Coley Parry, LO director, & Vitesse

[LittleMate]

The Dutch FA not liking his takeover is very much not a separate matter, given the reason for them rejecting it is that they found no evidence he had the money to see it through. Which makes his hardass approach to asset stripping the club while they sink to relegation a bit questionable, no?

His investment in Orient is considerable btw: he has a larger holding than Kent Teague.

Please explain how Parry is asset stripping Vitesse. I will explain what I believe to have happened first - so it gives you a chance to shoot it down.

Vitesse are in the sh*t because of their Ukranian owner; cash is tight. They sell a player to Stoke and agree a payment plan. Its the best they can do but they still have cashflow difficulties. Parry steps in as a potential investor, subject to clearance. He advances them a sum of money that is agreed to be repaid as the instalments from Stoke are received. Stoke are paying and Parry is getting his money - but Vitesse continue to be in the sh*t. Vitesse are going to try and renegotiate the deal they made with Parry. At what point has Parry asset stripped?

As a separate question, does Parry have any history of asset stripping any other sporting entities?

And here's a final one. How can Parry potentially asset strip us when we lose £50k a week and have sweet fa in assets?

We don't know what the club gave Parry in return for the loan nor the other terms attached to the acquisition. If the club are trying to renegotiate it suggests the terms may not have been very favourable.

I read that one of the reasons the deal is being held up by the KNVB is because there is no identifiable "Proof of Funds" and it has not been possible to identify how much funding will flow in to the club.

If he has the money why not just show them and the deal gets approved.

If his planned investment were not to go ahead then Parry may well have been charging interest on his advance. After all if it were available funds then he would have been earning 5+% on it if he'd left it where it was. If it were more of a payday loan type interest then that would be of more concern. What is clear is that Vitesse are struggling under the weight of continued losses and a lack of capital and in those circumstances vultures can gather. Having said that, there is no evidence that I've seen that Parry is a vulture.

[OyinbO]

Talk of asset stripping misses the mark by a long way.
The Dutch footballing authorities are not convinced this guy has the money.
Parry is an 18.5% shareholder of Eagle Investments, which, in turn, owns 90% of Leyton Orient.
The accounts of Leyton Orient are passed as a going concern as the losses are funded by Eagle.
Unless they have a different arrangement, then the directors of Eagle will be expected to fund Leyton Orient in proportion to their shareholding. So Parry will be expected to fund his share of the losses and provide funds as per the agreed budget.
Let’s hope this guy has the funds, as otherwise that’s an 18% shortfall that the other directors will have to make up, or else the budget will have to be cut.
There are several questions arising from Parry’s Dutch ‘adventures’
Was suitable DD done? Is Parry a suitable investor for our club?
Is Parry able to fund his 18%+ share?
What are Parry’s longer term aims wrt LO
More generally, what do these investors get out of Leyton Orient, apart from their share of losses! How does Nigel attract these people, I would be interested to know what the narrative is. Are they all benevolent benefactors, as I’m sure Nigel is, or have promises or forecasts been made to get their investment?
These are all very legitimate questions for all Leyton Orient fans, especially given our recent history.
I

this is all fair comment - although talk of asset stripping is not so far fetched as you say. The Dutch press are reporting that he was entitled to retain the proceeds from player transfers even while the Club was having to borrow money at exorbitant rates just in order to keep going until the end of the season.

Sure this is all part of the protracted and uncomfortable process of prising him out - he probably used this possibility as leverage, that doesn't mean it will actually happen.

He may well have enough dough still to remain a minority shareholder at Orient - but is he really the kind of person we want to be involved here? Vitesse have really gone down the toilet while he's been there, and he has demonstrated a serious lack of judgement at almost every turn.

[OyinbO]

Please explain how Parry is asset stripping Vitesse. I will explain what I believe to have happened first - so it gives you a chance to shoot it down.

Vitesse are in the sh*t because of their Ukranian owner; cash is tight. They sell a player to Stoke and agree a payment plan. Its the best they can do but they still have cashflow difficulties. Parry steps in as a potential investor, subject to clearance. He advances them a sum of money that is agreed to be repaid as the instalments from Stoke are received. Stoke are paying and Parry is getting his money - but Vitesse continue to be in the sh*t. Vitesse are going to try and renegotiate the deal they made with Parry. At what point has Parry asset stripped?

As a separate question, does Parry have any history of asset stripping any other sporting entities?

And here's a final one. How can Parry potentially asset strip us when we lose £50k a week and have sweet fa in assets?

