Thank you to all those who have responded to the post below about the possibility of buying shares in West Ham. So far, more than £200k has been offered. This is only 2% of the £10 million needed for a seat on the board, but it’s not bad going in 24 hours.

Last night I had an email from David Sullivan welcoming the initative. I won’t quote it all, as I don’t have his permission to, but the important bit is this:

What you suggest would be most welcome (though its not an easy task)… I love the idea of a consortium of supporters owning 5/10% of the club… the more people who can share the load the better.

Well that’s a pretty clear green light to progress the idea further, I’d say. The one thing I haven’t had is anyone from a leading bank or law firm who can advise further on the way forward – initially pro bono. I do not have the financial expertise to manage this on my own.

Any ideas? My email address is iain@iaindale.com

There was encouraging new today that Tony Fernandes had not completely closed the door on investing in the club.  Many had interpreted his comment on Twitter that he would be ‘giving football a rest for a while,’ as a clear indicator that he would not invest under the Gold-Sullivan regime.  Yet today he has been quoted in the Telegraph as stating that it is still a distinct possibility.

Obviously, everything will depend on whether he can reach agreement with Gold and Sullivan on the future development of the club and his role in it.  As Fernandes correctly states, to have two major investors with very different ideas and priorities would be a recipe for conflict within the club.  For it to work there would be be a synergy of purpose and a role created for his energy and ideas.

This is arguably a positive message back to Gold & Sullivan that he will invest in the right circumstances and is open to discussion.  They should take him up on this and make every effort to get him on board.  Not only does the club need the additional immediate investment that Fernandes’ stake would bring, but it also needs fresh and innovative ideas to increase revenue streams and strengthen the West Ham brand internationally.  These are areas where Fernandes could really contribute, as he has shown via his entrepreneurial flair in developing Air Asia and Lotus F1. 

Indeed, it can only bode well for the future of the club if Fernandes does get involved.  For it to happen, Gold & Sullivan will need to show that they are serious about working in partnership with other parties and harnessing their innovation and dynamism to the project that they have undertaken at West Ham.  The ball as they say, is obviously now in Gold & Sullivan’s court!

The Telegraph interview is also noteworthy on a couple of other points.  Fernandes reacted sharply to any suggestion that the funds to underwrite his bid were not available.  He states categorically that Rothschilds had proof that the necessary funds were lodged with his solicitors, Olswangs.  However,  Fernandes felt that to implement his three year plan for the development of the club he needed to buy 100% ownership and control from Straumur.  He states that he was about 6 hours away from a deal on a 100% buy out, but Straumur enforced a Monday morning deadline for concluding negotiations and accepted Sullivan and Gold’s 50% ownership deal.

Interestingly, when talking about the complicated ownership arrangements he is quoted as stating that the  ‘owners were bankrupt and the asset (the club) itself was, really, insolvent.’   Regardless whether or not one has any reservations about the club debt standing at over £100m, this statement alone reveals that the club was definitely in dire financial straits.   Remember, Fernandes is the other major party that has been through a due diligence process and examined the club’s books in real detail!  And it would appear from this statement that Fernandes’ estimation of the club’s overall financial position is not greatly at variance with Sullivan & Gold’s!

In the interview Fernandes also refers to his disappointment that his bid failed and that West Ham are ‘the unpolished diamond of the Premier League.’   Perhaps there is a real possibility that Fernandes may still bring his wealth and skills to the club to help cut and polish it and make the West Ham diamond shine?

We can but live in hope!

SJ. Chandos.

Here are just a few of the strikers we are being linked with this morning…

Eidur Gudjohnsen
Benni McCarthy
James Beattie
Ruud van Nistelroy
Robbie Keane

My instinct is that Van Nistelroy and McCarthy are the two real targets. I know Zola is a big fan of the Van Man and there were attempts to sign him last summer. I think Zola also quite likes the look of Beattie, who he sees as perfect foil for Carlton Cole. McCarthy on his day is a brilliant striker, and he nearly joined us under Alan Pardew. But he seems to be carrying an awful lot of excess weight.

