Tony Xia (no longer involved with AVFC)

[sne]

3 minutes ago, rodders0223 said:

Don't be surprised to see him first home game of the season, doing a 3hr long lap of honour and romantically nourishing himself in the centre circle.

Hope for his sake it's not pretzel day at VP

[The Fun Factory]

The wording was a bit strange that last Friday the deal was quoted as an significant investment, and now it is clear it was a majority share purchase. I thought Dr Tony's plan was to sell a minority stake? Or was he so desperate to  avoid AVFC going belly up he gave up control of it? 

All in all a very short, strange, ownership.

[sidcow]

3 hours ago, The Fun Factory said:

The wording was a bit strange that last Friday the deal was quoted as an significant investment, and now it is clear it was a majority share purchase. I thought Dr Tony's plan was to sell a minority stake? Or was he so desperate to  avoid AVFC going belly up he gave up control of it? 

All in all a very short, strange, ownership.

It's the Chinese keeping face doodar whatsit. 

He's sold he is either bought out completely for the pre agreed price once the due diligence and EFL checks are competed, or he's on another gamble staying a silent partner till we are promoted in x years when he sells his remaining stake for the higher price. 

Not much different to Randy selling with another £20m payable upon promotion in 2 years other than he has a sham front that he's still here with his investment. Reality is he's a minor shareholder hoping the guys now in charge can do the business and give him a return of some kind. 

We will know if it's the former or the latter as soon as Sawiris and Edens get EFL clearance. 

[cyrusr]

16 hours ago, The Fun Factory said:

The wording was a bit strange that last Friday the deal was quoted as an significant investment, and now it is clear it was a majority share purchase. I thought Dr Tony's plan was to sell a minority stake? Or was he so desperate to  avoid AVFC going belly up he gave up control of it? 

All in all a very short, strange, ownership.

I think he had no choice in the end. 

From his perspective, it would seem that, in hindsight, he was banking a lot on being able to be promoted quickly and for the club to fund itself. Sadly, that has not happened. When he has attempted to take money out of China he's had a big fat no and he has had to be desperate. That's why Nassef and Wes have managed to get 55% at 30 million. Absolute steal, given that you can't get a player for that price these days. 

From Tony's perspective and his investors, they still hold a 45% share as it stands. I suspect that they will hold onto that whilst Nassef and Wes sort out the club properly. He will then likely sell the remainder at some point in the future and get the money back he paid for it. That way he has managed to save his own face. 

[terrytini]

20 hours ago, The Fun Factory said:

The wording was a bit strange that last Friday the deal was quoted as an significant investment, and now it is clear it was a majority share purchase. I thought Dr Tony's plan was to sell a minority stake? Or was he so desperate to  avoid AVFC going belly up he gave up control of it? 

All in all a very short, strange, ownership.

It reminds me most closely of the Man City takeover. 

Thaksin Shinawatra was originally heralded as a wealthy benefactor but took them close to ruin particularly once his assets were frozen in Thailand. Similar ?

Then almost at the last hour, the new, very wealthy, owners took over......although they didn’t formally complete due diligence etc until late September, when they took full control. For a while - I don’t recall how long - Shinawatra held 10. % shares. He was also given an Honarary President ( or some such ) title which was later removed.

And of course, the new owners decided to stick with a British Manager who was already in Post, Mark Hughes.

I wouldn’t mind if the rest of the story unfolds with similar parallels !

 

[AvfcRigo82]

So it's Pepe Guardiola we're hanging out for and not Thierry Henry!   

[New_Hope]

13 minutes ago, terrytini said:

It reminds me most closely of the Man City takeover. 

Thaksin Shinawatra was originally heralded as a wealthy benefactor but took them close to ruin particularly once his assets were frozen in Thailand. Similar ?

Then almost at the last hour, the new, very wealthy, owners took over......although they didn’t formally complete due diligence etc until late September, when they took full control. For a while - I don’t recall how long - Shinawatra held 10. % shares. He was also given an Honarary President ( or some such ) title which was later removed.

And of course, the new owners decided to stick with a British Manager who was already in Post, Mark Hughes.

I wouldn’t mind if the rest of the story unfolds with similar parallels !

 

And it enabled them to buy Robinho on transfer deadline day too for £35m or something similar.

[DaveAV1]

50 minutes ago, terrytini said:

It reminds me most closely of the Man City takeover. 

Thaksin Shinawatra was originally heralded as a wealthy benefactor but took them close to ruin particularly once his assets were frozen in Thailand. Similar ?

Then almost at the last hour, the new, very wealthy, owners took over......although they didn’t formally complete due diligence etc until late September, when they took full control. For a while - I don’t recall how long - Shinawatra held 10. % shares. He was also given an Honarary President ( or some such ) title which was later removed.

And of course, the new owners decided to stick with a British Manager who was already in Post, Mark Hughes.

I wouldn’t mind if the rest of the story unfolds with similar parallels !

 

Well I’m not sure about the Man City parallels, we’re still way ahead in European Champions stats 

[richp999]

As xia still holds 45%,does that mean any investment in any way (sponsorships/direct investment) will need to be matched at a rate of 45% by xia? 

If so we might still be a bit stuck financially, as I can't see the new owners plowing in millions for xia to benefit to the tune of 45% of any investment they put in at a later date. 

So do we think we ll have to wait until xia is totally gone before our new guys can put in any serious cash? 

 

Edited July 27, 2018 by richp999

[sidcow]

9 minutes ago, richp999 said:

As xia still holds 45%,does that mean any investment in any way (sponsorships/direct investment) will need to be matched at a rate of 45% by xia? 

