Sport Republic

[Badger]

17 minutes ago, Turkish said:

here you go hun x

 

Better late than never’: Two years and 24 unsuccessful buyers later, Southampton have finally been sold

Dan Sheldon 5h ago 9 

At what point do you say, “Enough is enough”?

That must have been a thought going through the minds of those involved in trying to sell Southampton Football Club, be it club employees or intermediaries attempting to thrash out a deal.

For nearly two years, potential buyers expressed interest but then walked away due to economic uncertainty, the global pandemic, the threat of a European Super League and a host of other reasons.

It should be said there was also an element of Southampton being picky in terms of who they were sold to, ensuring the eventual purchasers would have a plan in place should they acquire Gao Jisheng’s 80 per cent majority shareholding. Many prospective owners were spurned because of this.

The uncertainty looked as if it would continue into 2022 until Sport Republic, a company backed by Dragan Solak and co-owned by Henrik Kraft and Rasmus Ankersen, entered the picture late last year and left the other interested parties in their wake. 

Their deal to buy Gao’s stake was officially announced on Tuesday afternoon.

But how did Southampton get to this stage, and what did their search for a new majority shareholder entail?

The Athletic has reported on the process throughout the last 18 months and is led to believe around 25 different potential buyers presented themselves to the Premier League club.

It is thought about half of them managed to sit down with those involved in trying to sell Southampton, and of that figure, five or six were deemed to be serious.

So, what happened to the other half of their suitors?

---

A deal had been agreed with an American hotelier at the beginning of 2020. It is thought the only thing left to do was put pen to paper. But after reading posts on fans forum saintsweb the american billionaire decided Southampton was not the club for him with negative, moaning fans  — that prospective owner pulled out at the last minute. This meant the club moved back to square one and now had to confront starting their search again amid a global crisis.

Supporters will be familiar with Joseph DaGrosa’s intention to purchase Gao’s stake, with the American entering a period of exclusivity with Southampton towards the end of 2020.

While the specifics of that deal will remain bound by non-disclosure agreements, DaGrosa later told The Athletic he thought Gao was seeking too much money, especially when you consider the losses incurred because of COVID-19.

Those on the other side of the negotiating table stress they weren’t interested in a leveraged buyout.

Like Sport Republic, DaGrosa planned to start a multi-club model, with Southampton at its centre, through his Kapital Football Group.

Alan Pace’s ALK Capital group, which eventually purchased fellow Premier League club Burnley just over a year ago, also showed an interest in Southampton before opting to look elsewhere. There were, again, concerns about how the mooted takeover at St Mary’s was going to be funded.

It was clear from those representing the club that leveraging money against Southampton to purchase Gao’s 80 per cent share was an idea that wasn’t ever going to get off the ground.

Crucial to this stance was Rolf Bogli.

Bogli sits on the board at Southampton and is an advisor to Katharina Liebherr, the club’s now-minority shareholder having sold that 80 per cent to Gao in the summer of 2017. It is thought his involvement took a lot of heat off Martin Semmens, the chief executive, in terms of workload.

Due to Bogli’s background in banking, he had little time for potential buyers who did not have the required funds at their disposal.

 

Gao (left) bought his 80 per cent stake in Southampton for around £160m in 2017 (Photo: Getty Images)

French news reports in May 2021 suggested that Gerard Lopez, former owner of current French champions Lille and currently in charge at fellow Ligue 1 club Bordeaux, was willing to buy Gao’s stake. The Athletic is led to believe Lopez was recommended to the club by one of their former players.

However, there were concerns about his track record. This was another potential deal that didn’t even get off the ground.

In what was an incredibly serious and important process, there were times where those taking part in it could only see the funny side to a situation. 

One of these was when they sat down — via Zoom — with a prospective owner purporting to be a billionaire. When the checks and balances were carried out by intermediaries, it became apparent this figure wasn’t who he said he was. His office address turned out to be nothing more than a hut.

A common complaint was that certain investors felt they had a God-given right to buy the club.

One is thought to have introduced himself and said he wanted the deal complete within 24 hours despite not providing any proof of funds or offering any kind of insight into his plans for Southampton.

At times during the last 18-24 months, names were shared with the Premier League, who then warned of the misdemeanours of some individuals. Those potential owners were quickly discarded.

In light of fellow Premier League side Newcastle United’s Saudi Arabia-backed takeover three months ago, Southampton have also had their fair share of interest from the Middle East.

---

Southampton eventually found a suitable buyer in Sport Republic.

There was an instant connection between both parties. A December meeting in Europe solidified each side’s intentions and a deal was concluded relatively quickly.

There was no media circus and news of their two-year hunt for new buyers ending until a handful of hours before Tuesday’s official announcement. It’s understood everything was completed around Christmas time, but there was a desire to wait until the new year to have a clean slate.

Those close to the lengthy and exhaustive process will be delighted it is finally over.

The focus has now shifted from finding a buyer to ensuring Sport Republic turns its exciting vision for a multi-club set-up into a successful reality.

It arrived late in the day, nearly two years after the deal with that American hotelier fell through, but those close to the situation will almost certainly be thinking it’s better late than never.

Thanks, you're a gent.

Assume this was your edit though :

 

Quote

But after reading posts on fans forum saintsweb the american billionaire decided Southampton was not the club for him with negative, moaning fans  — that prospective owner pulled out at the last minute.

Did make I laugh though...

[Daft Kerplunk]

41 minutes ago, Badger said:

Thanks, you're a gent.

Assume this was your edit though :

 

Did make I laugh though...

The giveaway was the lower case ‘a’ in American 🇺🇸 

 

or maybe it was Paris Hilton…

[miserableoldgit]

I am not sure if I have missed something, but I am a bit surprised that we haven't heard anything much from our new owners. Maybe a Press Conference to hear directly from the horses mouth regarding plans/direction? Apart from a couple of printed statements and the MS interview, it seems to be fairly quiet.

[saintwbu]

2 minutes ago, miserableoldgit said:

I am not sure if I have missed something, but I am a bit surprised that we haven't heard anything much from our new owners. Maybe a Press Conference to hear directly from the horses mouth regarding plans/direction? Apart from a couple of printed statements and the MS interview, it seems to be fairly quiet.

