• Existing user of old message board?

    Your username will have transferred over to this new message board, but your password will need to be reset. Visit our convert your account page, to transfer your old password over.

Textor buying Everton? / Bids to buy Palace outright

becky said:
The one saving grace is that he has equal voting rights with the other Directors, and I believe, the casting vote in a deadlock.
Click to expand...
That's now, right? I don't pretend to know how any of it works, but it seemed to be implied that if Textor brought his holding up to 80% this no longer applies.

I've also never fully understood how Parish has so much control with such a small stake!
 
taylors lovechild said:
The US economy shrank in Q1 2025 due to Trump's tariffs and trade policies, having grown by a promising 2% in the previous quarter. There is a good chance the US economy will enter recession in the next quarter according to many leading economists due to the continued impact of the tariffs and the uncertainty created by Trump's erratic behaviour. One person who has done very well out of the Presidency is Trump. Like Trump I would imagine Textor's involvement in Palace is entirely self-serving and he is thinking about his bank balance ahead of any romantic attachment to the club.

If we were to win the cup and enter Europe it will give Textor a hard decision to make, does he cash out at our most successful period in our history, or does he look to build on that success and potentially increase the value of the club even more.

It does feel like we have a ceiling due to the size of our fan base compared to the bigger London clubs and the impact of PSR so to my mind we're better off continuing as we are with Parish in charge of things, as boring and unambitious as some might see that.
Click to expand...
Wrong thread fior your TDS rant.
 
FinchleyEagle said:
That's now, right? I don't pretend to know how any of it works, but it seemed to be implied that if Textor brought his holding up to 80% this no longer applies.

I've also never fully understood how Parish has so much control with such a small stake!
Click to expand...
My belief is that Harris and Blitzer are passive investors and happy to let Parish get on with it. I believe they have a good relationship with him however if they wanted to they could outvote him.

Textor on the other hand is an active investor and wants a say in the running of the club except Parish backed by the other 2 have blocked him due to the stupid voting rights that Textor agreed to.

So his only choice is to buy out the Americans or sell.

I believe that Parish has blocked him mainly because Textor would like to spend more money or should I say borrow more which is exactly the model that Jordan and Goldberg tried and failed .

All of this is supposition of course.

As for the other potential owner Johnson, by all accounts he is hated by the fans of his American franchise so no thank you.
 
I'm surprised that the set up has lasted as long as it has.

It seems from the early days of their respective investments that there have been constant stories of the American investors wanting to pull out and invest elsewhere.
Ultimately they are business people who will move investments when they see fit and it's in their interests; this is a reality and not a criticism.

I would distinguish this from Parish who as a life long supporter seems more motivated by acting in the long term interests of the club.

As to the future it seems unlikely that there's a billionaire Palace supporter out there so we're likely to have to continue with some form of overseas investment that hasn't got the club as it's absolute core.
It's just one of a myriad of investments for the overseas investors which Parish has somehow to hold together in his executive role.
The question is for how long this model is sustainable.
Perhaps the future of the new stand will bring things to a head if there is fundamental disagreement between the investors and Parish on future direction.

Parish had two main objectives for the club - a new academy and a new stand which would increase capacity and revenue.
He saw these as critical for the club but the latter appears to be hugely problematic.
 
While it's obvious the main stand needs upgrading, and the plans look amazing, I have always wondered if it's a bit 'field of dreams'. Do we have 10,000 extra fans banging on the door for every home game? For a Wembley appearance, sure, but a home game against Everton? I doubt it.

I'm a big fan of Parish. He saved us, gave us our identity back, promoted the women's team and Palace for life and we became much more of a community club as well as making us a solid prem team. These are huge achievements, especially when we think back to how it was in May 2010.

I so hope this new stand isn't the folly that tarnishes his reputation.
 
PatrickA said:
I'm surprised that the set up has lasted as long as it has.

It seems from the early days of their respective investments that there have been constant stories of the American investors wanting to pull out and invest elsewhere.
Ultimately they are business people who will move investments when they see fit and it's in their interests; this is a reality and not a criticism.

