View Full Version : what is wrong with Wolves for
what is wrong with Wolves for us not to be sold, well given away with just one proviso?
if, if the asking price is £20 million spent on the playing staff and the club for free then why is the likes of Mandaric looking likely to pay that for Leicester plus have to find extra for purchases?
why or rather what is the point that is turning any invester in the past 4 seasons away from a club that is after all being given away?
something in the Molineux offices has to be very very wrong or someone is being very very economical with the truth over finances or sale agrrement.
They don't want to sell, it's all a bluff.
The_Blade
18-11-2006, 21:27
Land.
gaz kford
18-11-2006, 21:43
Land.
As Blade said we do not own the land the Mol is stood on.
This is what puts invester's off.
You can blame the bhattis for this nobody else.
If it was not for the council we would not have aground.
A 100 year lease to stop someone like the Bhattis taking over.
By the way way we can thank Doug Ellis as well for £150,000
Hibbitt was King
18-11-2006, 21:51
The only reason the land being on lease would put buyers of the club off was if they wanted to change its use in the short term. A lease with 80 odd years left on it gives a buyer plenty of time to play with, as long as he's only interested in football.
Hatch End Wolf
18-11-2006, 21:53
It's land, of course, Wolves don't own it. That's bad because we are a lousy investment for anyone with money who's not a Wolves supporter. However, it's good, because ****, like the Bhattis , will have no interest in buying the club! At least when the Haywards finally release the club it won't go to a property developer who wants to turn the Mol into a block of flats!
gaz kford
18-11-2006, 21:57
The only reason the land being on lease would put buyers of the club off was if they wanted to change its use in the short term. A lease with 80 odd years left on it gives a buyer plenty of time to play with, as long as he's only interested in football.
But the ownership of land means you can borrow money from investers against the value of said land.
Super Lupus
18-11-2006, 22:01
Leicester don't own their own stadium. I remember reading when it first opened that it was owned by some american company.
gaz kford
18-11-2006, 22:03
Leicester don't own their own stadium. I remember reading when it first opened that it was owned by some american company.
But do they own the land it stands on :confused:
Super Lupus
18-11-2006, 22:03
Quick google search confirmed that 15mil of the 25 mil mandaric offer is to buy the stadium from its current owners.
gaz kford
18-11-2006, 22:06
Quick google search confirmed that 15mil of the 25 mil mandaric offer is to buy the stadium from its current owners.You have not answer the qustion do they own the land it is stood on.
Hatch End Wolf
18-11-2006, 22:16
Mandaric knows what he's doing. He'll put money into Leicester City and if they are successful he can sell at a profit. If they're not successful........he can turn the land into dwellings, also at a profit.
At Wolves he wouldn't have the second choice. So, he'll go for leicester although Wolves would be a bigger club long term.
HIGHLANDER
18-11-2006, 22:18
So the prospective investor at Leicester and other clubs are only interested in them because of the land that these clubs are built on?.You can confidently predict then within the next ten years Milan Mandric is going to demolish Leicesters stadium and stick a supermarket on it? I'm sure that there's plenty of land around similar that Milan could buy if he had such ambitions.The difference between Wolves and Leicester is,we are not really for sale.
Hatch End Wolf
18-11-2006, 22:29
I'm not accusing dear old Milan of being a property developer. However, he will have a chance of getting his money back if he invests in Leicester. With Wolves it's a one way bet. If he was to put money into the Wolves and it failed, like Sir Jack's gamble has failed, he would lose the lot. Sad for us, but there it is.
HIGHLANDER
18-11-2006, 22:47
I still think that the only reason why Wolves have not been sold is because SJH wants to keep hold of us and just asks for silly money and puts up all sorts of obsticles to frighten off anyone half interested.Maybe he is even trying to up the price.I seem to remember a potential investor even came on to this board or the old E&S board and said as much.
Stewarton Wolf
18-11-2006, 23:14
Most european sides use stadiums owned by the city, the san siro, olympic stadium barcelona are but a few examples (i think coventry/leicester also has some form of community ownership as well). This is not the reason the club hasn't been sold. if anything it makes it a cheaper investment.
