ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:04 pm

I see stuff is starting to filter through on Companies House now. New Memorandums and Articles of Association (although that isn't online yet), it will be interesting to see what the changes will be. It could obviously remove the requirement for 4,000 shares to be a director which has been referenced recently.

jojomk1
Posts: 4735
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 11:20 am
Been Liked: 836 times
Has Liked: 574 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by jojomk1 » Thu Jan 21, 2021 8:51 am


Dark Cloud
Posts: 6586
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
Been Liked: 1981 times
Has Liked: 3299 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Dark Cloud » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:07 am

I suppose it's only like say several clubs borrowing money from Barclays and thus raising the possibility of Barclays taking their assets should they default and the bank having ownership or part ownership of several different clubs. That situation must have been the case frequently over the years. I assume it's not a problem to the EFL because the people who call in the loan aren't interested in running a football club or they'd go out and buy one. They would just look to get as much of their money back as they could by flogging the club and its assets off. Bad news for the fans definitely if that happened, but not really a "conflict of interests" I wouldn't have thought.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:23 am

"They have lended money...."

How does that get past anyone in the media industry?

Grumps
Posts: 4145
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:15 am
Been Liked: 954 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Grumps » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:34 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:23 am
"They have lended money...."

How does that get past anyone in the media industry?
If you think that is bad, try reading the Lancashire telegraph online.

gandhisflipflop
Posts: 5500
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:05 pm
Been Liked: 2317 times
Has Liked: 1399 times
Location: Costa del Padihamos beach.

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by gandhisflipflop » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:45 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:23 am
"They have lended money...."

How does that get past anyone in the media industry?
:lol:

Targetman
Posts: 1641
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:43 pm
Been Liked: 502 times
Has Liked: 46 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Targetman » Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:51 am

Grumps wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 9:34 am
If you think that is bad, try reading the Lancashire telegraph online.
Or the Burnley FC official website!
Some of the grammar and spelling in reports on that site leave a lot to be desired at times.
This user liked this post: randomclaret2

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:42 am

Hmm, I think he either doesn't understand how the loans work or wanted to sensationalise it. Security over the club's assets is quite a bit different to taking control of the club. For Burnley at least there is no mechanism to seize equity if the loans aren't paid.

There is a story in there, just not the one they've gone with.

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:11 pm

aggi wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 10:42 am
For Burnley at least there is no mechanism to seize equity if the loans aren't paid
where do you get that from Aggi, I thought the BFC assets were part of the deal as being collateral for the loan?

Spijed
Posts: 17112
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
Been Liked: 2892 times
Has Liked: 1294 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Spijed » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:17 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:11 pm
where do you get that from Aggi, I thought the BFC assets were part of the deal as being collateral for the loan?
Yes, I thought the ground and Barnfield were part of the deal.

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:27 pm

Spijed wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:17 pm
Yes, I thought the ground and Barnfield were part of the deal.
me to, perhaps what is meant by "equity" is part of the shares & ownership, which would be a slightly different slant on things, however.............

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:32 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:27 pm
me to, perhaps what is meant by "equity" is part of the shares & ownership, which would be a slightly different slant on things, however.............
that is how I read what Aggi was saying

I posted a similar view on the MMT thread about the story last night
This user liked this post: KateR

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:33 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:32 pm
that is how I read what Aggi was saying

I posted a similar view on the MMT thread about the story last night
threads are crossing over, I just posted a reply to you on the same subject regarding the Lancs article.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:36 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:33 pm
threads are crossing over, I just posted a reply to you on the same subject regarding the Lancs article.
It is staggering just how often it happens

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:40 pm

yes it is and have experience of it but not in footballing terms, but the present new members of the board have vast amounts of experience and I am confident of them knowing what they are doing in the business arena, so while the potential exists I do not believe there is any need whatsoever to worry about it. It's normal business 101

9thMay1987
Posts: 283
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 70 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by 9thMay1987 » Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:44 pm

Perhaps we need to look at this from a slightly different angle.

