Josh Harris/Chelsea

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Josh Harris/Chelsea

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Crystal_Clear Belfast 09 Mar 22 2.46pm
Yeah, say that Harris does buy Chelsea then I take it he would have to offload his stake in Palace before he takes over Chelsea ? So a couple of questions :- 1. What if a buyer is not forthcoming - does he give up his Palace investment for a much reduced price or pass it over to one of the other owners ? 2. Or is there a period allowed to hold interests in both clubs, whilst a buyer is found for other club (ie.Palace) ? As they said about Abramovich selling Chelsea, it can take quite a period of time to sell a football club.
Alert a moderator to this post

Crystal_Clear

Belfast 09 Mar 22 2.46pm

Yeah, say that Harris does buy Chelsea then I take it he would have to offload his stake in Palace before he takes over Chelsea ?

So a couple of questions :-

1. What if a buyer is not forthcoming - does he give up his Palace investment for a much reduced price or pass it over to one of the other owners ?
2. Or is there a period allowed to hold interests in both clubs, whilst a buyer is found for other club (ie.Palace) ?

As they said about Abramovich selling Chelsea, it can take quite a period of time to sell a football club.

Alert a moderator to this post

est1905 09 Mar 22 4.19pm
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle The big difference is that he would be buying all of Chelsea whereas he only has a minority stake at Palace and any funds invested here have to be matched by funds from the other shareholders with at least one not having anywhere near his wealth You are talking rubbish (again), There is absolutely no rule anywhere in business that says a shareholder has to put up the same amount of money as another shareholder. Utter tripe. An investor can grow his shares by putting money in when other investors dont. He can put money in and it can be chalked up as an interest free loan. there are dozens of ways a shareholder can put money in WITHOUT the other shareholders doing so.
Alert a moderator to this post

est1905

09 Mar 22 4.19pm

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

The big difference is that he would be buying all of Chelsea whereas he only has a minority stake at Palace and any funds invested here have to be matched by funds from the other shareholders with at least one not having anywhere near his wealth

You are talking rubbish (again),
There is absolutely no rule anywhere in business that says a shareholder has to put up the same amount of money as another shareholder. Utter tripe. An investor can grow his shares by putting money in when other investors dont. He can put money in and it can be chalked up as an interest free loan. there are dozens of ways a shareholder can put money in WITHOUT the other shareholders doing so.

Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider London 09 Mar 22 5.40pm
Originally posted by est1905 You are talking rubbish (again), There is absolutely no rule anywhere in business that says a shareholder has to put up the same amount of money as another shareholder. Utter tripe. An investor can grow his shares by putting money in when other investors dont. He can put money in and it can be chalked up as an interest free loan. there are dozens of ways a shareholder can put money in WITHOUT the other shareholders doing so. Ok. Calm down, calm down. Sounds like if Harris goes, Blitzer will go with him as I’m sure their shares are held in a single company. Maybe Texter will get them on the cheap and as part of the deal they give us Gallagher. Now that would be smart. At least Texter claims to love the Palace whereas H&B are money men. No more no less.
Alert a moderator to this post

dreamwaverider

London 09 Mar 22 5.40pm

Send a Private Message to dreamwaverider

Originally posted by est1905

Ok. Calm down, calm down. Sounds like if Harris goes, Blitzer will go with him as I’m sure their shares are held in a single company. Maybe Texter will get them on the cheap and as part of the deal they give us Gallagher. Now that would be smart. At least Texter claims to love the Palace whereas H&B are money men. No more no less.

Alert a moderator to this post

Painter Croydon 09 Mar 22 7.09pm
Not going to happen, just paper talk. Harris would have to dispose of his Palace interest, then negotiate to buy Chelsea, by that time the Government will have ceased it. Its doesnt appear that attractive as it appears, Abramovich doesnt own the ground, its owned by Chelsea Pitch owners to stop it being sold off for development. Seriously wealthy investors dont publicise their business, until its signed and sealed.
Alert a moderator to this post

Painter

Croydon 09 Mar 22 7.09pm

Not going to happen, just paper talk. Harris would have to dispose of his Palace interest, then negotiate to buy Chelsea, by that time the Government will have ceased it.
Its doesnt appear that attractive as it appears, Abramovich doesnt own the ground, its owned by Chelsea Pitch owners to stop it being sold off for development.
Seriously wealthy investors dont publicise their business, until its signed and sealed.