Fickleasfolk
18-11-2006, 23:15
Mandaric wants to buy Leicester so he can build a chain of happy shoppers on the land,i'm sure he does.:D
As for our own position,well if you went to buy a company and the sellers were telling you how they wanted the place run what would you do?
It seems that complicated no wonder anyone wants to touch us.
Stewarton Wolf
18-11-2006, 23:18
Mandaric wants to buy Leicester so he can build a chain of happy shoppers on the land,i'm sure he does.:D
As for our own position,well if you went to buy a company and the sellers were telling you how they wanted the place run what would you do?
It seems that complicated no wonder anyone wants to touch us.
I agree Hayward talks a good game, it just suprises me how many fall for the same old waffle time and time again todays radio phone call was the same old crap again.
ooh la la
18-11-2006, 23:29
Ownership of the land is nothing. You show me any team in the top two divisions that the city would allow "any" owner to shut the club down and put up a Tesco's and I'll show you me a&s! Buying a football club is pretty much a money loser and so there are not that many millionaires around willing to take the risk. Plus all this talk about Mandarick, yes he pulled Pompey out of a hole and lucky for him he found a manager to work along side that has a real savvy for putting together a team for as little money as possible.
Here's another thought. Say someone like Madarick bought Wolves and injected millions into the club. Does that mean we go back to "spend, spend for today" or do we continue to go down the "young and hungry" policy and build for the future?
The_Blade
19-11-2006, 00:05
Most european sides use stadiums owned by the city, the san siro, olympic stadium barcelona are but a few examples (i think coventry/leicester also has some form of community ownership as well). This is not the reason the club hasn't been sold. if anything it makes it a cheaper investment.
So what exactly is the investment? What's a cheap investment? I thought an investment was something you put money into which at some point in the future maybe profitable.
Stewarton Wolf
19-11-2006, 00:19
So what exactly is the investment? What's a cheap investment? I thought an investment was something you put money into which at some point in the future maybe profitable.
The opportunity to tap into the most lucrative league in the world and all the associated benefits (TV rights etc). These people do it for the kudos it gives them, like the tobacco barons built grand buildings/houses in Glasgow, the foundry owners at wightwick.
With regard to land ownership How many significant football stadiums have been redeveloped without an alternative or clubs folded. I can only think of one in recent memory Clydebank.
HIGHLANDER
19-11-2006, 00:32
..
HIGHLANDER
19-11-2006, 00:34
The opportunity to tap into the most lucrative league in the world and all the associated benefits (TV rights etc). These people do it for the kudos it gives them, like the tobacco barons built grand buildings/houses in Glasgow, the foundry owners at wightwick.
With regard to land ownership How many significant football stadiums have been redeveloped without an alternative or clubs folded. I can only think of one in recent memory Clydebank.The only one I can think of is Brighton..I don't think the vast majority of football club investors though are intersted in redeveloping the land that club is built on.Kudos like you say is one of the main draw for many of them to make them part with their money..
The Vicar
19-11-2006, 09:51
Mandaric wont be able to redevlop the crisp bowl because no planning authority would ever let it happen. Its a pointless discussion.
The reason no one wants Wolves is because the Haywards are applying too many conditions for any investor. Its a bit like opening a shop for business but insisting goods can only be bought with tins of baked beans, there are plenty of other shops without the hassle.
£20 millions to buy a championship club is still a lot of money, espacially when you consider how much it would need to get us into seruous contention, and there are no guarantees.
I think we are stuck with the haywards for some time yet.
Maybe he is even trying to up the price.
From £40 million to the £20-30 million he mentioned yesterday, you mean?
BlahBlah
19-11-2006, 10:09
Ownership of the land is nothing. You show me any team in the top two divisions that the city would allow "any" owner to shut the club down and put up a Tesco's and I'll show you me a&s!
Ownership of the land is everything. What if Wolverhampton City Council 'wanted' to be rid of the land? What if they want to see £100million pounds worth of flats/cinema's/restaurants/offices on there to inject more business into the City? They have no money to do that.
They might prefer to "give" us a site on the outskirts of town and let us build a new stadium?
A bloke such as Mandaric could make a fortune.....buying the club from SJH, buying the land from the Council, build a new stadium on donated land, then redeveloping Molineux Grounds and the money earned goes to pay off everything.
