• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Takeover News/Rumours

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sons of The Wear said:
Will the new situation when it happens see Sartori, Methven snd Donald have over 51% of the overall shareholding, meaning they will have the final say on all major decisions/appointments?
Discuss.
Click to expand...

Suppose it doesn't matter whether they own 41% or 51% collectively.
We don't truly know Sartori's intentions.

He's been near silent and distant apart from his Uruguayan youth comments. There's a suggestion he's pissed off with Donald and Meth for the way the clubs been run and his money spent (he's put about 5mil in so far)

It would also be the case to suggest that with Sartori bringing in KLD that he'd side with him than over Don and Meth.

Therefore you could say it'll be Don and Meth holding 21% with KLD and Sartori teaming up to own the other 79%. Thereby having control and there isn't anything that they could do or say to influence decisions in any way.

There is also an argument to suggest otherwise since Sartori joined at the same time as Donald, however without knowing the planned structure or his intentions for the club, you can't say definitively either way.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sons of The Wear said:
Will the new situation when it happens see Sartori, Methven snd Donald have over 51% of the overall shareholding, meaning they will have the final say on all major decisions/appointments?
Discuss.
Click to expand...
Definitely no. Sartori 20 percent Donald 15 percent Methven 9 percent Kyril 56 percent.
 
Johnnyh said:
Definitely no. Sartori 20 percent Donald 15 percent Methven 9 percent Kyril 56 percent.
Click to expand...
Where the hell did you get those figures from ?............ charlie increasing his stake? fekking deplorable!we need to hound these fekkers out!We cannot let don and charlie set foot in the sol again without a jimmy hill type welcome!
 
Last edited:
One way it could be done to avoid a Sartori majority is that the (lets say) 3 consortium members, JS, KLD and whoever else, set up a LTD and take an equal shareholding in this new company of 33.3% each.

They then purchase not only 85% of Donald's shares (a majority in itself of 62.9%) but also transfer the entirety of Sartori's current shareholding to the LTD, so that's 82.9% in total. Methven has 6% and that leaves Donald on 11.1%.

In this way none of the individuals holds a majority on their own and has to work within the structure of the LTD company's management regime, and what I assume would be an updated regime for Madrox too.

There are lots of options to do it though and this is just one. It may well be that KLD is happy for JS to own the majority and vice versa, don't rule that out.
 
Last edited:
The fact Sartori seeked out assistance in the takeover , if the reports are to be believed, then that will do for me.

SD could not take us forward. He needed promotion for that and he would have still been unable.

Feeling if we had gained that promotion then Sartori would have taken the reigns anyway.

That was mooted a while back.

Just have to see but those two will be in the background I'm pretty sure about that.
 
sksk3021 said:
I don't think our problem is lack of effort from the players.
Click to expand...

so you are of the opinion that each and every player has been at a consistently high level of performance?

i would say maguire for one has shown, at times, that he is one of the best in the league but he has not performed in that manner every game...i accept players will have an 'off game' or two and i also accept that parky playing certain ones out of position and breaking up partnerships has a lot to do with it as well, i just feel when watching them that some (griggs recent game for example) could just put a little more effort in and they will get the rewards.
 
If a club is joint owned by a mix of some people with lots of money to put in and some with none, what happens if the richer owner pumps say £50m into the club ?

Do Donald/CM and Sartori have to proportionally match that investment ? Or does the ownership get restructured ?
samwise said:
so you are of the opinion that each and every player has been at a consistently high level of performance?

i would say maguire for one has shown, at times, that he is one of the best in the league but he has not performed in that manner every game...i accept players will have an 'off game' or two and i also accept that parky playing certain ones out of position and breaking up partnerships has a lot to do with it as well, i just feel when watching them that some (griggs recent game for example) could just put a little more effort in and they will get the rewards.
Click to expand...

Maguire is a good example of one type of league one player.

Some players end up in league one because they reach a consistent level and that level suits league one, whereas some players with a little more technical ability can perform to a slightly higher level than league one but can’t do it consistently and when they are having a bad game they can even play to a level below league one. Maguire is that type of player.
 
