Telegraph suitor Dovid Efune loses a third financial backer

The Telegraph’s New York suitor has lost a third financial backer with just one week to go before the planned cut-off date for exclusive deal talks.
Dovid Efune, owner of The New York Sun, has been unable to secure funding from the billionaire philanthropist Michael Leffell for his takeover of the broadsheet, after losing support from both Hudson Bay Capital and Oaktree Capital for a deal valued at more than £500 million.
Portage Partners/10 East, the investment venture founded by Leffell, told The Telegraph it was “not participating” in a bid for the newspaper, raising further questions about whether Efune will be able to finance the acquisition.
Efune, a relatively low-profile editor born in Manchester, emerged as a frontrunner in the race for The Telegraph in September, and was granted six weeks of exclusive deal talks by RedBird IMI, the Abu Dhabi-backed fund selling the publication.
RedBird IMI’s plan to secure the title was blocked by Conservative government ministers in March, who were concerned about the venture’s funding, which is partly derived from Sheikh Mansour, vice-president and deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates. RedBird Capital, a US private equity firm, also provided funding. The Telegraph reported it was possible that “some or all” of RedBird IMI’s investment not provided by Abu Dhabi could be included in a new structure to support an onward sale.
IMI, the sheikh’s media investment firm, prompted a political backlash with its bid for The Telegraph after The Times reported that its chairman was Sultan Ahmed al-Jaber, a former head of the UAE’s censorship agency who had been criticised for “exercising strict control over local and international media”. The Times subsequently revealed IMI had broken promises of editorial independence at the Arabic business channel it launched with CNN.
Speaking on March 13, when the House of Lords debated the measures that blocked RedBird IMI’s deal, Lord Forsyth of Drumlean said: “The very idea of an autocratic state with a poor record on human rights owning or holding any influence in a major British daily newspaper is utterly surreal… a country whose laws ban any direct criticism of their rulers through the government’s national media council… a country that puts journalists in jail, deports critics and closes down any criticism.”