It's an option.
Hatch End Wolf
19-11-2006, 10:31
I'll go with that Blah. The W-ton council of today might not be quite as supportive as it was when the Bhattis were foiled. Indeed if you look at the gradually extending parking restrictions around the ground it already looks as if they don't care much for the club and it's fans. We were saved in the past only because the Labour leader on the Council was a Wolvesfan. Who's to that the present lot have any interest in the club?
Fickleasfolk
19-11-2006, 12:07
Ownership of the land is everything. What if Wolverhampton City Council 'wanted' to be rid of the land? What if they want to see £100million pounds worth of flats/cinema's/restaurants/offices on there to inject more business into the City? They have no money to do that.
They might prefer to "give" us a site on the outskirts of town and let us build a new stadium?
A bloke such as Mandaric could make a fortune.....buying the club from SJH, buying the land from the Council, build a new stadium on donated land, then redeveloping Molineux Grounds and the money earned goes to pay off everything.
It's an option.
Slightly confused here.:confused:
The council want to re-develop the land,Mandaric buys the club and wants to buy the land off the council,they say ok and we'll buy it back off you when we need to re-develop at a much bigger price and give you some free land to put a new stadium?Bizarre.
Who's to that the present lot have any interest in the club?
Isn't the council leader a baggies fan now?
Hibbitt was King
19-11-2006, 12:34
But the ownership of land means you can borrow money from investers against the value of said land.
A fair point, but someone looking to put £20m up isn't going to have much difficulty in giving a personal guarantee of say £5m if he only wants to put £15m of his own cash in and borrow the rest.
Stewarton Wolf
19-11-2006, 12:48
Ownership of the land is everything. What if Wolverhampton City Council 'wanted' to be rid of the land? What if they want to see £100million pounds worth of flats/cinema's/restaurants/offices on there to inject more business into the City? They have no money to do that.
They might prefer to "give" us a site on the outskirts of town and let us build a new stadium?
A bloke such as Mandaric could make a fortune.....buying the club from SJH, buying the land from the Council, build a new stadium on donated land, then redeveloping Molineux Grounds and the money earned goes to pay off everything.
It's an option.
Good theory on paper, but fails to take into account a number of issues.
1. There is no site within the city capable of taking a stadium of the size Wolves would require.
2. Whilst the site is located centrally, it is hardly prime real estate, the site is constrained and would probably be capable of delivering between 600 to 800 flats max probably majority 2 bed @ £125K this would generate £100m gross less build costs and abnormals. To generate that density building would be over 4 storey adding significant costs due to lifts and fire escape issues - So build cost maybe £75K+ per unit =£60m+ before land purchase at full market value and abnormals come into account.
3. The Council can no longer gift land - It has to be sold at Maximum Market value, ie wolves may need to pay residential land value for an out of centre site if one existed. It doesn't.
4. Wolves contribute significantly to the town centre economy, the site is well served by public transport and may use the facilities directley or indirectley when attending a game.
Essex Wolf
19-11-2006, 14:32
Maybe now SJH has lowered the sale price investors may show more interest. The original asking price of £40M was always way to high IMHO considering the clubs league status and lack of any high value playing assets.
Now with a more sensible and reasonable asking price things may start to happen?
Deutsch Wolf
19-11-2006, 14:35
The original asking price of £40M was always way to high IMHO considering the clubs league status and lack of any high value playing assets.
We were in the Premiership when that was the 'asking price' and our squad had been assembled at a cost of between £15m and £20m. You're right, the situation has changed now. It's still a hefty investment into a club that's spent one year out of the past 22 in the top flight.
Maybe now SJH has lowered the sale price investors may show more interest.
Depends on the conditions.
Do they have to transfer £20m into Wolves bank account?
Can they drip feed it at £2m a year like SJH has done?
Very few people want to buy something with any strings attached, let alone lots
Essex Wolf
19-11-2006, 14:40
We were in the Premiership when that was the 'asking price' and our squad had been assembled at a cost of between £15m and £20m. You're right, the situation has changed now. It's still a hefty investment into a club that's spent one year out of the past 22 in the top flight.
