You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Harris and Blitzer, Chelsea
November 29 2022 1.45pm

Harris and Blitzer, Chelsea

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 8 of 12 < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >

Play our World Cup 2022 Prediction League!

World Cup Prediction League 2022

Sponsor a forum or Advertise on the HOL!


 

View Davepalace707's Profile Davepalace707 Flag Northumberland 30 Mar 22 6.31pm Send a Private Message to Davepalace707 Add Davepalace707 as a friend

Originally posted by ASCPFC

Still, if we did get some filthy lucre a new 50,000 stadium would be nice. Or even a new stand or two or three.

Who knows? Maybe it’s our turn for some billionaire money. Most of the parties bidding for Chelsea won’t be successful.

 


“You miss 100 per cent of the shots you don’t take”

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Omph's Profile Omph Flag Liverpool 30 Mar 22 6.42pm Send a Private Message to Omph Add Omph as a friend

Originally posted by ASCPFC

Still, if we did get some filthy lucre a new 50,000 stadium would be nice. Or even a new stand or two or three.

Just been trying to work out the time scale for three new stands. Think 2050 seems about right factoring in marginally greater efficiency for stands 2 and 3.

Edit: bit ambitious on second thoughts - that’s more like 2 stands

Edited by Omph (30 Mar 2022 6.44pm)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View sydtheeagle's Profile sydtheeagle Flag England 30 Mar 22 7.51pm Send a Private Message to sydtheeagle Add sydtheeagle as a friend

Originally posted by ASCPFC

Still, if we did get some filthy lucre a new 50,000 stadium would be nice. Or even a new stand or two or three.

I think this is the Holy Grail BUT the question isn't would it be nice (obviously, absent of context it would be) BUT what price would the nice come in at? Nice is wonderful, but it's not free of cost or responsibility.

If we got those things from Harris and Blitzer it would be (or would have been) wonderful because a). they could afford to do it without leverage, and b). we know they'd do it in a responsible way because they've proven to be responsible investors. If, say, their Chelsea bid didn't go through and for whatever reason they decided to go "all in" on Palace, that'd be cause to break out the champagne. Abramovich was "nice" for Chelsea because he could afford to what he did. Glazer hasn't been nice for Man Utd because even though he's supported a large transfer budget, he's leveraged the club to do it and they're paying a high price for that.

The danger is that we that we get all you describe above, everyone starts popping the corks, but the source of it is Simon Jordan/Mark Goldberg version 2. And I fear football supporters being what they are, would just celebrate. No one would ask questions about the provenance of the investor, they'd just see a couple of new players and a new stand and think mannah from heaven had arrived. Two years later, when we're back in administration, they'd claim never to have seen it coming.

The thing for me with any investor who buys into Palace is that first and foremost, I want to know that they have a track record of successfully running businesses over a long period of time. Not a single, quick high-value success (a la Jordan or Goldberg) but real, demonstrable, serious pedigree. Then, I want to know that they're sufficiently capitalised to run the club for a long-ish period of time; not just spend money one summer or one season. That means they need to be pretty high net worth (not just rich).

Personally, I want investors in Palace to be COMPETENT INVESTORS. I want them to be brilliant at what they do (supporting and running a business). I couldn't give a toss if they're Palace fans or not because as we all know the last time we were owned by someone passionate about the club (before Parish), we ended up in administration. And the same the time before that. Of course, if the competent investors are also passionate about Palace so much the better but you can't always have your cake and eat it.

At the end of the day, more than anything else I want Palace to exist. So the first litmus test I apply to any prospective owner/investor is "are they likely to run the club in a manner that ensures that is the case?" "Are they likely to make us more successful on the pitch" comes a distant second. Plus, if they run the club in a way that provides a satisfactory answer to the first question, sooner or later a satisfactory answer to the second question is likely to follow. As Harris and Blitzer have proved. Look at where the club is now.

