• 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.

Confirmed KLD only owns 41%

Status
Not open for further replies.

Guinness Guzzler said:
A very good suggestion. I've mentioned to RAWA that if he doesn't attend it's yet another slap in the face of the fans. But aye, now we know the split there's actually very little point in having a meeting unless kld is there. Most of the things the fans will want answers to aren't going to be able to be properly addressed by speakman or Davison. I imagine it'll go ahead but I think I agree with you that it might as well be cancelled if he isn't going to be there
Click to expand...
The timing isn't ideal and doesn't give RAWA long to digest info. But like you say very little point in discussing those key issues (which let's be honest significantly outweigh any fan experience issues they may have wanted to raise) if KLD isn't going to be there. Also, they need to understand the strength of feeling on the continuation of these half truths. I'm not sure KLD fully understands.how this will be received by many.
 
Gaz said:
This from the club & SD suggest KLD as a controlling shareholder. Been very careful with wording since haven’t they 😡

You must be logged on to see external links
Click to expand...

When you read it back now, this was very clear drafted by lawyers to be technically correct, but mask/misrepresent the truth.

Getting technical - the FCA defines "controlling shareholder" as anyone with more than 30% of the voting rights.

You must be logged on to see external links


So they could argue that KLD meets this definition even if he doesn't actually have voting control over the club. That said, if we're applying this definition from the FCA - then Stewart Donald is also a "controlling shareholder". Something the club neglected to mention in it's f***ing press release - not to mention every single reference to the ownership structure since.
 
KittenMittens said:
Agree with this - KLD and Sartori will be in it together, but I guarantee at that shareholding, there will be lots they can't do without consent from Donald, and what worries me is that ultimately, we have a situation where together, Donald, Sartori and Methven collectively still own the majority stake in our club, just as they did before KLD joined.
Click to expand...

There are lots of factors here.

First thing - these are not the respective shareholdings in Sunderland. They are the holdings in Mercator. Mercator owns 100% of the club. Until we know what jurisdiction Mercator is in, what that means in relation to shareholder motions is anyone's guess.

Next thing is to look at board composition.

Sunderland - KLD, Treuer, Levin. 100% KLD.

SAFC - KLD (KLD), Treuer (KLD), Levin (KLD), Davison (KLD)), Sartori (probably KLD), Vambuca (presumed SD), Jones (?)

So, in terms of day to day control of both companies, KLD is clearly in charge.

The biggest problem is how future funding arrangements work, an area for RAWA to push at perhaps.

Above all, we need clarity from tomorrow's meeting.
 
If he has over 50% voting shares/rights - who doesn't have as much voting power as they should?

Overall very poorly handled by the club.
 
It’s amazing how badly they have mismanaged everything since the morning of the Doncaster game onwards. Our fan base has gone from excitedly snapping up tickets and a 38k crowd for a league one match to utterly deflated all trust in the club destroyed.

You’d think they were trying to make a mess of things because they’re so spectacularly bad at running it.

We need to let them know that there is no other option, they have to go.
 
Roger said:
You must be logged on to see external links



So I think the question needs to be asked at tomorrows meeting - What is the distribution of the voting shares?
Click to expand...
from the same page:

With the majority of large public companies, for example, a shareholder with much less than 50% of the outstanding shares may still have a lot of influence at the company. Single shareholders with as little as 5% to 10% ownership can push for seats on the board or enact changes at shareholder meetings by publicly lobbying for them, giving them control.
 
Hawyatt Earp said:
We’ve all been made fools of.

This is it for me. I’m angry enough at the endless failure of the players in this division. But to be lied to by the new owner and to have thieves and con men still running the club after over a year of pretending otherwise. It’s disgraceful

This isn’t my club any more and won’t be until Madrox has gone.

All the best to those who persevere. I’ll be back one day soon I hope
Click to expand...
Wheatsheaf been had anarl. The whole f***ing time. His source is a disgrace
 
SAFC2403 said:
isnt one of the board members something to do with Donald? Vumbaca apparently represented madrox during their original purchase from Short - so they are the representation on the board for madrox.

the whole thing has been a f***ing "fakeover"
Click to expand...
He’s their lawyer
 
chriswallace85 said:
Has anyone in this thread shared the rest of the article???
Click to expand...

