[PsalmXXIII]

Are you still intending to find out this info and report back?

Aye I've got the company information including shareholders, mortgages, loans, accounts and risk reports on WBA Group, WBA Holdings, WBAFC Ltd., WBA Heritage and some companies that no longer trade.

Interesting to see what Kappa do with their 10% shares in holdings, effectively owning 10% of Peace's majority shareholdings in Group.

I'll post the PDF documents of all info somewhere for you all to peruse. One is 20+ pages listing every shareholder at the club.

[PsalmXXIII]

Right here goes:

For those who want to do their own research, the reports are here:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B-C3MgynjIGkfnlWRWFvemFoVlNWUXRsY2puZnNiYjZxb19ubEtzeDZtMy1xQ0ZFUkFZck0&usp=sharing


Club Hierarchy - Corporate Tree

1. West Bromwich Albion Holdings Ltd. - Top of the corporate tree.

Shareholders -

Jeremy Peace: 50,000 Ordinary shares @ £500 per share- 80% total shares - 95.75% Value (£25,000,000)

Kappa Ltd: 12,500 Ordinary 'A' shares @ £125 per share - 20% total shares - 6.25% Value (£1,562,500)

This would theoretically place the value of the club, based on shares alone of it's Ultimate Parent company at approx. £26.5m - though this is a distorted figure as shares have a face value. Consider the fact that the face value of the shares in Group (that some people on here still own and others sold) are worth £10, having Mr Peace offer thousands for individual shares basically assigns the value of a single share at 'whatever someone is willing to pay'. So as much as the face value of the company is £26.5m this does not take into account changes in the company's revenue and profit increases since the shares were issued - which are considerably more now and the price someone would be willing to pay for said shares.

2. West Bromwich Albion Group Ltd. Second branch of corporate tree. Parent: Holdings

This is the company those on here claim they have or had shares. The list of shareholders is 20 pages long. Importantly however:

584 shareholders including:
- West Bromwich Albion Holdings Ltd: 6,446 Shares - 67%
- Mr Geoffrey Leonard Hale: 1,001 Shares - 10.3%

Active Directors: Mr Mark Jenkins - Appointed 1st October 2010
Former Directors: Mr Jeremy Peace - 21st April 2010 - Resigned 21 May 2013

3. West Bromwich Albion Football Club Ltd. - 3rd Branch of the corporate tree - Parent: Group

This is the 'footballing department', the actual football club.

Shareholders - West Bromwich Albion Group: 2 Shares - 100%

Directors: Mr Mark Jenkins, Mr Jeremy Peace, Mr Adrian Donald Wright, Mr Richard Paul Garlick

Note: The company has had 13 mortgages, the latest in 2005. These include parachute payments from the FA, property mortgages on the training ground, social club.

Fully satisfied mortgages on The Hawthorns, land free for development.

4. West Bromwich Albion Heritage Ltd. - 4th branch of corporate tree - Parent: Group

As far as I can tell this is the branch of the company that owns the social clubs, various areas for development including some of the land around Halfords Lane.

Shareholders: West Bromwich Albion Group - 139,571 Ordinary Shares - 99.7%
                                                                  47 Other - 0.2%

_______________________________________________________________________________________

[AlbionFan]

I reckon Hong Kong Pooey has been very quite on this thread and knows more than he / she is letting on 

[AlbionFan]

That's a very informative post PsalmXXIII.

I believe you said your wife researched and analysed it as well, so thank you to her.

Will need to take more time to absorb it all, but great post thanks.

[Hong Kong Phooey]

I reckon Hong Kong Pooey has been very quite on this thread and knows more than he / she is letting on 

I know nothing, my friend, absolutely nothing.

Always so much speculation at this time of year that I tend to view from afar until things actually start to happen.

Interesting and exciting times both on and off the field this summer though and I really do not think that JP is about to sell the club down the river!

[Standaman]

Any consortium that can stump up £150m for the club is going to feature some seriously wealthy individuals. But that does not mean that they are going to be throwing large parts of their personal wealth at the club.

 They could if they so chose run it as it is currently being run keep us in the Premier League let the TV contract drive the revenue stream and sell it on for more money to the next investor and banking a few million in dividends each year into the bargain.

I have no idea as to their intentions are but wealth does not equal additional investment. Wealth means they have the capacity to invest in the club but I guess having spent £150m on it in the first place they might believe that is enough of a commitment to be getting on with.       

[Adamstv]

If we are free of debt could the purchasers look to do what the glazers did at Man Utd and raise cash on the assets of the club to assist in their purchase of the club. Basically leverage the assets to the  max.

[tuamigos]

Its a wind of change only time will tell if its for the better, I won't get too excited just yet.
From past takeovers some go ok but there's a catalogue of disasters both financial and PR.
Blues/Cardiff/Hull to name a few.
Expect any time soon to be reading about re-branding and name changes, its both worrying and exciting in equal measures for me

[divinewind]

I hope we don't get rebranded. Our brand and name has been good for 136 years. Even Don Howe tried and failed to shorten our name to Albion.
But i expect new owners to want some changes for their money,something that reflects their ownership.