Our new direcrors are senior members of the LDS faith.

They have 16 million members and I believe Mr. Checketts is ranked 39 in the order of people of influence.

From the Wall Street Journal the Church has a secret investment fund of $100BILLION administrated through Ensign Peak Advisors of Salt Lake City.

Very probably there is no linkage but just a thought we may have some powerful new friends.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Thu Jan 21, 2021 7:11 pm

9thMay1987 wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:44 pm
Perhaps we need to look at this from a slightly different angle.

Our new direcrors are senior members of the LDS faith.

They have 16 million members and I believe Mr. Checketts is ranked 39 in the order of people of influence.

From the Wall Street Journal the Church has a secret investment fund of $100BILLION administrated through Ensign Peak Advisors of Salt Lake City.

Very probably there is no linkage but just a thought we may have some powerful new friends.
They have powerful friends, there is a a very powerful and wealthy network of Mormon's, who may or may not want to be involved - Michael Dell is reportedly one of this network, though I would not think that helped in any way with the loan given he has targeted English Football for lending prior to this takeover, CoLDS money would not be used in this way or form would be my take.

Murger
Posts: 4206
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 12:55 pm
Been Liked: 1235 times
Has Liked: 844 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Murger » Thu Jan 21, 2021 7:17 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 7:11 pm
They have powerful friends, there is a a very powerful and wealthy network of Mormon's, who may or may not want to be involved - Michael Dell is reportedly one of this network, though I would not think that helped in any way with the loan given he has targeted English Football for lending prior to this takeover, CoLDS money would not be used in this way or form would be my take.
Can't be that secret if they've just posted the amount.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jan 22, 2021 1:47 pm

aggi wrote:
Wed Jan 20, 2021 2:04 pm
I see stuff is starting to filter through on Companies House now. New Memorandums and Articles of Association (although that isn't online yet), it will be interesting to see what the changes will be. It could obviously remove the requirement for 4,000 shares to be a director which has been referenced recently.
The new Articles of Association are now available to read

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

to be a Director must have ownership over £4000 nominal value of shares - I think this is where the 4000 shares comes from- Shares are still held at that nominal value of £1 I believe

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:25 pm

KateR wrote:
Thu Jan 21, 2021 6:11 pm
where do you get that from Aggi, I thought the BFC assets were part of the deal as being collateral for the loan?
Yes, I was meaning equity specifically as shares and ownership of the legal entity.

However, thinking about it I'm not sure whether I was correct there.

The charge is over Burnley FC Holdings (the holding company) as well as the companies that own the club and the ground. The main assets in Burnley FC Holdings are those shareholdings in the club and the company that owns the grounds and investments are included in the security.

If the club defaulted on the loan there's a possibility that those shares could be taken.
This user liked this post: KateR

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:30 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jan 22, 2021 1:47 pm
The new Articles of Association are now available to read

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

to be a Director must have ownership over £4000 nominal value of shares - I think this is where the 4000 shares comes from- Shares are still held at that nominal value of £1 I believe
Yes, the only difference is the last page which I suspect was required by MSD.
Attachments
Screenshot 2021-01-22 142934.jpg
Screenshot 2021-01-22 142934.jpg (137.38 KiB) Viewed 3830 times

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:31 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:25 pm
Yes, I was meaning equity specifically as shares and ownership of the legal entity.

However, thinking about it I'm not sure whether I was correct there.

The charge is over Burnley FC Holdings (the holding company) as well as the companies that own the club and the ground. The main assets in Burnley FC Holdings are those shareholdings in the club and the company that owns the grounds and investments are included in the security.

If the club defaulted on the loan there's a possibility that those shares could be taken.
I tend to agree, they are at risk legally if the said shareholders/Company can not find funds from elsewhere such as player sales, that is why I believe the lenders can have a dramatic effect but only when owners really screw things up, therefore I stand by my thought that there is nothing to worry about given the present board/ownership credentials.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:33 pm

aggi wrote:
Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:25 pm
Yes, I was meaning equity specifically as shares and ownership of the legal entity.

