Cavendish Financial Share Discussion Threads

[thegreatgeraldo] 01/5/2003 19:01

who'll be first to go bust ?? leeds or chelsea ? :-))

[marquis] 01/5/2003 10:17

Looking at Chelsea's balance sheet;



Fixed assets Tangible £176,669,000
Intangible £50,836,000
Totalling £227,505,000


With net current liabilities of £59,028,000, this produces a figure of total assets less current liabilities of £168,477,000.

With a current market capitalisation of £27.1 million at 16p a share this makes the shares look good value..... or does it?

ADVFN has a market-to-book ratio of 0.4, valuing Chelsea Village at £67.75 million.

It is fortuitous that the property portfolio is worth so much, otherwise Chelsea would be rather 'unbalanced' on the balance sheet......

[cdrnet] 08/4/2003 15:20

If anyone's interested in a Chelsea email address, go to www.ClubNames.net.

Looks good to me.

[cdrnet] 05/4/2003 11:57

Can anyone tell me where I can get a ChelseaFC email address?

I saw an advert in last month's 4-4-2, but couldn't get a copy myself.

Anyone?

[marquis] 08/3/2003 11:27

Dear Hilary,

Thank you for the postings. I recall you warning of not buying the Chelsea shares some time ago... No wonder!!

[hilary] 07/3/2003 21:41

Hello Geraldo,

It's probably prudent to e-mail Pooch directly for an answer to that question. Have you got his address?

[thegreatgeraldo] 07/3/2003 20:58

Hilary , what's happened to the cafe society ?

[hilary] 07/3/2003 20:49

Monday, February 10, 2003

Fulham eye Stamford Bridge move


Fulham have revived plans for a controversial Stamford Bridge groundshare with their west London rivals Chelsea next season.

Cottagers chief executive Bruce Langham has held a series of talks with his Blues counterpart Trevor Birch and Langham's club are 'hopeful' a one-year deal will be clinched in weeks.


Jean Tigana's side were made homeless when chairman Mohamed Al Fayed abandoned plans to return to Craven Cottage after redevelopment costs rocketed to more than £100m.

They have played at the home of Second Division Queens Park Rangers in a reported £1m deal this season - and will be forced to make a final decision on Stamford Bridge by March 1 as that is their deadline to request another year at Loftus Road.

A Cottagers spokesman said: 'We think there's a good chance of getting a groundshare with Chelsea - and we're aiming for next season.'

The biggest obstacle to a Chelsea-Fulham alliance is the planning rule which allows only one team to be based at the Bridge.

The clubs will submit a joint application to the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham in the near future, requesting they change that rule.

If the Council delay, Fulham plan to stay at Loftus Road for another year and then move to Stamford Bridge in August 2004.

A groundshare with Chelsea would provide Fulham with a stop-gap while they search for a site for a new stadium.

But the Cottagers, who have averaged crowds of just 16,693 this season, would need to more than double their gate to fill the 42,449-capacity Stamford Bridge.

In October, Al Fayed discussed the possibility of buying into Chelsea Village in return for a deal allowing the Cottagers to play at the Bridge.

But the talks ended with Fulham announcing they had turned down an offer to purchase 9.9% of the club for £15m, in return for a 25-year groundsharing deal with further profit-linked payments.

The Blues responded by saying the gesture was a 'private, neighbourly act' - and claiming the Premier League suggested the idea to them in he first place.

[hilary] 07/3/2003 20:45

February 14, 2003

Legal spat may shed light on Chelsea
By Russell Hotten



THE affairs of Chelsea Village (CV), the football and leisure group, have become a sea of conspiracy theories that stretch from its West London home to New York, Guernsey, South Africa and the Middle East.

The state of CV's finances, the true identity of shareholders, a US fraud investigation into a former director: such issues have generated intense speculation. Now shareholders await news of the emergence of a new investor, possibly as a prelude to CV's chairman Ken Bates relinquishing some control over the company.

Yet, despite indications early last month of something imminent, there has been precious little news of fresh investment. No wonder shareholders, many of them Chelsea supporters whose investment has been eroded steadily, complain that there are too many questions and not enough answers.