[Standaman]

If we are free of debt could the purchasers look to do what the glazers did at Man Utd and raise cash on the assets of the club to assist in their purchase of the club. Basically leverage the assets to the  max.

Yes nothing to stop them doing that other than Peace might sell it to them on that basis. The Glazers were pretty astute (I know United fans hate them so I quite like them) but they did it with a global brand and given the strength of the club it would pretty much always be in the Premier League the debt, would only be an issue if they were relegated.

Unfortunately we are not in that position and because of the threat of relegation I would be concerned if we were being bought in a way that was heavily leveraged. Using United as a benchmark whose net debt is currently around 60% of turnover and their interest payments about 6% of turnover anything above £50m as debt and interest payments of £5m would be worrying. The less debt involved the happier I will be.

Debt in itself is not a bad thing and if the same leverage was applied to the club as investment in facilities that generated income that served the debt it would not be a bad thing provided that investment was well though out. Incidentally throwing money at players and their agents is not a great investment and I would be horrified if we were signing players using debt to pay for them. 

With regard to re branding I hope the owners have observed the abject failure of other such exercises and draw their own conclusions i.e. leave well alone otherwise what you have just bought for £150m won't be worth a mess of beans. 

 

[paulosull]

Well if new owners are interested in progressing the Albion then what we do in transfer window should gauge their ambition. On another note will we be seeing a couple of Chinese players in the near future.

[Mr Cynical]

Didn't JP do the same thing as the Glaziers, twice?  Or am I confused again...

[Adamstv]

Yes nothing to stop them doing that other than Peace might sell it to them on that basis. The Glazers were pretty astute (I know United fans hate them so I quite like them) but they did it with a global brand and given the strength of the club it would pretty much always be in the Premier League the debt, would only be an issue if they were relegated.

Unfortunately we are not in that position and because of the threat of relegation I would be concerned if we were being bought in a way that was heavily leveraged. Using United as a benchmark whose net debt is currently around 60% of turnover and their interest payments about 6% of turnover anything above £50m as debt and interest payments of £5m would be worrying. The less debt involved the happier I will be.

Debt in itself is not a bad thing and if the same leverage was applied to the club as investment in facilities that generated income that served the debt it would not be a bad thing provided that investment was well though out. Incidentally throwing money at players and their agents is not a great investment and I would be horrified if we were signing players using debt to pay for them. 

With regard to re branding I hope the owners have observed the abject failure of other such exercises and draw their own conclusions i.e. leave well alone otherwise what you have just bought for £150m won't be worth a mess of beans.

That's a good point about debt. It's like if you have £100k in the bank earning 0.5% but if you took that and bought a property for say £200K with a £100 k of debt plus your cash and rented it out for say £10k a year then you are getting a return of 5% on the property. Much better than the 0.5%. Invested wisely can be a good thing. Agents aren't a good investment.

[Droitwich Baggie]

With nothing being announced until the end of the month...I think I may go into "snooze" mode.

[BAGGIE5]

I think the people we sign, will be a clear indication of whether the new owners are wealthy or not.

Like JP said team recruitment remains uneffected. So that must mean its been discussed with the new party.

[hardtobeat]

Right here goes:

For those who want to do their own research, the reports are here:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B-C3MgynjIGkfnlWRWFvemFoVlNWUXRsY2puZnNiYjZxb19ubEtzeDZtMy1xQ0ZFUkFZck0&usp=sharing


Club Hierarchy - Corporate Tree

1. West Bromwich Albion Holdings Ltd. - Top of the corporate tree.

Shareholders -

Jeremy Peace: 50,000 Ordinary shares @ £500 per share- 80% total shares - 95.75% Value (£25,000,000)

Kappa Ltd: 12,500 Ordinary 'A' shares @ £125 per share - 20% total shares - 6.25% Value (£1,562,500)

This would theoretically place the value of the club, based on shares alone of it's Ultimate Parent company at approx. £26.5m - though this is a distorted figure as shares have a face value. Consider the fact that the face value of the shares in Group (that some people on here still own and others sold) are worth £10, having Mr Peace offer thousands for individual shares basically assigns the value of a single share at 'whatever someone is willing to pay'. So as much as the face value of the company is £26.5m this does not take into account changes in the company's revenue and profit increases since the shares were issued - which are considerably more now and the price someone would be willing to pay for said shares.

2. West Bromwich Albion Group Ltd. Second branch of corporate tree. Parent: Holdings

This is the company those on here claim they have or had shares. The list of shareholders is 20 pages long. Importantly however:

584 shareholders including:
- West Bromwich Albion Holdings Ltd: 6,446 Shares - 67%
- Mr Geoffrey Leonard Hale: 1,001 Shares - 10.3%

Active Directors: Mr Mark Jenkins - Appointed 1st October 2010
Former Directors: Mr Jeremy Peace - 21st April 2010 - Resigned 21 May 2013

3. West Bromwich Albion Football Club Ltd. - 3rd Branch of the corporate tree - Parent: Group

This is the 'footballing department', the actual football club.