We don't know what the club gave Parry in return for the loan nor the other terms attached to the acquisition. If the club are trying to renegotiate it suggests the terms may not have been very favourable.

I read that one of the reasons the deal is being held up by the KNVB is because there is no identifiable "Proof of Funds" and it has not been possible to identify how much funding will flow in to the club.

If he has the money why not just show them and the deal gets approved.

If his planned investment were not to go ahead then Parry may well have been charging interest on his advance. After all if it were available funds then he would have been earning 5+% on it if he'd left it where it was. If it were more of a payday loan type interest then that would be of more concern. What is clear is that Vitesse are struggling under the weight of continued losses and a lack of capital and in those circumstances vultures can gather. Having said that, there is no evidence that I've seen that Parry is a vulture.

He should accept the offer of the same amount that he bought the club for and clear off then, instead of using its wellbeing as leverage to try and get back everything he put in with interest. Some deals go wrong, and he should accept that this one did instead of making the Club suffer.

[PKM]

It’s a damn good job he’s at 18% +, although that is at a level to be concerned about.
Tbf, maybe everything is tickety-boo, but we have absolutely no idea.
Is Parry able to fund his ongoing commitments to Leyton Orient
?
Are Leyton Orient /Nigel happy with the situation at Vitesse?
Has suitable DD been done?
Is this guy a suitable guardian for our club?
If Parry can’t pay does the budget here get cut?
Over to you Nigel
Your all for transparency, so let’s have some of it on this very important issue.

[Mightynewsman]

I think we should all march down the high street saying we want our club back what a disgrace

[PKM]

Interesting article

https://unexpecteddelirium.substack.com ... t-theres-a

[Hoover Attack]

Not good.

I don’t expect the club to come out and make a statement but you’d hope some action is being taken to protect us from this.

[OyinbO]

Not good.

I don’t expect the club to come out and make a statement but you’d hope some action is being taken to protect us from this.

Fairly certain the aggressive investment raising round going on right now is partly to help buy him out. You'd hope so, anyway.

[Hoover Attack]

Not good.

I don’t expect the club to come out and make a statement but you’d hope some action is being taken to protect us from this.

Fairly certain the aggressive investment raising round going on right now is partly to help buy him out. You'd hope so, anyway.

No way should the new money coming in go to him. Don't buy him out, just dilute his holding until he's insignificant.

[Rich Tea Wellin]

Not good.

I don’t expect the club to come out and make a statement but you’d hope some action is being taken to protect us from this.

Fairly certain the aggressive investment raising round going on right now is partly to help buy him out. You'd hope so, anyway.

No way should the new money coming in go to him. Don't buy him out, just dilute his holding until he's insignificant.

How do you dilute someone’s holding if not with buying him out?

[PKM]

Fairly certain the aggressive investment raising round going on right now is partly to help buy him out. You'd hope so, anyway.

No way should the new money coming in go to him. Don't buy him out, just dilute his holding until he's insignificant.

How do you dilute someone’s holding if not with buying him out?

Simply by issuing more shares.
Eg if 100m shares now & CP owns 18m or 18%
Then say a new investor buys 100m shares. That money goes directly to the company, Eagle Investments.
New investor owns 50%, CP halved down to 9%, all existing shareholders are halved.
The reality is that CP could well have an anti dilute clause, which usually means he will have to be offered shares at the same level as new investors.
On the face of it, we’ve got ourselves in a bit of a hole here.
Nigel is going to have to say something about this situation at some point.

[Hoover Attack]

No way should the new money coming in go to him. Don't buy him out, just dilute his holding until he's insignificant.

How do you dilute someone’s holding if not with buying him out?

Simply by issuing more shares.
Eg if 100m shares now & CP owns 18m or 18%
Then say a new investor buys 100m shares. That money goes directly to the company, Eagle Investments.
New investor owns 50%, CP halved down to 9%, all existing shareholders are halved.
The reality is that CP could well have an anti dilute clause, which usually means he will have to be offered shares at the same level as new investors.
On the face of it, we’ve got ourselves in a bit of a hole here.
Nigel is going to have to say something about this situation at some point.

This.

My assumption was that he hasn't the funds nor the inclination to put more money into us....

His directorship shouldn't be such a big issue though.

[Max B Gold]

Not good.

I don’t expect the club to come out and make a statement but you’d hope some action is being taken to protect us from this.

Fairly certain the aggressive investment raising round going on right now is partly to help buy him out. You'd hope so, anyway.

