End of Moshiri - Friedkin, APPROVAL AGREED
-
Bluedylan1
- Posts: 4158
- Karma: 4730
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
Business wear + baseball cap = tech bro with a history of sexual misdemeanours
-
Big Nevs Vaz
- Posts: 425
- Karma: 243
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
This shower do not appear to be what you would consider to be fit and proper owners of a stall at car boot sale never mind a premier league football club. Ponzi schemers.
-
Cereal Killer
- Posts: 2509
- Karma: 837
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
PL are just letting it drag as they can’t win either way and are just trying to avoid their reputation taking another beating and another step toward a regulator. They’re desperately hoping someone else comes forward as much as we are
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
The sexual misdemeanours is the one to put it over the line for me , that most of this is all bullshit Wander is not being sued and the dam thing if it happened was in 2012 ffs why come out now
As for the money side of things one bit that is has not been said is how 777 get there funds its all about they do not have them at this time (SO WHAT)
To get the money in would be a round of funding (25 members £20m round of funding done ) money needed again can be done the same way and or new members buy in and that will happen a lot faster with a Prem team on your books
For me its more about can this lot get our income up and all signs say they can , take that with new ground and the naming rights for it
As for the money side of things one bit that is has not been said is how 777 get there funds its all about they do not have them at this time (SO WHAT)
To get the money in would be a round of funding (25 members £20m round of funding done ) money needed again can be done the same way and or new members buy in and that will happen a lot faster with a Prem team on your books
For me its more about can this lot get our income up and all signs say they can , take that with new ground and the naming rights for it
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
The prem can either approve or not approve, it is currently not approved. There is no 'failed' status for the prem to move them to.Cereal Killer wrote: ↑Sat Mar 09, 2024 10:40 pm PL are just letting it drag as they can’t win either way and are just trying to avoid their reputation taking another beating and another step toward a regulator. They’re desperately hoping someone else comes forward as much as we are
Currently the only thing between us and 777 is the prem.
- American Evertonian
- Posts: 539
- Location: NY
- Karma: 256
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
Honestly no idea how it hasn’t been denied. There’s so much smoke there has to be a dumpster fire raging. 777 seem lucky just to still be in business.
Feed the Yak!
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
American Evertonian wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2024 2:34 am Honestly no idea how it hasn’t been denied. There’s so much smoke there has to be a dumpster fire raging. 777 seem lucky just to still be in business.
-
Paddockoldie
- Posts: 1405
- Karma: 685
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
Just watched the Spider's Web. It wouldn't surprise me if we get owned by some jarg trust with a beach worth of shell companies. No accountability or oversight.. I hope these get fucked off, but who would come in to take over.... the above I fear.
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
A Bermudian financial structure used by the Miami-based bidder for Everton Football Club to funnel money invested for widows and orphans into the sport has begun to unravel.
777 Re, a Bermuda-based reinsurer, has enabled 777 Partners to pursue an ambitious dealmaking spree that has included trophy sporting assets and football clubs from Genoa and Hertha Berlin in Europe to Vasco da Gama in Brazil.
But the reinsurer’s ability to further finance the Miami-based firm’s deals is under pressure, while creditors to 777 Partners have turned to the courts.
US insurance group A-Cap, a lender to 777, late last month said it would attempt to raise $400mn in fresh capital and take back control of assets ceded to 777 Re because of credit rating downgrades. Separately, a lawsuit filed in New York last week sought to prevent the transfer of 777 Partners’ assets to a co-founder to protect creditors’ interests, calling the firm a “house of cards”. 777 declined to comment on the court case.
777, which initially made its money in niche areas of finance such as structured settlements, historically flew under the publicity radar.
The deal to acquire Everton, the nine-time champions of England, from British-Iranian Farhad Moshiri has put the group into the spotlight, drawing scrutiny from local politicians, journalists, rating agencies and regulators.
The Premier League has been assessing 777 since September last year, during which time Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s purchase of a Manchester United stake was waved through.
777 has not disclosed how it will finance an Everton takeover, but people close to the deal have said 777 Re was not essential to funding the deal. A person close to 777 told the Financial Times in December that an entity called Nutmeg Acquisition would be used in the purchase. Following scrutiny of 777 Re’s lending to Nutmeg, people close to 777 insisted that separate financing plans were in place.
