[overseas baggie]

I accept the technicality, but the make up of the Lai consortium is being portrayed as sinister in some quarters.
Although the loan from the football club & the earlier report of under the table dealings in the MP sale are concerning, in principle, there's nothing wrong with having a number of smaller investors in a consortium.

Agree 100%.   I wonder how much they have told though about the unpaid loans…

[gazberg]

No.  A SPAC is when you don’t even know what the investment will be (a “football club” rather than a named club).  This structure was set up specifically to buy West Brom.

Not true. I've invested in Spac's knowing what the 'new' SPAC name is and knowing what existing non-listed company it will absorb.

[baggiejohn]

It's not every day you come to a football forum and end up reading a detailed discussion of the technicalities of investment practices and law  whatever the fine details of his ownership of the club, it sure seems like he's flat out broke. I wonder how the Chinese culture of honour reacts to a bloke unable to pay back money he owed more than a year after he was supposed to pay it back! Must not be doing his reputation any favours.

Normally I wouldn't react, but I've been a member of this forum for some time now, &, IMO, it's by far the best organised West Bromwich Albion forum there is.

There are loads of opportunities to discuss football related issues, including one on systems, tactics & personell. For somebody who can just about make out two lines of 4 on a football pitch, I have learned a lot from that topic.

We have members who are professional statisticians who can help to explain statistical & kpi analyses related to football.

We also have some members who have played the game at a high level who bring their experience to the forum.

Football ownership, finance & geo-politics play a massive part in the performance of a modern football club, so surely it makes sense for members who have experience in buiness, law & accounts to add their two penneth.

[wbawill]

Normally I wouldn't react, but I've been a member of this forum for some time now, &, IMO, it's by far the best organised West Bromwich Albion forum there is.

There are loads of opportunities to discuss football related issues, including one on systems, tactics & personell. For somebody who can just about make out two lines of 4 on a football pitch, I have learned a lot from that topic.

We have members who are professional statisticians who can help to explain statistical & kpi analyses related to football.

We also have some members who have played the game at a high level who bring their experience to the forum.

Football ownership, finance & geo-politics play a massive part in the performance of a modern football club, so surely it makes sense for members who have experience in buiness, law & accounts to add their two penneth.

Absolutely, I think it's great that there are people who can interpret this kind of thing - Lai could publish the financial details in English or Mandarin, it would make the same amount of sense to me. Though I do look forward to a time we have an owner than doesn't make scrutinising the books part and parcel of being a football fan!

[beechyboy90]

Adrian Goldberg has posted an interesting article on Twitter identifying that up to 80 separate investors have a stake in the club, including the Chinese Government, financial arms from two regions, and a Singaporean bank. Lai has put very little money in himself and is merely ‘managing’ the investment on behalf of others

What a mess.

If thats the case theres 80 owners owning small percentages each one. Then surely as fans we can attempt to buy out some of the smaller ownership percentages and wrestle back control?

[johnny Cash]

Adrian Goldberg has posted an interesting article on Twitter identifying that up to 80 separate investors have a stake in the club, including the Chinese Government, financial arms from two regions, and a Singaporean bank. Lai has put very little money in himself and is merely ‘managing’ the investment on behalf of others

What a mess.

The image Goldberg has shared is quite interesting.

It suggests that Yunyi GSDL  is by owned by three investment groups.

Shanghai Yunyiye Investment Management Center, which holds a 20.94%.
Shanghai Yunjin Investment Management Center which holds 55.10%
Shanghai  Yitongweikai Investment Management Center, which holds 23.97%.

The graph seems to then sprout off and show detail of the ownership of each of those three companies, which is where entities like the Chinese state and Singaporean bank come in  (as does our chairman who seems to owns a percentage of Yitongweikai IMC)

However, it needs some further translation.

Personally, I think it’s more bad news.  If for example Yunyiye is an investment arm for an entire province of shanghai, id expect they have a huge portfolio. Their 20% would have been worth about 35m when lai bought us, but that will be chicken feed in the Chinese economy.  They generally might not give a **** about losing 35m.

If a bank owns 10% of one of those, they have a couple of million chucked in to us. It’s nothing in the global banking market.

