goldcoast_tiger
New member
@Harvey said:
Bastards!!!!!!
Brydens Lawyers could buy 50% stake in WT
- Thread starter Joe_s_Tigers
- Start date
Bastards!!!!!!
diedpretty
Well-known member
@Harvey said:
Or maybe Warren Zevons Lawyers Guns And Money
diedpretty
Well-known member
No wonder the NRL haven't jumped at this - this clown has offered 500K straight up and then 750k over the next 6 years to pay out Balmains debt - for those thinking the savior has arrived I suggest you put more faith in the Easter Bunny stumping up the money.
Go_Moltzen
Member
@diedpretty said:
Where did you source this info?
diedpretty
Well-known member
Brent Reads twitter - the same guy who broke the news on Triple M
diedpretty
Well-known member
Apparently story will be in tomorrows Australian
diedpretty
Well-known member
According to Read he has already pulled the pin on the offer because the NRL didn't kiss his butt - it would have valued Wests Tigers at $10 Mil. It would appear the NRL is going to want more than the 5.4mil owed to increase the value of the franchise.
Time will tell…
Go_Moltzen
Member
<big>Lawyer’s $5m bid for Balmain share of Tigers unlikely to succeed</big>
THE AUSTRALIAN MARCH 24, 2016 12:00AM
Brent Read-Senior sports writer Sydney
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9Wv37gaNb0MJ:www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/lawyers-5m-bid-for-balmain-share-of-tigers-unlikely-to-succeed/news-story/9c59db40f0c8dade6d52bad835661a1d+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk≷=au
Brydens Lawyers principal Lee Hagipantelis has tabled a $5 million bid to buy Balmain’s share of Wests Tigers.
Hagipantelis, whose company is a major sponsor of the Tigers, last week sent a formal proposal to the NRL and Balmain, which owns a 50 per cent stake in the club. However, he told The Australian last night that he was resigned to the offer being rejected after failing to receive a response from Balmain or the NRL.
“There were preliminary discussions,” Hagipantelis said. “I spoke with both the NRL and Balmain, and it didn’t proceed.”
Asked whether he was still interested in buying Balmain’s stake in the Tigers, Hagipantelis said: “Not now. It’s not a question of disrespect. I put a proposal forward which, it would appear, did not find favour with either of them. I feel I have made a genuine effort to assist. It was graciously received and it was left at that.
“I’m not necessarily disappointed as such but I do bemoan the fact that I suspect there will be a significant change to the identity of Wests Tigers by definition with the loss of a foundation club.”
Hagipantelis is the first person to table a bid for Balmain’s share in the Tigers, which is due to hit the market on April 1 unless the club can find a way to repay the $5m debt it owes the NRL.
Under his proposal, Hagipantelis offered to pay Balmain’s debt over a six-year period, with an initial payment of $500,000 and subsequent annual instalments of $750,000\. It is understood he also insisted no interest be paid on the outstanding amounts and he receive two representatives on the club’s board.
A spokesman for the NRL said a letter had been sent to Hagipantelis yesterday advising that a number of financial and governance issues would have to be resolved before the proposal could be considered.
Representatives of both Balmain and co-owner Wests Ashfield have been holding talks with the NRL in the lead-up to the March 31 deadline as they look to smooth the path forward.
Wests Ashfield have final say over the Balmain share because it has an option to buy the 50 per cent stake, although it is understood Wests is reluctant to purchase the club in its entirety.
It is believed Wests would prefer to buy part of Balmain’s share and allow the remainder to hit the market. Regardless, Balmain’s share in the Tigers is on the market.
Using Hagipantelis’s offer as a guide, the Wests Tigers would be valued at $10m, well below the market value of several of their competitors.
Manly owners the Penn family sold 22 per cent of their stake in the Sea Eagles late last year in a deal worth $5m. That deal placed the Sea Eagles’ value in excess of $20m.
South Sydney too was valued at more than $20m when James Packer paid $7.5m for a 37.5 per cent share of the club in late 2014.
THE AUSTRALIAN MARCH 24, 2016 12:00AM
Brent Read-Senior sports writer Sydney
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9Wv37gaNb0MJ:www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/nrl/lawyers-5m-bid-for-balmain-share-of-tigers-unlikely-to-succeed/news-story/9c59db40f0c8dade6d52bad835661a1d+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk≷=au
Brydens Lawyers principal Lee Hagipantelis has tabled a $5 million bid to buy Balmain’s share of Wests Tigers.
Hagipantelis, whose company is a major sponsor of the Tigers, last week sent a formal proposal to the NRL and Balmain, which owns a 50 per cent stake in the club. However, he told The Australian last night that he was resigned to the offer being rejected after failing to receive a response from Balmain or the NRL.
“There were preliminary discussions,” Hagipantelis said. “I spoke with both the NRL and Balmain, and it didn’t proceed.”
Asked whether he was still interested in buying Balmain’s stake in the Tigers, Hagipantelis said: “Not now. It’s not a question of disrespect. I put a proposal forward which, it would appear, did not find favour with either of them. I feel I have made a genuine effort to assist. It was graciously received and it was left at that.
“I’m not necessarily disappointed as such but I do bemoan the fact that I suspect there will be a significant change to the identity of Wests Tigers by definition with the loss of a foundation club.”
Hagipantelis is the first person to table a bid for Balmain’s share in the Tigers, which is due to hit the market on April 1 unless the club can find a way to repay the $5m debt it owes the NRL.
Under his proposal, Hagipantelis offered to pay Balmain’s debt over a six-year period, with an initial payment of $500,000 and subsequent annual instalments of $750,000\. It is understood he also insisted no interest be paid on the outstanding amounts and he receive two representatives on the club’s board.