777 Partners has lent at least £150mn to Everton, according to several people with knowledge of the matter. A-Cap has also provided direct finance to a number of 777 entities.
The reinsurer was at the heart of 777’s “insurance funding model”, according to 2021 pitch documents that said 777 Re sat between third party insurers and 777 portfolio companies. People close to 777 said the group and the reinsurer had an “aggressive” investment strategy. In the presentation, 777 said its approach could generate returns on equity of more than 40 per cent, compared with the 10 per cent in the “traditional approach”.
Annuities such as those offered by A-Cap are typically backed by low risk investments in liquid securities, because policyholders are often able to redeem funds, subject to penalties. Insurers sometimes “cede” assets and liabilities to reinsurers in order to manage their balance sheets.
AM Best, a rating agency that specialises in insurance, has raised concerns about the quality of assets held by 777 Re, which are invested to support annuity contracts sold by A-Cap and another insurer, Silac. Last month it downgraded the credit ratings of 777 Re and A-Cap, and placed Silac on negative watch.
At the start of last year, half of 777 Re’s $3bn assets were classified as related party investments, while $2bn worth were classed as “level 3” assets considered hard to sell or accurately value, according to the most recent accounts available.
A-Cap’s plan to raise capital is a response to the downgrade from AM Best, which centred on concerns about 777 Re’s holdings.
777 Partners co-founder Josh Wander told the Financial Times that he was “not that concerned” about 777 Re, which he said did not need more capital: “The business is overcapitalised.” He added that the entity was reducing its holdings of illiquid assets “even though . . . we have done absolutely nothing wrong”.
One industry expert who had examined 777 Re’s 2022 accounts said of its illiquid assets “in trying to reposition the portfolio it’s unlikely it’ll be able to sell at those valuations”.
A-Cap controls life insurers based in Utah and South Carolina. A-Cap chief executive Kenneth King late last month told insurance agents that AM Best’s downgrade was unwarranted. “I think that there was pressure for [AM Best] to take action, for anybody that had a relationship with 777 Re,” said King. He added: “We don’t agree with their position.”
Michael Wise of the South Carolina insurance regulator said he was aware that his Bermudian counterparts were addressing issues at 777 Re, and that the state continued to “co-ordinate our efforts as necessary” with other US state regulators.
Silac, which has $10bn in assets and is run by a longtime friend of Donald Trump, did not respond to requests for comment. The Bermuda Monetary Authority declined to comment. The Utah state regulator declined to comment on A-Cap. AM Best declined to comment.
Additional reporting by Josh Noble and James Fontanella-Khan in New York
777 Re, a Bermuda-based reinsurer, has enabled 777 Partners to pursue an ambitious dealmaking spree that has included trophy sporting assets and football clubs from Genoa and Hertha Berlin in Europe to Vasco da Gama in Brazil.
But the reinsurer’s ability to further finance the Miami-based firm’s deals is under pressure, while creditors to 777 Partners have turned to the courts.
US insurance group A-Cap, a lender to 777, late last month said it would attempt to raise $400mn in fresh capital and take back control of assets ceded to 777 Re because of credit rating downgrades. Separately, a lawsuit filed in New York last week sought to prevent the transfer of 777 Partners’ assets to a co-founder to protect creditors’ interests, calling the firm a “house of cards”. 777 declined to comment on the court case.
777, which initially made its money in niche areas of finance such as structured settlements, historically flew under the publicity radar.
The deal to acquire Everton, the nine-time champions of England, from British-Iranian Farhad Moshiri has put the group into the spotlight, drawing scrutiny from local politicians, journalists, rating agencies and regulators.
The Premier League has been assessing 777 since September last year, during which time Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s purchase of a Manchester United stake was waved through.
777 has not disclosed how it will finance an Everton takeover, but people close to the deal have said 777 Re was not essential to funding the deal. A person close to 777 told the Financial Times in December that an entity called Nutmeg Acquisition would be used in the purchase. Following scrutiny of 777 Re’s lending to Nutmeg, people close to 777 insisted that separate financing plans were in place.
