Takeover Thread - July 1st statement, Staveley letter to Tracey Crouch (and response) in OP

[Chris_R]

I can only assume that screenshot is doctored, because there's not a bookmaker in the world wouldn't just close his account long before he got to £13m.

[Greg]

I can only assume that screenshot is doctored, because there's not a bookmaker in the world wouldn't just close his account long before he got to £13m.

 

He claimed it is winnings from online poker on the site but it wouldn't surprise me - read there were a few fake emails from lawyers etc. leaked at the time.

[cosmic]

Felicia Tan Published on Mon, Aug 24, 2020 / 11:11 AM GMT+8 / Updated 7 hours ago

 

Axington shares drop 20% following admission of doctored Obama photos by company in Newcastle United takeover bid

 

Shares in management consulting company Axington Inc fell 20% to 18 cents as at 9.40am.

 

The Catalist-listed company was bought over by former investment bankers and cousins Nelson Loh and Terence Loh in June 2020.

 

The Loh cousins were in the news on August 16 for attempting to take over English football club, Newcastle United, through the Bellagraph Nova (BN) Group.

 

The BN Group came about through the merger between the Lohs’ Dorr Group and Evangeline Shen’s Bellagraph Group in June.

 

On August 22, the cousins made headlines again after the BN Group admitted to altering photos of former US President Barack Obama to make them look as if they met in a meeting in Paris, France.

 

According to Reuters, there was no company by the name of Bellagraph Nova Group that has been registered in France, according to official online records. The company was not at its given address at 10 Place Vendome either.

 

The BN Group also said that Hydra X -- a financial technology firm -- is one of its entities and is implementing a trading system for the Singapore Exchange (SGX). When contacted, Hydra X denied both claims. The SGX has also denied the claims.

 

Axington Inc, which was formerly known as Axcelasia till April this year, announced a proposed renounceable non-underwritten rights issue to raise some $9.4 million through 95.2 million new ordinary shares at an issue price of 10 cents for each rights share on July 28.

 

Axington Inc also intends to change its name to NETX Inc, as well as its core business to the provision of medical and consumer wellness services, as well as making investments in medical technology, robotics, and artificial intelligence (AI) in the medical and consumer wellness space.

 

An EGM will be held on Thursday for shareholders to vote on these proposals.

 

Shares in Axington Inc rose by 21.05% to 23 cents on August 20.

 

Previously, prices grew by 11.76% to 19 cents from July 8 to August 19 following a-month-long trading suspension, as the company undertakes a compliance placement to meet listing requirements.

 

The shares last traded at 17 cents.

 

Nelson and Terence Loh are also owners of the Singapore-based Novena Global Lifecare group, which provides medical and aesthetic services.

 

The cousins chose not to go ahead with their plans for a Taiwan IPO for the group, and instead, sought investors from China instead.

 

Since then, Novena Global Lifecare has attracted notable Chinese investors including Shunwei Capital, Sinovation Ventures, and the state-owned Sinopharm Group.

 

Shunwei Capital and Sinovation Ventures are co-founded by Xiaomi co-founder Lei Jun and former Google China president Kai-Fu Lee respectively.

 

As at 11.36am, shares in Axington Inc are still trading 4.5 cents lower, or 20% down, at 18 cents.

https://www.theedgesingapore.com/news/company-news/axington-shares-drop-20-following-admission-doctored-obama-photos-company

 

 

[Kanji]

Disgraceful.

[Miggys First Goal]

UEFA boss Ceferin relaxed about state-linked investments in clubs

 

LISBON (Reuters) - UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin has no issue with sovereign wealth funds and state-linked money coming into football as long as the game's financial regulations are observed.

 

The issue was highlighted earlier this year when the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, PIF, was part of an investment group that made a bid to buy Premier League club Newcastle United.

 

The offer was withdrawn last month after the Premier League started to carry out a lengthy examination of the proposed takeover as part of its "owners' and directors' test", which evaluates the suitability of ownership groups.

 

The consortium blamed the length of the evaluation, which usually takes a few weeks, for the decision to withdraw.

 

Newcastle have since held talks with the Bellagraph Nova Group (BNG) over a possible takeover bid, the Singapore-backed company said last week.

 

Also last month, Bahrain's sovereign wealth fund took a 20% stake in French second division club Paris FC.

 

Asked in a Reuters interview if he had any concerns about sovereign wealth or state-linked funds coming into the game, Ceferin said: “If it is within the regulation, I am not concerned.

 

"Since we distribute almost 90% of all the money back to the national associations and clubs, I would love to have even more revenues because it is good for the development of football."

 

Paris St Germain, owned by Qatari Sports Investments, were runners-up in the Champions League this season, losing 1-0 to Bayern Munich in Sunday's final.

 

Manchester City, backed by the Abu Dhabi United Group, reached the last eight of the competition after a season in which they prevailed against UEFA in court in a dispute over the European soccer governing body's Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations and whether they complied with them.

 

RULING FAMILIES

 

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

PSG's president Nasser Al-Khelaifi is chair of Qatari Sports Investments.

