BFC Investment Company

''I think we can all agree that there's been significant progress in our approach to running the football club''

Where? When? How?

The only difference is you Loko the tyke would have been going mad if it was under the old Chairman this summer but because its Neerav and Jean Crynes back involved you've said nothing. It's been a car car crash.

The comments about selling from Neerav. Jeans Cryne comments about going back to what the club was under Patrick. That isn't true from what I remember. signing players like Norwood that he was the biggest critic of post Wilson. Plus many more things.

You don't ask them to explain that like you were at the old chairmen to do.

No shirt sponsor. Never happened under them. Shirt timing for sale. Awful.

plus more and more.

 

And, duly updated..... (we just had missing the directors of the investment vehicle, now added, and the breakdown of the 20%, also added)

 

Looking at the above chart what influence, if any, does Chien Lee still have in anything to do with BFC?
He doesn't hold 31% of BFC but 31% of the 80%ers. (?)
It's still a significant amount but is it influential?

 

Neither Conway or he are on the board of the investment company or are directors of the football club.

We at least now know who the people with nominal stakes are. It would only take the 9% and 5% shareholders to realign with Chien Lee and we're back to square one. In the short term, I'd say that's very unlikely. If things go awry and we find ourselves in League 1 or worse for a while, who knows what they may do in the medium term if Lee maintains his holding.

 

But even later/more awful in Conway's Nancy - home kit not even to be unveiled until 28th July!

You couldn't buy it anyway as ASNL Boutique seems to be totally out of action too!

#betterwithoutconway

 

There's the added 'subtlety' of the 'A' shares and the 'B' shares as the majority 'A' shareholders get to appoint 4 of the directors and the 'B' shareholders 1. The Crynes' 20% are the 'B' shares.

Assuming that Lee and Conway/Hung are still 'pals' they own 38.75% of the 80% 'A' shares and so are collectively only 1.26% away from a majority that would allow them to appoint a Board with a majority of their own supporters.

Let's hope:-
(a) the JAQ group, including her marriage is solid and that her nomination period is a lengthy one; and
(b) the new share issues take place and start to diminish the Lee/Conway/Hung percentages.

 

Even more perilous than first thoughts then. Funny you mention that re Quay, it was something I'd considered too. A pity she has no direct equity given her new role.

And as for the hedge fund owners, well.... if you can't trust hedge fund owners who can you trust eh?!?!?!?

 

What an absolute mess.

This all stemmed from splitting the football club from the stadium asset. It's been a disaster everywhere it's happened.

Now we have a convoluted ownership where there is no clear decision making responsibility or accountability - with disgruntled ex board members still holding a significant stake - and a stadium that the Crynes and BMBC have run into the dirt over the last 15 years. What a total mess.

 

It is numerically but personally I honestly can't see a Conway comeback - even if one of the Quay group got fed up I think what they've seen from Conway to date and the acrimonious split would be enough to convince them not to go back to that. Any other majority grouping would have to include Lee and I'm not sure how appealing a partner he would be either.

Maybe she'd insist on the BFC shares as part of the divorce settlement

Indeed - such paragons of virtue

 

It's not 31% of the 80%ers, it's 31% of the share capital of the investment company, which owns 100% of the shares of BFC.

The shareholdings are split on the diagram, but could just have easily been shown as a single block totally 100%, instead of 2 blocks totalling 20% and 80% respectively.

 

I agree that in the short term an immediate shift is very unlikely. For me, thats why seeing the result of a new share issue is really interesting and will give us a much clearer indication as to what the Lee and PMG groups perceive as the future. If they agree to put additional funding in, it very much suggests they don't feel the game is up. And as you've highlighted on investment co voting rights, 1.26% is not a lot to acquire.

It would also be interesting to know more of the nominal transfers from Parekh to Lee. One more transfer of 1.5% would shift the balance of power again.

 

"run into the dirt" - a slight exageration there. At least you don't get covered in black dust walking up to the stands like it was in the 70's.

 

Yes, that's definitely one we need to know more on, or at least that there aren't any more transfers mandated!

The other thing that may or may not come into play is the resolution of the court case and/or the issues surrounding it - again one potential outcome of that could be an equity share redistribution in what we currently perceive to be the 'right direction'.

 

Time will tell, but last summer, Conway took us from being a club that finished 5th, to being one that could consider themselves lucky to be as high as 24th.

Can't get much worse really.

 

Until we actually know more about the claims and counterclaims, I'm not going to worry too much about that court case and any implications.

 

Yes it could.

I am making a distinct line of separation to show the ownership of the ground/assets.
As well as showing how James/Jean link into the whole equation through oakwell holdings.

Was mainly done to show how it's got so many legs to the whole structure. But what isn't shown is that at companies House Oakwell holdings isn't split 50/50 with James/Jean.

But since the entire fall out wasn't much of a concern from their side, I didn't start putting in exact % or list directors of oakwell holdings.

Curiously, whilst James/Jean also own 50% of oakwell community assets, only Council employees are directors (2 of them) as in Councillor Robert Frost, and Councillor Alan Gardener.

We could dig further, but our main concern was the make up of the 80% side, which is now more clearer than ever we managed previously

 

Thanks for this. Most enlightening.