However, thinking about it I'm not sure whether I was correct there.

The charge is over Burnley FC Holdings (the holding company) as well as the companies that own the club and the ground. The main assets in Burnley FC Holdings are those shareholdings in the club and the company that owns the grounds and investments are included in the security.

If the club defaulted on the loan there's a possibility that those shares could be taken.
Certainly gives more support to the recent letter of complaint to the EFL. Though it also makes you wonder about failed remaining payments outstanding on the shares - Mike and John may regain control but still have to finance the debt. I still suspect that taking the share equity would be the final resort for MSD

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:41 pm

Also interesting to note that Pace is the only new director at Longside Properties - no Smith and Hunt

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... 9/officers

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:17 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Fri Jan 22, 2021 2:41 pm
Also interesting to note that Pace is the only new director at Longside Properties - no Smith and Hunt

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... 9/officers
They've been added now.

Will be interesting to see what the upshot is when all this is updated, in particular who/what is in control. I suspect we may end up with a dead-end with the club being owned by a Delaware company. (It stops at Kettering Capital at the moment).

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:25 pm

aggi wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:17 pm
They've been added now.

Will be interesting to see what the upshot is when all this is updated, in particular who/what is in control. I suspect we may end up with a dead-end with the club being owned by a Delaware company. (It stops at Kettering Capital at the moment).
that would be my fear, the were complaints (a number well justified) under Garlick about transparency but burying information in Delaware would be pretty awful

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:40 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:25 pm
that would be my fear, the were complaints (a number well justified) under Garlick about transparency but burying information in Delaware would be pretty awful
Delaware is very well know for setting up companies and there are numerous reasons for it, I have been involved in setting up a few with the lawyers where I need to set up a foreign partnership but wanted to limit risks to the parent company.

I am not convinced it would be awful if that is where it went, my thoughts are it would protect some but not those of a UK company registered at Companies House. The owners of BFC would (IMO) be liable under UK law to the lenders, which are to the bets of my knowledge under the agreement a UK company, albeit a branch of the mother ship.

Just thoughts but we would need legal to make complete sense, yet I never like to see any long backwards trail from a company I am dealing with, what I also don't know is, are there any parent company guarantees involved and if so, what are they.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:46 pm

KateR wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:40 pm
Delaware is very well know for setting up companies and there are numerous reasons for it, I have been involved in setting up a few with the lawyers where I need to set up a foreign partnership but wanted to limit risks to the parent company.

I am not convinced it would be awful if that is where it went, my thoughts are it would protect some but not those of a UK company registered at Companies House. The owners of BFC would (IMO) be liable under UK law to the lenders, which are to the bets of my knowledge under the agreement a UK company, albeit a branch of the mother ship.

Just thoughts but we would need legal to make complete sense, yet I never like to see any long backwards trail from a company I am dealing with, what I also don't know is, are there any parent company guarantees involved and if so, what are they.
I would be interested to see what you make of this I posted on the MMT thread yesterday - a long way from coming off - if ever - of course
Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Jan 25, 2021 7:40 pm
This could prove very interesting and damaging for US Private Equity if it ever comes to pass - from Pitchbook.com - obviously thee is a surging mood of wanting to change in American politics as the Democrats power increases across the government - how that will reflect itself in actual action and law is likely to take both time and an awful lot of political will, the counter-pressure while powerful is likely to be largely invisible to most observers

https://pitchbook.com/news/articles/pri ... eth-warren

Private equity could face a reckoning as power shifts in Congress
By Adam Lewis
January 21, 2021

After years of operating with minimal government intervention, the US private equity industry could face new regulatory scrutiny in 2021 and beyond.

Democrats now control both chambers of Congress and the White House, giving progressive lawmakers who have long criticized the PE industry their best chance yet to enact significant change.

