David Gandler- New majority owner

[gshaw]

Whilst Travis can't hold the new owners to delivering a new ground, I don't see what the value of investing in Orient is if they don't. Otherwise they are sinking money into an asset-less financial sinkhole with a hard limit on how much it can grow.

The devil in the detail will be how much debt these people will load onto the club to deliver the ground. The profile of them suggests pretty clear eyed money men and not the types who are doing this for a bit of fun.

Based on what's been floating around online about the American football Euro franchise I wonder if Orient are the main aim or if the club is the means to an end something bigger, with the football club sharing a stadium used for other sports that wouldn't otherwise be given an opportunity for prime London land.

[Mistadobalina]

I'd imagine it's a bit of both. The Euro NFL league gets piddling attendances and the last time they tried one it didn't succeed. So I don't think it'll be the primary driver, Vs owning a football club that is a theoretical couple of good seasons away from the most lucrative football league in the world. But if the NFL league does take off, then they've gotten in early and cheap whilst owning the stadium.

If you look at the valuation of Brentford now, it's £400m. Foley at Bournemouth took what appeared to be a crazy punt and he's probably doubled his money (in theory anyway). Not that I think we're a premiership club in waiting but I don't think you put up 18m upfront unless you thought there was the possibility of a serious return.

[OyinbO]

Whilst Travis can't hold the new owners to delivering a new ground, I don't see what the value of investing in Orient is if they don't.

Simply securing permission for the new ground automatically boosts the value of the Club. You don't have to actually build it.

[Top of the JES]

Whilst Travis can't hold the new owners to delivering a new ground, I don't see what the value of investing in Orient is if they don't. Otherwise they are sinking money into an asset-less financial sinkhole with a hard limit on how much it can grow.

The devil in the detail will be how much debt these people will load onto the club to deliver the ground. The profile of them suggests pretty clear eyed money men and not the types who are doing this for a bit of fun.

Based on what's been floating around online about the American football Euro franchise I wonder if Orient are the main aim or if the club is the means to an end something bigger, with the football club sharing a stadium used for other sports that wouldn't otherwise be given an opportunity for prime London land.

I think this is probably the way it’s going to go, he will likely bring in money from the U.S to build a stadium and American Football team while also trying to develop the O’s. We are going to be limited on spend by income I think retaining T&T is going to be very important.

[cockhat]

Whilst Travis can't hold the new owners to delivering a new ground, I don't see what the value of investing in Orient is if they don't.

Simply securing permission for the new ground automatically boosts the value of the Club. You don't have to actually build it.

Unless we purchase the land - if offered - I don’t think WFBC are likely just to sit on it waiting to see if the club will develop it someday!

[Mistadobalina]

Looking at the new financial sustainability rules, they seem like they could be fudged, particularly for clubs who are investing in major infrastructure (like a new stadium.) from the BBC:

'Owners in League One putting £1m or more into a club will only be able to spend 60% on player-related expenditure while League Two sides will only be permitted to spend 50%.' so let's say we spent £4m on land acquisition, training facilities, designing the new ground etc. From how it's framed in the BBC article, that'd allow us to spend £6m on wages and transfers.

Not saying that'll happen but there's a lot of room for creative accounting.

[Rich Tea Wellin]

Looking at the new financial sustainability rules, they seem like they could be fudged, particularly for clubs who are investing in major infrastructure (like a new stadium.) from the BBC:

'Owners in League One putting £1m or more into a club will only be able to spend 60% on player-related expenditure while League Two sides will only be permitted to spend 50%.' so let's say we spent £4m on land acquisition, training facilities, designing the new ground etc. From how it's framed in the BBC article, that'd allow us to spend £6m on wages and transfers.

Not saying that'll happen but there's a lot of room for creative accounting.

Isn’t 60% of 4m around 2.5m?

[OyinbO]

Whilst Travis can't hold the new owners to delivering a new ground, I don't see what the value of investing in Orient is if they don't.

Simply securing permission for the new ground automatically boosts the value of the Club. You don't have to actually build it.

Unless we purchase the land - if offered - I don’t think WFBC are likely just to sit on it waiting to see if the club will develop it someday!

I think there's been some misunderstanding of my posts on this thread - possibly because I've been rushed in trying to make the point. Which is: ownership is a relay race - this new guy may not be the one who gets us over the line in terms of a new stadium. He may just be the next leg of the journey.