Alert a moderator to this post

Wilbraham413 10 Mar 22 1.02am
Originally posted by sydtheeagle Just a thought, but on the off-chance that Harris and Blitzer do end up buying Chelsea and the result is that we're put back on the market, we ought to be a pretty attractive investment right now. The leg-work has been done; we're an established Prem Club with a promising manager and a very exciting young squad most of whom are tied up contractually. Yes, the ground needs investment but in every other sense, we're in a good place. And, of course, we're in London. None of the other big clubs are for sale and Everton and Newcastle are now off the table too. The world isn't short of billionaires and if you are one who wants into the Premier League (and there seem to be a few who fit that description), Palace right now are probably, maybe along with West Ham, about the most attractive option you'll find. And we also come armed with a CEO who knows how to run your football club for you. While no one wants to disruption, we could lose our investors and still end up considerably better off. I agree with this. Harris/Blitzer are two billionaires who have been underwhelming in terms of financial support. They obviously don't care at all about our club, other than to add another line to their investment portfolio. With these two billionaires behind us, we can't build a new stand because we're haggling with a Sainsburys. Good riddance to Harris/Blitzer. They'll ruin Chelsea, which will be great. Textor is much more active, and actually seems interested in football. And like Syd says, our value has never been higher. We're a turnkey club, in London, with a popular CEO, popular manager, and a promising future. 2017 Feb. (Van Aanholt) Palace 1 - 0 Middlesboro 2018 Jan. (Sako) Palace 1 - 0 Burnley 2019 May (Batshuayi, Batshuayi, OG, Van Aanholt, Townsend) Palace 5 - 3 Bournemouth 2020 Feb. (Van Aanholt) Palace 1 - 0 Newcastle
Alert a moderator to this post

Wilbraham413

10 Mar 22 1.02am

Originally posted by sydtheeagle

Just a thought, but on the off-chance that Harris and Blitzer do end up buying Chelsea and the result is that we're put back on the market, we ought to be a pretty attractive investment right now. The leg-work has been done; we're an established Prem Club with a promising manager and a very exciting young squad most of whom are tied up contractually. Yes, the ground needs investment but in every other sense, we're in a good place. And, of course, we're in London. None of the other big clubs are for sale and Everton and Newcastle are now off the table too. The world isn't short of billionaires and if you are one who wants into the Premier League (and there seem to be a few who fit that description), Palace right now are probably, maybe along with West Ham, about the most attractive option you'll find. And we also come armed with a CEO who knows how to run your football club for you. While no one wants to disruption, we could lose our investors and still end up considerably better off.

I agree with this.

Harris/Blitzer are two billionaires who have been underwhelming in terms of financial support. They obviously don't care at all about our club, other than to add another line to their investment portfolio. With these two billionaires behind us, we can't build a new stand because we're haggling with a Sainsburys.

Good riddance to Harris/Blitzer. They'll ruin Chelsea, which will be great. Textor is much more active, and actually seems interested in football.

And like Syd says, our value has never been higher. We're a turnkey club, in London, with a popular CEO, popular manager, and a promising future.

2017 Feb. (Van Aanholt) Palace 1 - 0 Middlesboro
2018 Jan. (Sako) Palace 1 - 0 Burnley
2019 May (Batshuayi, Batshuayi, OG, Van Aanholt, Townsend) Palace 5 - 3 Bournemouth
2020 Feb. (Van Aanholt) Palace 1 - 0 Newcastle

Alert a moderator to this post

Daddyorc Atlantic Highlands, NJ 10 Mar 22 2.06am
Harris / Blitzer have been a disaster in the US, 76ers, Devils have been terrible since they took over. Harris recently was pushed out of Apollo. Wouldn't surprise me if the same happens to Blitzer at Blackstone! Originally posted by Wilbraham413 I agree with this. Harris/Blitzer are two billionaires who have been underwhelming in terms of financial support. They obviously don't care at all about our club, other than to add another line to their investment portfolio. With these two billionaires behind us, we can't build a new stand because we're haggling with a Sainsburys. Good riddance to Harris/Blitzer. They'll ruin Chelsea, which will be great. Textor is much more active, and actually seems interested in football. And like Syd says, our value has never been higher. We're a turnkey club, in London, with a popular CEO, popular manager, and a promising future. Edited by Daddyorc (10 Mar 2022 2.10am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Daddyorc

Atlantic Highlands, NJ 10 Mar 22 2.06am

Harris / Blitzer have been a disaster in the US, 76ers, Devils have been terrible since they took over. Harris recently was pushed out of Apollo. Wouldn't surprise me if the same happens to Blitzer at Blackstone!

Originally posted by Wilbraham413

I agree with this.

Good riddance to Harris/Blitzer. They'll ruin Chelsea, which will be great. Textor is much more active, and actually seems interested in football.

And like Syd says, our value has never been higher. We're a turnkey club, in London, with a popular CEO, popular manager, and a promising future.