 


Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View sydtheeagle's Profile sydtheeagle Flag England 30 Mar 22 8.01pm Send a Private Message to sydtheeagle Add sydtheeagle as a friend

Originally posted by Omph

Just been trying to work out the time scale for three new stands. Think 2050 seems about right factoring in marginally greater efficiency for stands 2 and 3.

Edit: bit ambitious on second thoughts - that’s more like 2 stands

Edited by Omph (30 Mar 2022 6.44pm)

I think the Old Stand rebuild is probably the elephant in the room for Parish (and Textor) right now and a Catch 22 situation. They can't increase the value of their investment without building it but building it (because of the diversion of the limited funds it requires) threatens the security of the underlying investment because there's no doubt that funds earmarked to strengthen the team would be diminished by the build.

In a way, whatever now happens with Harris and Blitzer is probably a line in the sand and forces the issue. The opportunity to bring in a new investor is also an opportunity to fire up the stadium plan. That's one reason I have reservations about Textor (and as I said earlier, I also see many positives). Whatever else he is, he's not going to fund the new stand. What we really need is someone to buy Harris and Blitser's shares who's able to do that or take us a long way towards it, yet who's still happy to be a minority owner in the club. That's probably wishful thinking.

As I've said before, I don't think Harris and Blitzer can be criticised because we have no right to expect them to do anything they haven't done but I would allow that it's disappointing that they haven't found more passion for the club over the past three to five years and found themselves wanting to commit more. They had no obligation to do so and we have no right to expect them to, but it's still disappointing that they haven't been inspired by Palace in the way that all of us are. They could have been legends and really built something but they've chosen, as is their right, just to be competent investors applying a proven and conservative business model instead.

 


Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View doombear's Profile doombear Flag Too far from Selhurst Park 30 Mar 22 10.59pm Send a Private Message to doombear Add doombear as a friend

I'm very much in agreement with Syd on this subject. Also, I worry about Textor getting a majority holding so hope (perhaps against hope) that he isn't looking to pay another £40m to buy out H & B. Ideally, we do want new investors who see Palace as a good medium to long term investment opportunity and are willing to be minority shareholders happy to leave Parish to carry on as Chairman.

We just have to wait and see who H & B have lined up to buy their shares and then either give a big sigh of relief or begin to be concerned (or even somewhere between the two).

Meanwhile, let's just enjoy the football whilst we can. Roll on Arsenal on Monday!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Omph's Profile Omph Flag Liverpool 31 Mar 22 6.24am Send a Private Message to Omph Add Omph as a friend

Originally posted by sydtheeagle

I think the Old Stand rebuild is probably the elephant in the room for Parish (and Textor) right now and a Catch 22 situation. They can't increase the value of their investment without building it but building it (because of the diversion of the limited funds it requires) threatens the security of the underlying investment because there's no doubt that funds earmarked to strengthen the team would be diminished by the build.

In a way, whatever now happens with Harris and Blitzer is probably a line in the sand and forces the issue. The opportunity to bring in a new investor is also an opportunity to fire up the stadium plan. That's one reason I have reservations about Textor (and as I said earlier, I also see many positives). Whatever else he is, he's not going to fund the new stand. What we really need is someone to buy Harris and Blitser's shares who's able to do that or take us a long way towards it, yet who's still happy to be a minority owner in the club. That's probably wishful thinking.

As I've said before, I don't think Harris and Blitzer can be criticised because we have no right to expect them to do anything they haven't done but I would allow that it's disappointing that they haven't found more passion for the club over the past three to five years and found themselves wanting to commit more. They had no obligation to do so and we have no right to expect them to, but it's still disappointing that they haven't been inspired by Palace in the way that all of us are. They could have been legends and really built something but they've chosen, as is their right, just to be competent investors applying a proven and conservative business model instead.

Nothing to disagree with there.

I'm fully in line with you and Doom (just above). There are any number of permutations fo what could happen next - itself quite worrying! - and as you say the investment in the stand is an issue. Looked at optimistically the need to set aside so much cash for the stand is a bonus as makes the club attractive as a long-term investment and not as a get rich quick scheme!