[Top of the JES]

Looking at the new financial sustainability rules, they seem like they could be fudged, particularly for clubs who are investing in major infrastructure (like a new stadium.) from the BBC:

'Owners in League One putting £1m or more into a club will only be able to spend 60% on player-related expenditure while League Two sides will only be permitted to spend 50%.' so let's say we spent £4m on land acquisition, training facilities, designing the new ground etc. From how it's framed in the BBC article, that'd allow us to spend £6m on wages and transfers.

Not saying that'll happen but there's a lot of room for creative accounting.

Isn’t 60% of 4m around 2.5m?

It’s 60% of turnover which in the last financial year was £7.7 million. Would allow us to spend £4.6 million on the playing side, which is a bit more than last season.I wrote a thread on this a couple of weeks ago warning people not to expect a massive uplift in budget.

[Mistadobalina]

Looking at the new financial sustainability rules, they seem like they could be fudged, particularly for clubs who are investing in major infrastructure (like a new stadium.) from the BBC:

'Owners in League One putting £1m or more into a club will only be able to spend 60% on player-related expenditure while League Two sides will only be permitted to spend 50%.' so let's say we spent £4m on land acquisition, training facilities, designing the new ground etc. From how it's framed in the BBC article, that'd allow us to spend £6m on wages and transfers.

Not saying that'll happen but there's a lot of room for creative accounting.

Isn’t 60% of 4m around 2.5m?

60% of the money they put in. So if they sink 4m on ground and training related costs, that leaves 6m for player expenditure from a hypothetical 10m injection.

I might be reading the rules wrong, that's how I've interpreted what the BBC wrote.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/ar ... 6e4068113o

[Hoover Attack]

Looking at the new financial sustainability rules, they seem like they could be fudged, particularly for clubs who are investing in major infrastructure (like a new stadium.) from the BBC:

'Owners in League One putting £1m or more into a club will only be able to spend 60% on player-related expenditure while League Two sides will only be permitted to spend 50%.' so let's say we spent £4m on land acquisition, training facilities, designing the new ground etc. From how it's framed in the BBC article, that'd allow us to spend £6m on wages and transfers.

Not saying that'll happen but there's a lot of room for creative accounting.

Isn’t 60% of 4m around 2.5m?

It’s 60% of turnover which in the last financial year was £7.7 million. Would allow us to spend £4.6 million on the playing side, which is a bit more than last season.I wrote a thread on this a couple of weeks ago warning people not to expect a massive uplift in budget.

So you’re saying mista is wrong? The new rules are still turnover based?

[ContrifibulatoryFred]

Goosey Goosey Gandler
Who’s he we wonder
New York and Paris
And now the Orient’s changer
Hope he’s not an old man
Who wouldn’t pay our players
Or takes us to the brink of doom
Before he sells his shares

[Top of the JES]

Isn’t 60% of 4m around 2.5m?

It’s 60% of turnover which in the last financial year was £7.7 million. Would allow us to spend £4.6 million on the playing side, which is a bit more than last season.I wrote a thread on this a couple of weeks ago warning people not to expect a massive uplift in budget.

So you’re saying mista is wrong? The new rules are still turnover based?

https://www.footballtradedirectory.com/ ... cial-rules

[Mistadobalina]

I think what I wrote is correct. The link there says there is already a 60% of turnover wage cap in place, they are just changing how additional investment from owners can be factored into turnover calculations.

[Top of the JES]

I think what I wrote is correct. The link there says there is already a 60% of turnover wage cap in place, they are just changing how additional investment from owners can be factored into turnover calculations.

I haven't doubted you Mistadobalina.

The owners contributions are now being calculated as a part of the clubs turnover. we know total turnover last financial year was £7.7 million but we don't know how much the new owner might or might not be adding to that at the moment.

[OyinbO]

we don't know how much the new owner might or might not be adding to that at the moment.

and here is the key point. There's been a tremendous amount of wishful thinking on this thread and elsewhere recently, but the truth is that we just don't know much yet. As an individual, Mr Gandler does not seem to be spectacularly wealthy (yet, although that may be about to change) but OTOH the bloke that Mr Hearn sold up to was, and we all know how that ended up. How you got the money is as important as how much you have in judging the fitness and properness of an owner.

There's nothing to suppose that Gandler will be as disastrous as the Mayfair Moron, but there's also very little yet to indicate he will transform our fortunes overnight. Some patience is required.

[Hoover Attack]

I think what I wrote is correct. The link there says there is already a 60% of turnover wage cap in place, they are just changing how additional investment from owners can be factored into turnover calculations.

I haven't doubted you Mistadobalina.

