Amanda Staveley’s statement on Friday morning further signalled an intention to connect to West Ham fans, and send a signal to David Sullivan that her interest in the club is still very much live, even after failing to land Vanessa Gold’s shares.
Given her previous offer was for both Gold’s 25% holding and Sullivan’s shares, her actions confirmed at the very least her consortium has access to a minimum of £380m. Yet, to balance this out post the pre-emption rights, Daniel Kretinsky will have spent approximately £400m in total on acquiring shares at West Ham.
The key question on most supporters lips is quite simply “Where’s Staveley’s money coming from?”: And it’s a fair question. West Ham isn’t a cheap date and any serious involvement in the club demands long‑term financial muscle.
The mystery partner behind Staveley’s bid was revealed as Ashland Forest Capital Partners, a US‑based investment partnership led by Peter Bernick and Tom McCauley. They’re not Blackstone, KKR, Apollo, or any of the mega‑funds with billions ready to deploy, but they do have decades of experience raising capital and turning underperforming assets around.
According to the firm’s latest form ADV data file registered with the SEC (source: Radient Analytics) Ashland Forest manages one active fund with a total Gross Asset Value of $30m. As such this suggests they raise money per transaction, assembling capital from their network depending on the deal size.
That means Staveley’s bid was potentially backed by a consortium of wealthy players and not a single mega‑investor writing a large cheque. A network of wealthy investors assembled by Ashland Forest Capital Partners is not a giant private‑equity fund.
The other concern would be whether the monies are part of an LBO (Leveraged Buy Out) which is allowed in the Championship yet not in the Premier League.
This would be unlikely and highly impractical as SCR is affected – given LBO loads a club with debt and the high interest payments would cripple West Ham’s day to day revenue, leaving no money to spend on players without breaching the SCR Cap. There are also regulatory hurdles.
Would West Ham Be Loaded With Debt?
Supporters only have to look no further than Burnley’s US takeover which has reportedly left the club loaded with debt.
To allay any fears, Staveley would need to prove that she has the money, and this would have been the case regarding the previous offer to Vanessa Gold. Any purchase of West Ham shares requires proof of funds(POF) so Staveley’s consortium would need to demonstrate they have the capital available or committed.
This includes bank statements, investor commitment letters, escrow arrangements and legal confirmations from capital partners. Regulators will also require source‑of‑funds verification, anti‑money‑laundering checks and the relevant fit‑and‑proper ownership assessments.
Existing shareholders, notably Daniel Křetínský has the right to match any potential future offers made to David Sullivan. This is exactly what happened with Vanessa Gold’s shares where Křetínský exercised his rights along with other shareholders which effectively blocked Staveley’s purchase.
Set to be the largest shareholder, Kretinsky blocked Staveley’s bid to buy a majority shareholding
So even if Staveley had the money ready, she still needed shareholder approval and she didn’t get it. Staveley is a deal‑maker, not a billionaire. She assembles capital from partners rather than deploying her own wealth. Many fans and insiders remain unconvinced Staveley’s consortium has the long‑term financial firepower to compete.
Too many people are beguiled by her involvement in the Manchester City and Newcastle United takeovers, and I’m very wary of the assumption that the same blueprint can be replicated simply by buying out Sullivan’s stake if he even decides to sell.
For that reason, I’m pinning my hopes on Daniel Kretinsky as the key to moving the club forward. For those saying he’s not a footballing person, look no further than the developments at Sparta Prague. He has working capital and is proven in the business world. A layer of investors via Stavely doesn’t inspire confidence.
Sullivan will sell eventually; it will happen regardless of suggestions that he will keep his stake for his sons, yet under Křetínský as the lead share holder I feel more confident, and hope others are too. Remember Křetínský‘s silence isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Lions don’t need to roar, while those who shout seek attention, and those who stay quiet already have it!
My hope has always been with DK and if Sullivan was to sell, DK would either sell his own shares to his Czech billionaire buddy and buy Sullivan’s with Tripp Smith also increasing his investment as what has occurred with the Gold shares or he buys the whole lot from Sullivan and take full ownership as the majority shareholder. Staverley would just walk away after making a few quid after a couple of years and we’d be at the mercy of another unknown owner. DK brings stability which is what West Ham now needs to move forward.
Great informative article Mat. Many of us have been wondering just who Staveley’s Consortium actually was. I personally feel very grateful we have a Kretinsky backing the club. He put staff in and stood by us when we dropped into the Championship and as major shareholder hopefully will address some the fans concerns regarding the Stadium etc.
I’m glad WHU will be kept out of the grasp of US ownership. I don’t trust US businessmen. Any business I’ve dealt with that fell into US hands has dispensed with good people mercilessly and created awful work environments for staff.
Stavely failed because it’s clear the existing ownership blocked her attempt. Good on them.
Much is made of Sullivan increasing his stake but it was less than an additional 2%.
Staveleys statement is pure stage management trying to capitalize on supporter distrust of Sullivan. There’s no heartfelt affection for WHU. She’s fronting a consortium whose sole interest is profit.
At least Kretinsky has a track record in Football club ownership and appears to be a football fan.
So, for all his faults, does Sullivan for that matter.
It’s difficult to see Staveley’s potential involvement as anything other than bad news. American investors do not have a good track record in English football, being more interested in making money than supporting the sport. – eg Man Utd. Non football people on the board meddling in the football side can also have bad outcomes — eg West Ham Utd. If Sullivan is on board with keeping Stavley out then it’s one final good thing he can do for the club. Kretinski appears to be a very rich, canny business man with a genuine interest in football who will leave the professionals to run the football side, which is surely what we want. I can’t see that being the case with Staveley.