Shareholders - West Bromwich Albion Group: 2 Shares - 100%

Directors: Mr Mark Jenkins, Mr Jeremy Peace, Mr Adrian Donald Wright, Mr Richard Paul Garlick

Note: The company has had 13 mortgages, the latest in 2005. These include parachute payments from the FA, property mortgages on the training ground, social club.

Fully satisfied mortgages on The Hawthorns, land free for development.

4. West Bromwich Albion Heritage Ltd. - 4th branch of corporate tree - Parent: Group

As far as I can tell this is the branch of the company that owns the social clubs, various areas for development including some of the land around Halfords Lane.

Shareholders: West Bromwich Albion Group - 139,571 Ordinary Shares - 99.7%
                                                                  47 Other - 0.2%

_______________________________________________________________________________________

From memory isnt Kappa JP´s company? Have tried to find info on this company before and couldnt but it isnt the sports wear company

[B_H_Baggie]

I think the people we sign, will be a clear indication of whether the new owners are wealthy or not.

Like JP said team recruitment remains uneffected. So that must mean its been discussed with the new party.

Not so sure myself. Until the deal to takeover the club is officially done the budget wont change significantly if at all. We wouldn't suddenly start spending more just because a potential new owner has a few quid, you don't spend someone else's money.

I do worry that people are maybe expecting too much, we may loosen the purse strings a little once a takeover is completed but even then I doubt we will suddenly become a club that spends a fortune on players as FFP will keep us from doing that. It may bring us in line with a few other clubs we haven't been able to compete with for a while financially though.

[Standaman]

Well if new owners are interested in progressing the Albion then what we do in transfer window should gauge their ambition. On another note will we be seeing a couple of Chinese players in the near future.

I don't think it will. The budget will have been agreed with the bidders and I would therefore assume that is fixed in the short term. I hope that they do not come in and try to make their mark by throwing money at players because they nearly always ends badly.

Equally I doubt whether we will be getting an influx of Chinese players they aren't generally good enough and that would be another way for the new owners to actively destroy the asset that they have just spent £150m on. Until we know otherwise I will credit them with a little bit of sense

[Baggieblood]

According to  daily mirror it's a chinese consortium that were al interested in the dark side from witton but they were upset when randy gave exclusivety to a usa consortium.

I'm not happy with a consortium as it suggests they are in it just f or a profit but, what can you do  when peace wants to sell, no one forced him out, he chose to sell.

I just hope he did have our best interests at heart when selling.

Personally, i would have gone for ths blues at around £25m spend another £25M on players and got them promoted.

I think blues are in a 2 year exclusive period with another chinese group who have paid or
loaned them 5m.

[divinewind]

I honestly believe Peace wanted to sell because he knew that he knew he could take us no farther, and when you stand still you end up going back.
A new owner could push us on that extra bit, but again no guarantees that they will.

I don't believe stuff i read in the Mirror or any papers tbh, we will only know when the club make an official statement.

[Baggieblood]

Disagree, how can you take us no further with all the extra tv money coming in plus the £20M we should have in our bank account from profits.

[RuncornBaggie]

I am with you on that, he realises that he cant take us forward any further than he has!

Also he has the clubs best interests at heart, along with making some sheckles for himself, we would all make money for ourselves as well.  What I mean by that is, he wouldn't just sell the club to anyone, I think he will make sure that it is all in the clubs best interests. 

I have never met the man though but believe he has done a fantastic job with the club.  But I think like you, he has taken us as far as he can. 

[VVVAlbion]

Disagree, how can you take us no further with all the extra tv money coming in plus the £20M we should have in our bank account from profits.

All the extra TV money just inflates prices and whilst everybody gets their share it isn't going to move us up in the Premier League pecking order. It may distance us further from the Championship,  but we were doing that anyway. Clubs come up, clubs go down. Even in a supposed "bad year" we finished 13th.

[PsalmXXIII]

Budget shouldn't be a problem - nor should buying and selling players. I doubt a Chinese consortium has any real soft spot for any players they want to keep or bring in to the club and so shouldn't have problems with us signing players on sensible deals until then. After all, it's the clubs money being spent, not theirs. For them to have a problem with a man who has run the club safely for 14 years and knows what he's doing would seem a little naive.

[divinewind]

Budget shouldn't be a problem - nor should buying and selling players. I doubt a Chinese consortium has any real soft spot for any players they want to keep or bring in to the club and so shouldn't have problems with us signing players on sensible deals until then. After all, it's the clubs money being spent, not theirs. For them to have a problem with a man who has run the club safely for 14 years and knows what he's doing would seem a little naive.

Peace will never buy players on the never never. Any players we buy before the takeover will be from the pot we have now.