[KN22]

Normally I wouldn't react, but I've been a member of this forum for some time now, &, IMO, it's by far the best organised West Bromwich Albion forum there is.

There are loads of opportunities to discuss football related issues, including one on systems, tactics & personell. For somebody who can just about make out two lines of 4 on a football pitch, I have learned a lot from that topic.

We have members who are professional statisticians who can help to explain statistical & kpi analyses related to football.

We also have some members who have played the game at a high level who bring their experience to the forum.

Football ownership, finance & geo-politics play a massive part in the performance of a modern football club, so surely it makes sense for members who have experience in buiness, law & accounts to add their two penneth.

Pray tell who it is that’s played the game at a high level. I’m intrigued.

[baggiejohn]

Pray tell who it is that’s played the game at a high level. I’m intrigued.

It's up to them to reveal who they are.

[Albionic]

Pray tell who it is that’s played the game at a high level. I’m intrigued.

i took a beach ball up snowdon once 

[Tony Goddens Gloves]

Anyone on here who has kicked a ball at the Hawthorns...don't forget we are the highest ground (above sea level) in the country !!

[NJS]

The image Goldberg has shared is quite interesting.

It suggests that Yunyi GSDL  is by owned by three investment groups.

Shanghai Yunyiye Investment Management Center, which holds a 20.94%.
Shanghai Yunjin Investment Management Center which holds 55.10%
Shanghai  Yitongweikai Investment Management Center, which holds 23.97%.

The graph seems to then sprout off and show detail of the ownership of each of those three companies, which is where entities like the Chinese state and Singaporean bank come in  (as does our chairman who seems to owns a percentage of Yitongweikai IMC)

However, it needs some further translation.

Personally, I think it’s more bad news.  If for example Yunyiye is an investment arm for an entire province of shanghai, id expect they have a huge portfolio. Their 20% would have been worth about 35m when lai bought us, but that will be chicken feed in the Chinese economy.  They generally might not give a **** about losing 35m.

If a bank owns 10% of one of those, they have a couple of million chucked in to us. It’s nothing in the global banking market.

It could be regarded as good news.  If the loss of £35M is chickenfeed to them, they won't be too bothered about selling at a loss?

[overseas baggie]

Not true. I've invested in Spac's knowing what the 'new' SPAC name is and knowing what existing non-listed company it will absorb.

It’s obvious that you would know what the name of the SPAC is - that wasn’t my point.  At the IPO stage target acquisitions are not named or announced and if you knew the name of the target at the IPO stage then you shouldn’t have done! 

[gazberg]

It’s obvious that you would know what the name of the SPAC is - that wasn’t my point.  At the IPO stage target acquisitions are not named or announced and if you knew the name of the target at the IPO stage then you shouldn’t have done!

Things get leaked I guess is all I can. The company would be listed in the SPAC sector on the brokers which is my point.

[overseas baggie]

Things get leaked I guess is all I can. The company would be listed in the SPAC sector on the brokers which is my point.

Slightly crossed purposes I think.  The SPAC itself isn’t the issue.  The SPAC raises money for a “purpose” of making an acquisition in a specific industry or sector but if at the time of soliciting for investors the target acquisition for the SPAC to invest into is named then that falls foul of securities regulations.

[gazberg]

Slightly crossed purposes I think.  The SPAC itself isn’t the issue.  The SPAC raises money for a “purpose” of making an acquisition in a specific industry or sector but if at the time of soliciting for investors the target acquisition for the SPAC to invest into is named then that falls foul of securities regulations.

At the very, very initial formation of the SPAC then i do not know of course. Only the people forming it have the idea in their heads however i've invested in multiple SPACs before the public IPO whilst knowing who they intend to buy. The risk element there is that the company purchase does not take place. I like to take 10-15% profit and run personally before it all gets too serious.

[overseas baggie]

At the very, very initial formation of the SPAC then i do not know of course. Only the people forming it have the idea in their heads however i've invested in multiple SPACs before the public IPO whilst knowing who they intend to buy. The risk element there is that the company purchase does not take place. I like to take 10-15% profit and run personally before it all gets too serious.