Some of these questions CV is not in a position to answer; others the AIM-listed company is not obliged to. But often the impression given by CV, 9.9 per cent-owned by BSkyB, the satellite broadcaster in which The News Corporation, parent company of The Times, has a 35.4 per cent stake, is that secrecy is preferable to openness.

The result has been a huge amount of criticism of the CV board, with Mr Bates singled out for special attention, particularly from the website, chelseaactiongroup.com. However, an issue that may soon shed some light on the affairs of CV is the fallout from a legal spat between two solicitors.

What started as a dispute between two men over money may end up revealing much about offshore interests connected to shareholders in CV and links to an investigation in America about a bank fraud.

Neil Jacobsen, of Jacobsen's solicitors in London, is suing his former partner, Mark Taylor, for money allegedly owed the firm, something which Mr Taylor is contesting.

While working for the firm, Mr Taylor acted for CV and later joined the board as a non-executive director. He eventually set up his own legal practice, whose main client is CV.

In the raft of claims and counter-claims that have been submitted in the case, Mr Taylor says that in 1998 Mr Bates lent him £500,000 to help to buy a house, and then a further £200,000.

But in a letter to Mr Jacobsen the Chelsea chairman denied lending money to Mr Taylor. It it later emerged that the money came from Harbour Group, a trust management company in Guernsey. One of the trustees for Harbour is Patrick Murrin, a non-executive director at CV.

And then, Mr Jacobsen, got a letter from Mr Taylor's solicitor, Alastair Pepper, of Carter-Ruck & Partners, a firm better known for libel actions and one which often acts for Mr Bates. The letter said that the £500,000 loan had been repaid to Harbour, and £200,000 written off.

The £500,000 loan had been made at a 1 per cent interest rate, well below the commercial rate. It is not clear if steps were taken to protect the loan by valuing Mr Taylor's property or ensure that there was provision for repayment of the money if the interest payments were not kept up.

Mr Jacobsen complained to the Guernsey Financial Services Commission about the workings of the trust, and Peter Neville, the GFSC's director-general, confirmed he was investigating Harbour.

It now appears that the US Department of Justice is also taking an interest in Harbour as part of its investigation into another individual who had close links with CV, Stanley Tollman. South African-born Mr Tollman is described by US investigators as a "fugitive from justice" after failing last year to appear in a New York court to answer fraud and tax evasion charges. Mr Tollman denies any wrongdoing, calling the claims against him "misconceived".

According to the indictment, one of the companies used by Mr Tollman and his associates was called Chelsea Acquisitions and that income from the alleged fraud found its way to a foreign bank in Guernsey.

Unfortunately for Mr Bates, his name appears as a shareholder of Chelsea Acquisitions, though he strenuously denies any involvement and does not know why he has been named.

Although Mr Tollman, who lives in London, has not been a director at Chelsea for ten years, he is a long-time friend of Mr Bates (the Chelsea chairman's dog is called Tollie) and the two men are thought to have kept in contact.

The reason that the US Justice Department is now digging deeper into the Guernsey connection is that Harbour, the subject of Mr Jacobsen's complaint, administers a trust called Swan Management.

Swan had been a 26 per cent shareholder in Chelsea Village, and it has been widely speculated that the beneficial owner of this trust is Mr Tollman. Last year Swan sold its entire holding in CV. Almost half the shares were bought by Mr Bates, taking his holding to 29.5 per cent, but the destination of the remaining 14 per cent is unclear. One month after this sale, Ashraf Marwan, an Egyptian financier and son-in-law of the late President, Gamal Abdul Nasser, emerged as a 3.2 per cent shareholder in CV.

This sparked much interest because Dr Marwan, an associate of the late Tiny Rowland, had been a shareholder in Cabra, which owned the freehold of Chelsea's Stamford Bridge. In 1992, after a long battle with Cabra, Mr Bates secured control of the ground after Dr Marwan sold him his stake.

It is possible that Dr Marwan bought some of the Swan trust shares. What happened to the rest is not known, though one theory is that they remain under the control of Mr Tollman. Swan originally bought its stake in Chelsea from Rysaffe, another Guernsey trust, in 1996. Rysaffe was administered by Saffery Champness, the chartered accountants, one of whose partners was Patrick Murrin. And, as mentioned earlier, Mr Murrin is a trustee of Harbour and a non-executive at CV.

