given to someone or mine? Some people really do stoop low to try and justify their agenda.

Just a lesson for you.. once someone gives you something it's yours to do with as you please, the previous owner is nothing to do with it.

 

[Barnfred 55]

He chucked in £80 million of the money Usmanov gave him for shares in Arsenal the Usmanov gave him?

I thought he sold his shares in Arsenal to Usmanov. From what I recall at the time there was no suggestion that the value of those shares was over valued at all. So if somebody buy's something off you, the money is then yours. Right?

 

[Saint Domingo]

Why is anyone knocking Moshiri?

 

[Deco]

That Moshiri is a right fraud sorting us a new stadium on the docks, who knows what he'll do next?

 

[hibbo'sclass]

Probably too simplistic, but Arsenal shares bid and offer prices per FT were 14 and 17k.
So mid market about 15.5k, published price 15.75k.
If no other assets held within R&W then a rough valuation of the assets would be approx:-
15.75×9.3475 k= 147,223,125.

Reported sale was worth about 200mil, so are the papers wrong or was a 30ish % premium paid on the basis of future income streams.

Don't know, but the cavaet is the reported price could include other assets or could be plain wrong like the valuation of EFC at £225mil when the Kansas lads were the subject of takeover rumours.

I thought he sold his shares in Arsenal to Usmanov. From what I recall at the time there was no suggestion that the value of those shares was over valued at all. So if somebody buy's something off you, the money is then yours. Right?

Ahem - the above was posted by yours truly in May last year mate.

 

[Kev50]

It is worth reflecting as Davek is, that fifteen months into his stewardship our leader has produced a reasonable and exciting plan for Everton, involving the construction of a stadium with little left from half a billion in change, where the current and projected level of his investment will stand at zero pounds zero pence.

 

[roydo]

It is worth reflecting as Davek is, that fifteen months into his stewardship our leader has produced a reasonable and exciting plan for Everton, involving the construction of a stadium with little left from half a billion in change, where the current and projected level of his investment will stand at zero pounds zero pence.

In the ground, yep.

The accepted theory is that the less of his bank balance that is tied up in that, the freer he is to invest in the team. That was what he said, sort of, anyrate.

As ever, time will tell.

 

[JLW]

That Moshiri is a right fraud sorting us a new stadium on the docks, who knows what he'll do next?

I know ye!! Does he not know i can only see half of the Park end goal due to the obstructed view, and he thinks serving me up with a dockside state of the stadium will please me... Pffft

The cheeky fker might even try and dump us in the CL

 

[hibbo'sclass]

It is worth reflecting as Davek is, that fifteen months into his stewardship our leader has produced a reasonable and exciting plan for Everton, involving the construction of a stadium with little left from half a billion in change, where the current and projected level of his investment will stand at zero pounds zero pence.

That would be true if EFC were solvent - technically they aren't. This means that the 80 mil is bottom of the pile to be repaid along with other unsecured creditors so can't be repaid without the distinct possibilty of setting up a preference. The liquidators would seek to reverse any repayments.

If we got any insolvency practitioners on here please confirm/berate.

 

[Barnfred 55]

Ahem - the above was posted by yours truly in May last year mate.

Didbt see your post at the time mate. Nothing in the papers as I recall. Of course the figures rumoured could be a bit out.