The Board of Tottenham Hotspur were unequivocal in their dismissal of two expressions of interest for the purchase of the North London club. The shock departure of long-time Chairman and significant ENIC shareholder, Daniel Levy, had provoked widespread uncertainty and speculation around a potential takeover bid. Spurs were required to disclose preliminary expressions of interest under the UK’s Takeover Code—such interest originated from Amanda Staveley’s PCP International Finance Limited and a consortium led by Dr. Robert Kennedy and Wing-Fai Ng.

The response from current club ownership though was clear:

“The Board of the Club and ENIC confirm that Tottenham Hotspur is not for sale and ENIC has no intention to accept any such offer to acquire its interest in the Club”

Could ownership still change?

As clear cut as the statement was, it doesn’t prevent the owners of Spurs from making a dramatic u-turn on their position—but for the moment let’s pretend they will be true to their word. The interesting area of contention though is the distinction between the shares in Tottenham Hotspur Limited and that of the ENIC Group. We feature a simplified version of this ownership structure below, and it is worth noting that there are multiple holding companies within the ENIC Group ownership structure that are not detailed. Additionally, both Daniel Levy and the Lewis Family Trusts are complicated structures that have again been simplified.

Importantly, the ENIC Sports Inc subsidiary is domiciled in the Bahamas and is not subject to the same UK laws that govern takeovers and public disclosure. ENIC could negotiate a sale or investment in this subsidiary without potentially having to inform minority investors of Tottenham Hotspur in advance. This would in effect allow the indirect sale of the club, with shares in Tottenham Hotspur then becoming assumed by the acquiring party and not directly contravening the original statement made by the Board. A new owner or person of significant control would likely still be subject to the Owners’ and Directors’ Test (ODT), a set of rules designed to prevent corrupt or dishonest individuals from owning or directing football clubs.

Simplified ownership structure of Tottenham Hotspur FC

Another interesting piece in a hypothetical sale scenario is outgoing Chairman Daniel Levy. As outlined above, Levy still holds a significant ownership stake (around 26%) in the club and potentially a say in its future from an investment standpoint, but not operationally. This is what is known as the divorce between ownership and control in a business, with Levy believed to be maintaining his equity share but losing his role in the day to day running of the club. There is no mention of Levy in the club’s current boardroom list or on their ‘persons with significant control’ disclosure to Companies House. Levy was never listed as a ‘person with significant control’, but he has ‘resigned’ as a company officer according to Companies House latest records. Peter Charrington and Katie Booth are the only listed ‘persons with significant control’

There has been some conjecture though around Levy’s role in a potential takeover or investment in Tottenham Hotspur. His 26% stake could allow him to block anything requiring a ‘Special Resolution’, which necessitates a 75% approval in number and value of shareholders. An issuance of new shares, reduction of share capital or other potential changes in or around a takeover could potentially require this level of approval. Whilst Levy is unlikely to have ultimate say or power to hold the Lewis family to ransom, he does potentially still hold some leverage around future negotiations.

Levy being the infamous deal-maker that he is, would probably have some preferential arrangement agreed around any future investment. It would seem unlikely for him to sit on his stake without much control, when he can potentially cash-out at a premium over not only what he originally paid but also over the current market valuation of his shares. Additionally, divesting would allow him the opportunity to pursue other projects in the sport without risking a contravention of UEFA’s multi-club ownership rules, something we have covered recently in detail. For those that have followed Levy over many years, it is clear that control and influence is potentially just as important to him as financial gain.

The speculation around the future ownership of Tottenham Hotspur is unlikely to go away anytime soon. Daniel Levy is doubtful to remain a silent minority shareholder for long, and until his future is clarified the debate will likely continue. Vinai Venkatesham’s appointment into a newly created CEO role should create stability through any future change and hopefully prevent any impact to the on-field trajectory of the club.

Do you think Tottenham Hotspur are for sale?