I like that, personally. The ‘look at us’ type approach we see at Newcastle always gives me a weird feeling and seems like it always ends badly. Moshiri at Everton is another one who likes the sound of his own voice too, always calling Jim White on Talksport, and look how that one is working out…

[Badger]

3 minutes ago, miserableoldgit said:

I am not sure if I have missed something, but I am a bit surprised that we haven't heard anything much from our new owners. Maybe a Press Conference to hear directly from the horses mouth regarding plans/direction? Apart from a couple of printed statements and the MS interview, it seems to be fairly quiet.

Won't take them seriously until they've gone on record and published their Five Pledges. 

[miserableoldgit]

25 minutes ago, saintwbu said:

I like that, personally. The ‘look at us’ type approach we see at Newcastle always gives me a weird feeling and seems like it always ends badly. Moshiri at Everton is another one who likes the sound of his own voice too, always calling Jim White on Talksport, and look how that one is working out…

Yes...maybe you are right. I suppose that having had an "absent" silent owner for the last few years, I just wanted to hear some positivity from the horses mouth....

[Toadhall Saint]

32 minutes ago, miserableoldgit said:

Yes...maybe you are right. I suppose that having had an "absent" silent owner for the last few years, I just wanted to hear some positivity from the horses mouth....

No news = good news

[miserableoldgit]

26 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

No news = good news

We never had any news from Mr Gao.....

[Toadhall Saint]

5 minutes ago, miserableoldgit said:

We never had any news from Mr Gao.....

And we are still in the prem no? Not sure what your point is?

[Dellman]

24 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

And we are still in the prem no? Not sure what your point is?

We don't need to hear a load of promises  like politicians make. WE do need to see results for ourselves, without trumpets blown, and I think we will.

[Gaucho]

Hi everyone,

I am very positive about this take over but can anyone enlighten me a bit more on Sport Republic? As they are an investment vehicle I was wondering about a couple of things:

1. What is their capitalisation? They have already (allegedly) spent somewhere in the region of £150 million. They have said they're going to buy more clubs so they will have to spend at least that again even if that is for more than one club. So even conservatively I would imagine they would need at least £400-£500  million to buy and invest (hopefully more in Saints!)  Is there any information on how much Dragan and other investors have put in?
2) Investors invest to get a return. Where is this going to come from? Football is notoriously loss making and I cannot see how data analytics investments are going to give massive returns.

All in all, however, this takeover has to be a good thing, especially as football people are involved and the noises being made are positive. Here's to a promising future!

[Charlie Wayman]

Well, Ralph says we are no longer a selling club. HOO-bloody-RAY!

 

That sounds like a decent promise.

Edited 7 January, 2022 by Charlie Wayman

[John B]

32 minutes ago, Dellman said:

We don't need to hear a load of promises  like politicians make. WE do need to see results for ourselves, without trumpets blown, and I think we will.

I agree with what you are saying but when do you expect to see results 

 

 

[Turkish]

35 minutes ago, Dellman said:

We don't need to hear a load of promises  like politicians make. WE do need to see results for ourselves, without trumpets blown, and I think we will.

Exactly, we dont want people who run their mouth off making all sorts of promises. We've heard from Semmens and Ralph who have been quite clear. We arent the new PSG, our model hasn't changed but we are now in a much better place financially to be able to me more proactive. I'm happy with that.

[Convict Colony]

Good profile on Dragan froma website on the business of football -  https://offthepitch.com/a/enter-dragan-serbian-mogul-who-joins-epls-billionaires-club

Enter the Dragan: The Serbian mogul who joins the EPL’s billionaire’s club

• Dragan Šolak, partnering with Danish investors, Rasmus Ankersen and Henrik Kraft, has bought Southampton in a deal that values the club at around £240 million.
• The 57-year-old Serb’s United Group is the largest media and telecoms company in South East Europe with a 2019 enterprise value of €2.6 billion.
• New ownership group promises both multiclub ownership and continuity for one of England’s best run clubs.
• The Serbian Government are very critical towards Šolak, the richest man in Serbia, who owns various independent media outlets in the country.

 

The last time a Serbian businessman took over a south coast English club, the results were dramatic, but the legacy mixed. 

In May 1999 Milan Mandarić, a Serb-American businessman who had previously owned NASL franchises and OGC Nice, bought Portsmouth. Promoted to the Premier League as First Division champions in 2003, they established themselves in the world’s richest league for nearly a decade. 

Mandarić sold up in 2006, with the foundations of the 2008 FA Cup winning side in place – although financial ruin followed under various successor owners – and bought Leicester City, who he later sold for a huge profit.

Southampton, who have played in England’s top flight for 46 of the last 56 seasons, will be hoping for a smoother ride under their new owner Dragan Šolak. 

Photo:

Alamy

Šolak this week led a takeover at St Mary’s, partnering with Danish investors, Rasmus Ankersen and Henrik Kraft, in a deal that values the club at around £240 million. 

Their vehicle, Sport Republic, is understood to have paid £100 million to majority shareholder Gao Jisheng for an 80 per cent stake, while also taking on £90 million of debt. Katharina Liebherr, daughter of the late Swiss-German billionaire Markus Liebherr who bought the club a year before his death in 2010, retains 20 per cent. 

Portfolio of high-influence stakes in football clubs

Southampton, promised Šolak in a statement announcing the takeover, “will be a cornerstone of the organisation we plan to build.” 

This, added Kraft, is “a portfolio of high-influence stakes in football clubs and other sporting assets across the world.”

Kraft is an investor in sports tech – he says that they plan to use their football investments “to accelerate the development of these companies” – and a former board member of United Group, the media and telecoms conglomerate that has made Šolak rich.  

The 38-year-old Ankersen is more widely known, having served as chairman of Danish Superliga club, FC Midtjylland, and as co-director of football of Brentford until last month. 

According to a 2020 profile, Šolak helped the Serbian opposition to Slobodan Milošević’s rule

Both of these clubs saw meteoric rises, leaning heavily on data based approaches, while he served them: Midtjylland won the Superliga three times, and Brentford reached the English top flight for the first time in 74 years.