I think we’d all be very excited if we managed to get Van Nistelroy. I can’t believe he’d choose Stoke over us! Mind you, Harry Redknapp is also interested, so it could be quite a competitive field.

Now here’s a thought. Yesterday David Sullivan overtly encouraged anyone with £10 million to come forward to invest in the club. They would get a 10% equity stake and a seat on the board. On the drive home last night I mulled over the possibility of trying to raise £10 million from ordinary West Ham fans. I have no idea how many West Ham fans there are in this country and throughout the world, but I’d have thought it must be at least a couple of hundred thousand. If 10,000 people each invested £1,000, you get to £10 million. Clearly there are all sorts of issues here, not least memories of the ill-fated Bond Scheme. There is also the potential cost of hiring advisers to structure an offer, let alone the obligations of the Financial Services Act.

I am no financial expert but it cannot surely be beyond our wit to structure something that both fans and the new owners would be happy with. This blog has 35,000 individual readers every month. I imagine KUMB has more. The Over Land & Sea fanzine sells quite a few thousand copies at each home game. Surely between us we have enough readers who could come up with this sort of money. A bit of celebrity backing from the likes of Ray Winstone, Phil Jupitus etc would also give any fundraising effort a boost.

I have this morning been in touch with the club and hope to get some positive reaction to the idea.

In the meantime, if you are a West Ham fan who has financial expertise and would be willing to help come up with ideas to structure this, please do get in touch.

Also, if you are a fan, and you would like to express an interest in taking this further, and investing at least £1,000, please do send an email to me. I’m not going to take this any further if there isn’t enough interest.

My email address is iain@iaindale.com – please put “West Ham” in the subject line of the email.

Media outlets are reporting that West ham may bid for former Hammer Bobby Zamora.  If true, is this a good move for either the player or the club?  They say it is never wise for a player to go back to a club, but at least you know that you will get 110% commitment from Zamora!  And that is exctly the type of attitude that we need right now.

Apparently Gold and Sullivan met with Zola last night to discuss transfer targets.  It’s good to see them taking a sensible approach in endorsing the  Zola and Clarke management team!  The transfer pot available is anywhere between £8-20m, depending on who you believe, although the lower figure is probably more accurate.  It will be interesting to see who they go for and whether there will be any exits?

The likes of Upson, if they go, will probably do so in the summer.  I would have thought that they will concentrate upon getting players in and look to undertake any major restructuring of the squad in the summer.  We already know the new owners views on the imbalance in the squad and the fact that a midfielder or two will probably eventually be moved on to help strengthen other areas. 

Personally, I would ideally go for goal keeper cover, a right-back, a centre half and a striker or two.  That is easier said than done, especially in the difficult circumstances of the January window.  Perhaps the emphasis will be on loan moves, or a player-exchange deal will be done to bring in a quality striker.

I guess we will all be keeping a close eye on the media outlets over the next ten days or so!  One thing is certain, Gold & Sullivan will do themselves a world of good with the fans if they can engineer a good deal or two in this window!

SJ. Chandos.

Well that was quite a press conference was it not!  Unfortunately I missed most of the developments, as they unfolded yesterday, because I was in meetings for most of the day.  I have, however,  now had an opportunity to view the full press conference on-line.  I have never claimed to be a financial expert, but I must admit that  there are certain things, relating to the club finances, that I do think need further clarification.

The most current set of club accounts should be published and the debts owed to the banks and other clubs quantified.  I expected the the level of debt to creditors to be in the region of £38-40m, so there is an additional £10-12m to account for.  Similarly, there needs to be a breakdown of the £40m allegedly ‘owed’ to other clubs.  How much of this is figure constitutes the compensation package to Sheffield Utd?  The commonly accepted estimate was that the figure was £20m in total and that the first £5m instalment was paid last summer.  That leaves an outstanding balance of £15m, so what transfer instalments, or any other payments, account for the remaining £25m?   Which clubs apart from the Blunts do we owe money and for what players?

