The two US investors purchased shares, at their then valuation, from the existing shareholders thus significantly reducing the holdings of three of the original owners and also reducing Parish's holding.

The so-called ringfenced £100m US investment, for a new stand, was indicated at the time to be an additional investment and that would appear to still be a possibility as Parish recently said that relegation (should it happen) would not affect the proposed works. These monies will not appear in the accounts until required as no investor leaves that sort of cash sitting around doing nothing.

Edited by bexleydave (23 Jan 2019 8.45am)

Bexley Dave

Can you hear the Brighton sing? I can't hear a ******* thing!

"The most arrogant, obnoxious bunch of deluded little sun tanned, loafer wearing mummy's boys I've ever had the misfortune of having to listen to" (Burnley forum)

Yes I know. I’m relating this money to Orpingtoneavle’s claim the club are being charged interest:-

‘The money put into the club by the American investors comes with interest payments. This debt needs to be serviced and sucks money out of the club.’

I’m unsure how seriously to take this comment. If he’s talking about the buy in money I take it 1% seriously. Is he talking about the recent transfer money Parish claims the Americans paid for?

There looks like there could be more reasons why a sale is desired and maybe all the US investment ever did and ever will do is keep us desirable as a Prem club. Maybe they’ve kept us up and Parish in the green in millions, but their shared tenure won’t be judged until they sell up because this is clearly the best it’s going to be. Some might say it’s the best it’s ever been but the problem is that following relegation the situation and future could be very bleak. We’re hanging on by a thread really and some major changes in transfer scouting and strategy are critical.

COYP

Actually I’m not sure that’s correct. One of 2010 took the money and reduced his shareholding. Parish and 2 others I think didn’t take any money at the time of this deal. My understanding, from memory so it might be hazy, is that the £100 mil buy in was the purchase of the shares but the money (kept in a bank account) was ringfenced for the stadium. When the stadium is built then the value of the club would rise to something like £200 million. Do you remember the discussion over how Parish appeared immediately worse off because his shareholding went from 33% to 18% with no financial gain? It was because when the stand is finished and with higher revenue his monetary ownership would be much more. There was no financial gain at the time apart from one of 2010 who took the money and reduced his shareholding to a smaller amount around 3% I think.

My wish is that someone else buys them out because the current strategies are there for the long term and the stadium plans and maybe council agreement are just there as part of the sale. We could try pushing this council agreement but it appears we’re content to go quiet on the whole thing.

COYP

Yep - my sentiments too.

We're just getting rid of the dead wood that doesn't even get on the bench, I'd expect youngsters to be given a spot on the bench if a few injuries happen as that's the way it's meant to be. Kai kai and Williams aren't youngsters anymore, they failed to make the grade so have been moved on so they can enjoy football rather than hate it with us where they don't fit in as well.

I had the distinct impression at the time - and not just from what I read in the press - that the yanks' investment was equity - not debt. Are you certain it is debt?