SAFC Takeover Latest

Status
Not open for further replies.
Excuse my ignorance and i’m not doubting GOM posts and i’m grateful for them but I thought over a week ago it was just a case of the FA giving us the all clear?? Surely if there is issues with due diligence then we aren’t as advanced with the takeover as we thought?
 


George Kaplan said:
Could someone do a brief description of the amusing straws and outlandish fantasies that many on this board are currently grasping for ...followed by the factual reality of the situation, for the mildly skeptical and/or mildly curious among us?
Click to expand...
"Now hands that do dishes can feel as soft as your face with mild green Fairy Liquid".
molthemackem said:
Much like the doctor but more senior.
Click to expand...
Ooh err Matron.
 
Last edited:
GBSAFC said:
thanks...
so in the simplest terms this is merely a prep for a transition of ownership, rather than evidence an explicit transfer of ownership.
corrective actions.... that term is disconcertingly vague
Click to expand...

Americans are about solutions, not problems. They want to implement solutions to historic problems before the announcement. More explicitly, if there's to be a media event, they don't want anyone at it who's going to be history a few days later. To be honest, I think that they should just scrub any media event, simply say they've bought the shares and crack on with what looks like being a purge of epic proportions.
 
As You Were said:
Excuse my ignorance and i’m not doubting GOM posts and i’m grateful for them but I thought over a week ago it was just a case of the FA giving us the all clear?? Surely if there is issues with due diligence then we aren’t as advanced with the takeover as we thought?
Click to expand...

It never was about the FA. It's about dealing with the issues raised in due diligence and starting with a blank piece of paper. The delays have always been about post-acquusition, not the deal itself.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
It costs a whole lot more to form a company in Delaware to own the shares in the UK company, and have blue chip lawyers in both jurisdictions do it though.
Click to expand...
I’d say you’re right on the nose there. That’s me cheered up a bit.
I was always a bit sceptical about the value of the companies house formation as info tbh. Mainly because when working in Covent Garden a smbr would regularly stroll by our site with a file under his arm heading for Companies House...to form 75 Ltd Co’s or so. He reckoned no one else wanted to do it but he was glad to as it got him out of the office for half a day. Not seen him on here for ages.
 
Blyth_Pirate said:
Morrisons chips and three mini chicken fillets this lunchtime, comes in at £2.00, approx £1.50 cheaper than my Bolton nightmare. :lol:
Click to expand...
Easy fella you are letting that old Bolton pie comparison creep in again there. Think..... Gregg's "All day breakfast" pastie and deep breath.......
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
To be honest, I think that they should just scrub any media event, simply say they've bought the shares and crack on with what looks like being a purge of epic proportions.
Click to expand...

A purge of epic proportions ? Surely we've already had one when SD came. If another one is due it would surely mean quite a lot of those appointed under SD must be at risk - both on the football and business side.
 
The Jarra Wanderer said:
Can we all at least agree that those saying the takeover was done, were at best misinformed or at worst bullshiting?
Click to expand...

Depends what you call done. The Americans are committed to it, Fuhrman has bee describing himself to his friends as the new owner. What's not fully in place is the shape of the organisation after completion, and that's what's holding things up. It's like you but a new house, and then you can't move in because there's last minute snagging needs to be done.
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
It means only that the company which will be used to hold their shares in Sunderland has been formed. There have been no filings for Sunderland Limited itself. Now, they could have been appointed as directors of Sunderland, and the related filings haven't yet been done; we have no way of knowing that. The delay, as I've said consistently, is them wanting to put corrective actions in place before announcing.
Click to expand...

Whee's paying for the said actions m'lud?
 
Grumpy Old Man said:
Americans are about solutions, not problems. They want to implement solutions to historic problems before the announcement. More explicitly, if there's to be a media event, they don't want anyone at it who's going to be history a few days later. To be honest, I think that they should just scrub any media event, simply say they've bought the shares and crack on with what looks like being a purge of epic proportions.
Click to expand...


cheer fella
its a good point ... why not just say we have new ownership, end of.
judge them on what they do, rather than what they intend to do
let the purge happen and face the consequences thereafter
 
Last edited:
riffraff said:
I’d say you’re right on the nose there. That’s me cheered up a bit.
I was always a bit sceptical about the value of the companies house formation as info tbh. Mainly because when working in Covent Garden a smbr would regularly stroll by our site with a file under his arm heading for Companies House...to form 75 Ltd Co’s or so. He reckoned no one else wanted to do it but he was glad to as it got him out of the office for half a day. Not seen him on here for ages.
Click to expand...

Ah, the good old off-the-shelf company merchants. Easily spotted when the buyers couldn't be arsed to change the name, and you were dealing with some thing like Coalpanini Ltd t/a Fred Bloggs Builders Merchants. These new companies are bespoke jobs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top