I would distinguish this from Parish who as a life long supporter seems more motivated by acting in the long term interests of the club.

As to the future it seems unlikely that there's a billionaire Palace supporter out there so we're likely to have to continue with some form of overseas investment that hasn't got the club as it's absolute core.
It's just one of a myriad of investments for the overseas investors which Parish has somehow to hold together in his executive role.
The question is for how long this model is sustainable.
Perhaps the future of the new stand will bring things to a head if there is fundamental disagreement between the investors and Parish on future direction.

Parish had two main objectives for the club - a new academy and a new stand which would increase capacity and revenue.
He saw these as critical for the club but the latter appears to be hugely problematic.
Click to expand...

Harris and Blitzer are both billionaires and big US sports investors. It appears they have quickly realised that there is not any money to be made out of Palace so seem to have been passive investors for a number of years.
Textor , for all his many faults, invested at a time when Palace needed money - just after covid when the team needed investment under Vieira.
It appears the other 3 weren't prepared to put in that money or in SP's case didn't have it.

SP still having an equal voting share is amazing negotiating on his part, i'm surprised Textor agreed to this.

Anyway, if we are to move forward we need proactive owners. If Harris and Blitzer want out then there will be limited options. Textor is clearly one. If he increases his ownership to c80% there is probably not a lot SP can do about it. The multi club model is still pretty unproven IMHO and Textor doesn't seem to be managing his other clubs particularly well. Also his ownership vehicle has Saudi backing so i'm guessing that is not something most fans want.
SP was seen with Woody Johnson, owner of NFL side the New York Jets, at a recent game. Is this as an alternative to Textor or in addition?

Who knows. Having SP on board is still important IMHO as it gives us some protection - despite his ridiculously high CEO salary
 
NMPalace said:
Harris and Blitzer are both billionaires and big US sports investors. It appears they have quickly realised that there is not any money to be made out of Palace so seem to have been passive investors for a number of years.
Textor , for all his many faults, invested at a time when Palace needed money - just after covid when the team needed investment under Vieira.
It appears the other 3 weren't prepared to put in that money or in SP's case didn't have it.

SP still having an equal voting share is amazing negotiating on his part, i'm surprised Textor agreed to this.

Anyway, if we are to move forward we need proactive owners. If Harris and Blitzer want out then there will be limited options. Textor is clearly one. If he increases his ownership to c80% there is probably not a lot SP can do about it. The multi club model is still pretty unproven IMHO and Textor doesn't seem to be managing his other clubs particularly well. Also his ownership vehicle has Saudi backing so i'm guessing that is not something most fans want.
SP was seen with Woody Johnson, owner of NFL side the New York Jets, at a recent game. Is this as an alternative to Textor or in addition?

Who knows. Having SP on board is still important IMHO as it gives us some protection - despite his ridiculously high CEO salary
Click to expand...
I've often wondered what attracted Textor to Palace in the first place. Clearly, Harris and Blitzer have been passive in as much that they have been happy to have Parish protecting their investment by his day-to-day running of the club. That was unlikely to change while they retain their shares, but as has been reported, they have seemingly been looking to sell for some time. So maybe Textor was content to play a waiting game.

Now I don't think that Textor woke up one morning and decided to embark down a multi club ownership route. I think that was his plan all along. There are plenty of instances where such ownership is successful. But his isn't one of them.

Woody Johnson ? - Could be interested in buying H and B out. That scenario would probably result in Parish staying as is. Could also be interested in buying Textor out, but Textor seems more interested - at least at this time - in increasing his holding, not selling or diluting.

The bit I struggle with in all this is the '' proactive owners '' bit that you refer to. Because the financial rules that are now in play mean there is only so much owners can do in terms of spending money. Certainly they could invest in getting the stadium up to scratch - not just the proposed new stand - but the return on that investment doesn't look overly attractive in the short/medium term.

Textor himself said that the current model on financial sustainability is “designed to stop clubs with ambition challenging the so-called Big Six.” Textor: “It doesn’t matter if you have a billion dollars of cash in a wheelbarrow, you’re not allowed to spend it.”

