clint van damme
Well-Known Member
,
Who would put money into wasps and why?
Who would put money into wasps and why?
John tends to be in the know more than most, which is unfortunate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
John tends to be in the know more than most, which is unfortunate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
,
Who would put money into wasps and why?
I doubt they have investment totalling £35 m actually it’s unlikely to be investment at all - it’s more loans I guess
I did ask myself the same thing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wouldn’t be surprised if they push the admin button leave the bond holders high and dry and reset - the bond holders can force the issue without that regardless of investment
I wouldn’t be surprised if they push the admin button leave the bond holders high and dry and reset - the bond holders can force the issue without that regardless of investment
I don’t believe for a minute that anyone would provide additional investment into wasps one bit.
John tends to be in the know more than most, which is unfortunate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Going into admin is given in the bond prospectus as an example of something that could trigger action by the Trustees. However, the trustees have recently reminded bondholders that it is just an example, it is not a given that they would take any action in that circumstance. Makes you wonder whose interests the trustees are there to protect.If they go into admin, I’m sure I read on their forum the trustees of the bond will be forced to act, regardless of any vote from bondholders, and that the lease would be sold to the highest bidder? Not an expert on bonds and charges though. Im sure someone on here will know.
I would imagine Derek Richardson has got something shady up his sleeve however.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
John tends to be in the know more than most, which is unfortunate
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Utter clap trap from this chap. Nobody would invest to lose there hard earned money in a rugby club that has the morals of an alley cat.doeent John like to be centre of attention so would say anything to provoke a reaction.
unless council have chucked them some money I struggle to see who would invest in them.
The trustees have a fiduciary responsibility to the issuer of bonds. In plain English this means that they have a responsibility to act on the best actions of the issuer of the bonds and not on their own behalf or of that of the registered bond holders.Going into admin is given in the bond prospectus as an example of something that could trigger action by the Trustees. However, the trustees have recently reminded bondholders that it is just an example, it is not a given that they would take any action in that circumstance. Makes you wonder whose interests the trustees are there to protect.
Is the >25% just the nominal bondholders or >25% of the value of bonds?But they don't automatically get the ground - that is in the prospectus
They also need >25% of bondholders to block any WF proposal. They are concerned that WF come back and offer a highly discounted figure or a very long term loan position which any larger bondholder might accept
ValueIs the >25% just the nominal bondholders or >25% of the value of bonds?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I agree. Utter tripe they have secured investment.Dawkins knows a thing or two about the playing side of things due to knowing a player or two but has no idea on the outer dealings of the club/CBS situation. Take that comment with a pinch of salt
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
Surely nobody in their right mind is sinking money into Wasps, and if by some miracle they've found someone to write a blank cheque wouldn't we be talking a takeover?I agree. Utter tripe they have secured investment.
seems hard to believe they can raise new funds from a "commercial" source when the bondholders would hold the first option on the main asset. Again there is nothing in the historic performance of the Arena to suggest it is a money spinner or that income streams can be dramatically increased in the current economic crisis. Anyone fancy paying the Arena utility bills for the next 12 months??Surely nobody in their right mind is sinking money into Wasps, and if by some miracle they've found someone to write a blank cheque wouldn't we be talking a takeover?
What is more likely is that they've found someone willing to loan them the money they need. They questions then are will the bond holders get paid or is there a SISU like admin in their future and what are the repayment terms. Its all well and good getting someone to loan you a huge amount but they're still losing millions a year and I'd be surprised if they'd manage to get something similar to the bonds where they only have to worry about interest for the next few years.
seems hard to believe they can raise new funds from a "commercial" source when the bondholders would hold the first option on the main asset. Again there is nothing in the historic performance of the Arena to suggest it is a money spinner or that income streams can be dramatically increased in the current economic crisis. Anyone fancy paying the Arena utility bills for the next 12 months??
Also any commercial lender is going to want a full report on actual stadium valuation and these reported repairs that need doing. Nothing in Wasps historic financial performance to show they can service a 10 year loan. Add in level of debt to owner and it just looks shakyif the funds raised were used to pay the bondholders, they wouldn’t have any hold over the main asset.
I wonder if HSBC stepped back when they saw that recovery from the security wouldn’t be entirely straightforward as the headlease is supposed to return to the council if Wasps went bust.
Is the >25% just the nominal bondholders or >25% of the value of bonds?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I wouldn’t be surprised if they push the admin button leave the bond holders high and dry and reset - the bond holders can force the issue without that regardless of investment
I assume you meant a point not a comma (sorry for being a pedant)Bond value, the FB forum says they have 1,259% notified to them with more people getting their papers in place
Is the >25% just the nominal bondholders or >25% of the value of bonds?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
I assume you meant a point not a comma (sorry for being a pedant)
Havnt seen that anywhereI see Wasps have rejected a proposal to merge with Worcester.
Worcester symptomatic of several professional rugby clubs ( and more than a few football clubs).I see Wasps have rejected a proposal to merge with Worcester.
a serious proposal or is it a fan rumour type thing? think we all know Wasps wouldn't be interested in anything that didn't directly benefit themselves.I see Wasps have rejected a proposal to merge with Worcester.
Needs must?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?