Chief among those lawmakers is Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the primary force behind the Stop Wall Street Looting Act, a comprehensive bill first introduced in 2019. The proposed legislation never left committee in a Senate controlled by Republicans. But Warren is now set to reintroduce her effort to regulate an industry she has derided for debt-heavy deals that can lead to layoffs, bankruptcies and other woes while exposing firms to few risks.

If passed, the bill would tax capital gains as regular income, ban dividends in the first two years a private equity firm owns a portfolio company, and hold firms responsible for debt and legal obligations incurred at portfolio companies under their ownership, among other outcomes.

"Senator Warren will continue her push to rein in the private equity industry this year," a Warren spokesperson told PitchBook. "And that includes holding these predatory companies accountable for lining the pockets of wealthy firms at the expense of struggling workers during the COVID-19 crisis, and wreaking havoc on low-income Americans at risk of losing their homes."

In terms of the pandemic's effect on private equity, the industry's top lobbying group takes the opposite view of Warren.

"Our nation is experiencing a serious economic downturn," said a spokesperson for the American Investment Council. "And now would be the worst time to pass legislation that will discourage investment in businesses and destroy jobs."

Indeed, any efforts to seriously reassess the role of private equity may have to wait. The newly blue Congress has several other high priorities, including efforts to pass another economic stimulus package and an infrastructure plan as well as holding a second impeachment trial for former President Donald Trump.

"I think the Biden administration has many catastrophes to contend with to move on PE in year one," said Eileen Appelbaum, a frequent private equity critic who has testified before Congress in support of the Stop Wall Street Looting Act. "Hopefully, there will be Congressional hearings to tee up financial reform in year two."

Not every member of Warren's party will be on board with her latest push. When the House held hearings in late 2019 to look at private equity's role in a string of retail bankruptcies, including Toys R Us, several Democrats voiced support for the industry's role in creating jobs in their districts.

One newly empowered lawmaker who could set his sights on private equity is Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who was recently named chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. Politico reported this week that Brown, a co-sponsor for Warren's bill, plans to hold public hearings to examine private equity's influence.

Appointees joining the Biden administration could also play a role in determining how private equity is regulated.

Last week, President Biden nominated Gary Gensler to lead the SEC. A former partner at Goldman Sachs and the head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in the Obama administration, Gensler has since become known for clashes with big banks over their role in the global financial crisis. The expectation is Gensler, if confirmed, would be an aggressive advocate for Wall Street regulation.

Biden also tapped Rohit Chopra, a Warren disciple and commissioner of the FTC, to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Last year, Chopra lobbied Congress to require private equity firms to notify the FTC of smaller add-on deals, describing such firms as "vulture investors" and expressing concern about potential monopolies in the healthcare industry.

One shift that could have more immediate impact would be increased congressional funding for the IRS, which was gutted under the Trump administration. A renewed push by the agency to investigate investment funds and monitor fees could increase transparency about whether those dividends were used to either enrich executives or actually pay their LPs.

"That would achieve one of the important ends of the Stop Wall Street Looting Act," Appelbaum said.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:06 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:25 pm
that would be my fear, the were complaints (a number well justified) under Garlick about transparency but burying information in Delaware would be pretty awful
Well, we already had the ground owned by unknown people in the British Virgin Isles so it won't be entirely new.

Mala591
Posts: 1887
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:02 pm
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 428 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Mala591 » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:32 pm

Why do business people (including BFC directors) invent numerous ‘strangely named’ off shore sub-companies to try and hide profits?

Our NHS needs everyone to pay their fair share of income tax/corporation tax to survive.
This user liked this post: Peter Loo

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:36 pm

Mala591 wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:32 pm
Why do business people (including BFC directors) invent numerous ‘strangely named’ off shore sub-companies to try and hide profits?

Our NHS needs you to pay your fair share of income tax/corporation tax to survive.
you would be as well asking why Mike Garlick created "Clarets go Large" in 2016 - a strange turn for someone with his business persona (at least in football)

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:44 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 6:46 pm
I would be interested to see what you make of this I posted on the MMT thread yesterday - a long way from coming off - if ever - of course
like many things it's which side of the dividing line you stand and how far back from it, whether in this case politics or financing in general and in this case private equity.