A spokesman for the NRL said a letter had been sent to Hagipantelis yesterday advising that a number of financial and governance issues would have to be resolved before the proposal could be considered.
Representatives of both Balmain and co-owner Wests Ashfield have been holding talks with the NRL in the lead-up to the March 31 deadline as they look to smooth the path forward.
Wests Ashfield have final say over the Balmain share because it has an option to buy the 50 per cent stake, although it is understood Wests is reluctant to purchase the club in its entirety.
It is believed Wests would prefer to buy part of Balmain’s share and allow the remainder to hit the market. Regardless, Balmain’s share in the Tigers is on the market.
Using Hagipantelis’s offer as a guide, the Wests Tigers would be valued at $10m, well below the market value of several of their competitors.
Manly owners the Penn family sold 22 per cent of their stake in the Sea Eagles late last year in a deal worth $5m. That deal placed the Sea Eagles’ value in excess of $20m.
South Sydney too was valued at more than $20m when James Packer paid $7.5m for a 37.5 per cent share of the club in late 2014.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
@hammertime said:
Someone correct if I'm wrong but Wests could still buy out part of Balmain's share and be majority owner.
goldcoast_tiger
New member
@GNR4LIFE said:
Someone correct if I'm wrong but Wests could still buy out part of Balmain's share and be majority owner
hammertime
Well-known member
@GNR4LIFE said:
I think the first option is to buy it by covering the debt? So they would be able to buy it, but would be now in competition with the others I think. From Pascoe's interview the other day, he said a couple of parties are in discussions.
The NRL doesn't want to sell for $5m, as they believe the club is worth more than that.
Fair enough.
So why doesn't Lee Hagipantelis just buy out Balmain for the $5m? He still gets his 50% ownership, the NRL is powerless to intervene on that basis, and Balmain aren't in a position to negotiate a higher price.
Fair enough.
So why doesn't Lee Hagipantelis just buy out Balmain for the $5m? He still gets his 50% ownership, the NRL is powerless to intervene on that basis, and Balmain aren't in a position to negotiate a higher price.
@Abraham said:
The offer is to buy out Balmain's debt to the NRL in the Wests Tigers…it's the terms of the offer that may be the stumbling block...nothing to do with BDRLFC itself so not sure what you mean.....
As for the value of the Wests Tigers ..I'm not sure that has anything to do with it either...Wests underwrote the loans so if a buyer isn't found in 6 months they are liable only for 5.4M....Are the NRL saying they will have to pay more because of the franchises value...I'm not so sure..plenty of questions still to be answered
cochise
Well-known member
@goldcoast tiger said:
There is a comment in the article stating that West Ashfield's preferred option is to buy part of Balmain's share.
What GNR was asking was by buying part of it could Wests Ashfield get control without paying for it all.
For example Wests Ashfield could buy an extra 25% of Wests Tigers and allow someone else to buy the remaining 25% giving them a majority 75% share in the club and atleast another seat on the Tigers board.
@Geo. said:
That's not what I have been told Geo.
I asked Brent Read if the offer was to buy out Balmain (their debt) or to purchase their 50% share in the JV in his own name. Brett said the offer was to buy out Balmain's Share of the JV. i.e. replace them as Shareholder in the Wests Tigers.
He then said the NRL is not really happy with accepting only $5m as purchase price for 50% of the club, for as it undervalues the JV as a whole.
This is a separate issue to what Wests Ashfield may have to pay if they take up their option.
So, as I wrote above, he can circumvent this by offering to buy Balmain (privatise the club) for the $5m they owe, and in the process acquire 50% of the Wests Tigers.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
Thanks cochise, that's what I was getting at.
GNR4LIFE
Well-known member
From Wests pov, it would probably be a wiser move just to buy part of Balmain's share, even if it was 25, 10 or even 1 per cent. They'd still be majority owners regardless and at a fraction of the cost it would be to buy the full share.
balmain boy
Well-known member
@Abraham said:
That's what i don't get. If he wants to pay off Balmain's debt in exchange for their half of the JV there's nothing anyone can do about it. If Balmain want's to sell their share for $5 million is another question. Given if Balmain don't sell they they walk away empty handed you'd think it's in the best interests to sell to Bryden's as they get cash and representative with similar values to their own on the board.
If Balmain doesn't sell in the next week then they have no control over what happens to their half and who's interests they represent.
The one issue i can possibly see is the terms of the repayment of the debt to the NRL. Do they require an upfront payment in full? Or are they happy just to get their money back and will take a payment plan with strict legal conditions attached?
If Bryden's pay cash up front there's nothing anyone but Balmain can do to stop them owning half the JV.
hammertime
Well-known member
@GNR4LIFE said:
Why do you want Wests as majority owner?
Members online
- loklok
- BBTF
- Aceshigh
- BlackWhiteGold
- BalmainBoy67
- Pascoes_barber
- Tigerjan
- innsaneink
- tigereye
- stephen
- Jobliberator
- Criz
- yeti
- Merlot
- Vicious
- Bellend
- Sco77y
- Squater
- mtd#2
- TCL
- Sunnycoast_tiger
- Rusty
- Moh
- BKS
- Wiz
- upthetigers
- Red88_Tiger
- Jimmy
- Dr_Ice
- TV Ted Ellery
- weststigerman
- lzcorut
- tigahhh
- GNR4LIFE
- Canberra Tiger
- Betterdays22
- Trevros
- palms
- Tito Santana
- jadtiger
- LiamFulton
- KH1988