Foxes Trust...

[SilverFox]

why has MM missed his own deadline. Poor business practice if you ask me.

You'd probably have to ask MM that one.

 

[Foxes_Trust]

More answerable questions would be:

Is MM still sounding out options with the board (and via them, shareholders)?

Yes with the board (& therefore the shareholders within the board), but not other shareholders, that has to wait for a formal offer as per the takeover panel rules

Are some still shareholders seeking clarification of what the bid might be?

Yes, awaiting the official bid

Why are you in favour of the MM bid?

We can't state we are in favour at this stage, we need the formal document to examine the detail, we have previously explained in our website articles some of the issues we required answers too.

At the end of the day each shareholder has to view what is being offered & then compare that with what the club will have to do if the deal doesn't go ahead

 

[SilverFox]

Do you know if Milan will be or was supposed to be at the game tomorrow?

 

[Dour]

Thanks for telling me what I should have asked mate

I'm sorry. I wasn't having a go. I was just trying to see ways of unpicking this one piece at a time.

 

[Foxes_Trust]

Do you know if Milan will be or was supposed to be at the game tomorrow?

Don't know

 

[SilverFox]

I know mate, I'm not really that anal...thought I had best post the :icon_wink smilie just so you knew.

I think sometimes a lot is lost in translation on message boards...I wasn't being pissy with you. Everyone wants to know what is going on and your questions were very sensible.

 

[Dour]

We can't state we are in favour at this stage

Thanks for the reply in general. But it may be helpful just to point out my reading what you've said here. You are in favour - you just can't state it yet (at least until the full facts are in).

 

[newtonfox]

Do you know if Milan will be or was supposed to be at the game tomorrow?

yes

 

[SilverFox]

Don't know

Fair enough.

Thanks for answering our questions though. I think obviously because we have reached the 15th it is natural for people to speculate and want to know why nothing seems to be happening.

I guess all we need really know is that both parties are making every effort to try to reach an agreeable conclusion...and that as reported in some quarters the deal is not on its last legs/verge of collapse.

 

[SilverFox]

yes

to which newts? Will be or was supposed to be?

 

[newtonfox]

to which newts? Will be or was supposed to be?

still going as far as i know

 

[SilverFox]

still going as far as i know

Cheers mate. :icon_wink

 

[Dour]

I think sometimes a lot is lost in translation on message boards...I wasn't being pissy with you.

No worries (and thank you).

 

[Chrysalis]

We have no new news from the club today and can't say a great deal due to the legal processes in place.

It's not about hiding as MadFox has posted, it's about following the legal rules laid out by the takeover panel

Our understanding is the talks are still ongoing with the aim of a formal bid document then being put in front of shareholders which is likely to gain approval

Given that still hasn't happened, we can't see the deal going ahead in 2006.

If you claiming the deal isnt dead do you have a reason as to why there is ongoing talks when a provisional bid was approved?

 

[foxpodder]

The point is this - the only people who ACTUALLY know what is going on are the Board (including the FT observer) and MM. Anyone who says the deal is going through or the deal is dead is summising from gossip and rumour - unless they themselves are a board member or MM! As for the FT answers - what else can they say? Seems reasonable to me.

So as they say in scouse land "calm down - calm down!" We'll all know soon enough one way or another. Then we can start the other type of rumours ... such as my mate says the bin man at the Walkers saw Lee Hendrie in reception!

Foxpodder

 

[alex]

The point is this - the only people who ACTUALLY know what is going on are the Board (including the FT observer) and MM. Anyone who says the deal is going through or the deal is dead is summising from gossip and rumour - unless they themselves are a board member or MM! As for the FT answers - what else can they say? Seems reasonable to me.

So as they say in scouse land "calm down - calm down!" We'll all know soon enough one way or another. Then we can start the other type of rumours ... such as my mate says the bin man at the Walkers saw Lee Hendrie in reception!

Foxpodder

Top post Sir....

 

[bocadillo]

With any takeover there will be various "issues" that need to be resolved, as each party looks for the best deal for them. The LCFC board have a duty to both act in the long term interests of the club & the interests of the shareholders who appointed them (those 2 interests can both compliment & conflict)

Only the shareholders on the actual board would be aware of the current deal on offer, the rest are waiting for the official document, so wouldn't be in a position to oppose or back anything. The shareholders will have received no update since Nov 18th.

As we have the Observer at board meetings, Trust representatives are up to speed with developments, but can't reveal anything & would be unwise to do so, as things change as the days progress (slowly).

We have heard various stories/theories about which shareholders may oppose the deal and the differing reasons why, but no shareholder has directly told us that they oppose it.

Don't forget 2/3 shareholders could not stop the deal if the rest were in favour.

That's not true. Two or three shareholders, who between them hold more than 10% of the shares of a company, could prevent a purchaser obtaining the 90% of shares which would allow him to have an automatic right to buy out the other 10%. If a purchaser was only interested in owning 100% of a company, the dissent of these two to three shareholders would effectively block the sale.

Therefore if MM is only interested in owning 100% of the club, there are various combinations of 2 or 3 shareholders who could prevent him doing so.

 

[Boy Genius]

That's not true. Two or three shareholders, who between them hold more than 10% of the shares of a company, could prevent a purchaser obtaining the 90% of shares which would allow him to have an automatic right to buy out the other 10%. If a purchaser was only interested in owning 100% of a company, the dissent of these two to three shareholders would effectively block the sale.

Therefore if MM is only interested in owning 100% of the club, there are various combinations of 2 or 3 shareholders who could prevent him doing so.

and you would have thought the FT would have known that with all their business knowledge....... :icon_roll

 

[Durham Fox]

That's not true. Two or three shareholders, who between them hold more than 10% of the shares of a company, could prevent a purchaser obtaining the 90% of shares which would allow him to have an automatic right to buy out the other 10%. If a purchaser was only interested in owning 100% of a company, the dissent of these two to three shareholders would effectively block the sale.

Therefore if MM is only interested in owning 100% of the club, there are various combinations of 2 or 3 shareholders who could prevent him doing so.

Which is the case, he will only proceed with 100% in favour

 

[Foxes_Trust]

If you claiming the deal isnt dead do you have a reason as to why there is ongoing talks when a provisional bid was approved?

The approval on Nov 18th was to explore the indicative offer further.

That indicative offer lacked much detail, so the agreement was to explore further & get a full understanding of what exactly was being offered.

An official bid document is still awaited