Not sure if they have but article below:

You must be logged on to see external links
chairman Kyril Louis-Dreyfus has admitted he owns just a 41 per cent stake in the League One club, The Athletic can reveal.

Louis-Dreyfus, who became the EFL’s youngest chairman aged 23 when first arriving into English football 12 months ago, has only ever stated he has a “controlling stake” in Sunderland.

The previous ownership group, comprising of Stewart Donald, Juan Sartori and Charlie Methven, were known to have retained a shareholding but the club previously told fans in November that details could not be revealed due to “confidentiality clauses” in the takeover deal.

Fans have been promised “openness and transparency” by Louis-Dreyfus, son of Robert — the former owner of Marseille — and it is now known that the Swiss owns less than a majority shareholding.

In response to questions put to Sunderland by The Athletic, a club statement to supporters confirmed Louis-Dreyfus owns 41 per cent, with Donald — who previously held a majority between 2018 and 2021 — still holding a 34 per cent stake.

Sartori, a Uruguayan businessman and political figure, continues to own his original 20 per cent stake, with Methven also retaining five per cent.

It means Sunderland’s pre-existing ownership group owns a greater combined shareholding than Louis-Dreyfus but the club are eager to stress that it is the current chairman that is still the key decision-maker ahead of his first anniversary at the Stadium of Light this week.

What does this actually mean for
You must be logged on to see external links
?​

The club believe the details have no impact on the day-to-day operations. The announcement that confirmed Louis-Dreyfus had struck a deal with Donald in December 2020 said he was taking on a “controlling stake” in Sunderland and the same message has been repeated.

Outlining the precise shareholding, though, underlines the continued presence of the club’s former owners, who had become increasingly unpopular when failing to deliver promotion back to the Championship.

Although a football board headed up by Louis-Dreyfus works independently without the input of Donald and Methven, the ownership group are known to have a say on some financial decisions within the club. They, like Louis-Dreyfus, have funding responsibilities.

What has Louis-Dreyfus said?​

In a letter to supporters groups ahead of a quarterly meeting held tomorrow, Sunderland’s chairman has said: “As previously stated, I have executive control of the running of the football club — something that was a fundamental requirement upon the purchase of my shares — and the executive management team inclusive of Steve Davison and Kristjaan Speakman report directly into me on a day-to-day basis.

“All major strategic decisions relating to the running of the club continue to be taken by the board of directors, compromising of myself, Maurice Louis-Dreyfus, David Jones, Steve Davison, Igor Levin, Patrick Treuer, Juan Sartori and Simon Vumbaca.

“Over the past 12 months, SAFC has required significant shareholder funding as part of our ongoing investment within the club and as a result of the lasting financial challenges from the pandemic.

“Substantial investment will continue to be required moving forward to ensure we fulfil our collective objectives and all shareholders remain wholly committed to honouring their respective financial obligations.”
 
Wearside Wanderer II said:
My take on it… might be shyte but I don’t care.

KLD was naive enough to go with the narrative set up by the Del boys originally.
He wasn’t overly happy after the last meeting and wanted to come clean about it.
Now it’s out my views are Jews hoping the pressure on the twats will lower their values of their shares.

Or meringue
Click to expand...

Christ some autocorrect going on here!
Nowt to do with Jews ffs!
Should say my views are he’s hoping the pressure on the twats!!
 
Yeah I think KLD is still the horse we need to tie our cart to. I think he's got involved for the right reasons, but I wonder whether the dynamics of how this would look, or that of SD/JS/CM vs the fans was properly communicated to him.

Sad day this. Obviously you have suspicions, but you always hope they're just a nagging doubt. The more this has dragged on the more obvious it was that something was very wrong.
 
Sweeper said:
When you read it back now, this was very clear drafted by lawyers to be technically correct, but mask/misrepresent the truth.

Getting technical - the FCA defines "controlling shareholder" as anyone with more than 30% of the voting rights.

You must be logged on to see external links


So they could argue that KLD meets this definition even if he doesn't actually have voting control over the club. That said, if we're applying this definition from the FCA - then Stewart Donald is also a "controlling shareholder". Something the club neglected to mention in it's f***ing press release - not to mention every single reference to the ownership structure since.
Click to expand...

Yep its written very carefully to not lie but also not disclose the truth. Sly
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top