Edited by Daddyorc (10 Mar 2022 2.10am)

Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle 10 Mar 22 6.27am
Originally posted by est1905 You are talking rubbish (again), There is absolutely no rule anywhere in business that says a shareholder has to put up the same amount of money as another shareholder. Utter tripe. An investor can grow his shares by putting money in when other investors dont. He can put money in and it can be chalked up as an interest free loan. there are dozens of ways a shareholder can put money in WITHOUT the other shareholders doing so. It does make me laugh when Clueless Charlie accuses someone else of talking rubbish There may well be no general rule in business but there is amongst Crystal Palace shareholders which has been done by shareholders agreement which is a very common type of agreement amongst company shareholders. How do I know this? Parish has mentioned it on more than one occasions so may I respectively suggest that you stop sucking on those lemons
Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle

10 Mar 22 6.27am

Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle

Originally posted by est1905

It does make me laugh when Clueless Charlie accuses someone else of talking rubbish

There may well be no general rule in business but there is amongst Crystal Palace shareholders which has been done by shareholders agreement which is a very common type of agreement amongst company shareholders.

How do I know this? Parish has mentioned it on more than one occasions so may I respectively suggest that you stop sucking on those lemons

Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11 Beckenham 10 Mar 22 8.19am
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle It does make me laugh when Clueless Charlie accuses someone else of talking rubbish There may well be no general rule in business but there is amongst Crystal Palace shareholders which has been done by shareholders agreement which is a very common type of agreement amongst company shareholders. How do I know this? Parish has mentioned it on more than one occasions so may I respectively suggest that you stop sucking on those lemons My tuppence worth. Why would one shareholder put more money into a company to the benefit of his fellow shareholders who get a freebie? That wouldn't make sense you would expect to get something back in return for your extra investment e.g. more shares. One more point
Alert a moderator to this post

Badger11

Beckenham 10 Mar 22 8.19am

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

It does make me laugh when Clueless Charlie accuses someone else of talking rubbish

How do I know this? Parish has mentioned it on more than one occasions so may I respectively suggest that you stop sucking on those lemons

My tuppence worth. Why would one shareholder put more money into a company to the benefit of his fellow shareholders who get a freebie? That wouldn't make sense you would expect to get something back in return for your extra investment e.g. more shares.

One more point

Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle 10 Mar 22 8.26am
Originally posted by Badger11 My tuppence worth. Why would one shareholder put more money into a company to the benefit of his fellow shareholders who get a freebie? That wouldn't make sense you would expect to get something back in return for your extra investment e.g. more shares. That's true and is the reason that most private companies have shareholders agreements that state exactly that.
Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle

10 Mar 22 8.26am

Originally posted by Badger11

That's true and is the reason that most private companies have shareholders agreements that state exactly that.

Alert a moderator to this post

NEILLO Shoreham-by-Sea 10 Mar 22 9.24am
Abramovich has now been sanctioned - should be interesting to see what happens next ! Old, Ungifted and White
Alert a moderator to this post

NEILLO

Shoreham-by-Sea 10 Mar 22 9.24am

Abramovich has now been sanctioned - should be interesting to see what happens next !

Old, Ungifted and White

Alert a moderator to this post

chris123 hove actually 10 Mar 22 9.29am
Originally posted by NEILLO Abramovich has now been sanctioned - should be interesting to see what happens next ! [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

chris123

hove actually 10 Mar 22 9.29am

Originally posted by NEILLO

Abramovich has now been sanctioned - should be interesting to see what happens next !

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle 10 Mar 22 9.40am
Originally posted by NEILLO Abramovich has now been sanctioned - should be interesting to see what happens next ! Given the significant impact that today’s sanctions would have on Chelsea football club and the potential knock on effects of this, the Government has this morning published a licence which authorises a number of football-related activities to continue at Chelsea. This includes permissions for the club to continue playing matches and other football related activity which will in turn protect the Premier League, the wider football pyramid, loyal fans and other clubs. This licence will only allow certain explicitly named actions to ensure the designated individual is not able to circumvent UK sanctions. The licence will be kept under constant review and we will work closely with the football authorities.
Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle

10 Mar 22 9.40am

Originally posted by NEILLO

Abramovich has now been sanctioned - should be interesting to see what happens next !

Given the significant impact that today’s sanctions would have on Chelsea football club and the potential knock on effects of this, the Government has this morning published a licence which authorises a number of football-related activities to continue at Chelsea. This includes permissions for the club to continue playing matches and other football related activity which will in turn protect the Premier League, the wider football pyramid, loyal fans and other clubs. This licence will only allow certain explicitly named actions to ensure the designated individual is not able to circumvent UK sanctions. The licence will be kept under constant review and we will work closely with the football authorities.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 2 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Josh Harris/Chelsea

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors