NEW YORK, July 7, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — Saba Capital Management, L.P. (“Saba”) welcomes the high level of engagement and debate that its proposal for Workspace Group plc (“Workspace” or the “Company”) has generated among shareholders, analysts and the media.
Few would dispute that Workspace has failed its investors. Over the past five years, the Company has delivered a total shareholder return, including dividends, of -48%, materially underperforming comparable UK REITs[1]. Its shares continue to trade at the widest discount to net asset value (NAV) in the sector.
The question is therefore not whether change is required. It is which strategy offers shareholders the greatest certainty of restoring value.
Management has presented its own turnaround strategy, including its latest presentation on 1 July 2026. We recognise the work that has gone into that plan. However, it asks shareholders to support a risky long-term reinvestment programme that management believes can generate returns eight times higher than the Company has historically delivered. Given the Company’s long record of value destruction, together with our own detailed analysis, we have little confidence that this strategy can be delivered successfully.
We continue to believe that the right path forward is a disciplined capital allocation strategy centred on substantial share repurchases, funded through a more ambitious programme of strategic property disposals.
Since publishing our proposal on 17 June, we have held extensive discussions with shareholders, analysts and other stakeholders. Those conversations were constructive and some raised practical questions around implementation. These are exactly the questions that shareholders should be asking of our proposal and of management’s reinvestment plan.
We set out below the answers to a number of questions. We encourage shareholders to read these answers in conjunction with our updated presentation, which can be found at www.makeworkspacework.co.uk.
1. Saba’s proposal for property sales looks attractive in theory, but how would you actually deliver it?
We have developed a detailed execution plan with leading real estate advisers with extensive UK market expertise. We have also spoken confidentially with a number of Workspace tenants to help validate key assumptions underpinning our proposed tenant relocation strategy.
The plan is based on selective disposals across the portfolio in geographic clusters and the simultaneous relocation of displaced tenants into nearby Workspace buildings.
Our analysis indicates that one or two properties could be sold within each cluster. Where appropriate, tenants could be encouraged to relocate through financial incentives, flexible lease terms and contributions towards relocation costs.
This approach is designed to preserve customer relationships, protect rental income and improve occupancy across retained assets while unlocking capital through the selective disposal of non-core properties.
Importantly, disposing of one to two assets within each cluster on a staggered timeline avoids flooding individual submarkets and helps maintain pricing discipline throughout the programme.
Rather than shrinking the business indiscriminately, the objective is to concentrate the portfolio around stronger assets while recycling capital into highly accretive share repurchases.
2. Is there a market for the scale of disposals you propose?
Based on discussions with leading UK real estate advisers and agents, together with our analysis of recent comparable transactions, we believe there is a deep and competitive market for Workspace’s assets.
We have identified 50-75 credible potential buyers, including private investors, family offices, specialist property companies, private equity firms and larger strategic investors interested in acquiring either individual assets or larger portfolio groupings[2].
Market liquidity is also influenced by lot size. A significant proportion of Workspace’s portfolio consists of assets valued between £10 million and £30 million, one of the most actively traded segments of the UK property market over recent years[3].
In addition, many Workspace properties have attractive alternative use potential, significantly expanding the pool of prospective buyers. We have already identified buyers who would be interested in repositioning selected buildings for more conventional long-term leased use.
Taken together, these factors give us confidence that the proposed disposal programme can be executed over a reasonable period without relying on a small number of buyers or unusually favourable market conditions.
3. Wouldn’t you have to accept steep discounts to achieve these disposals?
The 5-20% discount scenarios set out in our proposal are grounded in detailed analysis and have been reviewed by independent real estate advisers. They reflect current market conditions, likely buyer demand for individual assets and the scale and sequencing of the proposed disposal programme.
They are also consistent with recent evidence.
Workspace sold 13 properties from April 2025 to March 2026 at an average discount of 7.2% to book value. The three most recent disposals, which were sold at an average discount of 22% and cited by Workspace in its 1 July presentation, are not representative of the wider portfolio. Rather, they reflect underperforming assets and unsuccessful capital projects. Furthermore, even including these three properties, the average realised discount across all 16 properties sold by Workspace since April 2025 is 10%, not 22%.
We also note that Derwent, which Workspace itself identifies as one of its closest comparators, completed £278 million of disposals in Q1 2026 at an average discount of approximately 3% to its December 2025 book value[4].
We recognise that individual assets will achieve different sale prices depending on their characteristics and buyer demand. That variability has been reflected in our analysis. The relevant measure is the average outcome across the disposal programme as a whole, not any single transaction.
The central logic of our proposal is straightforward. Workspace’s shares trade at a substantially wider discount than the discounts at which the Company has recently sold properties. If Workspace can recycle capital by selling assets at relatively modest discounts and use those proceeds to repurchase shares trading at a much deeper discount to NAV, remaining shareholders will own a larger proportion of the Company’s underlying net assets. We believe that is a compelling and highly accretive use of capital.
4. Why should shareholders choose your proposal over management’s?
The two strategies ask shareholders to accept fundamentally different risk and return profiles.
Management’s strategy depends on investing substantial additional capital into refurbishment projects today, with the expectation of generating higher rental income and earnings several years into the future.
Our concern is that Workspace’s track record shows that this approach has generated minimal upside for shareholders.
Workspace’s reinvestment strategy assumes a 12% yield on cost for refurbishment capex – but this is approximately eight times higher than the returns the Company has historically delivered. Our analysis shows Workspace invested approximately £165 million of incremental capital across 15 refurbishment projects between 2016 and 2022. These projects generated, in aggregate, an annual net rental income increase of only £2.5 million or a 1.5% yield on cost – far below the assumed 12%[5].
Investors appear to share this scepticism. In Workspace’s Q4 results, published on 17 April, the Company announced a dividend reduction alongside its reinvestment strategy. Workspace’s shares fell approximately 11% over the following two trading days and have yet to recover[6]. Independent analysts have since highlighted the execution risk, long time horizon and uncertainty surrounding management’s strategy, leading to several earnings downgrades.
By contrast, our proposal is based on a capital allocation opportunity that exists today. Rather than asking shareholders to wait years for operational improvements that may never materialise, our proposal seeks to unlock value immediately by recycling capital from selective property disposals into repurchases of shares trading at an exceptionally wide discount to NAV.
We believe this represents a faster, more certain and less risky route to creating shareholder value.
For many investors, Workspace has historically represented a REIT investment expected to provide capital preservation, dependable income and modest long-term growth. Unfortunately, recent years have delivered the opposite.
We believe shareholders should carefully consider which strategy is more likely to restore both value and confidence.
5. Would a disposal programme damage tenant demand and renewals?
Businesses choose Workspace primarily because of the quality of its buildings, their location, the flexibility of the offering and the service they receive – not because of the identity of the building’s ultimate owner.
Where properties are sold for alternative use, we expect that affected tenants would be offered the opportunity to relocate within the Workspace portfolio wherever appropriate. That could include financial incentives, flexible lease terms and contributions towards relocation costs to minimise disruption and support business continuity.
As part of our analysis, we spoke confidentially with a number of Workspace tenants to better understand their priorities. Those discussions reinforced our view that, for many occupiers, location, quality, cost and continuity of service are considerably more important than who owns the building. Several indicated they would be open to relocating within the Workspace portfolio if supported by appropriate commercial incentives.
This approach is designed to preserve customer relationships, protect rental income and improve occupancy across the retained portfolio while releasing capital from selected assets.
It is also worth noting that Workspace has been an active seller of assets for many years. If changes in ownership materially undermined tenant demand or damaged the Company’s ability to attract and retain customers, shareholders would expect to see clear evidence of that in Workspace’s operating performance. We are not aware of evidence suggesting previous disposals have materially weakened the platform.
6. Is there a risk that outsourcing property management could reduce service quality or tenant demand?
Many of the UK’s highest-quality commercial property portfolios successfully use specialist third-party property managers. These firms bring specialist expertise across leasing, facilities management, maintenance, tenant services and accounting.
Within a more focused and geographically concentrated portfolio, third-party providers may also be able to deploy resources more efficiently across nearby assets while maintaining high service standards.
Any transition would need to be carefully planned and executed. The objective would not be to reduce service quality but to maintain or improve the customer experience through:
- retaining key personnel and tenant relationships wherever possible;
- implementing robust service-level agreements with measurable performance standards; and
- maintaining close oversight by Workspace’s executive team.
We believe outsourcing should be judged in the same way as every other operational decision: by whether it improves service for customers, strengthens operational performance and enhances long-term shareholder value.
7. Can you explain the discrepancy between net asset value (NAV) and gross asset value (GAV) in your presentation?
Our previous presentation used NAV as shorthand when discussing book values. That terminology should have been more precise, and we understand that it created confusion. We have corrected that terminology.
Importantly, this clarification does not change the central logic of our proposal, or the conclusions shareholders should draw from it.
If Workspace sells assets at discounts materially narrower than the discount at which its own shares trade and use the proceeds to repurchase those shares, remaining shareholders benefit through an increase in NAV per share.
That outcome is accretive whether the Company disposes of a significant portion of the portfolio or pursues a more selective disposal programme over time.
8. Are Saba’s board nominees independent and do they have the right skills and experience?
Workspace has suggested that Saba’s board nominees lack the balance of skills required to serve on its board and may not be considered independent under UK corporate governance standards. Neither claim is correct.
Our nominees bring decades of experience across listed real estate, real estate capital markets, portfolio optimisation, corporate governance, restructuring, capital allocation and complex strategic transactions. That experience is directly relevant to the strategic decisions facing Workspace today.
By contrast, only one of the six incumbent non-executive directors has meaningful real estate experience. Given Workspace’s prolonged underperformance, persistent discount to NAV and the strategic choices now facing the Company, we believe shareholders would benefit from new non-executive directors with deeper and more directly relevant sector expertise.
Workspace’s suggestion that our nominees may lack independence under the UK Corporate Governance Code is also incorrect. The nominees do not represent Saba; they are wholly independent. If elected, each would owe statutory and fiduciary duties to Workspace and would be required to exercise independent judgement and act in the interests of all shareholders.
The fact that a particular shareholder has nominated a director does not, in itself, mean the director cannot be considered independent under the UK Corporate Governance Code. Independence is assessed by reference to relationships, circumstances and judgement, not by who proposed the appointment.
Our nominees have been selected because they have the experience to strengthen board oversight, improve accountability and help ensure that whichever strategy the board ultimately pursues is subject to rigorous challenge and disciplined execution.
Our nominees are:
- Gautam Garg (Chair-Designate): Gautam has spent more than two decades investing in global REITs and real assets at firms including Lazard, Elliott, ExodusPoint, LMR and Verition. His experience includes engaging executive leadership teams on capital allocation and strategic change. During WeWork’s Chapter 11 restructuring, he tabled a proposal to become a control investor, recommending a strategy centred on asset divestitures, lease restructurings and a transition to a global franchisor model.
- Greg Attwood: Greg has more than three decades of experience in real estate development, restructuring and value recovery. Through Heathfield Partners and previously PwC’s Business Recovery Services practice, he has advised institutional investors, lenders and developers on distressed assets, regeneration projects and complex turnarounds. His experience of recovering value from underperforming real estate would provide an important perspective as Workspace considers its strategic options.
- Simon Hampton: Simon has more than 35 years’ experience advising listed real estate companies, institutional investors and property businesses. As former head of PwC’s UK Real Estate Deals practice and now Chair of Alantra’s UK Real Assets advisory business, he has advised boards on major strategic transactions, capital raising and portfolio disposals.
