By Kris Gonzo | Senior West Ham Columnist (Follow on X)
Amanda Staveley’s proposed purchase of 25% of West Ham from the Gold family could have much bigger implications than many of us Hammers fans first realised.
With Daniel Křetínský previously expected to acquire around half of Vanessa Gold’s shares, the arrival of Staveley raises plenty of new questions about what West Ham’s ownership structure could look like over the coming months.
How Does This Change The Picture?
In my latest video, I take a closer look at what Staveley’s investment could mean for Křetínský’s ambitions of becoming West Ham’s largest shareholder and whether this changes the balance of power inside the club.
Could this eventually lead to the pair working together? Would Křetínský be prepared to share influence if Staveley becomes a significant shareholder? Or does this alter his long-term plans altogether?
There are still plenty of unknowns, but the proposed deal has certainly added another fascinating layer to the ownership story.
If you’re interested in what this could mean for West Ham’s future direction, watch the full video below where I explore the possible outcomes and explain why this development could prove far more significant than it first appears.
Never good for a club to endure a ‘power struggle’ amongst its ‘owners’.
Much better to have certainty and a common cause from the top.
So let me get this straight, your making a clear statement saying this is what you believe to be the case, and that the buying and selling of the boardroom shares should have already happened? It seems to me your opinion piece is just that, an opinion which is designed to create some much needed content for you to post and then gossip about. You don’t appear to have any accurate information or facts to justify your opinion, and there definitely isn’t much else to write about. You’re using Amanda Stavely and a Sky news report as your reasoning as to why there have been no incoming players and also why the transfer of shares hasn’t occurred yet. You say the Amanda Stavely story explains everything and that you believe it to be true.
Or maybe you just aren’t getting any other news from the club and the club isn’t advertising it business like it used to in the past. Maybe have a read of this and tell me if you think it should take a while for shares to be bought and sold, or if the delay from it being first mentioned in June seems to be just about normal within the suggested time constraints.
The time line for transferring boardroom owner shares in a football club depends on the transaction structure. In a bilateral sale, the process typically takes three to nine months, while an auction process with an identified preferred bidder can be expedited to approximately three months.
Also approval is required from two primary entities:
The Company Board: Nearly every private company’s bylaws require the Board of Directors to approve any share transfer to ensure compliance with restrictions and vet the new shareholder.
The Governing Body: All new owners and directors must be approved by the respective league’s governing body (e.g., Premier League or English Football League) through the Owners’ and Directors’ Test (OADT). This is a condition of the sale, and any person owning more than 10% (or 25% for Premier League clubs) must be listed in the application.
Key regulatory and procedural factors include:
Disqualifying Events: Rejection can occur if the buyer has a criminal conviction, is bankrupt, or exerts influence over another league club.
Transfer Restrictions: Shareholders may face Right of First Refusal (ROFR) clauses requiring shares to be offered to existing shareholders first, or league-imposed hold periods.
Documentation: The process involves negotiating a Share Purchase Agreement containing warranties and indemnities, followed by the formal transfer of shares and registration in the company’s register of members.
Also with ROFR clauses in place, which there are in this instance – there is no way that Amanda Stavely can purchase Vanessa Gold’s shares without them first being offered to the other board members which includes Kretinsky. You say the talks are not certain to reach a successful conclusion and are complicated by the pre emption rights. Then you gloss straight over that point even after reading it out. Those pre emption rights mean she can only buy them if they are offered to the others first. So no reason why Kretinsky cant buy them as was planned in June, and its all still well within the correct time frame. Also if you read what I wrote above, it explains just how long it takes to sell and buy shares and how long it takes to be approved.
Well done for your imaginative thinking and creative flair, and also for the story, but I think it will create more stress amongst fans than is needed, instead of just following the facts of the matter.
A story that is just designed to create some speculation and clicks as there is no other real gossip to write about!
I don’t even know what constitutes a good owner anymore. Ask Newcastle supporters if their owners are good and you’ll likely get a mixed response. Man City and it’ll be all good as it seems that a good owner is just one that can spend fortunes. That pathway of frivolous spending though has been closed off by mechanisms put in place by the people running the game as proved by the way in which Newcastles absolutely minted owners are hampered by those mechanisms. So what’s in it for the likes of Kretinsky, Stavely or the Reuben brothers if they can’t just spend their way to the top or have any previous affection for the club, it is of course altogether different motives that includes making money for themselves by land grabbing parts of the Olympic park. They aren’t interested in the club and whilst their investments are tied up in property development, how much altruism will feature in developing the football club ? Zero I suspect. The prime reason for having a slice of the club won’t be anything to do with the fortunes of the club. They will of course want it back in the premier league at some point in order to maximise their share price, but then what, what happens once they’ve got their hands on what they were after. We are dropped like a stone in plenty of debt, that’s what.
I’ve never seen any signs Kretinsky wants to be the majority owner. He makes investments. Someone like Staveley coming along (and she’ll have someone bigger in the background) suits him well. He wants a group of people with money who can make the club grow. That doesn’t include people like Sullivan or the Golds. Brady could have looked for partners but had no interest in finding anyone who would challenge Sullivan.
I wonder if the obvious is being missed? Kretinsky has had ample time and opportunity to purchase the Gold family shares yet he has CHOSEN not to do so. Let’s not be niaive and suggest he hasn’t the liquidity to proceed, he has. Kretinsky has dragged his heels and that is deliberate on his part. I suspect his reluctance is driven by not wanting to increase the value of Sullivan’s stake. But now his hand is being forced. As an existing shreholder Kretinsky has first option to buy. Let’s see if he really is the saviour many have suggested, rather than a businessman who is maximising the asset value of our club with a view to cashing in at the right time. I’m not sure which by the way!
So Kretinsky has turned out to be another poor owner., Never interested in building the club just in making money for himself. Stavely won’t be any different. In 65 years of supporting the best owners have been Gold and Sullivan. They may have made a lot of mistakes but at least they had the club at heart. Not like the Icelandic clowns or Kretinsky the snake and I predict Stavely who is an opportunist
I was optimistic about this season but can now only see a poor team and a toxic atmosphere. I wish I hadn’t renewed my tickets