However, it is Šolak who is understood to have provided the hard cash that drove this deal. But who is the 57 year old Serb, and where does his money come from? What underpins his wealth, widely reported to be in the billionaire stratosphere? Will he be a good investor? And what does this mean for Southampton?

Rise to wealth

Šolak was born in the former Yugoslavia in July 1964, and began his business career in 1990, founding VANS, one of the first film production and distribution companies in Yugoslavia. 

At the end of 1992, and with the country riven by civil war, he sold all his businesses in Belgrade and for the next decade moved between Prague, London and Ljubljana, founding numerous companies, incorporating everything from music rights to broadband.

According to a 2020 profile in the Croatian newspaper, Express 24, Šolak helped the Serbian opposition to Slobodan Milošević’s rule. 

Milošević was overthrown in 2000 and foreign investment opened up in Serbia soon after. 

Šolak’s internet company KDS – later renamed as Serbian Broadband (SBB) – signed a $10 million investment agreement with the Southeast Europe Equity Fund (SEEF) - reputedly the first foreign investment in Serbia after the fall of Milošević. 

A few years later, he founded Total, a TV platform for satellite distribution, and with SBB, which expanded to Telemach in Slovenia, becoming a leader in cable television in the region.

In 2012, he merged everything into the United Media company based in Luxembourg, and a year later the headquarters moved to Amsterdam. 

Private equity investors

Today United Group is the leading media company in the Balkans, incorporating five national television and over 50 cable channels, as well as 28 web portals, numerous newspapers, magazines and radio stations. 

Sport Klub, his sports TV network, have a number of high profile rights deals, including F1 and, until recently, the EPL. By its own account United Media employ more than 13,500 people and their services are used by 11.32 million. 

Photo:

PR Brentford: Rasmus Ankersen

In March 2019 British Private Equity Group, BC Partners, acquired a majority stake in the group from KKR, a leading global investment firm, giving it an enterprise value of €2.6 billion. 

Šolak retains a 34 per cent stake in Summer BidCo BV, United Group’s Luxembourg domiciled holding company, valuing his assets from United Group at €1.1 billion.

In addition, he has a number of large stakes in SMEs, mostly relating to hotels and his great passion of golf.

Local outrage

Šolak’s enterprises have made him the richest man in Serbia, but he isn’t universally loved in his home nation. 

In a fiercely nationalistic country, his Maltese citizenship and Swiss residency don’t go down well, nor does the overseas domiciliation of his businesses. 

This week, the Serbian MP Djordje Todorovic, acerbically tweeted that Šolak “got rich by falsely rebroadcasting his programs from Luxembourg” – a reference, it seems, to Summer BidCo BV’s residency. 

Indeed news of the Southampton takeover prompted something of a social media pile on, led by the Serbian Prime Minister, Ana Brnabić, who tweeted: “his acquisition shows crystal clear what kind of oligarchy we were in the first decade of the 2000s, when Serbia was led by Šolak’s political and business partners. All this was done with the money of the citizens of Serbia, the misuse of state resources (Telecom) and political power.”

The nationalist politician, Sandra Bozic, tweeted about Šolak and his friend Dragan Djilas, the former mayor of Belgrade, who is also the main opposition leader in Serbia.

“I just didn't understand whether the thieves Šolak and Djilas will share the profit from the club with the citizens of Serbia, considering that they are buying it from the money they stole from them? And from which account do they transfer money? The one from Mauritius or Hong Kong?” 

Another Serbian politician, Bojana Radaković, tweeted: “If you didn't know what could be bought from the money that Djilas and his partner stole from our people.”

Media campaign

None of these lurid and seemingly libellous allegations were backed up by any evidence, but are in keeping with the hostility the tycoon has faced from the government. 

It is also a tone adopted by pro-government media in Serbia towards Šolak, not just in the past week, but over a sustained period of time. 

The tabloid Kurir last February described him as a “calculating and avaricious tycoon” who “played dirty and without scruples in the game of business” whose “empire was built on a slew of speculative, cowboy-style, even cartel-like activities.” 

It was less a profile than a character assassination. 

A source, who works in Serbia’s independent media, says that the campaign emanates directly from the office of the Serbian president, Aleksander Vucic, who views Šolak’s media empire as a challenge. 

Pro-government media stirs up this hostility and acts as an echo chamber for allegations, many of which are exaggerated or baseless. Šolak has in the past successfully sued state media in the Swiss courts for these type of attacks.

“What's important is that the government has basically been waging a campaign against any independent voices in Serbia,” says one western journalist who has reported from the country for a number of years.

“N1 [a newspaper owned by Šolak ] was one of them, so Vucic has gone after the United Group. Sports Klub is one of the battles.”

900 per cent rise in rights value

Sports Klub is an interesting case study in how the state has tried to take on Šolak‘s empire. 

Telekom Srbija, the state owned telecoms provider, has invested some €2 billion on rights in an attempt to gain market dominance in the telecoms and broadcast market from United Group. 

Last year it outbid Sports Klub for a six year deal for EPL rights, paying €705 million over that period to screen the English league – a 900 per cent rise on the previous deal with Serbia, and an unfathomable amount for a company with annual revenues of barely €1 billion. (The interesting epilogue to this is that Šolak now gets a slice of that bloated Serbian foreign rights cash at Southampton).

Other attacks against his media business are less overt. When United Group launched a new daily newspaper called Nova last year, it was unable to find a printing house in Serbia that would take on its business. 

Supermarkets have also been pressured not to carry any independent newspapers, who are also excluded from state funding according to Reporters Without Borders.

Serbia has fallen from 76 to 93 in Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index, and is characterised as “a country with weak institutions that is prey to fake news spread by government-backed sensational media, a country where journalists are subjected to almost daily attacks that increasingly come from the ruling elite and pro-government media.”

United Group’s news outlets are seen as something of an antidote to that.

A good fit

Beyond the statements published on the day of the takeover, alluding to multi-club ownership, no real detail has emerged about where Sport Republic want to take Southampton. Neither the club nor Rasmus Ankersen responded when we approached them for comment. 

Ankersen is still listed as the Midtjylland chairman on its website, although a statement circulated in December said that he was working with them as an external consultant until the end of the season. 