777 Partners has lent at least £150mn to Everton, according to several people with knowledge of the matter. A-Cap has also provided direct finance to a number of 777 entities.
The reinsurer was at the heart of 777’s “insurance funding model”, according to 2021 pitch documents that said 777 Re sat between third party insurers and 777 portfolio companies. People close to 777 said the group and the reinsurer had an “aggressive” investment strategy. In the presentation, 777 said its approach could generate returns on equity of more than 40 per cent, compared with the 10 per cent in the “traditional approach”.
Annuities such as those offered by A-Cap are typically backed by low risk investments in liquid securities, because policyholders are often able to redeem funds, subject to penalties. Insurers sometimes “cede” assets and liabilities to reinsurers in order to manage their balance sheets.
AM Best, a rating agency that specialises in insurance, has raised concerns about the quality of assets held by 777 Re, which are invested to support annuity contracts sold by A-Cap and another insurer, Silac. Last month it downgraded the credit ratings of 777 Re and A-Cap, and placed Silac on negative watch.
At the start of last year, half of 777 Re’s $3bn assets were classified as related party investments, while $2bn worth were classed as “level 3” assets considered hard to sell or accurately value, according to the most recent accounts available.
A-Cap’s plan to raise capital is a response to the downgrade from AM Best, which centred on concerns about 777 Re’s holdings.
777 Partners co-founder Josh Wander told the Financial Times that he was “not that concerned” about 777 Re, which he said did not need more capital: “The business is overcapitalised.” He added that the entity was reducing its holdings of illiquid assets “even though . . . we have done absolutely nothing wrong”.
One industry expert who had examined 777 Re’s 2022 accounts said of its illiquid assets “in trying to reposition the portfolio it’s unlikely it’ll be able to sell at those valuations”.
A-Cap controls life insurers based in Utah and South Carolina. A-Cap chief executive Kenneth King late last month told insurance agents that AM Best’s downgrade was unwarranted. “I think that there was pressure for [AM Best] to take action, for anybody that had a relationship with 777 Re,” said King. He added: “We don’t agree with their position.”
Michael Wise of the South Carolina insurance regulator said he was aware that his Bermudian counterparts were addressing issues at 777 Re, and that the state continued to “co-ordinate our efforts as necessary” with other US state regulators.
Silac, which has $10bn in assets and is run by a longtime friend of Donald Trump, did not respond to requests for comment. The Bermuda Monetary Authority declined to comment. The Utah state regulator declined to comment on A-Cap. AM Best declined to comment.
Additional reporting by Josh Noble and James Fontanella-Khan in New York
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
Surely to God this farce of an investigation into 777’s suitability doesn’t have to go on a day longer, it’s clear as fuck that they are totally unsuitable, unqualified, incapable, financialy depleted and the PL have more than sufficient evidence to just declare them as unfit as owners. Why is Masters dragging this out when he knows the eventual outcome, to drive us into receivership perhaps as his points deduction might not do the job after all ?
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
As per multiple posts over the last few pages, they don't get declared unfit. They just don't get approved. People normally take the hint and fuck off, but not these. And we're probably not in a position to tell them to do one either as we owe them a load of money and potentially have a clause in the accepted offer where it costs us if we're the ones to pull out.Escla wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2024 12:07 pm Surely to God this farce of an investigation into 777’s suitability doesn’t have to go on a day longer, it’s clear as fuck that they are totally unsuitable, unqualified, incapable, financialy depleted and the PL have more than sufficient evidence to just declare them as unfit as owners. Why is Masters dragging this out when he knows the eventual outcome, to drive us into receivership perhaps as his points deduction might not do the job after all ?
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
Barring a Knight in shining armour - an incredibly rich person with soft spot for us, generous pockets and excellent business nouse comes out from the shadows to buy us and turn the ship around, I can only see eventual relegation or administration, or both.
Re: 777 Partners Takeover
So if they don’t get approved they have been deemed unfit.Goaljira wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2024 1:35 pm As per multiple posts over the last few pages, they don't get declared unfit. They just don't get approved. People normally take the hint and fuck off, but not these. And we're probably not in a position to tell them to do one either as we owe them a load of money and potentially have a clause in the accepted offer where it costs us if we're the ones to pull out.