Yes the disastrous Prem campaign when a great deal more could and should have been done by the Molineux heirarchy to try and ensure Wolves remained there. Instead abject failure won the day.
The asking price has only just been reduced and the playing squad right now would do well to fetch £10M including any sale of Murray. Just maybe if SJH used some of his business acumen when dealing with Wolves the club would not be in the state they are now. This offer should have been on the cards 2 years ago DW.
Essex Wolf
19-11-2006, 15:08
Depends on the conditions.
Do they have to transfer £20m into Wolves bank account?
Can they drip feed it at £2m a year like SJH has done?
Very few people want to buy something with any strings attached, let alone lots
Who knows what the criteria will be John, suppose a lot depends on SJH's mindset at the time as we all know he chop changes like the weather.
Your second point of "can they drip feed it at £2M a year like SJH has done? is a superb point but again who knows what strings will be attached?
Florida Wolfey
19-11-2006, 15:17
The 83-year-old told the club's website: "I have always said that if someone comes in with some money we would be prepared to sell.
"Originally we asked for £40m but maybe now we would sell if someone came in with £20m to invest in the club.
Note the use of "MAYBE".
From the look of that quote I'd say it would have to be a sizeable lump sum rather than drip feeding money for a few years. If SJH was prepared to allow payments then I think we'd see all kinds of creative investment people being interested. You buy either on price or terms. Anyone who is interested can always contact JM or SJH directly.
There is plenty of land on the Cannock Road (A460 ?) close to the M54 and the M6. If planning could be obtained they could build a leasure/Shopping park incorporating a football ground. Similiar to the arrangment at the Reebok.
It is not unusual for grounds to be out of town nowadays look at Middlesborough, Bolton etc.
Further thoughts.
The council own the land.
SJH owns the buildings and the team through two separate companies I believe.
Could the problem be that SJH wants to give/sell the WWFC business away but retain ownership of the buildings and therefore charge for the use of the stadium.
I have no axe to grind here I am an SJH fan its just a thought that popped into my head.
If anyone close to SJH knows what the situation is could you let us know.
East Bay Ray
19-11-2006, 16:10
From £40 million to the £20-30 million he mentioned yesterday, you mean?
or from £0 (giving it away) to the £20-30 million. Nice spin though mutchy.
Its not spin. Originally Sir Jack was willing to give Wolves away to someone willing to invest £40 million into the club - their own club in effect. Now he says he is willing to consider the same, but with less investment into the club needing to be guaranteed. He will get no money out of it for himself. But you try to spin that all you like...:rolleyes:
Stewarton Wolf
19-11-2006, 17:12
There is plenty of land on the Cannock Road (A460 ?) close to the M54 and the M6. If planning could be obtained they could build a leasure/Shopping park incorporating a football ground. Similiar to the arrangment at the Reebok.
It is not unusual for grounds to be out of town nowadays look at Middlesborough, Bolton etc.
No because national planning policy no longer allows out of town retail leisure uses to support other forms of development.
derbyrameater
19-11-2006, 17:18
JH can easily clarify the situation for supporters and potential owners all he has to say is "all associated companies with involvement in Wolverhampton Wanderers including stadium, players, access roads and any assetts including land will be given for no cost".
Fickleasfolk
19-11-2006, 19:49
It would be interesting to note how he has given Wolves the money.Can you just give it away or is it not that simple and it has to be termed as a loan?If so then if someone buys the club and God forbid SJ pegs it,then arn't there financial implications relating to the loans?Maybe meaning the new owners would have to meet that cost as well?
Any financial wizards on here?
Hibbitt was King
19-11-2006, 20:12
FaF, if SJH loans cash to the club, he is in effect able to take it back when he wants.
If he converts the loans to shares, a legal process, he cannot in effect take the cash back.
New owners have to buy the shares off the current owner. In Wolves' case, that would be £0 to SJH, but as part of the deal, £20m would be placed in the club - SJH couldn't subsequently withdraw that sum, so it would all be available for the new owners/ board to spend, but set up to be for players only.
New owners would normally pay back any outstanding loans. In Wolves' case there are none to SJH because he has converted them into shares.
At least that is my understanding of SJH's proposed sale of the club.