 

Ceferin said UEFA relied on investment in the game in order to redistribute funds across the continent.

 

"You have to know that without UEFA distributing the funds, out of 55 national associations close to 50 would be bankrupt and then children couldn’t play in those countries.

 

"So for us it is very important that we allow investments to come, but within the regulation (and) bearing in mind Financial Fair Play and competitive balance," he said.

 

The FFP regulations aim to stop clubs running up big losses buying players. They also ensure sponsorship deals are based on market value and are genuine commercial agreements and not ways for owners to pump cash into a club to get around the rules.

 

The UEFA president said discussions would continue about reforming the FFP system, introducing some form of a 'luxury tax' on big spending clubs and the broader issue of 'competitive balance' in the game.

 

"FFP is not enough any more, we have to do something to take care that, if you spend too much, by our regulations you have to give something back to the others," he said.

 

"Why is competitive balance so important? Because otherwise competition is not interesting anymore, it becomes boring and we don’t want that to happen."

 

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-champions-bay-psg-ceferin/uefa-boss-ceferin-relaxed-about-state-linked-investments-in-clubs-idUKKBN25K18C

[huss9]

why do we have to rely on Reuters all the time to do any decent journalism.

sports and general media in this country are a joke.

[jdckelly]

why do we have to rely on Reuters all the time to do any decent journalism.

sports and general media in this country are a joke.

decent journalism doesn't generate clicks and "engagement" compared to 5 things you didn't know about random bullshit etc and costs more to do so its out.

[TRon]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

[Guest Cheesy Beans]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the FA's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

The PL’s response will be ‘we don’t have a problem with PIF owning a PL club, they chose to withdraw from the test’.

 

When in reality they delayed and delayed before putting up every hurdle possible to prevent it from happening.

[Guest neesy111]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the FA's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

FA != PL.

[TRon]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the FA's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

FA != PL.

 

Yeah fixed it thanks.

[Whitley mag]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

[TRC]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

 

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

[Whitley mag]

Liam Kennedy still mentioning possible legal action, and work continuing in background.

 

https://www.shieldsgazette.com/sport/football/newcastle-united/mike-ashleys-business-power-play-highlights-newcastle-united-takeover-intentions-2951420

[Whitley mag]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

 

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

 

As Mark Douglas has confirmed they’ll be back like a shot if the deal can proceed.

[wormy]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

 

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

 

As Mark Douglas has confirmed they’ll be back like a shot if the deal can proceed.

 

I'm going to tell myself this 'it's gonna happen' thing is just your shtick now or I'd be worried about your sanity.

[Strawberry]

 

 

Political knots bind sovereign funds trying to beat the market

 

 

Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund walked away from buying Newcastle United after struggling to win approval from the Premier League © Andrew

Arash Massoudi AUGUST 21 2020

 

Nicolai Tangen and Yasir al-Rumayyan have had tricky summers for different reasons.

 

Mr Tangen, a successful hedge fund manager in London, is hoping to take over as head of Norway's $1tn sovereign wealth fund. But a big political row has broken out over his alleged conflicts of interest.

 

Mr Rumayyan, who runs Saudi Arabia’s $300bn fund, walked away from a deal to buy Newcastle United football club from the British retail tycoon Mike Ashley after struggling to win approval from the Premier League. It turns out that years of brazen Saudi pirating of televised football was not the way to win hearts and minds everywhere. 

 

Both men’s experiences have a common thread. While state-run funds are becoming more influential, managing them remains riddled with complexity.

 

That will always be the case where statecraft is mixed with money management but it adds a massive headache to what is ostensibly their day job: generating returns, which is difficult enough already even for investors who don’t have to worry about politics.

 

From risk-hungry gurus such as SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son to more conservative ones such as Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett, some of the biggest names in finance this week gave a glimpse of how their portfolios have changed from earlier this year.

 

SoftBank, which has spent the past four years extolling the virtues of investing in private start-ups through its $100bn Vision Fund, revealed that it had begun pouring its spare cash into shares in Amazon, Google and Netflix, following the investing herd.

 

As the US benchmark S&P 500 hit a record high, Mr Buffett’s Berkshire struck a bearish note. The Oracle of Omaha offloaded some of its bank stakes and bought shares in a gold miner.

 

More than 40 per cent of Berkshire’s equity portfolio, or roughly $90bn, is sitting in shares of Apple, whose value briefly passed the $2tn mark on Wednesday.

 

Although they have the same pressures of having to juggle high politics and big money, the Norwegian and Saudi wealth fund approaches to investing could not be more different.

 

The Norwegian fund largely eschews active management in favour of something that looks a lot like an index approach. Thanks to a market rebound from the panic-stricken drop in the first quarter, the fund recovered from its worst quarter on record to report its second-best one ever.

 

Recommended

Markets InsightHenny Sender

Bringing sovereign funds into Covid fight would be misguided

 

But the fund’s leadership added to the chorus of voices who have warned of a disconnect between financial markets and the real economy. It owns, on average, more than one per cent of every listed company worldwide and is very aware of how damaging a huge market correction would be to its performance.