And I agree re SP - he does give us a level of protection. And for that reason alone I have no issue with his salary.
 
Eagleman13 said:
I know it's 'footballinsider', but, does anyone one know what this is all about(1t story) . . .

www.footballinsider247.com

Crystal Palace owners bankroll £10m injection - official documents filed

Football Insider has learned the Crystal Palace owners have bankrolled a £10million injection after official documents have been filed.
www.footballinsider247.com www.footballinsider247.com
Click to expand...

It may be one of the worst clickbait sites but it's true as I subscribe to the Palace sites on Companies House and saw the documents when they were filed. Dunno what the money was used for though
 
NEILLO said:
I've often wondered what attracted Textor to Palace in the first place. Clearly, Harris and Blitzer have been passive in as much that they have been happy to have Parish protecting their investment by his day-to-day running of the club. That was unlikely to change while they retain their shares, but as has been reported, they have seemingly been looking to sell for some time. So maybe Textor was content to play a waiting game.

Now I don't think that Textor woke up one morning and decided to embark down a multi club ownership route. I think that was his plan all along. There are plenty of instances where such ownership is successful. But his isn't one of them.

Woody Johnson ? - Could be interested in buying H and B out. That scenario would probably result in Parish staying as is. Could also be interested in buying Textor out, but Textor seems more interested - at least at this time - in increasing his holding, not selling or diluting.

The bit I struggle with in all this is the '' proactive owners '' bit that you refer to. Because the financial rules that are now in play mean there is only so much owners can do in terms of spending money. Certainly they could invest in getting the stadium up to scratch - not just the proposed new stand - but the return on that investment doesn't look overly attractive in the short/medium term.

Textor himself said that the current model on financial sustainability is “designed to stop clubs with ambition challenging the so-called Big Six.” Textor: “It doesn’t matter if you have a billion dollars of cash in a wheelbarrow, you’re not allowed to spend it.”

And I agree re SP - he does give us a level of protection. And for that reason alone I have no issue with his salary.
Click to expand...

Maybe he should check out the league table? Spurs and Man U the worst of the surviving teams. Everton were once considered one of the top teams and slumming it.

Newcastle do have billions and seem to have done pretty well spending what they are allowed to and winning a trophy and probably a second Champions League qualification in recent years.

Then there is Forest who have been top four for a lot of the season, Villa champions league this year and maybe next and smaller clubs like ourselves vying for trophies and great seasons for Bournemouth, Fulham and even our dear friends from the South Coast.

So plenty of evidence to the contrary!

If they have billions they should do the ground and the increase in revenue would help us compete better on the pitch.
 
mileend said:
Maybe he should check out the league table? Spurs and Man U the worst of the surviving teams. Everton were once considered one of the top teams and slumming it.

Newcastle do have billions and seem to have done pretty well spending what they are allowed to and winning a trophy and probably a second Champions League qualification in recent years.

Then there is Forest who have been top four for a lot of the season, Villa champions league this year and maybe next and smaller clubs like ourselves vying for trophies and great seasons for Bournemouth, Fulham and even our dear friends from the South Coast.

So plenty of evidence to the contrary!

If they have billions they should do the ground and the increase in revenue would help us compete better on the pitch.
Click to expand...
A lot of the teams you mention are the highest spending sides. I heard Brighton have spent the most over the last few years. Bournemouth got a new owner who spent loads. Villa spent loads. Forest clearly spent loads - what have they bought? Over twenty players last two seasons.
I believe Forest and Bournemouth were investigated but were they charged? I think Bournemouth just avoided a penalty and Forest cooked the books somehow.
Obviously, there's Chelsea too.
And all are in the Champions League race - what a surprise.
I don't know much about City, Arsenal and Liverpool but they probably spent more than we did anyway. When these teams get discussed, I turn the news off. I watch the Man U stuff as it's great comedy but will turn off anything with Ferguson or Keane in.
 
NEILLO said:
I've often wondered what attracted Textor to Palace in the first place. Clearly, Harris and Blitzer have been passive in as much that they have been happy to have Parish protecting their investment by his day-to-day running of the club. That was unlikely to change while they retain their shares, but as has been reported, they have seemingly been looking to sell for some time. So maybe Textor was content to play a waiting game.