I think I tend to be slight one side of the line or the other and often stradling it, in this case I think Biden and the democrats need to be careful, the Chinese have just for the first time topped the charts in foreign invest as the US have dropped significantly during the pandemic and China has actually increased 4% in 2020, the only country on the plus side in the world I believe.

When you couple that with the fact that Biden has/is slapping 8% on top of corporate tax and increasing tax all round, plus they want to increase the minimum wage, it points to a "do I really want to invest in the US" The actual economy (for every country obviously) is going to be the number one thing coming out of the pandemic, which is as we all hope and many expect in 2021 but I think more so for Americans than anywhere else.

Regulating the industry, is I feel required, however it is about how far will it go, far to often in many cases we see the pendulum swing to far and that is a worry. Clearly for me the vultures need to be sorted out similarly to the payday loans etc.

I think minimum wage should increase, that will also help with the areas like payday loans.

I don't think corp tax should have increased but it was there during Obama and people/companies lived with it, however that will not help foreign investment to come in, create jobs etc.

Warrens wishes are well known but will face hurdles and not sure all democrats will be jumping on the bandwagon so it will be a tough sell even though they control both houses.

Bottom line, we all want to improvements, more protection, higher penalties and improved quality of life across the board but people who invest funds want a return, if it affects any of us, other than giving to charity, then typically we are against it. The higher the risk the more return you want, business 101, MDS/ALK will be no different in that way, nor will companies that Warren is going after, usually there is always somewhere else you can take your business so make it to difficult and it's the majority of people who suffer while trying to protect a few.

KateR
Posts: 4138
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 1018 times
Has Liked: 6156 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by KateR » Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:48 pm

Mala591 wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:32 pm
Why do business people (including BFC directors) invent numerous ‘strangely named’ off shore sub-companies to try and hide profits?

Our NHS needs everyone to pay their fair share of income tax/corporation tax to survive.
because without the investors there is no tax at all and the companies first duty is to the investors and the return on investment, all to often it is a way to improve investor return by reducing tax and other burdens, it is endemic in business and as long as legal we can have few complaints. It's trying to close the tax loopholes where endeavors should be concentrated plus obviously going after companies/individuals that avoid the tax illegally.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Tue Jan 26, 2021 11:40 pm

Mala591 wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:32 pm
Why do business people (including BFC directors) invent numerous ‘strangely named’ off shore sub-companies to try and hide profits?

Our NHS needs everyone to pay their fair share of income tax/corporation tax to survive.
What makes you think the structure will be hiding profits?

All employees of Burnley Football Club will always pay full income tax and national insurance on their wages. That includes 13.8% of Employer's NIC.

International structure of companies will take into account the international ownership of the club. ALK Capital are owned by US citizens.

Exciting times.

UTC

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Tue Jan 26, 2021 11:50 pm

From Companies House filings: Kettering Capital Limited issued 99,000 shares, fully paid amount (rounded) £98,000,000 (£98 million) on 30th December. Notified to Companies House 26-Jan-2021.

That's £88 million more than the various 3rd party media reporters were saying - and that our Chairman, Alan Pace, had got their "facts" wrong.

It's not just a new set of Memorandum and Articles of Association.

Exciting times.

UTC

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:24 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 11:50 pm
From Companies House filings: Kettering Capital Limited issued 99,000 shares, fully paid amount (rounded) £98,000,000 (£98 million) on 30th December. Notified to Companies House 26-Jan-2021.

That's £88 million more than the various 3rd party media reporters were saying - and that our Chairman, Alan Pace, had got their "facts" wrong.

It's not just a new set of Memorandum and Articles of Association.

Exciting times.