 

How to navigate that risk could soon fall to Mr Tangen, who has built AKO Capital into a leading equity hedge fund with $20bn in assets. If he survives the row about his appointment, any changes in investment strategy will be closely scrutinised. 

 

The Saudi fund, meanwhile, is a relative newcomer to playing the markets. As coronavirus fears gripped markets in March, the PIF took the rare step of buying a near $8bn portfolio of US and European blue-chips from Boeing to BP, saying it was a “patient investor with a long-term horizon”.

 

This week, however, it revealed that it had sold some of these holdings and moved into a few sector-specific tracker funds.

 

Saudi Arabia’s opportunistic approach, which in some lights looks more like the sovereign equivalent of day trading, contrasts sharply with the methodical, careful investing preferred by Norway and most of its peers. 

 

But in other ways, its choices are clearly marked by the political considerations that underpin everything it does.

 

The few companies where the PIF increased its stake, cruise operator Carnival and concert organiser Live Nation, have been explained as strategic for the development of the country under Mr Rumayyan’s boss, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Newcastle United was meant to be part of that grand plan. 

 

[Robster]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

As Mark Douglas has confirmed they’ll be back like a shot if the deal can proceed.

Isn't the ball in their court though? It'll therefore only proceed if they actively do something.

[Consortium of one]

Let them work on it in silence.  I'm just going on the assumption that it is dead.  If anything happens I'm sure we'll hear about it.

 

 

[Whitley mag]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

 

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

 

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

 

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

 

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

 

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

 

As Mark Douglas has confirmed they’ll be back like a shot if the deal can proceed.

 

I'm going to tell myself this 'it's gonna happen' thing is just your shtick now or I'd be worried about your sanity.

 

I’m merely weighing everything up I‘ve read, and have come to the conclusion this isn’t dead yet. A raft of journalists have now confirmed that talks remain ongoing in background, and I’m convinced Staveley won’t let this go now. All parties want the deal to happen and have PR people and lawyers working on it.

 

I absolutely believe Staveley will have the club by xmas with or without PIF, however I don’t rule out PIF also being part of this yet.

 

I’m also not naive to the point I don’t understand the problems with the deal and have all along as I’ve previously  posted, however it’s a long game and the deal is not dead as some experts on here would have us believe.

[LV]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

As Mark Douglas has confirmed they’ll be back like a shot if the deal can proceed.

Isn't the ball in their court though? It'll therefore only proceed if they actively do something.

 

As far as I can see, the PL have concluded that MBS has ultimate control and influence over PIF so they wanted him to go through the O&D test. As de facto head of state of Saudi Arabia he understandably didn’t want to go through that as its not befitting of a monarch to be put to a test. The result is an impasse and PIF withdrew. Nothing will happen unless either the PL or MBS change their stance. Which they won’t.

[madras]

Its not dead, its on life support, the power grid is down and its on an emergency generator.

[Guest Cheesy Beans]

Its not dead, its on life support, the power grid is down and its on an emergency generator.

 

The emergency generator is also solar powered and situated in a basement.

[OpenC]

Its not dead, its on life support, the power grid is down and its on an emergency generator.

 

The emergency generator is also solar powered and situated in a basement.

But the basement has a sun tube leading to it which various journalists are aiming mirrors at

[Whitley mag]

While neither club are directly owned by sovereign wealth funds, their close links to ruling families has led to some criticism from commentators.

Abu Dhabi United Group, the investment vehicle owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, are the majority owners of the City Football Group.

Man City really should have their approval rescinded in light of the PL's about turn with Newcastle. By all means the bin Zayeds can continue to own the club, just don't allow City to play in the Premier.

If PIF try and mirror the city model, taking piracy out of the equation it would be very difficult for them to justify blocking it on ownership structure alone.

I wouldn’t be surprised if they working on something like this now, or changing percentages.

I think PIF have long forgotten about Newcastle.

As Mark Douglas has confirmed they’ll be back like a shot if the deal can proceed.

Isn't the ball in their court though? It'll therefore only proceed if they actively do something.

 

As far as I can see, the PL have concluded that MBS has ultimate control and influence over PIF so they wanted him to go through the O&D test. As de facto head of state of Saudi Arabia he understandably didn’t want to go through that as its not befitting of a monarch to be put to a test. The result is an impasse and PIF withdrew. Nothing will happen unless either the PL or MBS change their stance. Which they won’t.

 

I retain hope that these expensively assembled legal teams will find an inventive solution to this. As in Staveley’s 1st bid which had sovereign wealth behind it, whats to stop PIF becoming an investor in PCP, and purely becoming a silent investor. PCP would be technically 90% owners of the club with Staveley at the helm.

 

PIF would expect a return at some point clearly as in any investment fund, but they’re clearly all happy working together, and this may be a short term solution to get deal done. PIF would have no seat on the board, and we may not get the level of investment as originally planned this way.

 

Basically your right with your assessment and that is just something off the top of my head, but there’ll be some very highly paid people currently working on a way round the MBS issue and working on various ownership models.