Now I don't think that Textor woke up one morning and decided to embark down a multi club ownership route. I think that was his plan all along. There are plenty of instances where such ownership is successful. But his isn't one of them.

Woody Johnson ? - Could be interested in buying H and B out. That scenario would probably result in Parish staying as is. Could also be interested in buying Textor out, but Textor seems more interested - at least at this time - in increasing his holding, not selling or diluting.

The bit I struggle with in all this is the '' proactive owners '' bit that you refer to. Because the financial rules that are now in play mean there is only so much owners can do in terms of spending money. Certainly they could invest in getting the stadium up to scratch - not just the proposed new stand - but the return on that investment doesn't look overly attractive in the short/medium term.

Textor himself said that the current model on financial sustainability is “designed to stop clubs with ambition challenging the so-called Big Six.” Textor: “It doesn’t matter if you have a billion dollars of cash in a wheelbarrow, you’re not allowed to spend it.”

And I agree re SP - he does give us a level of protection. And for that reason alone I have no issue with his salary.
Click to expand...

IMHO it's simple.

A proactive owner will fund investment in the club e.g. academy and main stand, either by extra equity or via a cheap loan. Currently Palace has a c£30m bank loan at 11%. I would have thought the owners would see this as overly expensive and would maybe cover this at say 1/2 the interest level we are paying.

Textor's quote is in relation to transfers - you can't just start buying loads of players (unless you are Forest!) and stay within PSR/FFP rules.
 
I always think that buying success taints the achievements but I also would love if Palace could just afford to splash the cash. It's pretty grim when your team is poor isn't it? Although the success from that maybe more satisfying? I don't know really having never tasted the phenomenon of buying success. Certainly, we have been pretty grim with the finances a couple of times.
Obviously, when we did splash the cash we went tits up, so again it's hard to know with us. I don't fancy the morals of being taken over by a country, or really want to be a rich person's plaything, but it seems to be the way of the Premier League these days.

I am, however, always surprised that there isn't more takeover interest in us. What is it? One thing I would blame is our lack of merchandising. Chain stores have Spurs kits but not ours. I think we could do better there.

The other obvious thing is still chance of relegation. But I think that chance is diminishing. Plus, if you're that rich you can pretty much guarantee survival. Even if you can't fully guarantee immediate success.

Forest, Villa, Bournemouth, Brighton for example, have spent loads but over a few transfer windows. That way they more gradually build a team or, especially in Forest's crazy case, are a safer bet for future success. I'm not sure of Brentford's spending or ownership. I guess they're almost more of a surprise than any others.

The other thing: our ground. Something has to happen there one day. Sugar Daddy build us a new Selhurst - no expense spared? Maybe one day.
 
The French qualifiers for the Europa League are Lille, who finished 5th, and the French Cup winners.

The French Cup Final on 24th May is between PSG and Reims.

If PSG win, France’s 2nd Europa League spot will go to the 6th place team, who are John Textor’s Olympique Lyonaise. Could this snatch our hard-won European dream away from us?

Has anybody looked at this?

Needless to say, I shall be supporting Reims on Saturday.
 
whatton said:
The French qualifiers for the Europa League are Lille, who finished 5th, and the French Cup winners.

The French Cup Final on 24th May is between PSG and Reims.

If PSG win, France’s 2nd Europa League spot will go to the 6th place team, who are John Textor’s Olympique Lyonaise. Could this snatch our hard-won European dream away from us?

Has anybody looked at this?

Needless to say, I shall be supporting Reims on Saturday.
Click to expand...
Why would it effect us?
 
ASCPFC said:
Why would it effect us?
Click to expand...
I'd imagine it's something about ownership and not being allowed to have two teams in the same competition. Became a talking point when Forest and Olympiakos looked likely to qualify for champions League.

I don't know enough about the rules i.e percentages of shares etc, to pass judgement though. My only input would be, don't let our Euro dream get fu*ked up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top