By Kris Gonzo | Senior West Ham Columnist (Follow on X)
Amanda Staveley has opened up a second route into West Ham, with discussions already taking place over David Sullivan’s shares should Daniel Křetínský block her move for Vanessa Gold’s stake.
A source with inside knowledge of the proposed deal has told Claret & Hugh that the process will “take a long time”, but Staveley and PCP Capital Partners have no intention of walking away.
As we reported yesterday, Křetínský has no intention of selling his own stake and appears ready to exercise his pre-emption rights over the Gold shareholding.
However, that won’t necessarily stop Staveley.
Staveley turns attention to Sullivan
C&H were told:
“Amanda will go after David Sullivan’s shares and there have already been discussions.”
Křetínský would again have pre-emption rights should Sullivan decide to sell, but we’re told there are two potential obstacles which could make that route considerably more difficult for him to block.
Firstly, the Czech billionaire has no desire to take his West Ham holding beyond 50%.
Secondly, it’s considered unlikely that he would match Staveley’s valuation.
Staveley is going after David Sullivan’s West Ham shares
Price could prove crucial
PCP’s offer for Gold’s shares was already well in excess of Křetínský’s original proposal, and it’s expected Staveley could again place a valuation on Sullivan’s stake that is a little too rich for the Czech billionaire.
That could become particularly significant given the previous questions raised by talkSPORT over Křetínský’s liquidity.
Whatever happens with the Gold shares, the message we’re getting is clear: Staveley isn’t going away.
If one route into West Ham is closed off, she appears ready to try another.
This one really will run and run.
Firstly, the reports of a liquidity problem with Kretinsky are false; Gold changed her mind about selling the shares to kretinsky because of stavely’s higher offer. She went back on her word – which is true to form given the Sullivan-Gold ethos. Second, Kretinsky can’t put money into a team he doesn’t know he’ll own. Stavely is a problem for west ham and has created a liquidity problem for the club in this transfer window. Finally, it would have been better to launch this bid after the window shut. But Stavely doesn’t care about the club; she’s after the real estate.
Real estate? What a rented ground
And 2 training grounds that need a good revamp
Mayor Khan is already looking to do a deal and offload the London Stadium, and Amanda Staveley and the Reuben Brothers are long-standing business partners.
The area around the London Stadium (Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in Stratford) was historically associated with the Reuben Brothers and their joint venture partner Multiplex regarding the Stratford City development, and the Reubens now hold effective control of that stake.
who hold effective control of that stake already own sections of land around the area as well London Stadium (Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park in Stratford); that area was historically associated with their joint venture partner Multiplex regarding the Stratford City development, though the Reubens now hold effective control of that stake.
“That could become particularly significant given the previous questions raised by talkSPORT over Křetínský’s liquidity.”
This is the part that makes me laugh. Kretinsky has ZERO liquidity problems, apart from in the minds of hacks like Jim White on TS. DK could find all the money he needs down the back of a sofa, or with one phone call…
Just our luck. Sullivan is sidelined and no longer in a decision making position. Kretinsky, an uncontroversial quiet multi billionaire, agrees to be biggest shareholder with agreement of the other active shareholders and will pump £90m into the club on completion of the deal. What could possibly go wrong? Ah this is West Ham and life is never so simple
Yeah … this is exactly how I’ve been feeling over the past few years. West Ham have this amazing ability to turn an empty net into an own goal. It’s gotten to the point where I sometimes just can’t watch the last five or 10 minutes because I know what’s going to happen. 2-0 becomes 2-2 and I’m just kind of grateful it didn’t become 2-3.
Found this regarding Sullivan shares Gonzo:
The Times reports Sullivan has the right to purchase approximately 13 per cent, which would potentially take his holding to 51 per cent, with the current pre-emption deadline set for 2 September.
The regulator cannot prevent an existing owner from increasing their shareholding through that process.
However, its statutory powers allow it to assess whether existing owners remain suitable and, where the relevant legal threshold is met, ultimately require an owner to divest.
That makes the regulator’s continuing enquiries particularly important while West Ham’s long-term ownership structure remains unresolved.
For now, Sullivan retains his substantial stake while the regulator continues gathering information from the relevant authorities.
But they can’t force an existing owner to sell at a certain price; if the owner’s valuation of his shareholding is ‘X’, then they can’t be made to sell for less. What if no one wanted to buy? How can you be made to divest shares if no one wants them?