It seems that the consortium has got a good deal: the South Coast club are one of the best run in English football: they are stable, have a good stadium that they fill each week, and have an outstanding pedigree in developing young players at their own academy or buying them in and selling them at a profit. 

Ankersen worked miracles with far less at Brentford.

“One of the first things they [Sport Republic] said to us was that they know we don’t need fixing,” its CEO Martin Semmens said in an interview with The Athletic this week. 

He added that the club resisted a leveraged purchase of the club, in the manner of Burnley’s takeover at the end of 2020.

“There are three things we were looking for: good people, good investment and a plan that fits with our strategy,” he said.

“The reason this one was successful was that we believe in their plan, and they believe in our plan. In the short term, it gives us security and clarity. In the long term, it gives us something to work towards that will make a real difference.”

[Saint_clark]

1 hour ago, Gaucho said:

Hi everyone,

I am very positive about this take over but can anyone enlighten me a bit more on Sport Republic? As they are an investment vehicle I was wondering about a couple of things:

1. What is their capitalisation? They have already (allegedly) spent somewhere in the region of £150 million. They have said they're going to buy more clubs so they will have to spend at least that again even if that is for more than one club. So even conservatively I would imagine they would need at least £400-£500  million to buy and invest (hopefully more in Saints!)  Is there any information on how much Dragan and other investors have put in?
2) Investors invest to get a return. Where is this going to come from? Football is notoriously loss making and I cannot see how data analytics investments are going to give massive returns.

All in all, however, this takeover has to be a good thing, especially as football people are involved and the noises being made are positive. Here's to a promising future!

Buying clubs in other countries won't cost anywhere near what it cost to buy saints. In the Belgian league for example, the bottom half of the league are all valued at under £30million. If they invest in the right places they could conceivably get another 3 clubs for what they've paid for saints. 

With the abroad clubs they may even do what originally happened with Leipzig - pick up lower league teams for dirt cheap with the understand we'll loan talent to them to help them rise up the leagues.

[whelk]

1 hour ago, Turkish said:

Exactly, we dont want people who run their mouth off making all sorts of promises. We've heard from Semmens and Ralph who have been quite clear. We arent the new PSG, our model hasn't changed but we are now in a much better place financially to be able to me more proactive. I'm happy with that.

Anyone remember Michael Knighton doing keepy uppys at Old Trafford?

[verlaine1979]

Wonder if they'll have a Scandinavian club on their shopping list, or will be leaving that linkup to Brentford/Midgetland?

[EBS1980]

3 hours ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Well, Ralph says we are no longer a selling club. HOO-bloody-RAY!

 

That sounds like a decent promise.

But if a player wants to leave and won’t sign a new contract I’d still rather sell them than let them go for nothing. Don’t expect much to change there as most of our sales recently have been due to players running down their contracts. 

[Chez]

6 minutes ago, EBS1980 said:

But if a player wants to leave and won’t sign a new contract I’d still rather sell them than let them go for nothing. Don’t expect much to change there as most of our sales recently have been due to players running down their contracts. 

spot on. Players will be sold if they don't extend contracts. I dare say they will be sold if the player pushes for a move to a mega club. They will also be sold if the price is massive. Every club is a selling club unless you are at the top of the football pyramid. 

[for_heaven's_Saint]

Did Ralph say we are no longer a selling club? I took it to mean that we no longer have to wait until we have sold someone to buy, rather than that we wouldn’t sell them at all. 
 

I know it’s not going to be the same model as Brentford but if you look at how they’ve built success, it’s been from selling when the time is right and reinvesting wisely. Ings for £30m when his contract is running down would still be a no brainer. 
 

That said, I wonder if we will now get better at getting players to sign new contracts and therefore not being forced to sell or lose for nothing?

[verlaine1979]

Hopefully we've now got enough cash to speculate in the market for young players with potential alongside the likes of Dortmund and Leipzig. There's always a high failure rate with speculation, and you need enough of a buffer to absorb the (hopefully still comparatively small) cost of those players that don't work out, which we haven't had up to know. Could be exciting times if we've got the cash, confidence and competence to lean into that model fully.

[Saint_clark]

43 minutes ago, for_heaven's_Saint said:

Did Ralph say we are no longer a selling club? I took it to mean that we no longer have to wait until we have sold someone to buy, rather than that we wouldn’t sell them at all. 
 

I know it’s not going to be the same model as Brentford but if you look at how they’ve built success, it’s been from selling when the time is right and reinvesting wisely. Ings for £30m when his contract is running down would still be a no brainer. 
 

That said, I wonder if we will now get better at getting players to sign new contracts and therefore not being forced to sell or lose for nothing?

I always think 4 year contracts with an option for the club to extend for one season is the way to go. That way if a player turns out to be quality two seasons in, is valuable and wants out we can extend it to a three year contract and demand a higher price. 

Except for anyone under 20, 5 year deals are the way to go then.

[CB Fry]

4 hours ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Well, Ralph says we are no longer a selling club. HOO-bloody-RAY!

 

That sounds like a decent promise.

Reading through message and the person posting it, I have absolutely no doubt that Ralph did not say this.

[HnycS]

3 hours ago, for_heaven's_Saint said:

Did Ralph say we are no longer a selling club? I took it to mean that we no longer have to wait until we have sold someone to buy, rather than that we wouldn’t sell them at all. 
 

I know it’s not going to be the same model as Brentford but if you look at how they’ve built success, it’s been from selling when the time is right and reinvesting wisely. Ings for £30m when his contract is running down would still be a no brainer. 
 

That said, I wonder if we will now get better at getting players to sign new contracts and therefore not being forced to sell or lose for nothing?

To me Nathan Tella signing a new contract immediately after the deal was announced was a good indication\example of this being the case.

[aintforever]

4 hours ago, for_heaven's_Saint said:

Did Ralph say we are no longer a selling club? I took it to mean that we no longer have to wait until we have sold someone to buy, rather than that we wouldn’t sell them at all. 

Every club sells players, but being able to invest in players without having to sell would be a massive step forward from the Gao days.