UTC
not seeing that yet Paul

Kettering Capital
https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

Calder Vale
https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

though £98m is close to the £100m or so that Matt Slater had said was paid up front - and we do not know how much of that was money from the loans - or as yet what the real value of the loans was

Chester Perry
Posts: 19167
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3115 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Chester Perry » Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:35 am

Checketts and Parra confirmed as Directors of Burnley FC Holdings - given the articles of Association not being amended for Directors we have to assume that they have stumped up over £6m each for shares - they are not directors of ALK UK, Velocity Sports, Kettering Capital or Calder Vale

https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:53 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:24 am
not seeing that yet Paul

Kettering Capital
https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

Calder Vale
https://find-and-update.company-informa ... ng-history

though £98m is close to the £100m or so that Matt Slater had said was paid up front - and we do not know how much of that was money from the loans - or as yet what the real value of the loans was
Hi CP, did you take a look at the statement of capital following allotment of shares on 30-Dec-2020?

The details are:

50,000 shares at £200 each and 49,000 shares at £1,795.918. All fully paid.

Thus totals are: 50,000 x £200 = £10,000,000 and 49,000 x £1,795.918 = £87,999,982. Combined total £97,999,982.

Exciting times.

UTC

Mala591
Posts: 1887
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:02 pm
Been Liked: 681 times
Has Liked: 428 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Mala591 » Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:57 am

Exciting times for the accountants who are contracted to provide financial services for the takeover.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:13 am

Chester Perry wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:36 pm
you would be as well asking why Mike Garlick created "Clarets go Large" in 2016 - a strange turn for someone with his business persona (at least in football)
I forgot about those.

Clarets go Large was a UK company but there were Braeburn Trading, Bideford Trading and Rothbury Trading (Mike Garlick) and Co. Utc Ltd (John B) which were all overseas companies holding shares in the club.

Newcastleclaret93
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 pm
Been Liked: 1559 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Newcastleclaret93 » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:14 am

Would anyone be able to break the above down into simple terms?

I am assuming what it is saying is that they actually invested close to 100m in to buying the club and the reporters were incorrect when they said they only put 15m up front?

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Tall Paul » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:16 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 9:53 am
Hi CP, did you take a look at the statement of capital following allotment of shares on 30-Dec-2020?

The details are:

50,000 shares at £200 each and 49,000 shares at £1,795.918. All fully paid.

Thus totals are: 50,000 x £200 = £10,000,000 and 49,000 x £1,795.918 = £87,999,982. Combined total £97,999,982.

Exciting times.

UTC
I think you're out by a factor of 100,000. Although the individual allotments do seem a bit confusing, the statement of captal (totals) shows that the shares have a nominal value of 1p each for a total share value of £1,000.
This user liked this post: Chester Perry

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:23 am

Paul Waine wrote:
Tue Jan 26, 2021 11:50 pm
From Companies House filings: Kettering Capital Limited issued 99,000 shares, fully paid amount (rounded) £98,000,000 (£98 million) on 30th December. Notified to Companies House 26-Jan-2021.

That's £88 million more than the various 3rd party media reporters were saying - and that our Chairman, Alan Pace, had got their "facts" wrong.

It's not just a new set of Memorandum and Articles of Association.

Exciting times.

UTC
I guess the underlying question is how those shares were paid for. On its own it doesn't prove or disprove the media reporting.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:27 am

Tall Paul wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:16 am
I think you're out by a factor of 100,000. Although the individual allotments do seem a bit confusing, the statement of captal (totals) shows that the shares have a nominal value of 1p each for a total share value of £1,000.
Nominal values are pretty meaningless though. They often don't reflect what he payment for the shares actually was.

android
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 10:01 am
Been Liked: 119 times
Has Liked: 43 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by android » Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:49 am

Tall Paul wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:16 am
I think you're out by a factor of 100,000. Although the individual allotments do seem a bit confusing, the statement of captal (totals) shows that the shares have a nominal value of 1p each for a total share value of £1,000.
I think Paul W is correct that the amount paid up for Kettering's share capital is £98m. For example, the £1,795.918 reported to Companies House as paid for the issue of 49,000 shares has to be an amount paid per share and not the total amount paid for all those shares as you cannot pay 8 tenths of a penny. So £87,999,982 was paid for those shares, which represents £1,795.918 per share. Add 50000 shares at £200 each and the initial 1000 shares at nominal £0.01 makes a total of £97,999,992.