Just to confuse matters further, Saffrey Champness Management International is named in the US Justice Department indictment as a firm that "managed and oversaw bank accounts held by Stanley S. Tollman".

The importance of all this is that the inquiries into Harbour might reveal more about the identity of those behind Swan Management which, in turn, might shed light on who owned a substantial stake in CV. There is no suggestion that anyone on the CV board has done anything wrong, and the use of trusts and offshore accounts is commonplace. But continued speculation could be damaging for the company, and is certainly a worry for shareholders.

With CV hoping to bring in a big new investor, the company can ill-afford to be the subject of so much suspicion. Investors are desperate for news, and with some shares in the hands of unnamed individuals or groups, rumours that there could be bid for CV won't go away. On January 8 CV announced that it was in talks to sell all or part of the unissued share capital (representing 15 per cent of the company) at a significant premium to the market price. "The injection of new equity into the company is in the best interests of the company and most important for its long-term future," the CV statement said.

Although shareholders would see their stake diluted, including Mr Bates, whose holding would fall to about 25 per cent, the sale was expected to raise up to £10 million for the loss-making company.

Paul Taylor, chief executive of the Rotch property group and a lifelong Chelsea fan, was tipped as the investor. And the California Public Employees' Retirement System (Calpers) has also been linked as an investor, or possible buyer of the whole club. Yet, there is still no news of the investor or investors, and the shares have eased back since that January announcement from 23p to 19.5p. Once again, many shareholders and football fans have been left wondering about the future of their club.

[hilary] 07/3/2003 20:32

Flackwell,

He could hold stakes in as many clubs as he wanted so long as the secondary stakes did not exceed 9.9% vis-a-vis BSkyB.

[flackwell-raineri] 07/3/2003 19:05

Hilary - Re: Your Shopkeeper allegation - Would this not fall foul of the FA/Premier rules. ie Is he allowed stakes in both CFC/FFC given his role as Chairman at Fulham ?

[marquis] 04/3/2003 10:42

hilary - 01 Mar'03 - 17:15 - 45 of 45

Thanks for the information.

[hilary] 01/3/2003 17:15

Marquis,

Bates was trying to do a deal with Al Fayed.

Al Fayed was going to take the unissued stock in CAV at a premium and Fulham were going to ground share with Chelsea. The ground share part of the deal has run into two problems (it needs planning permission which is unlikely to be obtained before August plus the to-be-laid new pitch will not be adequate for 40+ games a season) so the deal currently looks like it's probably dead.

[marquis] 01/3/2003 10:18

Marquis: I note with interest;

The EGM held on 29 January, the special resolution to issue shares for cash and disapply pre-emption rights was duly passed by its shareholders.

How many shares and at what discount are they being offered?
Are they going to have to do this again?

[rafboy] 10/1/2003 15:05

As a long term supporter both financially and as a football club, I think Bates should step down and let someone else have a go. Even if the cash injection comes about it will not solve things on the pitch and these days that is where it counts. Points make prizes in every sense. Regards paul

[gran] 10/1/2003 08:39

So, Ken's cultivating a new rich friend is he? £10 million should help straighten out the transfer fee mess. And then, if a Champions League place is won for next year, things should look a lot better all round. I'm now glad I bought a few more of these for Christmas!!

[manu4me] 17/10/2002 16:30

Rumour Of The Day
"A consortium is in secret talks to gain control of Chelsea Football Club and the Village complex from controversial chairman Ken Bates... The group will also provide a crucial cash injection of about £52million and Bates will be given an above-market rate for a large proportion of his 29 per cent shareholding. He will continue at the club in a senior position, but day-today control will fall to the consortium members" – The London Evening Standard.


m4m

[shigi] 17/10/2002 16:19

Don't know what it'll do to the share price but being a CFC fan I am expecting exciting things!

[try again] 17/10/2002 13:01

Bloomberg mentioned Chelsea are in "secret talks" regarding the taking over of chelsea and Ken Bates could make a profit on his £1 stake to buy the club 20 years ago

Any ideas will this move the price up or down

[marquis] 25/9/2002 10:38

Hutchinson - Paying Tribute - RIP

By Juvenile D
Date: 19/9/2002

Former Chelsea forward, Ian Hutchinson, passed away this morning at the age of 54. Ian had been suffering from a long illness and all those who followed Chelsea Football Club in the golden era of the early 1970's will mourn the passing of a player who always gave 100%.