Edited 7 January, 2022 by aintforever

[angelman]

Christ, sounds like we had a lucky escape from the US hotelier billionaire who didn't like the moaning fans on this forum. If he couldn't handle the odd crack pot or 3 on here, then what chance would they have in the big boys world of soccer? Far better to stick to something they know about rather than buy us. or any other club, which has just as many crack pots whinging. 

 

EDIT - OK, OK. I got taken in. Booze colours the judgement. 

Edited 8 January, 2022 by angelman

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, angelman said:

Christ, sounds like we had a lucky escape from the US hotelier billionaire who didn't like the moaning fans on this forum. If he couldn't handle the odd crack pot or 3 on here, then what chance would they have in the big boys world of soccer? Far better to stick to something they know about rather than buy us. or any other club, which has just as many crack pots whinging. 

It has made me feel I need to be more positive about posting on here. Fucking love Serbs me

[Toadhall Saint]

3 minutes ago, angelman said:

Christ, sounds like we had a lucky escape from the US hotelier billionaire who didn't like the moaning fans on this forum. If he couldn't handle the odd crack pot or 3 on here, then what chance would they have in the big boys world of soccer? Far better to stick to something they know about rather than buy us. or any other club, which has just as many crack pots whinging. 

I think that bit might just have been embellished by the poster.

[angelman]

6 minutes ago, Toadhall Saint said:

I think that bit might just have been embellished by the poster.

Ah yes, it's late on Friday and a few drinks have been taken.

[Wurzel]

18 hours ago, Convict Colony said:

Good profile on Dragan froma website on the business of football -  https://offthepitch.com/a/enter-dragan-serbian-mogul-who-joins-epls-billionaires-club

Enter the Dragan: The Serbian mogul who joins the EPL’s billionaire’s club

• Dragan Šolak, partnering with Danish investors, Rasmus Ankersen and Henrik Kraft, has bought Southampton in a deal that values the club at around £240 million.
• The 57-year-old Serb’s United Group is the largest media and telecoms company in South East Europe with a 2019 enterprise value of €2.6 billion.
• New ownership group promises both multiclub ownership and continuity for one of England’s best run clubs.
• The Serbian Government are very critical towards Šolak, the richest man in Serbia, who owns various independent media outlets in the country.

 

The last time a Serbian businessman took over a south coast English club, the results were dramatic, but the legacy mixed. 

In May 1999 Milan Mandarić, a Serb-American businessman who had previously owned NASL franchises and OGC Nice, bought Portsmouth. Promoted to the Premier League as First Division champions in 2003, they established themselves in the world’s richest league for nearly a decade. 

Mandarić sold up in 2006, with the foundations of the 2008 FA Cup winning side in place – although financial ruin followed under various successor owners – and bought Leicester City, who he later sold for a huge profit.

Southampton, who have played in England’s top flight for 46 of the last 56 seasons, will be hoping for a smoother ride under their new owner Dragan Šolak. 

Photo:

Alamy

Šolak this week led a takeover at St Mary’s, partnering with Danish investors, Rasmus Ankersen and Henrik Kraft, in a deal that values the club at around £240 million. 

Their vehicle, Sport Republic, is understood to have paid £100 million to majority shareholder Gao Jisheng for an 80 per cent stake, while also taking on £90 million of debt. Katharina Liebherr, daughter of the late Swiss-German billionaire Markus Liebherr who bought the club a year before his death in 2010, retains 20 per cent. 

Portfolio of high-influence stakes in football clubs

Southampton, promised Šolak in a statement announcing the takeover, “will be a cornerstone of the organisation we plan to build.” 

This, added Kraft, is “a portfolio of high-influence stakes in football clubs and other sporting assets across the world.”

Kraft is an investor in sports tech – he says that they plan to use their football investments “to accelerate the development of these companies” – and a former board member of United Group, the media and telecoms conglomerate that has made Šolak rich.  

The 38-year-old Ankersen is more widely known, having served as chairman of Danish Superliga club, FC Midtjylland, and as co-director of football of Brentford until last month. 

According to a 2020 profile, Šolak helped the Serbian opposition to Slobodan Milošević’s rule

Both of these clubs saw meteoric rises, leaning heavily on data based approaches, while he served them: Midtjylland won the Superliga three times, and Brentford reached the English top flight for the first time in 74 years.

However, it is Šolak who is understood to have provided the hard cash that drove this deal. But who is the 57 year old Serb, and where does his money come from? What underpins his wealth, widely reported to be in the billionaire stratosphere? Will he be a good investor? And what does this mean for Southampton?

Rise to wealth

Šolak was born in the former Yugoslavia in July 1964, and began his business career in 1990, founding VANS, one of the first film production and distribution companies in Yugoslavia. 

At the end of 1992, and with the country riven by civil war, he sold all his businesses in Belgrade and for the next decade moved between Prague, London and Ljubljana, founding numerous companies, incorporating everything from music rights to broadband.

According to a 2020 profile in the Croatian newspaper, Express 24, Šolak helped the Serbian opposition to Slobodan Milošević’s rule. 

Milošević was overthrown in 2000 and foreign investment opened up in Serbia soon after. 

Šolak’s internet company KDS – later renamed as Serbian Broadband (SBB) – signed a $10 million investment agreement with the Southeast Europe Equity Fund (SEEF) - reputedly the first foreign investment in Serbia after the fall of Milošević. 

A few years later, he founded Total, a TV platform for satellite distribution, and with SBB, which expanded to Telemach in Slovenia, becoming a leader in cable television in the region.

In 2012, he merged everything into the United Media company based in Luxembourg, and a year later the headquarters moved to Amsterdam. 

Private equity investors

Today United Group is the leading media company in the Balkans, incorporating five national television and over 50 cable channels, as well as 28 web portals, numerous newspapers, magazines and radio stations. 

Sport Klub, his sports TV network, have a number of high profile rights deals, including F1 and, until recently, the EPL. By its own account United Media employ more than 13,500 people and their services are used by 11.32 million. 

Photo:

PR Brentford: Rasmus Ankersen

In March 2019 British Private Equity Group, BC Partners, acquired a majority stake in the group from KKR, a leading global investment firm, giving it an enterprise value of €2.6 billion. 

Šolak retains a 34 per cent stake in Summer BidCo BV, United Group’s Luxembourg domiciled holding company, valuing his assets from United Group at €1.1 billion.

