RAWA Supporter's groups meeting with SAFC - 16th Feb
- Thread starter Guinness Guzzler
- Start date
Hep
Striker
Louis-Dreyfus acquires controlling interest in Sunderland AFC
Sunderland AFC today received approval from the English Football League for Kyril Louis-Dreyfus to acquire a controlling interest in the club, signalling the start of a new era on Wearside.
www.safc.com
A controlling interest has to be more than 50%, otherwise it's not controlling.
Did anyone ever care what the share percentages were under Cowie, Murray, Drummaville etc?
Last edited:
6inarow
Winger
Mate - Im with you on this and im not a keyboard accountant by any stretch but discussions on here have established that this is not always the case. He can have controlling interest by signed agreements but not own more than 50%Louis-Dreyfus acquires controlling interest in Sunderland AFC
Sunderland AFC today received approval from the English Football League for Kyril Louis-Dreyfus to acquire a controlling interest in the club, signalling the start of a new era on Wearside.
A controlling interest has to be more than 50%, otherwise it's not controlling.
Hep
Striker
That is technically correct but highly unlikely, and even it is was true, why do we care?
If there's an NDA I think it's pretty certain that we can't hear any more about it at present so I agree with those suggesting it shouldn't be a main focus of the meeting, we've asked the question and we've had the answer they're going to give (would be good to find out when the NDA expires mind but it's possible they can't even give that information out).
It doesn't surprise me that people are bothered though. We all hope that the club can progress. To do so we might well need investment. If, as would be expected from a "controlling stake", KLD has more than 50% of the shares and could, in theory, invest money and dilute the shareholdings of the others than that's good news for the club. We're then only limited by KLDs ambitions.
If, however, that isn't the case and he can't just dilute the others (however unlikely that may be), then we're still going to be massively limited until such time as Donald and co sell more of their shares. Not that I think this is the case, but if we find out that they didn't invest much in the pitch / the new lighting that was talked about, could that be because the others weren't willing? That is something which might be directly affecting our chances. That's the kind of thing people will be thinking whilst there's no full clarity.
Again, it's unlikely, but whilst we don't know for certain I'm not surprised that people ask about it. You'd expect KLD could dilute them. But equally, if I was Donald and I wanted to hold onto some shares to make profit down the line, I'm not sure why I'd agree to a takeover which allows kld to dilute me straight away, that's just signing away his potential profit.
In terms of the football direction it's obvious that KLD is calling the shots. It's his strategy. That's all well and good. I can see why people would have questions though, especially given the presence of an NDA, the history we've had with the owners, and the fact that there will naturally be concern whilst there's a possibility of a 5th season in league one.
You're welcome not to care, there's plenty who won't be bothered, but I can see reasons why some would and I wouldn't be criticising them for it
ooh its a corner
Full Back
Why do we care? I am in a group of 6 who have been supporters since the mid sixties, season ticket holders for 40 years, away games, using the club shop to buy strips, scarves, books, mugs and anything else they sell. Pints and pies from the kiosks. Travelling 20 mile round trips to fit new seats for a pie and the club being the focal point of our lives and your asking why do we care? We want, no deserve, to know that the chancers haven't still got their fingers in the till. Too much to ask? I don't think so
Hep
Striker
What will the percentages tell you the you don't already know.
SD/CM/JS are shareholders today, we already know that.
That's only true if you equate any involvement from SD with no investment at all, that is a big leap, especially as he's overseen KLD coming onboard.
There nothing to stop any of the shareholders investing or finding new investors.
Last edited:
ooh its a corner
Full Back
The higher the percentage the chancers own , the more money they could potentially screw out of our club before they finally f*** off. This affects the amount of money I'm prepared to spend supporting it. The higher percentage they own, the less I'd want to spend. Its OUR club not their's.
