Skip to main content

Complicated situation at Everton

When The Friedkin Group pulled out of talks with Everton owner Farhad Moshiri to buy the Premier League club, the two parties issued a joint statement saying they had agreed “to explore alternative options”, without explaining why the deal had collapsed.

It quickly became an established fact that The Friedkin Group got cold feet because of legal uncertainties surrounding the £200million ($260m at current rates) that former Everton suitor 777 Partners has lent to the club over the last year. That bid failed to receive Premier League approval and the Miami-based firm is now in quasi-administration, while 777 and its long-term backer A-Cap are embroiled in a $600million lawsuit with a London-based firm called Leadenhall, which believes it is the rightful owner of 777’s assets, including the loan to Everton.

It is a complicated situation, so it is hardly surprising that some commentators have boiled this down to saying the takeover collapsed because Leadenhall blocked it — an explanation that neither The Friedkin Group nor Moshiri objected to, as it suggests they are collateral damage in somebody else’s squabble.

It is a nice theory, but it is not true. The reality of the Leadenhall-related obstacle is far more concerning for Everton’s future.   Leadenhall’s case against 777 is that the latter borrowed money from the firm secured on assets in its portfolio of companies, but 777 had also been borrowing money from A-Cap using the same security. This is known as double-pledging and Leadenhall also alleges that A-Cap was complicit in the fraud. 777 and A-Cap deny any wrongdoing.

Opportunities to settle the case have come and gone, but a district court judge in New York has granted Leadenhall a “preliminary injunction” over 777’s assets to make sure any money that comes back to 777, which is now under A-Cap’s control, is available to all of its creditors and is not moved to somewhere they cannot get it.

The injunction is not meant to stop 777/A-Cap from running its various businesses or even selling them. So, there is no reason why 777/A-Cap cannot agree to Everton’s sale or enter into negotiations with a new Everton owner over full or — more likely — partial repayment of that debt.

Leadenhall would surely like 777/A-Cap to bring in some cash, as it wants its money back. The idea it is blocking 777/A-Cap from doing a deal on the Everton loan has come as a surprise. So, what is really happening here?

Is it that Leadenhall will not accept a penny less than the £200million 777/A-Cap lent to Everton, or is it that 777/A-Cap need that £200million to sit on the balance sheet at full value and therefore cannot get into everyday business conversations about settling a bad debt?

 

 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Threat of financial calamity removed from Baggies

West Bromwich Albion had effectively been in decline ever since the club was sold to a Chinese consortium in August 2016, paying a figure north of £200m to buy former owner Jeremy Peace’s stake. Controlling shareholder Guochuan Lai’s ownership was fairly disastrous for the club, but his unloved tenure finally came to an end after Bilkul Football WBA, a company ultimately owned by Florida-based entrepreneur Shilen Patel and his father Dr Kiran Patel, acquired an 87.8% shareholding in West Bromwich Albion Group Limited, the parent company of West Bromwich Albion Football Club. This change in ownership was urgently required, due to the numerous financial problems facing West Brom, including growing high-interest debt and serious cash flow concerns, following years of no investment from the former owner. Indeed, West Brom’s auditors had already rung the alarm bell in the 2021/22 accounts when they cast doubt on the club’s ability to continue as a going concern without making player s...
1 comment
Read more

Gold standard ground boosts Tottenham's income

The gold standard in European football grounds is the Tottenham Hotspur stadium in north London, a £1bn construction project completed in 2019. Its impact on the club’s finances has become increasingly clear as the effects of the pandemic have faded. Previously, the average fan would spend less than £2 inside the ground on a typical match day, but now that figure is about £16, thanks to new facilities including the longest bar in Europe and an on-site microbrewery. Capacity has gone up from 36,000 at the club’s previous home of White Hart Lane to 62,000.  The new stadium — built on land adjacent to White Hart Lane — has opened the door to a broad range of other events that have helped to push commercial income up from €117mn in 2018 to €215mn in 2022. Last year, Tottenham hosted US singer Beyoncé for five nights on her global Renaissance tour, two NFL matches, as well as rugby games and heavyweight boxing bouts.  Money brought in from football has gone up too. Match day ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Spurs to sell minority stake

Tottenham Hotspur is in talks to sell a minority stake in a deal that could value it at up to £3.75 billion and pave the way for Joe Lewis and his family to sever ties with the Premier League football club. Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy is seeking an investment that values the club at between £3.5 billion and £3.75 billion, including debt. While the terms of any deal have not been finalised, City sources expect Spurs to sell about 10 per cent. The club is being advised by bankers from Rothschild on the sale. Tottenham wants to raise fresh capital for new player signings and to help fund the development of an academy for its women’s team, as well as a 30-storey hotel next to its north London stadium. The financier Amanda Staveley, who brokered the deal for Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund to take over Newcastle United, is understood to be among the parties to have expressed an interest in Tottenham. Staveley’s fund, PCP Capital Partners, has raised about £500 million to ...
Post a Comment
Read more