In addition, he has a number of large stakes in SMEs, mostly relating to hotels and his great passion of golf.

Local outrage

Šolak’s enterprises have made him the richest man in Serbia, but he isn’t universally loved in his home nation. 

In a fiercely nationalistic country, his Maltese citizenship and Swiss residency don’t go down well, nor does the overseas domiciliation of his businesses. 

This week, the Serbian MP Djordje Todorovic, acerbically tweeted that Šolak “got rich by falsely rebroadcasting his programs from Luxembourg” – a reference, it seems, to Summer BidCo BV’s residency. 

Indeed news of the Southampton takeover prompted something of a social media pile on, led by the Serbian Prime Minister, Ana Brnabić, who tweeted: “his acquisition shows crystal clear what kind of oligarchy we were in the first decade of the 2000s, when Serbia was led by Šolak’s political and business partners. All this was done with the money of the citizens of Serbia, the misuse of state resources (Telecom) and political power.”

The nationalist politician, Sandra Bozic, tweeted about Šolak and his friend Dragan Djilas, the former mayor of Belgrade, who is also the main opposition leader in Serbia.

“I just didn't understand whether the thieves Šolak and Djilas will share the profit from the club with the citizens of Serbia, considering that they are buying it from the money they stole from them? And from which account do they transfer money? The one from Mauritius or Hong Kong?” 

Another Serbian politician, Bojana Radaković, tweeted: “If you didn't know what could be bought from the money that Djilas and his partner stole from our people.”

Media campaign

None of these lurid and seemingly libellous allegations were backed up by any evidence, but are in keeping with the hostility the tycoon has faced from the government. 

It is also a tone adopted by pro-government media in Serbia towards Šolak, not just in the past week, but over a sustained period of time. 

The tabloid Kurir last February described him as a “calculating and avaricious tycoon” who “played dirty and without scruples in the game of business” whose “empire was built on a slew of speculative, cowboy-style, even cartel-like activities.” 

It was less a profile than a character assassination. 

A source, who works in Serbia’s independent media, says that the campaign emanates directly from the office of the Serbian president, Aleksander Vucic, who views Šolak’s media empire as a challenge. 

Pro-government media stirs up this hostility and acts as an echo chamber for allegations, many of which are exaggerated or baseless. Šolak has in the past successfully sued state media in the Swiss courts for these type of attacks.

“What's important is that the government has basically been waging a campaign against any independent voices in Serbia,” says one western journalist who has reported from the country for a number of years.

“N1 [a newspaper owned by Šolak ] was one of them, so Vucic has gone after the United Group. Sports Klub is one of the battles.”

900 per cent rise in rights value

Sports Klub is an interesting case study in how the state has tried to take on Šolak‘s empire. 

Telekom Srbija, the state owned telecoms provider, has invested some €2 billion on rights in an attempt to gain market dominance in the telecoms and broadcast market from United Group. 

Last year it outbid Sports Klub for a six year deal for EPL rights, paying €705 million over that period to screen the English league – a 900 per cent rise on the previous deal with Serbia, and an unfathomable amount for a company with annual revenues of barely €1 billion. (The interesting epilogue to this is that Šolak now gets a slice of that bloated Serbian foreign rights cash at Southampton).

Other attacks against his media business are less overt. When United Group launched a new daily newspaper called Nova last year, it was unable to find a printing house in Serbia that would take on its business. 

Supermarkets have also been pressured not to carry any independent newspapers, who are also excluded from state funding according to Reporters Without Borders.

Serbia has fallen from 76 to 93 in Reporters without Borders World Press Freedom Index, and is characterised as “a country with weak institutions that is prey to fake news spread by government-backed sensational media, a country where journalists are subjected to almost daily attacks that increasingly come from the ruling elite and pro-government media.”

United Group’s news outlets are seen as something of an antidote to that.

A good fit

Beyond the statements published on the day of the takeover, alluding to multi-club ownership, no real detail has emerged about where Sport Republic want to take Southampton. Neither the club nor Rasmus Ankersen responded when we approached them for comment. 

Ankersen is still listed as the Midtjylland chairman on its website, although a statement circulated in December said that he was working with them as an external consultant until the end of the season. 

It seems that the consortium has got a good deal: the South Coast club are one of the best run in English football: they are stable, have a good stadium that they fill each week, and have an outstanding pedigree in developing young players at their own academy or buying them in and selling them at a profit. 

Ankersen worked miracles with far less at Brentford.

“One of the first things they [Sport Republic] said to us was that they know we don’t need fixing,” its CEO Martin Semmens said in an interview with The Athletic this week. 

He added that the club resisted a leveraged purchase of the club, in the manner of Burnley’s takeover at the end of 2020.

“There are three things we were looking for: good people, good investment and a plan that fits with our strategy,” he said.

“The reason this one was successful was that we believe in their plan, and they believe in our plan. In the short term, it gives us security and clarity. In the long term, it gives us something to work towards that will make a real difference.”

If he can piss off an Eastern European government he's already a good 'un in my eyes.

But knowing our luck I wouldn't bet against our first away fixture once we qualify for Europe again being Red Star or Partizan Belgrade. Probabaly not as popular as a trip to the San Siro for away fans 🤣

[Toadhall Saint]

10 minutes ago, Wurzel said:

If he can piss off an Eastern European government he's already a good 'un in my eyes.

But knowing our luck I wouldn't bet against our first away fixture once we qualify for Europe again being Red Star or Partizan Belgrade. Probabaly not as popular as a trip to the San Siro for away fans 🤣

I’d love to do either of those. Certainly a warm welcome

 

Edited 8 January, 2022 by Toadhall Saint

[Golac's Cunning Stunts]

11 hours ago, angelman said:

Christ, sounds like we had a lucky escape from the US hotelier billionaire who didn't like the moaning fans on this forum. If he couldn't handle the odd crack pot or 3 on here, then what chance would they have in the big boys world of soccer? Far better to stick to something they know about rather than buy us. or any other club, which has just as many crack pots whinging. 

if they have been reading the forum, I'll be surprised if the new owners don't hire that MLG guy. Just think of all the football manager stats he will be able to feed to Rasmus.