Last edited:
norfolk mackem said:
If a club is joint owned by a mix of some people with lots of money to put in and some with none, what happens if the richer owner pumps say £50m into the club ?

Do Donald/CM and Sartori have to proportionally match that investment ? Or does the ownership get restructured ?


Maguire is a good example of one type of league one player.

Some players end up in league one because they reach a consistent level and that level suits league one, whereas some players with a little more technical ability can perform to a slightly higher level than league one but can’t do it consistently and when they are having a bad game they can even play to a level below league one. Maguire is that type of player.
Click to expand...
That's what all the arguing is about I would guess....no serious businesman would want to invest loads into an enterprise without reaping the benefits.....they would baulk at those two leeches making money with little investment.....Don may have a few few quid (parachute money)but Charlie is all salmon pants and no calvins.
 
Last edited:
norfolk mackem said:
If a club is joint owned by a mix of some people with lots of money to put in and some with none, what happens if the richer owner pumps say £50m into the club ?

Do Donald/CM and Sartori have to proportionally match that investment ? Or does the ownership get restructured ?


Maguire is a good example of one type of league one player.

Some players end up in league one because they reach a consistent level and that level suits league one, whereas some players with a little more technical ability can perform to a slightly higher level than league one but can’t do it consistently and when they are having a bad game they can even play to a level below league one. Maguire is that type of player.
Click to expand...


If a shareholder is going to put further capital into the club then they'll firstly sort out the ownership % to be further in their favour. As the cliche goes 'money talks'. The other shareholders are in no position of strength financially conpared to dreyfus and sartori. Its probablys a period of handing over the reigns and SD and CM eventually f***ing off (within a year is my opinion)
 
samwise said:
so you are of the opinion that each and every player has been at a consistently high level of performance?

i would say maguire for one has shown, at times, that he is one of the best in the league but he has not performed in that manner every game...i accept players will have an 'off game' or two and i also accept that parky playing certain ones out of position and breaking up partnerships has a lot to do with it as well, i just feel when watching them that some (griggs recent game for example) could just put a little more effort in and they will get the rewards.
Click to expand...
No I am not saying all of the players have performed at a high level consistently. I am saying that that’s not because of a lack of effort.

Maguire might be one or two who could put more in but he has been like this throughout his career it’s probably why he is at this level in the first place.
 
@Grumpy Old Man it’s probably been already asked but say the new owner/owners want to splash a bit cash £30 million would the other shareholders have to contribute to that said amount, like say SD owns 15% he contributes 15% of said amount and CM 5% of said amount?
 
The Cabbage said:
That’s in interesting approach. However it’s also similar thinking to why I’d go for a flexible 4-3-3. It’s also easier to introduce players to ‘the next level’ in a midfield or forward 3 imo. More protection alongside.
Click to expand...
In recent times Stuart Webb and Steve Weaver have been involved in two of the best academies out side of the top 6 clubs at Wolves and Norwich. They have a system that produces revenue for the club and players for the first team. Its working an treat. Adam Idah just off production line picked up for pence, Max Aarons, Todd Cantwell, Jamal Lewis, Ben Godfrey. Theres two or three more who will join 1st team over the coming season. We will sell academy graduates and why not maximise the revenue and do what Norwich do by having two centre forwards in each team in the academy.
 
Norwich Exile said:
In recent times Stuart Webb and Steve Weaver have been involved in two of the best academies out side of the top 6 clubs at Wolves and Norwich. They have a system that produces revenue for the club and players for the first team. Its working an treat. Adam Idah just off production line picked up for pence, Max Aarons, Todd Cantwell, Jamal Lewis, Ben Godfrey. Theres two or three more who will join 1st team over the coming season. We will sell academy graduates and why not maximise the revenue and do what Norwich do by having two centre forwards in each team in the academy.
Click to expand...
No I know they do very well. However it’s noticeable that of the player mentioned as moving on/potential for big fees, not one of them is a centre forward. Besides, if you want to produce forwards surely it’s better to have three than two;-)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top