Yes, the Independent Football Regulator (IFR) can force an owner to sell their shares in a club.
Under the Football Governance Act, the IFR has the power to compel divestment in extreme cases if an owner fails to meet the Owners, Directors and Senior Executives (ODSE) test. This test assesses an owner’s honesty, integrity, and financial soundness.
The regulator’s enforcement powers include:
Issuing financial penalties of up to 10% of club revenue.
Disqualifying owners from holding a stake in English football.
Appointing independent trustees to manage and sell the club if the owner is deemed unsuitable.
This power is designed as a last resort to protect the long-term sustainability of the club, ensuring the original owner receives the sale proceeds (minus costs) rather than facing outright confiscation.
The Independent Football Regulator (IFR) does not set a fixed formula for valuing shares in a forced sale; instead, the valuation is determined by independent trustees appointed to manage the disposal process.
Valuation Process and Principles
When the IFR issues an ownership removal order, it appoints independent trustees to run the club and secure a buyer. The valuation is effectively the market price achieved through this regulated sale process.
Independent Trustees: The trustees are responsible for selling the club. Their fiduciary duty is to secure the best possible price under the circumstances to maximize the return for the outgoing owner (after costs).
Market-Based Valuation: Rather than a statutory calculation, the value is derived from what a qualified buyer (who has passed the ODSE test) is willing to pay in an open, albeit regulated, market.
Proceeds Distribution: The legislation ensures the process is not confiscatory. The original owner receives the sale proceeds minus the costs of the trusteeship and the sale process. This aligns the mechanism with compulsory purchase principles, where compensation is paid, rather than asset seizure.
Hi Gonzo.
The thing that confuses me is where does Amanda Staveley’s money come from? Apologies if that has already been addressed here. PCP capital partners don’t have any substantial money as far as I know because they are a private equity and advisory firm. The money I assume would be coming from numerous (mostly Middle Eastern) sources. That lack of transparency is a major concern for me and why I hope Staveley isn’t successful in her pursuit. Is West Ham fans thought the stadium move and rebranding by Gold and Sullivan was bad how would they feel about the possibility of green away shirts and who knows what else?
Staveley’s Consortium will be an absolute disaster. She did not buy into Newcastle, her stake was gifted to her by the Rueben Bros. Please stop reporting this as though she is a billionaire investor she isn’t and is just a front for speculators that don’t want to be in the public eye. Staveley has never invested any money in any football club ever, she is not rich enough!
Just found this Gonzo, hopefully its accurate:
The Times reports Sullivan has the right to purchase approximately 13 per cent, which would potentially take his holding to 51 per cent, with the current pre-emption deadline set for 2 September.
The regulator cannot prevent an existing owner from increasing their shareholding through that process.
However, its statutory powers allow it to assess whether existing owners remain suitable and, where the relevant legal threshold is met, ultimately require an owner to divest.
That makes the regulator’s continuing enquiries particularly important while West Ham’s long-term ownership structure remains unresolved.
For now, Sullivan retains his substantial stake while the regulator continues gathering information from the relevant authorities.
Amanda Staveley may not be going away, but she has no control over the situation at the moment due to the pre-emptive rights process. And if things go according to Kretinsky’s plan – he will have sold roughly 2.2% to Jakub Havrlant and bought all of Vanessa Golds shares which means he will have 49.9% shares and his business partner and mate will have roughly 2.2% meaning Kretinsky and his ally will have majority control of WHU. If Staveley still wants in as a large, but still minority shareholder then great as she will shake things up and probably be good for our club….but she will be in, make her money whilst laying plans to maximise her investment – and then gone. The steady, sensible and long term strategy will always be Kretinsky.
I think Kretinsky was maybe waiting to buy the whole club for the right price NOT Sullivans inflated premiere leauge price once the organisers force Sullivan to sell over this scandel
Makes me wonder WHO brought it all up again over what Sullivan supposed to have done all those years ago
I thought at first it might have been kretinsky’s followers to get a foot hold
Now i’m wondering IF Staverley and backers did it to get what they want
Just seems strange to me how she has come out of the woodwork more or less straight after Sullivan resigned
For me IF it’s true it is far to underhand So why would we want them running our club
Supposed to have done??? Really, buddy, supposed to have done? The man is a disgrace. Supposed to have done!!!! Nice one
This is all playing out about as successfully as Sullivan could have wished. No investment made, relegation occurred as a result, but Sullivan will sell his shares at premier league price.