So, that leaves a gap of c.£55-57m between the anticipated debt and what it has been stated that we owe.  Even if there are, indeed, player instalment fees outstanding to other of clubs of say c.15m, that still leaves an unexplained gap of c£40-42m.  The only other factor quoted was Curbishley’s compensation package and that certainly does not account for c.£40-42m?   There may well be other debts of which I am not aware and have not taken into account, but if so, what are they?  Is the cost of the training ground re-development included in this figure of  £11om? 

Another issue is the club’s debts to the banks.  Just what are the terms of those loans?  We were led to believe that the club had recently renegotiated its loan facility, presumably on more preferential terms?  Similarly, what has happened to the turnover of the club, estimated to be the region of c.£81m a year?  We had assumed that the club was self-sustaining and financially viable.  However, borrowing against the next two seasons of ticket money and securing 70% of a 3 year shirt sponsorship deal up front indicates extreme financial pressure. 

BG put £30m in to the club, prior to his regime’s demise, to increase the working capital and it had been thought that this had significantly improved the club’s financial position.   The recent incoming fees for Ferdinand (£8m), McCartney, (£4m), Bellamy (£12m),  Pantsil, Zamora (6.5m) and Collins (£5m) amounted to an estimated £35.5m.   There have been some incoming deals, but nothing on this scale.   Similarly, the club has taken decisive action over the last two seasons to significantly reduce the player wage bill, with high earners such as Ljundberg, Neill and Bellamy exiting the club.  Surely these factors should have significantly improved the club’s solvency?  

Furthermore, what has happened to the £30m TV money this season?  It certainly was not spent on players last summer was it!

These are just some of the questions that I would like clarified.  I am in no position to challenge the statements of people who has been through a process of due diligence and has examined the club’s books in detail.  They obviously know the true financial situation.  However, the circle does need to be squared for the fans.

Sullivan and Gold were very open about the state of the club’s finances.  Hopefully this openness and transparency will continue to be a feature of their ownership.  In particular, they will be equally open about their business model and proposals to place the club on a firmer financial footing, whilst implementing their 7 year plan for achieving CL football.

The elements that they did reveal, were attracting additional investment for the remaining 50% of the club and, longer-term, moving to the Olympic Stadium and presumably raising funds on the sale or re-development of Upton Park.  Will the likes of Fernandes agree to buy a stake in the club now it is owned by Sullivan & Gold?  It will be interesting to see his response to such a direct appeal to work with the new regime.  Similarly, will any of the wealthy Hammers fans, supposedly involved in the Intermarket bid, now come forward and invest in the remaining 50% of the club?

As for the move to the Olympic Stadium it is only logical to explore this option.  The Olympic Authority and West Ham Utd FC are reluctant suitors that really do need each other.  The Authority need to redefine their conception of ‘an athletics legacy’ and remove the barriers to a deal.  Whilst the future development of the club needs the extra revenue streams from a £55-60,000 seater stadium.  David Gold put it on the line to supporters in a sky interview, do you accept the limits imposed on the club’s potential by staying at Upton Park or do you move to the Olympic Stadium and raise your sights and ambitions.  To compete with the best we need a bigger stadium, that conclusion is pretty much inescapable!

I have been attending Upton Park since 1967 and I have wonderful memories of the place.  However, I will accept the move if it benefits the club and helps bring the sustained success that I have dreamed of for over 40 years.  Sentimentality has its place, but we need to recognise that Upton Park cannot be allowed to become a fetter to the club finally realising its enormous potential.

I will also be interested to see their short-medium term strategies for increasing income and attracting investment, whilst reducing debt.  How will they reduce the alleged debts, without reverting to major player sales next season?  With the new training ground in development, will assets such as Chadwell Heath eventually be sold?  That will mean the Academy also relocating to the new training base.  What is their position on the whole approach now commonly referred to as ’project football’ ? 

We Hammers fans continue to live in ‘interesting’ times!

Fans may welcome this takeover or they may not.  But the bottom line is that Gold and Sullivan now own the club and we are all along for the ride.  We should avoid taking entrenched positions and wait to see exactly what they are proposing, whilst also maintaining an analytical and critical point of view.  As far as I am concerned it is the only credible position to take if you love this great football club of ours. 

