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

Takeover News/Rumours - Part 42

Status
Not open for further replies.
samaistonsrightfoot said:
People didn't have a problem with Sartori years ago was what you referred to suggesting that people should still feel the same way now.

By the same logic people were buzzing with Donald years ago so that means everyone should be buzzing now?
Click to expand...

I've not said that either.
You are generating your own narrative because you can't see past your own hatred of Donald. I've said we are where we are...investment for me in our current clime is probably a positive step. Investment in a footballing structure and strategy is a positive step.....I don't yearn for a "takeover", I'd just like to see better performances on the pitch. They are more likely to occur with investment and structure in place. If SD is involved I really don't care.
 

JERUDONG No.10 said:
I've not said that either.
You are generating your own narrative because you can't see past your own hatred of Donald. I've said we are where we are...investment for me in our current clime is probably a positive step. Investment in a footballing structure and strategy is a positive step.....I don't yearn for a "takeover", I'd just like to see better performances on the pitch. They are more likely to occur with investment and structure in place. If SD is involved I really don't care.
Click to expand...

So what was your original post meaning?
 
KittenMittens said:
This is not true.

Ellis Short narrowed the field down to Donald and only Donald, because he was the only one prepared to give him money from the club's future income (the parachute payments). That's it. That's the reason. There were other offers, Short just put the EFL in a position where they couldn't say no.

When Short went into the EFL meeting and said that it was either Donald or administration, what he meant was that he wouldn't go back to any of the other bidders and try to work something out with more reputable people, he would just put the club into administration to spite the EFL. You can bet that we would have been blaming the EFL at that point, rather than counting our blessings for avoiding Donald and co.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. We were inches from going under as will come out in some bodies book one day.
 
Left For Dead said:
That is incorrect. We were inches from going under as will come out in some bodies book one day.
Click to expand...

We were, but that was because Short manipulated the situation to give the EFL no choice. There was at least one other bid, if not more, so there was no need for the club to be in administration with willing buyers around unless Short wanted to do so.

I can tell you from within that bid, that the Madrid half of Madrox were pushed into dropping their involvement by Donald, who was only a minority shareholder in the original deal. Funnily enough, within a few days he and Short were able to figure out a way for him to afford a £40m deal, at least £25m of which came from the club's coffers.

All of these things are related. The only thing we don't know is whether Donald identified the Parachute payments loophole, or Short did, but either way, both of them are complicit in funneling money out of SAFC for their own benefit at a point where we desperately needed that cash.
 
Last edited:
6inarow said:
But that is a re-distribution share percentage to a newco consortium with a 50/50 stake (between Sartori & KLD) controlling 76% of Madrox/Sunderland...That is a takeover of control
Click to expand...
What if the owners group Santi and mbk own say 80%. But what if they disagree this will lead to inertia and a larger than they deserve input by the disaster duo.If Donald owns anythinging near 20, % he will hold up investment in the club as he won't have the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk ..........
6inarow said:
But that is a re-distribution share percentage to a newco consortium with a 50/50 stake (between Sartori & KLD) controlling 76% of Madrox/Sunderland...That is a takeover of control
Click to expand...
The desperate owners group Santi and mbk own say 80%. But what if they disagree this will lead to inertia and a larger than they deserve input by the disaster duo.If Donald owns anythinging near 20, % he will hold up investment in the club as he won't have the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk ..........
Lord Potts said:
You do realise that this astute financial observation is being made by someone whose own company was compulsorily wound up by the Court only a couple of weeks a go .
It's a touch of the Pot and Kettle to say the least
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...
Who borrows money at s high interest rate in this climate.........interest rates are as low as they ever have been...........otherwise boris wouldn't have spent 22 billion on tat.
 
Last edited:
oddbod said:
What if the owners group Santi and mbk own say 80%. But what if they disagree this will lead to inertia and a larger than they deserve input by the disaster duo.If Donald owns anythinging near 20, % he will hold up investment in the club as he won't have the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk ..........
Click to expand...
Santi and MBK?

Do you mean Sartori and KLD?
 
oddbod said:
What if the owners group Santi and mbk own say 80%. But what if they disagree this will lead to inertia and a larger than they deserve input by the disaster duo.If Donald owns anythinging near 20, % he will hold up investment in the club as he won't have the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk ..........

The desperate owners group Santi and mbk own say 80%. But what if they disagree this will lead to inertia and a larger than they deserve input by the disaster duo.If Donald owns anythinging near 20, % he will hold up investment in the club as he won't have the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk ..........

Who borrows money at s high interest rate in this climate.........interest rates are as low as they ever have been...........otherwise boris wouldn't have spent 22 billion on tat.
Click to expand...

Consortium agreement
Whichever form of consortium is chosen, the legal rights and obligations of each member should be set out in a consortium agreement, also called a joint working agreement. The agreement should clearly outline the scope of what the consortium wishes to achieve, and identify the various members. The rights of duties of the partners should be clearly defined, and how risks and liabilities are to be apportioned if necessary. If there is to be a lead organisation, its role and powers should be set out. It is also vital to set out the duration of the agreement, and give thought to how and when an individual partner may exit from the agreement before the end of the term should they wish to do so.
 
oddbod said:
The desperate owners group Santi and mbk own say 80%. But what if they disagree this will lead to inertia and a larger than they deserve input by the disaster duo.If Donald owns anythinging near 20, % he will hold up investment in the club as he won't have the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk ..........
Click to expand...
He doesn’t need “the pro rata funds to keep up with Santi and the mbk(sic)”
Either extra funds are introduced as a “directors loan” or as consideration for new shares.

The former means that Donald doesn’t need to put anything in but it will sit on the balance sheet as a creditor until such time as it is converted to capital or written off.

In the case of new shares, Donald would have first refusal in the purchase of a pro-data share but if he is unable to purchase any more shares there’s nothing he can do about it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top