[richardc]

2 hours ago, Toadhall Saint said:

I’d love to do either of those. Certainly a warm welcome

 

This will be the Chapel next year

[Doctoroncall]

It will be interesting to see how the academy fits into their vision. Brentford abandoned theirs, although it could be due to cost of making it cat.1 as well as a catchment area competing with many other clubs. 

[Matthew Le God]

1 minute ago, Doctoroncall said:

It will be interesting to see how the academy fits into their vision. Brentford abandoned theirs, although it could be due to cost of making it cat.1 as well as a catchment area competing with many other clubs. 

Saints have no need to abandon their academy like Brentford did. Brentford were unable to compete with the other London clubs so focused on 17-21 year olds released by other clubs. 

[Professor]

On 07/01/2022 at 10:35, The Left Back said:

 😂 Loving your tweak @Turkish

Interesting, because Americans can make the mistake of thinking that because they use a version of our language,they understand us.  They don't. We are as foreign to them, as are the French, Germans and Italians.  We are Europeans and it takes Americans a long time to understand us.

In England, if the team we support is doing badly we moan about them, because they should be doing better. If they are doing well, we moan about them because they aren't doing well enough.

If he wanted a team with fans who do what they are told, he needed to stick with an American team.. Perhaps he did, and is now watching their versionof rounders and trying to pretend it's exciting.

 

,  

[Chez]

16 hours ago, aintforever said:

Every club sells players, but being able to invest in players without having to sell would be a massive step forward from the Gao days.

We will probably still need to sell though. Reading between the lines, the only difference now will be the order things happen. Cash will be available to buy first, but that outgoings (perhaps using a short term loan from the owners) will likely need to be recouped by sales thereafter.

[egg]

16 hours ago, aintforever said:

Every club sells players, but being able to invest in players without having to sell would be a massive step forward from the Gao days.

It would be, but if we're working on a Brentford model of buying cheap and selling high (essentially what we've always done but with a different approach to scouting) that ain't going to happen. As Chez says, I think the main difference will be cash flow. 

[Travelling matte]

2 hours ago, Doctoroncall said:

It will be interesting to see how the academy fits into their vision. Brentford abandoned theirs, although it could be due to cost of making it cat.1 as well as a catchment area competing with many other clubs. 

Good point I reckon. An academy seems almost like a complication for a team running a full-on "moneyball" system but a huge advantage of having a redbull-like series of clubs is that players can be given development time in similar teams. I guess what Brentford is doing makes sense for teams in isolation.

[Chez]

2 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Saints have no need to abandon their academy like Brentford did. Brentford were unable to compete with the other London clubs so focused on 17-21 year olds released by other clubs. 

have we been able to compete with Chelsea, who seem to have hoovered up all the top talent across the Southern region in recent years? Or have we found a way to reverse that trend?

 

[Doctoroncall]

4 minutes ago, Travelling matte said:

Good point I reckon. An academy seems almost like a complication for a team running a full-on "moneyball" system but a huge advantage of having a redbull-like series of clubs is that players can be given development time in similar teams. I guess what Brentford is doing makes sense for teams in isolation.

It seems the Saints academy hasn't really delivered over the last few years, a number of promising players haven't made the grade, although do they see it as something that can be fixed or an issue with the academy?  Is the goal to produce first team players or to cover costs in the hope of unearthing a gem? A different strategy can have a profound effect on costs. As you say, the development time in loaning to associated clubs could be the missing key.

How much will and can be data driven when dealing with young players?  Do they consider personal traits (drive, ambition, mental fortitude, etc) more important than technical ability with young recruits?

The competition from other clubs for Brentford was too great and it did make sense when they were a lower league side to pick up players that had been well coached elsewhere and see if they could make the next step without incurring the supporting costs.  Of course, that could change if they stay in the PL for a number of seasons if they see some advantage with the changing circumstances.

[Verbal]

1 hour ago, Professor said:

Interesting, because Americans can make the mistake of thinking that because they use a version of our language,they understand us.  They don't. We are as foreign to them, as are the French, Germans and Italians.  We are Europeans and it takes Americans a long time to understand us.

In England, if the team we support is doing badly we moan about them, because they should be doing better. If they are doing well, we moan about them because they aren't doing well enough.

If he wanted a team with fans who do what they are told, he needed to stick with an American team.. Perhaps he did, and is now watching their versionof rounders and trying to pretend it's exciting.

 

,  

Sorry, what? 

[The Kraken]

5 hours ago, Doctoroncall said:

It seems the Saints academy hasn't really delivered over the last few years, a number of promising players haven't made the grade, although do they see it as something that can be fixed or an issue with the academy?  Is the goal to produce first team players or to cover costs in the hope of unearthing a gem? A different strategy can have a profound effect on costs. As you say, the development time in loaning to associated clubs could be the missing key.

How much will and can be data driven when dealing with young players?  Do they consider personal traits (drive, ambition, mental fortitude, etc) more important than technical ability with young recruits?

The competition from other clubs for Brentford was too great and it did make sense when they were a lower league side to pick up players that had been well coached elsewhere and see if they could make the next step without incurring the supporting costs.  Of course, that could change if they stay in the PL for a number of seasons if they see some advantage with the changing circumstances.

So long as we can bring players through like Tella, it’s worthwhile and I wouldn’t say it’s not delivering. Just difficult to churn out a PL player year after year.

Also you have the likes of Obafemi who get sold (reported at £1.5m to £2m) which helps offset costs.

Theres a consensus that we seem to hold onto some young players for too long, and I maybe agree with it. Like you say, maybe the new/future setup with other clubs may provide a better solution.

[Convict Colony]

Updated analysis - had to screenshot the graphs you can find them at the bottom.

Analysis: Southampton takeover looks like the perfect match

• Southampton FC have been taken over by the newly-founded sports investment firm, Sport Republic, which is backed by Serbian media magnate Dragan Solak and has Rasmus Ankersen in the role of CEO and co-founder.
• The former owner of the Saints, Chinese businessman Gao Jisheng, bought the club in 2017 for €244 million, but sold them in a deal worth €120 million - reflecting a loss of €124 million on his investment, as he has not invested further.
• The Saints' business model has built on profit on player sales for years, which fits in perfectly with Ankersen’s capabilities and strategy for building a profitable and competitive football club.
• Looking at valuation, the takeovers of Southampton and Newcastle have been the best value for money, as the gaps between revenue and valuation for the other clubs are rather high.