That’s not supposed to happen re disclosing the target pre-IPO, but hey-ho

Too risky for me as an investment but I did nearly set one up about 3 years ago.  COVID thwarted it and I suspect that was a blessing in disguise!

[gazberg]

That’s not supposed to happen re disclosing the target pre-IPO, but hey-ho

Too risky for me as an investment but I did nearly set one up about 3 years ago.  COVID thwarted it and I suspect that was a blessing in disguise!

Glad you did not lose out! I stay away from them now as fingers were definitely burnt on one occasion!

[skyclad99]

Meanwhile, in China........

[baggiejohn]

The image Goldberg has shared is quite interesting.

It suggests that Yunyi GSDL  is by owned by three investment groups.

Shanghai Yunyiye Investment Management Center, which holds a 20.94%.
Shanghai Yunjin Investment Management Center which holds 55.10%
Shanghai  Yitongweikai Investment Management Center, which holds 23.97%.

The graph seems to then sprout off and show detail of the ownership of each of those three companies, which is where entities like the Chinese state and Singaporean bank come in  (as does our chairman who seems to owns a percentage of Yitongweikai IMC)

However, it needs some further translation.

Personally, I think it’s more bad news.  If for example Yunyiye is an investment arm for an entire province of shanghai, id expect they have a huge portfolio. Their 20% would have been worth about 35m when lai bought us, but that will be chicken feed in the Chinese economy.  They generally might not give a **** about losing 35m.

If a bank owns 10% of one of those, they have a couple of million chucked in to us. It’s nothing in the global banking market.

Just had a look at the diagram.

It does look as though Yunyi GSDL is supported by a number of institutions, both National & Regional.
I agree that a global bank would consider the investment peanuts, but aren't these institutions set up in China specifically to support projects like Lai's?
My guess is, the institutions collectively have a sizeable stake, & that's why he's struggling to sell.

[gazberg]

Meanwhile, in China........

Lai and co are asleep at the wheel

[costa blanca baggie]

Anyone on here who has kicked a ball at the Hawthorns...don't forget we are the highest ground (above sea level) in the country !!

Being that I care little for in-depth financial gobbledygook, I can’t say I’ve kicked a ball at the shrine, but I did install the team shelters at the academy. Now, back to SPACs and other stuff. 

[gazberg]

Weirdly enough just started my new job as debt advisor this week and currently learning about charges against secured assets etc

In a few years I may have some knowledge to dispense on Lais mishandling of the club but I'd hope things don't get that bad

[Albionic]

Business folks,

If the company (WBA) is owned by such a disparate group as the digging around seems to have identified with Mr Lai as its figure head, is Lai likely to be empowered to sell the company at a significant loss? Could one of the entities with a stake block a sale?

How does this structure appear to a potential buyer, to myself (who knows nothing of M&A processes) it seems that it would put me off knowing that I am dealing with someone who has to get approval from all sorts of people / organisations, or is he (Lai) in same position as the chairman of a publically listed company owned by shareholders?

keep it simple please :-)

[baggiejohn]

Business folks,

If the company (WBA) is owned by such a disparate group as the digging around seems to have identified with Mr Lai as its figure head, is Lai likely to be empowered to sell the company at a significant loss? Could one of the entities with a stake block a sale?

How does this structure appear to a potential buyer, to myself (who knows nothing of M&A processes) it seems that it would put me off knowing that I am dealing with someone who has to get approval from all sorts of people / organisations, or is he (Lai) in same position as the chairman of a publically listed company owned by shareholders?

keep it simple please :-)

I don't know how this sits legally, both here & in China, but.............

If the Chinese institutions have a significant stake, they will take a long term view & not authorise a loss making sale.
We don't know the details of the contracts within the consortium, but you can bet the institutions will have a water-tight case to protect their investments.

[SmethDan]

I think it's fair to suggest we have a fairly opaque ownership structure. With that in mind it makes me wonder what questions were asked by the powers that be before the sale went through, what answers they were given and whether they have any more questions they'd like to ask now.

Because as a none business person on the outside looking in our sale makes a mockery of the fit and proper person's test. If I were in a position of football administrative authority I'd be going over old ground with a very fine tooth comb. I'd hate to think someone hadn't done a thorough job.