• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

SAFC Takeover Latest

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ramona1234 said:
Don't shoot the messenger :eek:

Been told the hold up is due to Short owning lots of surrounding land and the Hilton. The land is needed for (if) the Americans want to complete the concourse. Also, Sartori negotiating a price or his shares apparently.

Sounds like a haggling process that takes time and there is no rush I guess. I hope the source is accurate, because I don't think Short would see it pass by after his previous fantastic gesture. As for JS , it would appear he was hoping for promotion so he could let loose with cash, as we already knew was the general idea as intimated by SD. It didn't happen and obviously that caused upset and unrest, as it has to us all.

The key focus for me is that if they are wanting to expand the concourse, or are at least thinking about it. It suggests forward planning for a positive successful future.
Click to expand...

Might be wrong but I didn't think Sartori, as a minority shareholder, could negotiate his own price. Thought it was a case that, as by far the majority shareholder, if Donald decided to sell then Sartori would have to take the same price per share as Donald was getting (maybe yet another one for @Grumpy Old Man !)
 

Ramona1234 said:
Do you think that would affect the construction of extending the concourse ? Or just a case of him getting the price he wants for the Hotel ?
Click to expand...

The latter, but again that's nothing to do with the club (and never has been)

Unless they're saying it's a dealbreaker, they could buy the club and deal with the hotel later
 
Ramona1234 said:
Been told the hold up is due to Short owning lots of surrounding land and the Hilton. The land is needed for (if) the Americans want to complete the concourse. Also, Sartori negotiating a price or his shares apparently.
Click to expand...


That was only a joke post when someone said that a while ago 😕
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Might be wrong but I didn't think Sartori, as a minority shareholder, could negotiate his own price. Thought it was a case that, as by far the majority shareholder, if Donald decided to sell then Sartori would have to take the same price per share as Donald was getting (maybe yet another one for @Grumpy Old Man !)
Click to expand...

Sartori doesn't have to sell his shares in Madrox if he doesn't want to - they would only have a compulsory right to buy his shares if they owned 90% or more

He doesn't own shares in the club so they could go about it that way if needs be

Might be the case they want 100% and he's not budging thouhg
 
Ramona1234 said:
Don't shoot the messenger :eek:

Been told the hold up is due to Short owning lots of surrounding land and the Hilton. The land is needed for (if) the Americans want to complete the concourse. Also, Sartori negotiating a price or his shares apparently.

Sounds like a haggling process that takes time and there is no rush I guess. I hope the source is accurate, because I don't think Short would see it pass by after his previous fantastic gesture. As for JS , it would appear he was hoping for promotion so he could let loose with cash, as we already knew was the general idea as intimated by SD. It didn't happen and obviously that caused upset and unrest, as it has to us all.

The key focus for me is that if they are wanting to expand the concourse, or are at least thinking about it. It suggests forward planning for a positive successful future.
Click to expand...
What a load of cobblers
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Might be wrong but I didn't think Sartori, as a minority shareholder, could negotiate his own price. Thought it was a case that, as by far the majority shareholder, if Donald decided to sell then Sartori would have to take the same price per share as Donald was getting (maybe yet another one for @Grumpy Old Man !)
Click to expand...
It depends on what rights are attached to the shares in the articles and/or any shareholders agreement. Haven’t got time to read the articles and any shareholders agreement wouldn’t be on Companies House so I doubt we would be able to get to the bottom of this.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Might be wrong but I didn't think Sartori, as a minority shareholder, could negotiate his own price. Thought it was a case that, as by far the majority shareholder, if Donald decided to sell then Sartori would have to take the same price per share as Donald was getting (maybe yet another one for @Grumpy Old Man !)
Click to expand...
It depends what the Americans are buying. If they're buying a percentage of Sunderland from Madrox, then Donald and Methven own enough to force it through on a majority vote of Madrox shareholders. If the Americans are buying shares in Madrox it's a different matter. They could only force Sartori to sell his shares at the same price if they already owned 90%, which is impossible as Sartori owns 20%. Of course, Donald could simply sell enough to give FPP a majority, and leave Sartori as a minority shareholder.

My own feeling is that the Americans will be looking to buy Sunderland Ltd. Any dispute on price would be between Donald and Sartori.

I've heard unconfirmed rumours that they're looking to buy the Hilton from Short at the same time as buying the club. That would seem to me far more likely to cause a delay.
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
Might be wrong but I didn't think Sartori, as a minority shareholder, could negotiate his own price. Thought it was a case that, as by far the majority shareholder, if Donald decided to sell then Sartori would have to take the same price per share as Donald was getting (maybe yet another one for @Grumpy Old Man !)
Click to expand...

I don't recall how much of a holding Sartori has, but once the purchasing company owns 90% of the shares it may compulsory purchase the remainder whether agreed or not. This has happened twice with me, ironically once with SAFC shares!

The situation is complicated at SAFC as obviously Sartori won't own shares in SAFC, just in Madrox. So I guess Madrox could still sell its stake in SAFC without his agreement as it he isn't a majority shareholder in Madrox. My head hurts now.

Regarding the land, I always thought SAFC owned plenty land around there, certainly enough to extend the concourses if required (although possibly not behind the North Stand).
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
It depends what the Americans are buying. If they're buying a percentage of Sunderland from Madrox, then Donald and Methven own enough to force it through on a majority vote of Madrox shareholders. If the Americans are buying shares in Madrox it's a different matter. They could only force Sartori to sell his shares at the same price if they already owned 90%, which is impossible as Sartori owns 20%. Of course, Donald could simply sell enough to give FPP a majority, and leave Sartori as a minority shareholder.

My own feeling is that the Americans will be looking to buy Sunderland Ltd. Any dispute on price would be between Donald and Sartori.

I've heard unconfirmed rumours that they're looking to buy the Hilton from Short at the same time as buying the club. That would seem to me far more likely to cause a delay.
Click to expand...

When you consider SDs podcasts and the negotiating a new deal with Short regularly despite a year passing you can see why they want to iron out issues prior.
Didnt fat mike buy a load of debt he wasnt aware of too.

Some smbers think this is akin to buying a lawnmower off gumtree.
 
Roger said:
I don't recall how much of a holding Sartori has, but once the purchasing company owns 90% of the shares it may compulsory purchase the remainder whether agreed or not. This has happened twice with me, ironically once with SAFC shares!

The situation is complicated at SAFC as obviously Sartori won't own shares in SAFC, just in Madrox. So I guess Madrox could still sell its stake in SAFC without his agreement as it he isn't a majority shareholder in Madrox. My head hurts now.

Regarding the land, I always thought SAFC owned plenty land around there, certainly enough to extend the concourses if required (although possibly not behind the North Stand).
Click to expand...
ooops, sorry. Didn't realise we were back on topic.
 
JimmyQuinn said:
Sartori doesn't have to sell his shares in Madrox if he doesn't want to - they would only have a compulsory right to buy his shares if they owned 90% or more

He doesn't own shares in the club so they could go about it that way if needs be

Might be the case they want 100% and he's not budging thouhg
Click to expand...

So just to clarify
Madrox owns the shares in Sunderland
Sartori owns shares in Madrox
If Madrox chose to dispose of an asset, shares in Sunderland, surely it would be a simple case of voting your shares and a simple majority wins

Though I admit I'm probably missing something

I'm pretty sure that someone mentioned that for tax purposes it may be more efficient if Madrox sold the shares rather than Madrox being sold - or a meringue

Edit - thread has moved on see above
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top