Eisner’s proposals – our view
Mr Eisner has now outlined some of the fundamentals of his bid to buy our Club. It is clear that he has done considerable research and is more serious and credible than recent ‘investors’.
Key points of his bid include:
Club Board – Only his own appointees
Heritage Board – A veto over name, colours and moving more than 15 miles
Fratton Park – A commitment only to essential safety work
Financial – Not disclosed
The Trust Board statement (20 March 2017) said ‘The 3 PST Directors….. will be fully involved in discussions’, however Mr Eisner’s media offensive however raises concerns. Why were the Trust Board ‘unaware this article (News article on bid 11 April 2017) was going to be published’? If Mr Eisner is leading the Trust Board a merry dance when he needs its’ support, what will happen if he has complete control of the Club?
No To The Takeover’s views on Mr Eisner’s bid
Club Board – At present all the members of the Club Board are Pompey fans. Mr Eisner isn’t even guaranteeing token fans representation and is proposing board members living in a different continent!
Ground Location – Mr Eisner could move the ground up to 15 miles without any ability for the Heritage Board to object. That’s three-quarters of the way as the crow flies to………… St Mary’s and within the Southampton City boundary!
Safety Works – It says a lot about previous owners’ that a commitment to essential safety work is necessary. However, the key point is that Mr Eisner is not making any commitment to either develop Fratton Park or build a new stadium in Portsmouth.
A dated ground with a small capacity does not provide the basis for the Club to thrive in the Championship.
Financial – Mr Eisner has not outlined financial information. He has stated that PST shareholders will get our money back, but this is not the point. We didn’t invest to get our money back .We invested, with no guarantees, because we needed the Club to survive.
Our Alternative
No To The Takeover has outlined that the immediate priority of rebuilding the Milton End, to increase the operational capacity of the ground, has been costed at about £3million. The Club’s most recent published accounts (June 2016) showed £1.9m available cash. There is also approximately £1m held by the City Council for the Club from the Tesco development. So a new Milton End could be financed now with the resources available to the Club.
This would introduce better facilities, increase matchday revenues and provide positive investment with no change of ownership.
FC United of Manchester raised over £6m to build a new ground and AFC Wimbledon have advanced plans for a new ground. In both cases this has been without diluting fans’ ownership. Pompey is a much bigger Club than either of them. We can redevelop our ground in stages, enhancing income and the level the Club can be sustained at.
A new Milton End, the re-instatement of unused seats in North Stand G Section and an extended Fratton End could take Fratton Park’s capacity to 23,000 which is close to the typical capacity of a Championship club.
A Fundamental Conflict
The Trust Board statement (20 March 2017) included ‘We understand how much owning your club means and retaining an ownership stake will be central to any discussions we enter into’ but Mr Eisner stated ’I don’t want to do it (the takeover and management of our Club) with handcuffs on, or an impossible structure to manage.’
PST members have a veto on Mr Eisners’ bid because we currently own more than 25% of the shares. In other words we own the ‘handcuffs’. If we owned less than 25%, a majority owner could sell it to anyone he chose. As Tony John commented on The News website (25/03/17):
‘It isn’t about whether Eisner is a ‘good chap’. It is about the fact that there is only one Portsmouth FC and once it is sold to anyone… they can sell it on to whoever they wish.’
What happens if the takeover does not take place?
Club Chairman Iain McInnes has stated ‘It’s the board’s responsibility to assure we are in a position to maintain a steady and progressive club’ (Pompey Programme Board Talk 08/04/17). This applied before Mr Eisner interest and will apply if he walks away.
Our Club’s most recent account were signed off on 22 March 2017. They demonstrate a well controlled business capable of developing within the resources it is already generating. There is no mention that external investment is a necessity. Indeed it states ‘The future is firmly in your hands’ (Chairman’s Statement Financial Statements year ended 30 June 2016)
What should the Trust do now?
No To The Takeover believes there is a key choice to be made. We can either continue the patient progress of the last four years under our own control or we can take a punt on Mr Eisner who has given no legally binding commitments.
The Trust Statement (12 April 2017) stated ‘It is important to re-iterate that PST is a democratic organisation.’ We believe that prior to considering Mr Eisner’s bid the Trust should call a meeting to consider the pros and cons of relinquishing community control. If community shareholders are prepared to consider relinquishing control, consideration of Mr Eisner’s bid would be a second stage.
If you agree with this strategy please contact No To The Takeover using the contact form on this site and include your mobile number.
No To The Takeover 