 

This week the newly-founded Sport Republic bought an 80 per cent stake in Southampton in a deal worth €120 million. As the club recently took out a €95 million loan, the value of the club including debt is about €245 million. 

The former owner, Chinese businessman Gao Jisheng, has been eager to sell the club for over a year, and the new owners seem to have secured a scoop in terms of takeover price when compared to other takeovers of English clubs in 2021.

The takeover of the majority stake in Southampton is Sport Republic’s first investment in a football club, but it won’t be their last, as they plan to build an investment portfolio of clubs, which could be equivalent to that of Red Bull which includes ownerships in teams across the world. 

The financials for Southampton were on the rise for years prior to the takeover by Gao, but during his reign, all numbers have plummeted. 

The same level of expenses, lower turnover and significantly lower profit on player sales have seen the Saints record a combined loss after tax of €110 million in the last two years.

As the club have not yet published their 2020/21 figures, which are expected to be heavily influenced by Covid-19, this figure could now look even worse. 

The 2019/20 figures can partly be blamed on the pandemic as revenue and transfer spendings have been lower than usual, but Southampton’s negative financial trend was already showing prior to the pandemic. 

Gao seems to have bought the club at its peak and sold it off at its low point.

Profit on player sales has been an important factor for Southampton’s profitability. 
Southampton’s average profit on player sales has been €42.5 million in the last seven years, which is substantially higher than the Premier League average of €27 million. 

The operating loss was decreasing in the years prior to the acquisition in 2017 and turned into a positive number in 2016/17, but since then it has been on a negative trend resulting in a €99 million operating loss in 2019/20. 

The profit on player sales peaked in 2017/18, but since then has been at its lowest since 2012/13 and has not been able to offset the operating loss, which has resulted in the club presenting big EBIT losses for the first time since the 2012/13 season. 

These numbers show Southampton’s heavy reliance on profit on player sales.

All the profitability numbers peaked in the year of Gao Jisheng’s acquisition, but since then all numbers have dropped year after year. 

This has resulted in all the profitability numbers reaching their lowest point since the comeback to the Premier League in 2012. The EBIT margin has fallen from a positive 24 per cent to a negative 57.9 per cent in Gao’s ownership period.

The new owners, led by the former Brentford co-director of football Rasmus Ankersen, will look to bring the club back to their earlier positive profitability numbers. 

Ankersen has shown his ability to build up a business on the back of developing young cheap players and selling them off for great profits in his former positions at Brentford and FC Midtjylland. 

He joined Brentford in 2015 when they were a mid-table championship side, and developed the club to be a Premier League team.

The profit on player sales of Brentford show the impact Ankersen’s strategy has had with a rise of 185 per cent from 2016/17 to 2019/20. And with the sale of Said Benrahme and OIlie Watkins to West Ham and Aston Villa respectively, the forthcoming 2020/21 report will undoubtedly show an even bigger profit on player sales.

On the other hand, Southampton’s profit on player sales has decreased 68 per cent in the same period. In the last two years, Brentford have had a higher profit on player sales than Southampton, despite playing in the Championship. 

Based on Southampton’s clear strategy of monetising on player sales, which in the past led to positive profitability numbers, the deal seems to be the perfect match for both sides as it fits to the strategy of Ankersen and the rest of Sport Republic. 

Low value in comparison

Last year saw a lot of interest in investing in English football clubs, with a lot of sides having struggled financially under the pandemic and their owners no longer being keen to splash money into loss-making clubs. 

At the same time, a lot of institutional investors have been sitting on their money and building up large cash holdings that now need to be invested.

With all clubs except Newcastle having negative profitability numbers on average between 2017/18 and 2019/20, it would be hard to explain the valuations based on profitability numbers. 

Using revenue to explain the valuations seems more appropriate. Doing that, the takeovers of Southampton and Newcastle have been the best value for money, as the gaps between revenue and valuation for the other clubs are rather high.

By contrast, the minority investments in Crystal Palace and West Ham could seem to have been acquired at overvaluations based on financial numbers. 

West Ham have been valued three times higher than Southampton, which seems relatively steep as the two clubs’ revenue and profitability numbers are equivalent. 

However, West Ham are a big London club and the results on the pitch have been quite different. Last season and this, West Ham showed they can fight for the European spots, whereas Southampton have been in the lower part of the table for years. 

[VectisSaint]

On 08/01/2022 at 21:32, The Kraken said:

So long as we can bring players through like Tella, it’s worthwhile and I wouldn’t say it’s not delivering. Just difficult to churn out a PL player year after year.

Also you have the likes of Obafemi who get sold (reported at £1.5m to £2m) which helps offset costs.

Theres a consensus that we seem to hold onto some young players for too long, and I maybe agree with it. Like you say, maybe the new/future setup with other clubs may provide a better solution.

Is Tella a product of our Academy? 10 years at Arsenal before he joined us when he was 17. 

[Matthew Le God]

13 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

Is Tella a product of our Academy? 10 years at Arsenal before he joined us when he was 17. 

The academy is for roughly 8 to 22 year olds. Tella played for Southampton's academy teams at under 18 and under 23 level. So he is an Arsenal and Saints academy product.

Edited 10 January, 2022 by Matthew Le God

[VectisSaint]

2 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

The academy is for roughly 8 to 22 year olds. Tella played for Southampton's academy teams at under 18 and under 23 level. So he is an Arsenal and Saints academy product.

Today's award for stating the bleeding obvious. Try reading the posts and understanding the context before you come back with your pedantry. Now I've wasted one of my 3 posts replying to you. Presumably you still haven't got a grasp on what professionalism means with regard to Valery's performance on Saturday.

[Monk]

For those interested in the potential similarities that might be adopted from the 'Red Bull model' there's a great book called 'Wings of Change' which is all about the Red Bull franchise, it's operations and issues.

 

Decent little read. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Thanks for the heads up Monk.