If so we might still be a bit stuck financially, as I can't see the new owners plowing in millions for xia to benefit to the tune of 45% of any investment they put in at a later date. 

So do we think we ll have to wait until xia is totally gone before our new guys can put in any serious cash? 

 

No he owns 45% of the club he doesn't need to put anything more into it, you've got the wrong end of the stick 

[richp999]

4 minutes ago, sidcow said:

No he owns 45% of the club he doesn't need to put anything more into it, you've got the wrong end of the stick 

Maybe, but let's say wes and naseef invest £100m over the next 12 months, which raises the value of the club by £100m.

This would mean xia receives 45% of the £100m when he sells his shares, without investing anything. 

Point is if I owned 50%of a business with someone I would no way provide all the investment with my partner providing nothing, for them to be able to sell thier half with a tidy profit sometime later. 

I would want them to match everything I invested,in relation to thier percentage holding. 

So I am concerned until xia is totally out of the picture, wes and naseef will not invest unless xia matches it (or 45%of it). 

Unless of course there is some agreement elsewhere that he only gets the value of his 45% of shares as agreed when the new guys took over.. I. E. He won't get any benefit of appreciation of the value of the club. 

[Jareth]

There's been a heck of a lot of generalisations but saving face does not come into it. Tony chose investors who gave him the best chance of making a profit. £30 mill for a controlling stake might seem like small beer, but 45% of a club returned to the prem with the ability to be mega is one sound little investment.

[sidcow]

35 minutes ago, richp999 said:

Maybe, but let's say wes and naseef invest £100m over the next 12 months, which raises the value of the club by £100m.

This would mean xia receives 45% of the £100m when he sells his shares, without investing anything. 

Point is if I owned 50%of a business with someone I would no way provide all the investment with my partner providing nothing, for them to be able to sell thier half with a tidy profit sometime later. 

I would want them to match everything I invested,in relation to thier percentage holding. 

So I am concerned until xia is totally out of the picture, wes and naseef will not invest unless xia matches it (or 45%of it). 

Unless of course there is some agreement elsewhere that he only gets the value of his 45% of shares as agreed when the new guys took over.. I. E. He won't get any benefit of appreciation of the value of the club. 

This will be part of the deal. 

Either a) he's only there fulfilling the fit and proper person requirement of the EFL and the second Sawiris and Edens get clearance his remaining 45% will be sold at whatever price they have agreed or b) they have indeed agreed to give him a cut of the future increased value of the club and will buy him out at the higher value when we are promoted. 

I don't see this stopping them investing, it would have all been agreed in advance. Don't forget they will also have made a massive profit on their investment when we are promoted anyway, the extra to give Xia will be worth it, 

If they weren't going to invest they wouldn't be here, the whole venture would be a big fat waste of their time and effort. 

[CosmicVillan]

1 hour ago, richp999 said:

Maybe, but let's say wes and naseef invest £100m over the next 12 months, which raises the value of the club by £100m.

This would mean xia receives 45% of the £100m when he sells his shares, without investing anything. 

 

Surely in that scenario Dr X's share would be diluted and he would no longer hold 45%

[sidcow]

5 minutes ago, CosmicVillan said:

Surely in that scenario Dr X's share would be diluted and he would no longer hold 45%

He owns 45% of the issued share  capital. He will always own 45% of the company. 

However the other 2 can buy those shares off him for whatever he is willing to sell them for. He can sell them for £1 or £1bn if they offer it. I suspect however the price is pre agreed and written into the deal. 

[richp999]

Sounds sensible to me! 

 

[AntrimBlack]

19 hours ago, cyrusr said:

I think he had no choice in the end. 

From his perspective, it would seem that, in hindsight, he was banking a lot on being able to be promoted quickly and for the club to fund itself. Sadly, that has not happened. When he has attempted to take money out of China he's had a big fat no and he has had to be desperate. That's why Nassef and Wes have managed to get 55% at 30 million. Absolute steal, given that you can't get a player for that price these days. 

From Tony's perspective and his investors, they still hold a 45% share as it stands. I suspect that they will hold onto that whilst Nassef and Wes sort out the club properly. He will then likely sell the remainder at some point in the future and get the money back he paid for it. That way he has managed to save his own face. 

A Liverpool keeper costs twice that. Unbelievable. Any wonder no one can get near the top clubs.

[AntrimBlack]

13 hours ago, sidcow said:

This will be part of the deal. 

Either a) he's only there fulfilling the fit and proper person requirement of the EFL and the second Sawiris and Edens get clearance his remaining 45% will be sold at whatever price they have agreed or b) they have indeed agreed to give him a cut of the future increased value of the club and will buy him out at the higher value when we are promoted. 

I don't see this stopping them investing, it would have all been agreed in advance. Don't forget they will also have made a massive profit on their investment when we are promoted anyway, the extra to give Xia will be worth it, 

If they weren't going to invest they wouldn't be here, the whole venture would be a big fat waste of their time and effort. 

They will have done this. They will know the sort of guy Xia is. And Xia,as I recall, had a pre-agreed arrangement with Lerner for further monies to go to Lerner depending on promotions etc.

[terrytini]

2 hours ago, AntrimBlack said:

A Liverpool keeper costs twice that. Unbelievable. Any wonder no one can get near the top clubs.

Ah yes but he is the final piece in the jigsaw don’t you know ? 

[Alakagom]

3 hours ago, AntrimBlack said:

A Liverpool keeper costs twice that. Unbelievable. Any wonder no one can get near the top clubs.

Liverpool is valued at 2 billion dollars. We are valued at less than 60 million.