Florida Wolfey
19-11-2006, 23:53
One thing SJH mentioned that hasn't been raised so far is his statement that he is puzzled why a consortium of local business people hasn't come together to invest in the club.
Is this because local business people don't help each other?
It's certainly a possibility. In my experience the business people of W'ton don't help each other. They'd rather stab each other in the back.
Is it because the investors would require a return on their investment?
People knock SJH but he has not asked for a return on his investment or any money back. It's highly likely that the new people would want to see a return on their money or have it secured in some way.
There aren't too many people around with 20M to give away so naturally selling the club isn't as easy as some might think.
Is it then that SJH has conditions attached?
Again a possibility until a ) a future investor tells us this is the reason talks broke down or b) SJH tells us one way or the other.
MTW raises a very good point in which he states a possibility maybe that SJH wants to retain ownership of buildings or charge for the use of the stadium. I guess we won't know until SJH clarifies the position to either us or a future investment group.
East Bay Ray
20-11-2006, 10:47
Its not spin. Originally Sir Jack was willing to give Wolves away to someone willing to invest £40 million into the club - their own club in effect. Now he says he is willing to consider the same, but with less investment into the club needing to be guaranteed. He will get no money out of it for himself. But you try to spin that all you like...:rolleyes:
You're right. I'm wrong. I saw SJH's comments after I posted that.
We are often told that the club needs to stand on it's own two feet, with young and hungry players. However -when SJH said what he said, he specifically mentioned that the £40/20m was to invest in players.
So it seems that the club should go down the young and hungry route today, but if a new man comes in we should then go back to the bad old days tomorrow?
wolf of sedgley
20-11-2006, 10:52
So it seems that the club should go down the young and hungry route today, but if a new man comes in we should then go back to the bad old days tomorrow?
Nobody with half a brain cell wants us to go back down that route (i hope).
Nobody with half a brain cell wants us to go back down that route (i hope).
What do you want the new investors to do with the money they would put in?
Offer free beer
You're right. I'm wrong. I saw SJH's comments after I posted that.
Cheers, fair play to you.
wolf of sedgley
20-11-2006, 12:39
What do you want the new investors to do with the money they would put in?
Offer free beer
Invest in quality young players with potential- not prem rejects. What would you want? More Nathan Blakes?
Invest in quality young players with potential- not prem rejects.
Steve Sidwell was a prem reject wasn't he.
Exactly what do you have against players being signed from a premiership club.
I take it Aliadiere would have offended you by pulling on a Wolves shirt if we had signed him in the summer.
wolfie smith
20-11-2006, 12:48
one way the potential investor could get a return would be to make the team successful through promotion and consolidation in the premiership via sensible player purchases who are young and have potential, then sell the club with all its tv rights and payments and high value players.
from an outsiders point of view wolverhampton is a dump, why shouldnt any planning application that improves the city and gets us a new stadium with good access(but not a standard new type stadium) be passed??
from an outsiders point of view wolverhampton is a dump,
I accept that from an insiders point of view as well.
However, surely Pompey is a dump? Leicester certainly is. Doesn't stop any investment in them
wolf of sedgley
20-11-2006, 12:58
Steve Sidwell was a prem reject wasn't he.
Exactly what do you have against players being signed from a premiership club.
I take it Aliadiere would have offended you by pulling on a Wolves shirt if we had signed him in the summer.
I think you know what i mean. Sidwell and Aliadiere are young talent, not Shaun Newtons/Steve Sedgleys/Robbie Slaters/Darren Andertons.
I think you know what i mean. Sidwell and Aliadiere are young talent, not Shaun Newtons/Steve Sedgleys/Robbie Slaters/Darren Andertons.
You'd be quite happy then for this club to start splashing some cash then as long as the target was young?
Like Olofinjana?
wolfie smith
20-11-2006, 13:47
I accept that from an insiders point of view as well.
However, surely Pompey is a dump? Leicester certainly is. Doesn't stop any investment in them
john what i was getting at was the planning issue, someone said it would be impossible to get permission, all i was saying was if it made the city a better place then planning should be granted, as for pompey and leicester agreed, dumps of highest order.
olofinjana? well sometimes it doesn work out and i suppose him being foreign didnt help with settling in etc, the likes of billy sharpe, nugent etc should be the targets for any transfer funds, but i wouldnt be against a paul ince figure driving us on.
paddingtonwolf
20-11-2006, 13:51
it wasn't he was foreign - more that he is unadulterated scheizer
it wasn't he was foreign - more that he is unadulterated scheizer
But proves that just because someone is young doesn't mean someone is a good transfer target.