Gonzo i have just read on another West Ham Forum who were apparently quoting from the Times that under the pre-emptive period David Sullivan could bid for just thirteen percent of Vanessa golds shares and if successful would end up with fifty one percent of the club.
I gotta say i felt sick when i read it.To think that little weasel could once again be running our club.
Do you know anything about this Gonzo?
As things stand David Sullivan cannot currently purchase additional shares. Sullivan remains under active investigation by the Independent Football Regulator (IFR), which is exercising its statutory powers to gather urgent information regarding his suitability as a club owner following serious allegations. Until this regulatory process concludes, Sullivan cannot pass the Owners’ and Directors’ Test, effectively excluding him from increasing his stake. Furthermore, should the investigation yield adverse findings, the IFR possesses the authority to compel him to sell his existing 38.8% holding in West Ham United.
Mt guess is that he has an agreement with Staveley to do this, then she offers to purchases the 51% at a price that Kretinsky wont pay. But agree with you, knowing that Sullivan could own the majority of the club, turns my stomach, but if its a stepping stone to get Stavely in with 51%, then it might work. Only issue is that the 51% would also go into the Pre-Emptive period, and Kretinsky would then have refusal again……completely screwed our transfer window and long term plans, we’ll be lucky to be in the top half by xmas, when all of this will hopefully be resolved.
Morning Richard.
Yes indeed, he has the right to do so but won’t.
Firstly he will not match the price Staveley has offered and secondly, he is being investigated by the football regulator.
There appears to be very little chance he will be deemed a fit and proper person to run a football club so pointless him buying enough shares to trigger a takeover.
Similar to what I just commented Gonzo, but doesnt seem to have passed moderation yet.
More to the point, until the IFR investigation concludes, Sullivan cannot pass the Owners’ and Directors’ Test, whch effectively excludes him from purchasing any shares and increasing his stake.
From what I understand Gonzo, Sullivan can’t purchase any more shares until he passes the Owners and Directors or fit and proper person test, whch effectively excludes him from purchasing any shares or attempting to increasing his stake at this time. Is that correct?
No, Sullivan is under no moratorium with regard to buying shares until any decision is made by the Regulator, whose actual power to enforce a sale isn’t clear.
What hasn’t been addressed anywhere yet is that it’s likely Sullivan’s shares – if they were put up for sale – are subject to the same mutual preemption rights as the Gold shares. This means Kretinsky has the same option to buy (up to his %age ratio) as he does with the Gold shares as an existing shareholder. He could buy up to around 60% under those rules.
Staveley and anyone else could then buy any or all shares not sold under the ‘first dibs’ rule on the open market if both Gold and Sullivan shares were up for sale, meaning we still have absolutely no idea – an entirely new buyer we’ve not heard of yet could still emerge with enough shares to assume overall control.
Not entirely true. The pre-emption rights process has two stages. Round 1 you can buy shares proportionate to your existing holding and then in round 2 you can buy up to 100% any shares left unsold in round 1 meaning theoretically Kretinsky could buy all of them before Staveley’s consortium could buy any.
Are you certain that the preemption clause includes ‘second dibs’? Usually, once your option period on your %age expires, the selling party can dispose on the open market. Stage 2 options aren’t unheard of, but has anyone actually the shareholders’ agreement?
There’s a lot of unknowns involved – for instance, were Kretinsky’s 2% shares that he sold to his mate not also subject to a preemption agreement?
Yes, there is definitely a 2nd round in this particular case which has been well documented.
Could there be another angle to this? If Staveley is already looking to buy Sullivan’s shares, maybe him taking the extra 13% isn’t about staying at all. It could potentially give him a 51% controlling stake which Staveley then buys from him.
Pure speculation obviously, but Sullivan spending millions to get back above 50% just as someone is reportedly trying to buy him out does make you wonder whether there’s a bigger deal being worked on behind the scenes.
He has to offer the same as Staveley has for the same amount of Gold’s shares I believe. That would take him to 63.9%. He won’t do that.
West Ham don’t have any assets left, where is the value that Sullivan is holding out for. Its just been reduced by £300 million.
Hopefully Stavely buys Sullivan out. I think she’ll be good for our club. Better than Kretinsky has been. Definitely better than Sullivan has been.