The owners contributions are now being calculated as a part of the clubs turnover. we know total turnover last financial year was £7.7 million but we don't know how much the new owner might or might not be adding to that at the moment.

You literally have - youre saying it’s based on turnover, mista is saying it’s also based on money the owners put in.


The. Link mista put up says ‘The key changes agreed include a staggering of the amount of owner equity injections that can be included in the calculation’ but doesn’t provide any more detail than that. So I’ve no idea what this means.

[Top of the JES]

I think what I wrote is correct. The link there says there is already a 60% of turnover wage cap in place, they are just changing how additional investment from owners can be factored into turnover calculations.

I haven't doubted you Mistadobalina.

The owners contributions are now being calculated as a part of the clubs turnover. we know total turnover last financial year was £7.7 million but we don't know how much the new owner might or might not be adding to that at the moment.

You literally have - youre saying it’s based on turnover, mista is saying it’s also based on money the owners put in.


The. Link mista put up says ‘The key changes agreed include a staggering of the amount of owner equity injections that can be included in the calculation’ but doesn’t provide any more detail than that. So I’ve no idea what this means.

Just for once stop being an arse and try reading the link - it is ultimately based on turnover but with changes to the way owners contributions are put into that figure.

"Another change relates to how other specific football income – including cup income and competition prize money – is recognised within the calculation. This will now be included in a Club’s turnover at the relevant SCMP percentage for their division (League One 60%, League Two 50%), whereas previously this income was included at 100%."

[Bandy Legs]

we don't know how much the new owner might or might not be adding to that at the moment.

and here is the key point. There's been a tremendous amount of wishful thinking on this thread and elsewhere recently, but the truth is that we just don't know much yet. As an individual, Mr Gandler does not seem to be spectacularly wealthy (yet, although that may be about to change) but OTOH the bloke that Mr Hearn sold up to was, and we all know how that ended up. How you got the money is as important as how much you have in judging the fitness and properness of an owner.

There's nothing to suppose that Gandler will be as disastrous as the Mayfair Moron, but there's also very little yet to indicate he will transform our fortunes overnight. Some patience is required.

Gandlers net worth is estimated to be $440 million.
More than Kent if correct
https://www.quiverquant.com/insiders/18 ... id-Gandler

[OyinbO]

we don't know how much the new owner might or might not be adding to that at the moment.

and here is the key point. There's been a tremendous amount of wishful thinking on this thread and elsewhere recently, but the truth is that we just don't know much yet. As an individual, Mr Gandler does not seem to be spectacularly wealthy (yet, although that may be about to change) but OTOH the bloke that Mr Hearn sold up to was, and we all know how that ended up. How you got the money is as important as how much you have in judging the fitness and properness of an owner.

There's nothing to suppose that Gandler will be as disastrous as the Mayfair Moron, but there's also very little yet to indicate he will transform our fortunes overnight. Some patience is required.

Gandlers net worth is estimated to be $440 million.
More than Kent if correct
https://www.quiverquant.com/insiders/18 ... id-Gandler

You seem to have omitted a decimal point, old bean

[PKM]

Presumably waiting till end of season to announce
Don’t want anything to take the spotlight off the play off push

[e15O]

Presumably waiting till end of season to announce
Don’t want anything to take the spotlight off the play off push

Takes a while for all processes to be completed, setting up the ownership company is only the beginning, I’d say there’s at least another six weeks plus any additional time for EFL checks before it can be completed.

[Jaggsy1979]

Saw something someone posted on Facebook that was on companies house for Leyton Orient Football Club Limited and the issuing of shares for repayment of something like 22 million to Eagle Investments 2017 Limited, so suspect a deal is very close, I'd love to see what Kent said in the Burnley programme as it sounds like he said it was pretty much done

[PKM]

Presumably waiting till end of season to announce
Don’t want anything to take the spotlight off the play off push

Takes a while for all processes to be completed, setting up the ownership company is only the beginning, I’d say there’s at least another six weeks plus any additional time for EFL checks before it can be completed.

Agree these things take a while, which is what I said ages ago, but was roundly poo-pooed by some on here who laughably thought it would be a few weeks tops.
But it does sound like we are close now. Would expect something in May.

[RedDwarf 1881]

Saw something someone posted on Facebook that was on companies house for Leyton Orient Football Club Limited and the issuing of shares for repayment of something like 22 million to Eagle Investments 2017 Limited, so suspect a deal is very close, I'd love to see what Kent said in the Burnley programme as it sounds like he said it was pretty much done

It sounded like Kent and Nigel are staying on the board which is very reassuring considering what happened under our previous regime