- Nick Shattock: Nick spent 16 years on the board of FTSE 250-listed Quintain Estates & Development, including as Deputy Chief Executive, where he helped oversee the regeneration of Wembley Park and Greenwich Peninsula. He also has extensive experience of acquisitions, portfolio rationalisation and a broad range of operational real estate sectors.
- Andrew Sim: Andrew has more than 30 years’ experience across international real estate capital markets. He founded Knight Frank’s European investment business before leading its European platform across 19 countries and later established Mosaic Capital. Throughout his career, he has advised on major real estate transactions and complex portfolio sales, giving him deep experience of how assets are positioned, marketed and sold across different market cycles.
- Richard Starr: Richard has more than 25 years’ experience in UK real estate, including board-level responsibility for portfolio strategy and capital allocation as Executive Property Director of Palace Capital plc. During his time there, he helped scale the business from £2 million to £260 million and oversaw its transition to REIT status and a Premium Listing on the Main Market. Richard also secured board approval for a post-Covid disposal and reinvestment programme that repositioned the business towards higher-quality assets.
Compared to the incumbent non-executive directors, we believe that our nominees represent a step-change in quality, expertise and experience. We believe their combination of skills would strengthen oversight of management and help maximise long-term value for all Workspace shareholders.
9. What engagement have you had with the board?
Workspace has suggested that our engagement has been “inconsistent and short-term focused”. That characterisation is inaccurate.
Since first engaging with the Company, we have sought on multiple occasions to engage constructively with the board and management to discuss our analysis, our concerns about the Company’s performance and our proposals for enhancing shareholder value.
While those discussions took place, we did not find the board willing to engage meaningfully with alternative strategic proposals or to consider other approaches to capital allocation.
As one of Workspace’s largest shareholders, our objective has always been to work constructively with the Company to improve long-term returns for all shareholders. When it became clear that our proposals would not receive meaningful consideration, we concluded that it was important to present them publicly so that all shareholders could assess the merits of both approaches and reach their own conclusions.
We remain open to constructive dialogue with the board and management in the interests of all shareholders.
Media Enquiries
Greenbrook – Rob White / Peter Hewer / James Dean
saba@greenbrookadvisory.com
+44 (0) 207 952 2000
Shareholder Enquiries
DF King – David Chase Lopes
saba@dfkingltd.co.uk
+33 6 72 54 69 79
Website
makeworkspacework.co.uk
About Saba
Saba Capital Management, L.P. is a global alternative asset management firm that seeks to deliver superior risk-adjusted returns for a diverse group of clients. Founded in 2009 by Boaz Weinstein, Saba is a pioneer of credit relative value strategies and capital structure arbitrage. Saba has offices in New York City and London. Learn more at www.sabacapital.com.
Disclaimer
This announcement is not intended to be and does not constitute or contain any investment recommendation as defined by Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 (as it forms part of the domestic law in the United Kingdom by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018). No information in this announcement should be construed as recommending or suggesting an investment strategy. Nothing in this announcement or in any related materials is a statement of or indicates or implies any specific or probable value outcome in any particular circumstance. This announcement is provided merely for general informational purposes and is not intended to be, nor should it be construed as (1) investment, financial, tax or legal advice, or (2) a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security or other investment, or to pursue any investment style or strategy. Neither the information nor any opinion contained in this announcement constitutes an inducement or offer to purchase or sell or a solicitation of an offer to purchase or sell any securities or other investments in the Company or any other company by Saba or any of its affiliates in any jurisdiction. This announcement does not consider the investment objective, financial situation, suitability or the particular need or circumstances of any specific individual who may access or review this announcement and may not be taken as advice on the merits of any investment decision. This announcement is not intended to provide the sole basis for evaluation of, and does not purport to contain all information that may be required with respect to, any potential investment in the Company. Any person who is in any doubt about the matters to which this announcement relates should consult an authorised financial adviser or other person authorised under the UK Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. To the best of Saba’s ability and belief, all information contained herein is accurate and reliable, and has been obtained from public sources that Saba believes to be accurate and reliable. However, such information is presented “as is”, without warranty of any kind, whether express or implied, and Saba has not independently verified the data contained therein. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice, and Saba does not undertake to update or supplement any of the information, analysis and opinion contained herein.