But I think aggi is also right that it doesn't confirm that the individual investors stumped up £98m in cash. Velocity sports owns Kettering so we don't yet know the source of the £98m of cash that Velocity invested in Kettering.
This user liked this post: Paul Waine

Tall Paul
Posts: 7170
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:07 am
Been Liked: 2560 times
Has Liked: 690 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Tall Paul » Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am

android wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:49 am
I think Paul W is correct that the amount paid up for Kettering's share capital is £98m. For example, the £1,795.918 reported to Companies House as paid for the issue of 49,000 shares has to be an amount paid per share and not the total amount paid for all those shares as you cannot pay 8 tenths of a penny. So £87,999,982 was paid for those shares, which represents £1,795.918 per share. Add 50000 shares at £200 each and the initial 1000 shares at nominal £0.01 makes a total of £97,999,992.

But I think aggi is also right that it doesn't confirm that the individual investors stumped up £98m in cash. Velocity sports owns Kettering so we don't yet know the source of the £98m of cash that Velocity invested in Kettering.
Yes, I stand corrected. That surprises me, I think it's unusual for a holding company to have that much equity. It'll be interesting to see the accounts when they're filed.

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:17 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:14 am
Yes, I stand corrected. That surprises me, I think it's unusual for a holding company to have that much equity. It'll be interesting to see the accounts when they're filed.
Chelsea are the obvious one. They have a hefty share premium and capital contribution reserve in the holding company (and all the loans).

aggi
Posts: 8762
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:31 am
Been Liked: 2109 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by aggi » Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:20 pm

Newcastleclaret93 wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:14 am
Would anyone be able to break the above down into simple terms?

I am assuming what it is saying is that they actually invested close to 100m in to buying the club and the reporters were incorrect when they said they only put 15m up front?
There's no real clarity on how these things are being funded so it may be that they invested £15m or it may be that they invested £100m of their own money.

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:15 pm

Tall Paul wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 10:16 am
I think you're out by a factor of 100,000. Although the individual allotments do seem a bit confusing, the statement of captal (totals) shows that the shares have a nominal value of 1p each for a total share value of £1,000.
Hi TP, you ok, now, that is not the nominal value of the shares (1p) but the amount subscribed for the shares that determines the share capital?

It's not clear to me why 50,000 shares were subscribed at £200/share and a further 49,000 shares were subscribed at £1,795.918 per share. The shares themselves are all equal "ordinary shares." Maybe the difference is determined by who has acquired these shares, those paying £200 per share may have already contributed something else of value, possibly they've been more active in the acquisition of the club?

Exciting times.

UTC

Paul Waine
Posts: 9845
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:28 pm
Been Liked: 2344 times
Has Liked: 3164 times

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Post by Paul Waine » Wed Jan 27, 2021 2:28 pm

aggi wrote:
Wed Jan 27, 2021 12:20 pm
There's no real clarity on how these things are being funded so it may be that they invested £15m or it may be that they invested £100m of their own money.
Hi aggi, I know anyone can buy shares with money that they've borrowed..... But, we know that the lender will always want to know how the money they lend will be repaid and, in the first instance, without the need for the lender to exercise any security that supports the borrowing. Anyone borrowing money to buy shares will always face a sizeable "haircut" against the value of the shares. I'd be surprised if it was possible to borrow money with only a 50% haircut if the borrowed money was to be spent on buying shares in a football club.

Agree, no clarity on the information in the public domain. I think we can conclude that Alan Pace is correct when he say's that The Athletic (and others) have not got their facts right.

Exciting times.

UTC

Post Reply