 COYI!

SJ. Chandos.

Click on the image above to see the Gold/Sullivan news conference.

Interview with David Gold with BBC TV.

David Sullivan on 5 Live Breakfast

Iain Dale interviewed with West Ham fan David Keane on Victoria Derbyshire on 5 Live. Scroll in 15 mins.

David Sullivan on talkSport – hear his voice crack with emotion three quarter of the way in. He teared up so much he couldn’t continue for a few seconds.

David Gold speaks to Gaby Logan. Scroll in 1hr 33 mins.

If anyone has links to other interviews from today, let me know.

I’m afraid I have been in meetings all morning so I haven’t seen the press conference. I just heard a very excited David Gold on 5 Live, whose tone was in great contrast to the funereal tone adopted by David Sullivan on 5 Live Breakfast. I did a 5 minute piece myself on the Victoria Derbyshire Show at about 10.15 in which I tried to maintain a balance between excited anticipation and outlining what I felt fans would be concerned about.

Peter Robinson, from the West Ham Email List that I belong to summarises the press conference as follows…

- Still £110 million debt
- West Ham have borrowed against everything
- 70% of sponsor money already paid ( 3 year deal )
- If e.g. Bellamy was sold for £15 mill , WHU received £3 million and the
remaining £12 mill was sold to a finance house for less ( e.g. £10 mill )
- We owe other clubs £40 million ( incl. Sheffield Utd. he isn’t allowed to
say how much of that goes to the scum )
- Other clubs owe us nothing
- We still owe Curbs a payoff
- No players will be sold to raise money , this was a fundamental of them
buying the club
- Both are fans and wouldn’t have bought the club if it wasn’t West Ham
- they will approach Tony Fernandes
- They want to move to Olympic Stadium so that ticket prices can be reduced
- WHU has borrowed against 70% of next season and 60% of the season afters’
season ticket revenue
- They have strategic and operation control
- Sullivan has a 4 year option to buy the remaining 50%
- He complemented Duxbury & Igoe for keeping the club in business
- We needed to raise 8 mill in this transfer window and £12 mill in the
summer if the club wasn’t sold.
- They will make money available to Zola
- they have faith in Zola and the squad , although there is a vast amount of
midfielders and short in every other position.
- They would rent the Olympic Stadium
- Sullivan says one club in the Premiership has debts more than assets and
could go out of business by end of season – is it Pompey!?
- Sullivan has paid £52.5 mill for 50%
- Brady is Vice Chairman , Sullivan & Gold co-Chairmen
- Wants cheapest Premier League prices in the country if we move to the
Olympic Stadium
- They will speak to Zola re transfer targets

I would love to spend the rest of the afternoon discussing all of this with you by way of an online chat forum, but unfortunately my company has its AGM tonight and I need to spend the afternoon preparing for it. So for now I will leave you to it. I am sure SJ Chandos will post something later.

News has just broken that West Ham have been sold to David Sullivan. It is thought that Karren Brady will become West Ham’s new chairman, which is likely to mean a hasty exit for the existing management team led by Scott Duxbury.

I have very mixed feelings. I have made no secret that Sullivan was not my preferred bidder, but the deal is now done. There’s no point in thinking what might have been, let’s look to the future. And at least we have a future.

I just hope that David Sullivan has the money to invest in the club to take us to the next stage, and also that he and Brady will keep faith with Gianfranco Zola. There were rumours that they want to bring back Alan Curbishley. I am sure they were just rumours, but the last thing the club needs now is the instability provided by a managerial change.

It is now up to David Sullivan to prove himself to us. I’m going to try to banish any negative thoughts but it isn’t going to be easy.

Good night.

Tony Fernandes twittered this a few minutes ago…

Deal lost on west ham. Hopefully new owners protect what’s good. We gave awesome deal and new ideas to rejuvenate a club and bring excitment

I was told that Sky were reporting a deal with Sullivan has been done, but I can’t see anything either on Sky News or Sky Sports News. PR Week’s David Singleton is twittering that Karren Brady will be our new chairman.