He was however performing excellently for Brann and was a young long term investment.
Japan Wulf
20-11-2006, 14:02
As a point of interest, if we did manage to get 20 million injected into the coffers, exactly how would you like it to be spent? Splash the lot over a couple of seasons in a bid for quick promotion or use it for a genuine long term rebuilding exercise?
As another point of interest, one of the refreshing things about this season is that the "kids" are getting their chances.. which is how kids become men. Put 20M in the manager's pocket and it's a fair bet that at least some of them will be back in the reserves.
As a final point of interest, I was just thinking that 20M is about three years of parachute payments.... which in another universe might equal three years of Hoddle. In actual fact if Wolves had had 20M to spend Hoddle would probably never have resigned at all.
Are you sure you really want the money?
The only example of large sums of money being spent in one season resulted in us being promoted. As well as being brilliant to watch
wolf of sedgley
20-11-2006, 14:19
You'd be quite happy then for this club to start splashing some cash then as long as the target was young?
Like Olofinjana?
Young with potential, yes. Olofinjana is the only youngster we've paid a lot of money for. He hasn't set the world on fire i admit but if you want to use the fact that one bad buy is enough to cross a big line through that idea then fine. Miller hasn't turned out so bad though has he?
Young with potential, yes. Olofinjana is the only youngster we've paid a lot of money for. He hasn't set the world on fire i admit but if you want to use the fact that one bad buy is enough to cross a big line through that idea then fine. Miller hasn't turned out so bad though has he?
Miller cost us £3.5M and was a good buy IMO. We should be finding money to buy a striker of that quality and a CM.
EddieClamp-tops
20-11-2006, 14:42
Despite all that's been written and spoken about the SJH offer of giving away WWFC to anyone prepared to invest £20million in the club, I still cannot understand how this can happen from a practical/accountancy viewpoint.
If I take ownership surely I can most easily put money on the balance sheet by putting cash into the club's bank account? I could then remove it as the club/company would be mine.
Alternatively I could put in £20million to reduce the debt by that amount, but surely WWFC has no debt?
Finally I could purchase £20million of assets and put them into the accounts - in this case either players or ground improvements. Presumably SJH does not want the £20million to be spent on the team immediately does he? And he certainly does not want the money spent on the ground.
So the only alternative I can think of is a guarantee written into the sale/purchase contract. This means I could buy the club but have this millstone round my neck, stopping me running my club how I see fit, based on the perceived, ongoing circumstances, known only to me as owner rather than to SJH living in the Bahamas.
If I am not missing something obvious, it is no wonder no-one has rushed in to buy the club!
East Bay Ray
20-11-2006, 16:46
I know you should never believe what you read in the press (http://www.people.co.uk/sport/football/tm_method=full%26objectid=18120287%26siteid=93463-name_page.html)
but the way this is reported here makes me believe that the £20/40million under discussion here is for a sale, and not an investment:
"I've always said that if someone comes in with some money that I would be prepared to sell."
"Originally it was £40million that I wanted, but maybe it's time to change that valuation. If someone came in with £20 million then maybe."
Perhaps thats where the confusion over for sale or not for sale has arisen? I am 100% sure that Jack's figure is for investment into the club - he is not after money for himself from the 'sale'.
Hibbitt was King
20-11-2006, 17:13
The deal as publicized would entail a new owner putting £20m into Wolves bank account, to be spent in accordance with a legal agreement that SJH approves of, presumably for spending on players after he's left the club, in accordance with some pre-arranged rules.
If that agreement can be reached, SJH then gives his share certificates in Wolves to the new owner, receiving no money either from Wolves nor the new owner. Those share certificates are then cancelled and new ones issued to the new owner in his name.
What I'm not sure of is what happens if the new owner spends the £20m in breach of what he's agreed with SJH. Perhaps a legal eagle could explain how that might work.
