WMS Who Owns Sunderland AFC?

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Who else was willing to pay Short what he wanted?

why is it absolutely necessary?

Transparancy in football is becoming an increasingly worry/threat. We even have MP's now campaigning for it. If we don't know who or what is responsible for the governance or running of a football club then nobody can be held accountable for their actions.

Recent times have seen the Oystons dismantle a football club, Steve Dale dismantle a football club, dodgy dealings seeing Rangers thrown out the league and we now have a Saudi state owning a football club, with dubious at best, connections with arguably the most destructive tyrant on the planet.

They should absolutely not be protected by a cloak of invisibility, a dodgy offshore umbrella company or two, by 'fans' running around with their fingers in their ears screaming, or by an avoidance of providing very basic information for nearly a year despite several promises to do so.

The notion that Steve Dale and KLD both act the same way as owners of a club, so it makes no difference if we know which one owns us, is bewildering tbh.

Instead of speculating, on who has what shares would it not be wiser, to wait on the RAWA mins, and see what has been wrote and agreed.

They've had nearly a year to provide the info tbf. I don't see any issue in talking about it in the interim. Their silence on the matter, up until this point at least, has only fueled the interest so presumably they have been content with any speculation.

It's quite rightly being highlighted leading up to another meeting and posts now or off the back of that.

 

[Hep]

Transparancy in football is becoming an increasingly worry/threat. We even have MP's now campaigning for it. If we don't know who or what is responsible for the governance or running of a football club then nobody can be held accountable for their actions.

Recent times have seen the Oystons dismantle a football club, Steve Dale dismantle a football club, dodgy dealings seeing Rangers thrown out the league and we now have a Saudi state owning a football club, with dubious at best, connections with arguably the most destructive tyrant on the planet.

They should absolutely not be protected by a cloak of invisibility, a dodgy offshore umbrella company or two, by 'fans' running around with their fingers in their ears screaming, or by an avoidance of providing very basic information for nearly a year despite several promises to do so.

The notion that Steve Dale and KLD both act the same way as owners of a club, so it makes no difference if we know which one owns us, is bewildering tbh.


They've had nearly a year to provide the info tbf. I don't see any issue in talking about it in the interim. Their silence on the matter, up until this point at least, has only fueled the interest so presumably they have been content with any speculation.

It's quite rightly being highlighted leading up to another meeting and posts now or off the back of that.

So if we get told, what changes?

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

So if we get told, what changes?

Depends on what we get told.

 

[Hep]

Depends on what we get told.

Let's cover both scenarios.

We get told KLD owns the club - Nothing changes.
We get told KLD doesn't own the club - Nothing changes.

 

[stevo]

So if we get told, what changes?

We get the chance to jump up and scream our heads off that the 3 amigos are still here.Then when Sartori brings a load of south americans over we back peddle and say well done Juan ,we knew he wasnt like them other 2.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Let's cover both scenarios.

We get told KLD owns the club - Nothing changes.
We get told KLD doesn't own the club - Nothing changes.

If we get told KLD doesn't own the club do you not think people will question why we've been told for a year he does and what those lies would lead to?

 

[The Cabbage]

It's absolutely necessary to know who owns the club. Not sure why so many people are so desperate not to know tbh.

I'm not all that fussed about who owns the club in general (save for some sort of undercover headchopper takeover). All I'm really bothered about is that the club is run competently - or even, God forbid, well! That's where it becomes important in these specific conditions for me. I want to know that the worst, most incompetent owners in the history of SAFC are no longer anywhere near a position of influence at the club. Any involvement from the leftovers of the Donald regime is likely to result in disaster given their unbroken run of terrible decisions and actions. That's why it is so jarring to see perennial failures like Methven even insinuating involvement on official club business.

 

[kildaremackem]

Let's cover both scenarios.

We get told KLD owns the club - Nothing changes.
We get told KLD doesn't own the club - Nothing changes.

if he dont it will impact fan sentiment and expectations

 

[Grumpy Old Man]

Details weren't disclosed of the other interested parties werent disclosed (it would be strange if they were). I think @GarethQ and the lads at WMS could vouch for there being other another interested party who were wanting to take the club on better terms than Donald. i.e. have the parachute money go into the club.

Which is precisely why Short turned it down. He wanted to limit his losses by, in effect, having the club pay off the last £25m of the loan rather than him.

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

I'm not all that fussed about who owns the club in general (save for some sort of undercover headchopper takeover). All I'm really bothered about is that the club is run competently - or even, God forbid, well! That's where it becomes important in these specific conditions for me. I want to know that the worst, most incompetent owners in the history of SAFC are no longer anywhere near a position of influence at the club. Any involvement from the leftovers of the Donald regime is likely to result in disaster given their unbroken run of terrible decisions and actions. That's why it is so jarring to see perennial failures like Methven even insinuating involvement on official club business.