One way in which the current situation could (bold undermined) work in the club's favour is that the sale of the H and B shares might be close to something below true market value simply given that sale will be on almost fire sale terms with H and B unable to hold out for the most favourable result. Looked at like that potential investors might (bold underlined again) be able to push more money into the club as they got the shares themselves on favourable terms.

The other point is this whole scenario rather points out the delicate balance of power in the ownership with so much power in the hands of the minority owner, How many investors are there out there who are willing to spend a very significant chunk of money to become "sleeping partners"?

I'd assume that that most investors looking to spend a 9 figure sum would be wanting outright control. That makes me nervous for what I think are understandable historic reasons. If we are talking about groups of people as opposed to individuals to come on board then the limiting factor is the potential investors may be less prepared to pump money into the club itself (as opposed to spending it on the share holding) as they will have less control of the direction of the club. It's a tricky balance.

In all very much hope H and B fail to get Chelsea.


Edited by Omph (31 Mar 2022 6.25am)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Dubai Eagle's Profile Dubai Eagle Flag 31 Mar 22 9.05am Send a Private Message to Dubai Eagle Add Dubai Eagle as a friend

I seriously still feel that some kind of European Super League isn't so far away, be that under the guise of UEFA or as an independent organisation, if that happens we almost certainly dont have the financial clout / past Champions League pedigree to be part of it (at least in the early days) but it would leave us in an attractive position with the remainder of the PL.

If we suspect that the really serious money would be in this ESL format (whatever shape it comes in) then we could be an attractive proposition for a kind of Tier 2 investor.

Another big question would be , what happens to the TV coverage, do they focus just on the ESL format where all the big money is or does some of it filter down ?

The ground unquestionably needs work / investment but if we were then trying to keep pace with the other fish in our pond maybe our modernisation plans could be seen as more realistic & as I think Syd says above, hopefully dosent detract too much from the team investment.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Eaglecoops's Profile Eaglecoops Flag CR3 31 Mar 22 10.10am Send a Private Message to Eaglecoops Add Eaglecoops as a friend

I am totally against Textor becoming the majority shareholder. At 40% he could still be reined in but if he gets the B&H shares then he can dictate what the club does. I am pretty sure Parish would not want this.

I also have some memory of B&H money being ring-fenced for the stand development or was that never the case?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 31 Mar 22 11.40am Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

I also have some memory of B&H money being ring-fenced for the stand development or was that never the case?

If it was it would have been ring fenced externally otherwise it would have shown up in the accounts

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View sydtheeagle's Profile sydtheeagle Flag England 31 Mar 22 11.57am Send a Private Message to sydtheeagle Add sydtheeagle as a friend

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

If it was it would have been ring fenced externally otherwise it would have shown up in the accounts

I have no idea whether true or not but if there was a contractual commitment to ring-fence a sum for the stand, it would presumably be in an escrow account.

 


Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View trapperjohn's Profile trapperjohn Flag Horsham 02 Apr 22 11.31am Send a Private Message to trapperjohn Add trapperjohn as a friend

[Link]

Not sure if this appears elsewhere (apologies if so) but an interesting take on things

 


I got vision, and the rest of the world wears bifocals.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View braunstoneagle's Profile braunstoneagle Flag the middle of bumf*** nowhere... 02 Apr 22 8.48pm Send a Private Message to braunstoneagle Add braunstoneagle as a friend

apologies if this has been answered, but does anybody know what textor is worth? google research says bout £300m which would be worrying if he became the majority shareholder as he could not afford to underwrite out losses that easily.

tbh i want parish to run the day to day affairs as we all know 100% he has the best interests at heart at heart, on its own is, from a fans POV really really important.

 


‘Football isn’t instant coffee. You have to work at it. You must grow the bean, grind it.’ Ian Holloway


Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 8 of 12 < 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Harris and Blitzer, Chelsea