Altrad - the real deal (not Villa either)

[Oxford Glaws]

Telegraph reporting:

1. Stake would be 45%
2. No input into player or coach recruitment
3. Breach punishable by 5 year ban from Europe for both clubs
4. Kingholm to be "rebuilt"
5. New pitch
6. Altrad main shirt sponsor
7. New academy investment
8. No part in day to day running of the club
9. Decision down to a vote of the Premiership in next two weeks.

[Kinga]

I would be quite happy if that is the deal which is approved.

Rebuilding the stadium might upset a few on here though.

[Lebowski]

Two aspects just make me chuckle.

Firstly the opposition get to vote on it - how on earth does that work apart from in a parallel universe?

Secondly it describes the ownership of provinces by the IRFU etc, which we are told on here is completely different, as a 'grey area'. Lmao.

[forresterinyorks]

So what are the prospects of the vote going in our favour? Brucie may not like it.
I wonder if clubs voting against it could make it difficult for themselves if they are considering similar plans at some future date.

[Ken Burney]

Why would opposition clubs in the AP support a deal which gave us advantages over them?!

[grunter]

I wonder what "No input into player or coach recruitment" would actually mean? Does it mean having no part in the negotiations or does it mean being unable to have any money input?

[Lebowski]

The former Derek. It says in the article that reports of PSA coming in are rubbish because Altrad wouldn't have any say in the matter. Having said that he would be a board member, so clearly he would have an input!

[RTS2]

I am pleased that MA's biggest fan has started yet another thread on Altrad

I can now post some thoughts ( if I am allowed of course ! ) as not posting on the pending thread as I said two days ago.

So indeed some news/announcement was imminent after all .

The club will be announcing sooner than later ?.

I have conjectured through the various threads related that MA would hold a 48% stake so the 45% suggestion in the Telegraph is not far off. I also suggested the delay from a reliable source weeks ago on the pending thread before the Geneva meeting of EPRC and indeed that the deal was in difficulty and that the RFU was the one suggested back track in the deal. It's ironic that the deal is being left to The Premiership to decide and IMHO a total conflict of interest has become the irony in itself.

Potential banning from Europe if protocols are breach should be the order of the day for all clubs anyway and it's a tad cheeky that the powers that be have a) passed the buck and b) have in effect doubted Monsieur Altrad's integrity.

The deal is now to be decided on a vote held by the Premierships clubs who of course have no vested interest in not supporting the potential for Gloucester Rugby's progress in the Premiership . How ridiculous can this whole matter become ?......

So various legal matters arise from this process ; especially if the Premiership decide to oppose the deal. For starters it would contravene several complex area's of company law and in effect the club could take this matter beyond the rugby powers that be into the court's. That would potentially throw a cat amongst the pigeons !. I think the Premiership will/should take legal council of potential scenarios if they oppose the deal.

Personally I think several members will want to oppose the deal for commonsense reasons; but when reflected upon will come to the conclusion it should be allowed to progress given the protocol's being suggested by EPRC and those that MA and the club are most likely prepared to offer as assurances to The Premiership.

It is also ironic that the penalty for breaching protocols is a ban in Europe following a decision to be made by The Premiership !!. Where does that leave EPRC in all of this ? !.

Much valuable time has been wasted. The club has ( even though many on here refuse to accept it ) suffered this season partly as a result of uncertainty.

It's time to get this resolved and move on.

[Theotherjonny]

In case you're not registered, here's the article (part 1):

Mohed Altrad, the Syrian-born billionaire owner of French Top 14 side Montpellier, will be denied any operational control over Gloucester if his multi-million pound investment in the Premiership club is approved later this month.

It is understood that Altrad abandoned his controversial plan to take a majority stake of 54 per cent in the Premiership club at a European Professional Club Rugby board meeting in Geneva last month in the face of overwhelming opposition from the governing bodies and clubs.

Now it can be disclosed that revised proposals to buy a 45 per cent stake would be bound by stringent regulations to prevent any perception of a conflict of interest – including severe sanctions that could see both Gloucester and Montpellier face expulsion from European competitions for up to five years for any breach.
That would prevent Altrad having any input into Gloucester’s player recruitment or the coaching structure – ending the speculation that Philippe Saint-André would be parachuted into the club as a new director of rugby by the new investor.

European regulations prevent any club buying more than a 10 per cent stake in another club to protect the integrity of the European Champions Cup and the Challenge Cup so approval of Altrad’s investment will require unanimous backing by the EPCR stakeholders.

European rugby officials are keen not to be seen to stand in the way of new investment coming into club rugby without valid legal reasons. There is a grey area, too, over the conflict-of-interest concern, given that the Irish provinces and Scottish club sides are owned by their respective unions and yet there is never any question about the integrity of the competitions they participate in. Yet the authorities want rigid safeguards – against even the perception of a conflict of interest.

© Daily Telegraph

[Theotherjonny]

Part 2:

Altrad has written a letter to the EPCR for circulation to the clubs, provinces and unions, outlining his proposals to ease these concerns. He is thought to have made it clear he is happy to consent to any restrictions on the scope of his influence.

It is understood that his investment would include the rebuilding Kingsholm Stadium – which almost certainly would be renamed the Altrad Stadium – laying a new pitch and improving facilities for Gloucester’s academy.
He would also have a place on the Gloucester board as a major shareholder but would not have a say in the day-to-day running of the club.

Nonetheless there remains a degree of suspicion as to his intentions among some Premiership clubs, a feeling that was not helped by the announcement yesterday that the Altrad Group, which sells and hires out equipment for the building and construction industry, has been confirmed as the new shirt sponsor of the France national side.

The France shirts will now carry the words Soutenu par Altrad (Supported by Altrad) as part of an agreement with the French Rugby Federation until the end of this year.

The English clubs have yet to declare whether they will give their backing to the proposals but appear to be key players in the decision and it may be that they insist that Altrad reduces the percentage of the shareholding or that they reject it altogether.

A meeting of Premiership Rugby stakeholders is expected to take place in the next couple of weeks and a final decision is expected by the end of the month.

© Daily Telegraph