The ownership is an indication of that. After we've been led to believe Donald and Methven are nothing but a lingering fart but they turn out to have a 49% share then there will be reason to believe they still have an input (regardless of a 51% share majority from KLD) which would be supported by Methven going away on club duty, KLD appointing Satori and their lawyer (another layer of track covering) to the board and the deliberate ignorance of share distribution.

A lot of good will towards KLD will be lost at best, and we would be looking at a similar level of misrepresentation as what Donald and Methven spent years peddling in terms of clarity with fan pressure and a position where the club is again disconnected with it's fanbase because the owners again couldn't be honest.

That's not to say they do have a 49% share. We don't know but they have created that speculation and failed for nearly a year to acknowledge it.

 

[Freddie the Greek]

Instead of speculating, on who has what shares would it not be wiser, to wait on the RAWA mins, and see what has been wrote and agreed.

When are they out?

 

[samaistonsrightfoot]

When are they out?

Rawa said this morning they are doing them but they will need signing off by the groups bjt it shouldn't be long.

 

[CissesUnderpants9]

Let's cover both scenarios.

We get told KLD owns the club - Nothing changes.
We get told KLD doesn't own the club - Nothing changes.

I don’t know you could be so confident about the second part of that statement given the bad feeling among many fans of the statements of certain points parasites Whom own shares, have made.

 

[North Yorks Mackem]

Which is precisely why Short turned it down. He wanted to limit his losses by, in effect, having the club pay off the last £25m of the loan rather than him.

Ultimately the sale happened. And Donald said (more than once) he would repay a sum of money to the club equitable to parachute payments, and it looks like that isn't going to happen in full with a significant sum seemingly outstanding.

 

[DonaldDownTheWing]

I don’t know you could be so confident about the second part of that statement given the bad feeling among many fans of the statements of certain points parasites Whom own shares, have made.

Agreed. There would be voiced dissatisfaction at least, protests at most.

 

[kildaremackem]

Ultimately the sale happened. And Donald said (more than once) he would repay a sum of money to the club equitable to parachute payments, and it looks like that isn't going to happen in full with a significant sum seemingly outstanding.

if they remian shareholders its more likely he will pay it back than if they leave..thats the problem..he stays money goes in but rightly, the fans are annoyed he is around..he leaves...fans are happy he is gone, but the club doesnt get much more of the cash back than it probably already has.

 

[CissesUnderpants9]

Agreed. There would be voiced dissatisfaction at least, protests at most.

So in effect, something would change, if not the mood among the fan base, but many who are already looking for some way to voice there displeasure with the situation could then write blogs,and voice discontent at the games, even if it’s just one person that does not lead to unity among the fan base, i would also go as far as to say many maybe upset, that the club would have lied to them for over a year, but something would change.

 

[Soton Pete]

Transparancy in football is becoming an increasingly worry/threat. We even have MP's now campaigning for it. If we don't know who or what is responsible for the governance or running of a football club then nobody can be held accountable for their actions.

Recent times have seen the Oystons dismantle a football club, Steve Dale dismantle a football club, dodgy dealings seeing Rangers thrown out the league and we now have a Saudi state owning a football club, with dubious at best, connections with arguably the most destructive tyrant on the planet.

They should absolutely not be protected by a cloak of invisibility, a dodgy offshore umbrella company or two, by 'fans' running around with their fingers in their ears screaming, or by an avoidance of providing very basic information for nearly a year despite several promises to do so.

The notion that Steve Dale and KLD both act the same way as owners of a club, so it makes no difference if we know which one owns us, is bewildering tbh.


They've had nearly a year to provide the info tbf. I don't see any issue in talking about it in the interim. Their silence on the matter, up until this point at least, has only fueled the interest so presumably they have been content with any speculation.

It's quite rightly being highlighted leading up to another meeting and posts now or off the back of that.

Who is the most destructive tyrant on the planet?

 

[CissesUnderpants9]

if they remian shareholders its more likely he will pay it back than if they leave..thats the problem..he stays money goes in but rightly, the fans are annoyed he is around..he leaves...fans are happy he is gone, but the club doesnt get much more of the cash back than it probably already has.

A case of which is better In the longer term, many would say seeing the back of the worse set of owners the clubs ever had, others may disagree, me i think they are holding on in the Hope they can sell up there shares once we reach the premiership and triple the price and be off into the sunset having made a profit.

 

[kildaremackem]

A case of which is better In the longer term, many would say seeing the back of the worse set of owners the clubs ever had, others may disagree, me i think they are holding on in the Hope they can sell up there shares once we reach the premiership and triple the price and be off into the sunset having made a profit.

well they may do but the point is..if they want to stick around until the premier league....its going to cost them..because its unlikely the club could get to thePrem without shareholders needing to put lots of cash in...so it will cost them a fortune to wait until promotion to the prem and get the profit you envisage..and thats the irony..sticking around a hugely loss making and capital intensive business for an easy profit is not a thing.