Ian was born in Derby on the 4th August 1948 and progressed into the professional ranks via non-league football with Burton Albion and Cambridge United.

Chelsea, were in fact his only professional club. Ian signed for the modest fee of £5,000 in July 1968. At first he was a raw bustling talent and he didn't make his first team debut until the closing weeks of the 1968-69 season. His initial performances were enough to guarantee him an extended run and in eleven subsequent appearances he amassed six goals.

Supporters were quick to acknowledge the strong running and physical attributes to his game. However, the best was yet to come. At Hillsborough on a November afternoon in 1969, Hutchinson found himself paired with fellow legend, Peter Osgood.

Almost immediately the pair hit it off. Ian's robust style seemed to compliment the silky skills of the young Osgood. Chelsea beat Sheffield Wednesday that day with Ian rounding off a gutsy display with a brace of goals.

As Ian began to establish himself his game improved immensely. Always acknowledged as a strong physical individual, it became noticeable that his ball control also began to improve dramatically. The 1969-1970 season, on reflection was probably the best of his career.

Chelsea were on the FA Cup glory trail and Ian was to play a significant contribution. With Wembley beckoning and Watford the opposition, Ian sent the vast army of travelling Chelsea supporters into ecstasy as Chelsea cruised home 5-1. Amongst Ian's contribution that day were scoring the fourth and setting up the fifth for the late Peter Houseman.

The rest, as they say is now history. Chelsea played Leeds in a dramatic final at Wembley. Just as it looked as if defeat was on the cards, up popped Ian to head home a dramatic late equaliser. It set the stage for a memorable night at Old Trafford.

With the crowd nervously chewing their nails and the game delicately poised, Ian prepared to launch one of his trademark long throws. Anyone who doesn't recall the outcome doesn't deserve to be called a Chelsea supporter.

Sadly, Ian's career was to be blighted by injury. In December 1970 he suffered a fractured arm after a clash with a Nottingham Forest defender. In the early months of the 1971 he damaged a knee in a fixture against Southampton. The injury was to see him sidelined for over two years.

His rehabilitation was not helped when he broke his leg on the comeback trail. Unfortunately, he was to suffer the agony of repeating the fracture before he was to play again.

However, in December 1972, he returned and the supporters hoped that all his injury woes were behind him. In his comeback fixture he scored twice against Norwich.

Unfortunately knee trouble saw Ian return to hospital and he could only manage a couple of games during the 1973-1974 season. The following season, once again he appeared to have overcome the problems and his determination appeared to have overcome the injury problems.

However, respite was short lived and in February of 1976, Ian decided that the pain and his knee joint could not be put through the physical exertion that is professional football.

I last saw Ian at the benefit game held for Alan Hudson at Carshalton in May 2001. It was fairly obvious then that all was not well with his health. Nevertheless it still came as a great shock to discover that he had passed away early this morning.

His death will probably touch as many people as his football achievements did. Cool Blue, for one, openly admits that Ian was his favourite player.

Myself, I would ask that you raise a glass tonight and remember Chelsea legend Ian Hutchinson.




Ian Hutchinson - RIP

By The Reporter
Date: 19/9/2002

It was with great sadness we learned today that Chelsea legend Ian Hutchinson died at 9.30 this morning. He had been in a London hospital after suffering a long illness. 'Hutch' as he was known to his team-mates, was member of the 1970's Chelsea squad that first saw FA and Cup Winners Cup glory.


He was renowned for his long throw, one commentator describing his arm movements as similar to 'blades on a windmill'.

It was such a throw that set up David Webb's Cup winning goal against Leeds at Old Trafford in the 1970 replay.

Although best remembered for that moment, it should not be forgotten that he scored Chelsea's equaliser at Wembley that made the final score 2 - 2.

It has been confirmed that the club will hold a minute's silence in tribute to Ian Hutchinson before tonight's game against Viking.

God bless you Ian

"IAN, IAN HUTCHINSON, IAN, IAN HUTCHINSON!"