No way should the new money coming in go to him. Don't buy him out, just dilute his holding until he's insignificant.

Buy him out. The shares are probably worth at least £1

[CEB]

Wait, so a stake in a company can be diluted by someone with a bigger stake deciding that they can make more shares exist?

Can I ask a stupid question then of what a share tangibly represents, or , if it doesn’t represent anything tangible, what guarantee anyone has that a “share” represents a fixed percentage of ownership? (or why it wouldn’t be important to)

[OyinbO]

How do you dilute someone’s holding if not with buying him out?

Simply by issuing more shares.
Eg if 100m shares now & CP owns 18m or 18%
Then say a new investor buys 100m shares. That money goes directly to the company, Eagle Investments.
New investor owns 50%, CP halved down to 9%, all existing shareholders are halved.
The reality is that CP could well have an anti dilute clause, which usually means he will have to be offered shares at the same level as new investors.
On the face of it, we’ve got ourselves in a bit of a hole here.
Nigel is going to have to say something about this situation at some point.

This.

My assumption was that he hasn't the funds nor the inclination to put more money into us....

His directorship shouldn't be such a big issue though.

My assumption also. Even if we're not buying him out, we will be looking to replace the dosh he has put in over the last couple of years.

[Hoover Attack]

we will be looking to replace the dosh he has put in over the last couple of years.

The dosh he put in has long gone.

[Hoover Attack]

Wait, so a stake in a company can be diluted by someone with a bigger stake deciding that they can make more shares exist?

Can I ask a stupid question then of what a share tangibly represents, or , if it doesn’t represent anything tangible, what guarantee anyone has that a “share” represents a fixed percentage of ownership? (or why it wouldn’t be important to)

There are laws to protect minority shareholders from having that happen to them. But yes it is a thing.

Holding a share usually means you are entitled to that percentage of a say in the running of the company and that percentage of its earnings.

[CEB]

Wow, guess I can’t trust capitalism.

[Mistadobalina]

Interesting article

https://unexpecteddelirium.substack.com ... t-theres-a

This is an excellent read. When you step back from the on field success, the amount of money we lose every year is seriously concerning and I don't understand how we're losing quite this much given the gates we're getting and the players we're signing not seeming to be obviously expensive. The first few years I wrote off the expenses on rebuilding the clubs infrastructure but we're surely now at the point where our losses should at least be reducing.

[LittleMate]

Wait, so a stake in a company can be diluted by someone with a bigger stake deciding that they can make more shares exist?

Can I ask a stupid question then of what a share tangibly represents, or , if it doesn’t represent anything tangible, what guarantee anyone has that a “share” represents a fixed percentage of ownership? (or why it wouldn’t be important to)

There are laws to protect minority shareholders from having that happen to them. But yes it is a thing.

Holding a share usually means you are entitled to that percentage of a say in the running of the company and that percentage of its earnings.

When issuing new shares for fundraising, the existing shareholder usually get first dibs. If they do not want to participate its common practice to seek outside investment which then has the effect of diluting the % but not the value of the shares.

[OyinbO]

we will be looking to replace the dosh he has put in over the last couple of years.

The dosh he put in has long gone.

Yeah. I should have said "the dosh that he was putting in" ie what would be expected annually from someone with such a significant holding - that will need replacing or else we'll be going backwards. That said, who knows how much he contributed this season, as he's been in the mire at Vitesse for at least a year now. Maybe it's linked to the same high interest loans that he now wants to recoup from Vitesse.

[Rich Tea Wellin]

Interesting article

https://unexpecteddelirium.substack.com ... t-theres-a

This is an excellent read. When you step back from the on field success, the amount of money we lose every year is seriously concerning and I don't understand how we're losing quite this much given the gates we're getting and the players we're signing not seeming to be obviously expensive. The first few years I wrote off the expenses on rebuilding the clubs infrastructure but we're surely now at the point where our losses should at least be reducing.

Agree. Don’t people like Kent get tax breaks in the US if loads of his money is in a company losing money?

[Proposition Joe]

Vitesse relegated after a whopping points deduction (related to the previous owners): https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -deduction

[OyinbO]

Vitesse relegated after a whopping points deduction (related to the previous owners): https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... -deduction

It’s not unrelated to the current takeover attempt: had that not been such a hot mess, some of this might have been resolved by now.

Also, it’s not surprising that The Guardian should focus on the Abramovich angle, given it was their reporting that exposed that connection a couple of years back.

[Proposition Joe]

Fair points.