Saba may continue transacting in the shares and securities of the Company, and/or derivatives referenced to them (which may include those providing long and short economic exposure) for an indefinite period following the date of this announcement and may increase or decrease its interests in such shares, securities and/or derivatives at any time.
Forward-Looking Statements
This announcement contains certain forward-looking statements and information that are based on Saba’s beliefs, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to, Saba. These statements include, but are not limited to, statements about strategies, plans, objectives, expectations, intentions, expenditures and assumptions and other statements that are not historical facts. When used herein, words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan” and “project” and similar expressions (or their negative) are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements reflect Saba’s current views with respect to future events, are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Further, certain forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions as to future events that may not prove to be accurate. Actual results, performance or achievements may vary materially and adversely from those described herein. There is no assurance or guarantee with respect to the prices at which any securities of the Company or any other company will trade, and such securities may not trade at prices that may be implied herein. Any estimates, projections or potential impact of the opportunities identified by Saba herein are based on assumptions that Saba believes to be reasonable as of the date hereof, but there can be no assurance or guarantee that actual results or performance will not differ, and such differences may be material and adverse. No representation or warranty, express or implied, is given by Saba or any of its officers, employees or agents as to the achievement or reasonableness of, and no reliance should be placed on, any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects or returns contained herein. Neither Saba nor any of its directors, officers, employees, advisers or representatives shall have any liability whatsoever (for negligence or misrepresentation or in tort or under contract or otherwise) for any loss howsoever arising from any use of information presented in this announcement or otherwise arising in connection with this announcement. Any historical financial information, projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects or returns contained herein are not necessarily a reliable indicator of future performance. Nothing in this announcement should be relied upon as a promise or representation as to the future. Nothing in this announcement should be considered as a profit forecast.
Permitted Recipients
In relation to the United Kingdom, this announcement is being issued only to, and is directed only at, (i) investment professionals specified in Article 19(5) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005 as amended (the “Order”), (ii) high net worth entities, and other persons to whom it may lawfully be communicated, falling within Article 49(2)(a) to (d) of the Order and (iii) persons to whom an invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity (within the meaning of section 21 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000) in connection with the issue or sale of any securities of the Company or any member of its group may otherwise lawfully be communicated or caused to be communicated (all such persons together being referred to as “Permitted Recipients”). Persons who are not Permitted Recipients must not act or rely on the information contained in this announcement.
Distribution
Not for release, publication or distribution, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly, in, into or from any jurisdiction where to do so would constitute a violation of the relevant laws of that jurisdiction. The distribution of this announcement in certain countries may be restricted by law and persons who access it are required to inform themselves and to comply with any such restrictions. Saba disclaims all responsibility where persons access this announcement in breach of any law or regulation in the country of which that person is a citizen or in which that person is residing or is domiciled.
[1] Source: Saba analysis, FactSet as of 15 Jun 2026, as this date was utilised for the original 17 Jun 2026 presentation and not modified thereafter for consistency purposes. Total shareholder returns assume dividend reinvestment.
[2] Source: Research for Saba by leading UK commercial property adviser
[3] Source: Research for Saba by leading UK commercial property adviser
[4] Source: https://www.derwentlondon.com/uploads/downloads/2026-05-12-DLN-Q1-2026-Business-update.pdf
[5] Source: Saba analysis based on public Company filings. Detailed analysis set out in Saba Presentation available at www.makeworkspacework.co.uk
[6] Share price reduction from market close on 16 April 2026 (373.6 pence) to close on 20 April (332.6 pence). Source: London Stock Exchange data
Logo – https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/3004432/Saba_Capital_Logo.jpg
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-releases/saba-addresses-questions-relating-to-its-workspace-proposal-302818842.html