I’m afraid I just don’t trust Kretinsky.
Too many other businesses on.the go, and doesn’t want total control.
Looking at what Amanda Stavely has done in the past, would much rather she ran the club.
That’s a rather short sighted and ridiculous statement, you must be a spurs supporter in disguise. So in real terms, what has Kretinsky done to make you not trust him? You are entitled to your opinion but Kretinsky has only ever done what has been best for West Ham and played the steady long game showing he is there for the long haul, not just a year or two to make money.
In fact at this precise moment he has invested more in our club than anyone else. He has proven with his track record that he knows what he is doing and how to grow and develop a club and he has the resources to do so. All Staveley has proven is that she is good at PR and looking after her own interests. By making an offfer to Gold at exactly the wrong time, her actions ruined our transfer window and forced us to sell more players to cover existing debt and generate a small transfer budget. And Vanessa Gold is no better by accepting the offer and forcing Kretinsky to purchase more shares at an inflated rate instead of paying off club debt as planned.
So many people were taken in by the staveley PR machine that they forgot to check where the money was coming from and how much debt it would have left the club with. Remember when Man Utd got bought out by the Glasers and they loaded the club with debt while still taking their dividends. That would have been West Ham under Staveley and Ashland Forest as they dont appear to have the funds required to invest properly. Maybe just enough funds to purchase the required shares and saddle the club with the debt of purchasing those shares. The only way that gets paid off is 10’s of years down the line when the surrounding land has been developed to make them a huge profit…..and maybe not even then. The biggest mistake we could have made would have been to believe the charm offensive like so many did, and let Staveley and her American investors into our club.
Kretinsky is the sensible and safe bet every single time for me. Everyone who disaagrees is looking at things through Claret & Blue tinted glasses and dreaming of a quick fix.
How you say you dont trust him is beyond me, as any promises he made that havent been realised were dashed the minute Vanessa Gold accepetd the Staveley offer. As theres no way he invests the £90 million that was mentioned if he hasnt secured the shares to be the largest shareholder.
Maybe have a look at what is becoming clearer to us all as time goes on instead of dreaming about what might have been. You say he doesnt want total control, he does just not on the terms of the agreement he signed originally which majorly benefits Sullivan. But there will come a time when he takes full control on his terms.
COYI
Totally agree with the above. Personally I would prefer a European taking over rather than having Americans. We’ve seen more than enough when Americans are involved.
That´s a well reasoned article. When a consortium rather than one rich individual owns a majority you can get a Camel designed by the Committee when you had really wanted a Horse.
Additionally, a cash flow from utilities such as Kretinsky´s is stable unlike the volatility of the Icelandic Bankers years ago. In a Geopolitically uncertain time that´s a significant factor. Funds can dry up from sanctioned oligarchs, Gulf State sheiks, countries on the brink of a Trade War & AI entrepreneurs if that sector goes wrong.
Kretinsky has stepped up and overseen an effective rebuild and stopped Sullivan from sacking Nuno which could well have led to freefall. It would be good if he could show up to the occasional game, though. The optics also matter (as AS realises).
Finally, someone at C&H has done their homework. As Someone whose career was in Asset Management and Private Equity the red flags over this deal were easily apparent. Unfortunately for others it was easy to be seduced by the hype.
Kretinsky will a good leader for the club and the last 30 years of Sparta Prague illustrate this.
I meant 20 years!
Great stuff, Matt. Mandy has absolutely no chance of dealing our club to asset strippers interested only in return on investments and with minimal interest in soccer.
Their investments should be targeted elsewhere.
After all, Mandy is just speaking words in her statement. Saving face and hoping to justify her commission and future credibility before moving on to the next big thing. Loving her time in the spotlight. Celebrity Traitors beckons. Could be Dragons’ Den but she doesn’t have any money of her own to invest.
A bullet dodged and happily so. We can get on with supporting our team on the pitch. Our winning team on the pitch, that is.
COYI
Well articulated article Matt. I am on the same page as you. I don’t care who owns WHU as long as it is for the betterment of the club and the fans who love it.
Hasn’t Staveley stated the Reuben brithers and their 25 billion is backing her interest in West Ham, or rather the Reuben Brothers return to developing in the Stratford area, that they have already been involved in.
Yes,let Kretinsky run the football side, and Staveley or rather the Reubens run the development
Let them all packet and leave us with a well financed and properly run football club, with a real football stadium and hopefully free of Sullivan
No she did not. There was speculation that they might be involved, but it turns out they aren’t which makes sense since they would have to sell their holding in Newcastle fc if we got promoted.
Aye to all of this Matt, anyone with any sense should be totally averse to an LBO. Look at the mess over many years at Man Utd & the massive interest payments each year…
Kretinsky’s looking to provide a modern stadium at Sparta, and reportedly is looking at improving The London Stadium, although we don’t know to what extent at the moment, however he has a track record.
Very good article presenting both sides of the argument. I suggest that you explain your logic to your colleague Gonzo. He is still accusing Kretinsky of “doing a deal” with Sullivan which is somewhat misleading the fanbase. He either does not understand the pre-emption process properly or is choosing to ignore it.
Matt
Good well thought out article 👏
Let’s not forget without him Bowen would probably be gone .. some people at C & H seem to have conveniently forgotten that ..
We are in safe hands again lm sure !
COYI
Steve B
Well said John!