BFC Investment Company

He was wrong though, as Data has been in use in European football clubs for nearly 30 years. Also Cricket,Rugby and Athletics, all use data systems.

 

Thanks Exile for your sterling work. I'm reluctant to simplify a complex issue... but...

I too have searched for a 'motive' and come up short. Is there not a chance that the parties involved in selling the original opportunity (Conway) and the investors themselves are not and were never very well attuned to the realities of running a mid-size professional English football club?

To be blinded by the revenue riches of the Premier League boom and spending power of clubs even at the top end of the Championship, as well as a few of our headline sales such as Mawson and Stones might have been enough to persuade stakeholders to invest, what to them, is a relatively small speculative sum in comparison to their other business interests. Add to that the pathways followed by Brentford, Burnley, Bournemouth and the unique customer relationship guaranteeing fans dip into their pockets regardless (as Conway will have pitched it) and you may just end up with enough of a pyramid to find some willing blocks. For Mr Figurehead's part, he gets to play real-life Football Manager and cream six-figure salaries and remuneration across a stable of European clubs.

In so many words, the figureheads didn't do their homework and never had a sound business model and the investors bit at a slice of the cake hoping they'd drop on cherry. As we've seen all too prominently in recent times, wealth and influence does not equate to intelligence or competence.

 

I think this is the first question NP should be asked on his next meeting with supporters. " Do you intend to continue to sell your Beane shares to Lee Chien? Yes or no". Then continually pressed on this until a satisfactory answer and explanation is given. Lee Chien's involvement with Barnsley and other football clubs in europe has been disastrous for them,but lucrative for him.

 

Yes but surely at some point in the 4 years one of those investors such as JAQ, who says she loves Barnsley and is a fan of the club, uttered a peep or came to the club just the once to watch a game?

Also

But again why didn't they fire him at the end of the 4 year term rather than after bad PR against themselves from protests

 

Think that's the key. European football below the Premier leagues was sold to unknowledgable Americans/ Chinese as the next upcoming thing. A If we'd got to the Prem again those investors would have made money.its all speculation, sonething to bung spare cash into with a possibility of return.

 

Agree with a lot of this and add to the income streams for 'Mr. Figurehead' that PMG have been able to obtain consultancies with other American investment groups 'advising' them on how to get involved in buying European clubs - eg they hold a 1m (not sure if dollars or euros) contract to 'advise' 777 Partners Capital on their takeovers (Genoa, Standard Liege - still think there's a fishy link to the Oulare transfer there!)

On the data point raised by @Archerfield I think that this is and would have been particularly relevant in relation to the investors in Barnsley as Lee/Conway brought with them a renowned and successful data-driven American sports club executive to the party in Billy Beane which would have been pretty convincing to other US based investors.

Bear also in mind that for all the damage they have done on and off the pitch at most, if not all, of their clubs they made a bomb financially from their first one in OGC Nice. That alone probably dwarfs what they have put into other clubs and is another tangible selling point to investors with only a partial understanding in this market.

 

Why is it I read this and can't help thinking that Paul Conway reminds me of Zero Mostell in the Producers

 

Not hard to imagine someone using someone like Burnley and saying for a few quid and using our proven data system etc it could be replicated and the rewards could be fantastic.
No different to us buying a ticket on lottery unlikely to win but risk against reward is good.

 

The difference is that Max Bialystock inadvertently created a hit while trying desperately to fail. Conway appears to have the same basic idea, but in reverse.

 

Neerav now showing as a person of significant control, over 25% holding in BFC investments.

Either an existing shareholder has trimmed their stake selling to Neerav or being diluted down by new share issuance which they chose not to take up.

 

Can you explain it for the simpletons. (Me)

 

Hopefully it’s either Conway or Lee, or better still both.

 

Say a company has four shareholders, and they each own a million shares. The company is made up of four million shares and each person owns 25% of the company

If the board need to raise funds, they can issue a new shares. So say they want to raise a million quid and to do so they sell one million new shares at a pound each. The existing shareholders would be able to buy the new shares in line with the proportion that they currently own, so if each spent £250,000 they'd get 250,000 new shares and still own 25% of the business. But if Lee or Conway don't want to (or perhaps can't) put the money in, other shareholders would get the chance to buy the shares. If Neerav bought all one million new shares, he'd own two million of the now five million total shares in the company - 40%.

The thing is only the board can call for new shares to be issued, so by getting Conway and Lee off the board they have made it posible to raise capital in this way. They now have to either keep putting in money to maintain their current holding, or see the percentage they own wiped out.

The alternative could be that somebody has directly sold their shares to Neerav but it's more likely directly tied to this £3m capital investment that was announced the other month. Either way, it limits the chances of Lee or Conway getting involved again.

 

Got to be a positive thing, shares now slightly less diluted.

It would be good if the board would update us on how the finances are looking mid season. By that I mean have they papered over a few cracks or are we back on a more balanced financial footing month to month. Do they expect to have to inject X more millions in to get us through to the end ofbthe season. If they do, what does that mean longer term?

 

Have any of the board confirmed whether these cash injections will need to be paid back to them? If so, when?

 

If it's a share issue it won't need to be paid back.

 

Does that mean she(and presumably husband) are no longer part of a consortium/group and now single investors like the others?