To be fair its not equating involvement from SD not as no investment at all, but as being likely to be less than the investment you'd get from a club 100% owned by KLD. We have no way of knowing if that's the case as we don't know how much kld would invest in an ideal situation, but it's fair to say that, at least in terms of wealth, he's in a position to spend a lot more than Donald is. Again, I'm not saying he would or he wouldn't, but there's that element of doubt. KLD might be happy spending £500k on some pitch investment but if £260k of it has to come from the others he might meet resistance. Its just to answer your question of why anyone cares. You don't and that's fair enough but you seem to be constantly posting about how no one should care, its like you've got a vested interest in people not even asking a question about it. People have legitimate reasons to be interested and to hope that kld gets a higher share or at least is capable of diluting to get a higher share. I think most fans would feel a lot better if they heard kld owned 90% of the club and could absolutely do what he wants.
Hep
Striker
Do you really think KLD has gone into this without being able to spend £500k freely?
As he has a controlling stake he can do what he wants.
what money are they screwing out of the club?
Also, what difference does it make if it's 51% or 90% - anything over 50% gives control.
Last edited:
I don't know what he's gone into, that's the point. It's unlikely he'd go in without being able to spend, but equally its unlikely that Donald would be determined to keep shares so he can cash in later if he's going to give KLD the ability to simply dilute all his shares straight away.
And 51% compared to 90% doesn't make much difference as long as he can dilute the others. But if its less than 50% but a majority of voting shares without the ability to dilute the others then it does make a difference.
You're obviously convinced he can, in effect, do what he wants, and you might be right. The trouble is, until we know for certain there is a chance, however slim, that you're wrong. So again, I'm just saying it's not surprising that people will be asking the question even if you personally aren't bothered. If they were simply to confirm that kld owns over 50% of the shares, including a majority of the voting shares, and is free to invest should he so wish with the ability to dilute other shareholdings then people would be satisfied. For me that would be worth them agreeing to remove the NDA.
I'm not personally too concerned at this point, but you've asked several times why anyone would be interested and that's why. Anyway, it's not really one I need to pass onto RAWA because they're well aware of it already and might feel that they've had as much of an answer as they can get at this stage, but there's no need to repeatedly criticise people for simply asking the question
ooh its a corner
Full Back
I said potentially screwing out of our club. Everyone knows Donald and Co didn't come to put money into the club, they came to take money out. Also, I think GG is right, you do seem to have a vested interest in us not knowing the share allocation, calling out everybody who does. Point is, if you did a poll asking supporters if they want to know who owns what in terms of share allocation, 99.9 % would. You would obviously be in the 0.1%
Hep
Striker
People think that SD would be opposed to having his shares diluted- that’s not the case. If it was me, I’d be keen to be diluted. Let me explain.
Let’s say I’m Sd and I own 15% of Safc and that’s worth 15% of £40m, so £6m
If Kld invests £60m, my shares get diluted to 6%, but Safc is now worth £100m as it’s now got an extra £60m in the bank. So my 6% is still worth £6m so I’ve lost nothing.
However, if invested wisely, that could get us promoted to the premier where the value of the club goes up again, say to £200m and now my 6% is worth £12m. So tbh diluting the shares, I’m better off.
I’m sure people are curious, but my point still stands. What will change depending on the answer, given it’s already confirmed that KLD has control?
Last edited:
Digsys dinner
Winger
Aye this!Ownership percentages
Can Donald and Charlie please never set foot in stadium again please?
Last edited:
KittenMittens
Midfield
I think to avoid getting bogged down in a question of ownership % that they're not going to answer, the questions should be:
- There is a concern among some fans that although KLD seems to have the club's best interests at heart, the previous owners could be a hindrance to putting future investment into the club by not being able to commit funds. How does the ownership structure work in this regard?
Red and White
Central Defender
Probably already been mentioned but ticketing fees needs to be questioned.
Maybe also a option to still buy online but collect from ticket office for free.
Last edited:
tynevalleyblackcat
Striker
You also said it has no relevance. It happens to be the tune we chant to regularly if we are winning and doing well which is why its only played at the end if we win. So its actually very relevant.
