• 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.
gards2 said:
This supposed new arrangement has been going on for months! I'm starting to think this really is, a massive pile of bullshit!
Click to expand...

I think Wigan and Derby were in front of us in the EFL que to be fair....ours is getting seen to now by all accounts
 

Tin Soldier said:
Sauce ??
Click to expand...
no source mate.....Wigan proposed takeover went to the EFL and got rejected, Derbys went in front of them and went through (I think)....various outlets have said (not confirmed) that ours is in front of the EFL now (even discussed by Tom White on a recent podcast which he believed was the case)...so im going with that...I expect it would be one at a time
 
samaistonsrightfoot said:
I've read it, pointed out it's suggestion, and you've continually distanced yourself from it. So far so you are now refusing to comment on it and are deflecting.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a suggestion. It was a statement that future investment could come Sartori. We accepted that at the time and now it could be coming to fruition. I don't have an issue with it as it's not something I can influence.
 
JERUDONG No.10 said:
It wasn't a suggestion. It was a statement that future investment could come Sartori. We accepted that at the time and now it could be coming to fruition. I don't have an issue with it as it's not something I can influence.
Click to expand...

It was indeed. And we did accept it at the time but over time things change so I'm not sure of the relevance of it.

Is it just takeovers you don't have issues with due to influence or do you apply that to everything?
 
KittenMittens said:
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.
Click to expand...
Even if short did funnel money out of the club he was still millions out of pocket
 
Mickdundee said:
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.
Click to expand...
Thanks for making it very clear!
 
KittenMittens said:
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.
Click to expand...
What is the provenance of this gen? How do you know about it? None of this is in the public domain.
 
KittenMittens said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well, short has lost tens of millions on is, hi fault. Donald had an ego that he cant fulfill anvtrie to look with grigg despite hi advice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top