Leicester City set to unveil third members in the consortium

[homer]

Bet the club are seriously shitting it now.....

 

[Blue Maniac]

If the club do read this, I'd like them to take note of the following:

1. Your stance on the Fosse Boys is entirely correct. Don't bend at all. Please.
2. I will never ever pay twenty quid for an umbrella. Just saying, like.
3. Some of your ticket office staff could be more polite to the people who pay their fecking wages. I spend approximately two grand a year following this club, I don't expect to be talked to like some misbehaving child. That said, whatever you're paying Lucy and Jim, it's not enough.

That is all for now.

 

[Steven]

If the club do read this, I'd like them to take note of the following:

1. Your stance on the Fosse Boys is entirely correct. Don't bend at all. Please.
2. I will never ever pay twenty quid for an umbrella. Just saying, like.
3. Some of your ticket office staff could be more polite to the people who pay their fecking wages. I spend approximately two grand a year following this club, I don't expect to be talked to like some misbehaving child. That said, whatever you're paying Lucy and Jim, it's not enough.

That is all for now.

If the club do read this, then I am sure they have already formed an opinion about the content of your posts.

 

[Miles Away]

If the club do read this, then I am sure they have already formed an opinion about the content of your posts.

"...a load of old wank." - Macky

To coin a phrase.

 

[Blue Maniac]

If the club do read this, then I am sure they have already formed an opinion about the content of your posts.

If anyone but you had said it, it wouldn't be as funny :icon_lol: :icon_lol: :icon_lol:

 

[Dour]

Why not follow the money? It would seem likely to me that it would be easy enough to trace the company(-ies) owning Leicester City or else the League fit and proper test is worth **** all. :icon_conf

The holding company is offshore - British Virgin Islands, I think. Anyway, some jurisdiction where they don't and won't disclose ownership. Who (other than the MOF and the new owners) will know where, or how much, money was paid for the transfer of shares in that company?

Leeds have already shown that the fit and proper person is worth **** all anyway. Unless you're going to insist on ownership in the UK, or in countries with similar levels of transparency in private companies, the rules are going to be unenforcable.

 

[Dour]

1. Your stance on the Fosse Boys is entirely correct. Don't bend at all. Please.

I shouldn't worry about this. Since the Fosse Boys definition of support seems to be anything but watching the football (walking out every other match, supporting bitter rivals, twatting around in the concourse rather than going to their seats, and now turning their backs on the match to show their support) it can't be long before they decide that the best way to show their true fanship is to go to another club.

 

[Filthy Rich]

Without going into details on the process, it would be accurate to say that the FL think a Trust would be the most appropriate body to raise concerns over the transparency process not yielding information to fans as intended.

In summary, the fans should make the complaint to the FL, who would then act.

From our direct conversations with The Football League during this takeover ratification it has become clear that the FL have regular dialogue with Supporters Direct, and have a full understanding of the kind of issues where Trusts are likely to get involved

Do not overstand where you are coming from. If everything is finalised why would the club not confirm who all the investors are? The club is a business. Until you are 100% certain of things in business you do not make statements. Sometimes the naivity of people on here is frightening.

 

[Dour]

Until you are 100% certain of things in business you do not make statements. Sometimes the naivity of people on here is frightening.

Irony doesn't always come across well on this forum.

 

[Foxes_Trust]

Do not overstand where you are coming from. If everything is finalised why would the club not confirm who all the investors are? The club is a business. Until you are 100% certain of things in business you do not make statements. Sometimes the naivity of people on here is frightening.

If those investing are not finalised, then the Football League would not ratify the deal.

If they have ratified, then the investors are known & should be revealed

 

[pork pie fox]

Please forgive me for being ignorant if I miss something obvious. If the original take-over was solely by Top & his dad (or whoever has been initially approved), why does this preclude someone else joining the consortium later on and being approved at a future date? There is a lot of talk about the mystery investor when surely it may not be the case that he/she is even involved right now. Does the deal as it stands at the moment stop someone else joining in further down the line?

By the way I'm absolutely fecked and this has taken me a long time to write so apologies in advance for any stupidness

 

[David Gwilliam]

If the club do read this, I'd like them to take note of the following:

1. Your stance on the Fosse Boys is entirely correct. Don't bend at all. Please.
2. I will never ever pay twenty quid for an umbrella. Just saying, like.
3. Some of your ticket office staff could be more polite to the people who pay their fecking wages. I spend approximately two grand a year following this club, I don't expect to be talked to like some misbehaving child. That said, whatever you're paying Lucy and Jim, it's not enough.

That is all for now.

Who are Lucy and Jim?

I would add a (4) Thank you for getting rid of Sousa and appointing Sven.

 

[Jeff]

Who are Lucy and Jim?

They work in the ticket office.

 

[Mawsley]

By the way I'm absolutely fecked and this has taken me a long time to write so apologies in advance for any stupidness

I <3 U

 

[Macky]

I loves it when the trustophobes get all indignant and pissy.
Foxes Trust, gggggrrrrrrrrr, comin over here taking our jerbs, can't speak the language, gggggggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr, how dare they? Not fit to rattle buckets or have pointless meetings, gggggggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

 

[city-faithful]

Rabble...rabble, rabble, rabble...GOAL!

 

[Filthy Rich]

If those investing are not finalised, then the Football League would not ratify the deal.

If they have ratified, then the investors are known & should be revealed

If the Football League know who they are then let them disclose it. Simple!

 

[Chrysalis]

The Football League were promised by the club that the club would release the information to fans quickly after the deal was ratified, they will be far from happy that hasn't happened.

The FL will not want the effectiveness of the new transparency rules brought into question the very first time they have been applied.

Well the FL have themselves to blame, I would have told the club reveal the owner or you dont get ratified take it or leave it.

Now its ratified what can they do? unratify it and look like idiots.

 

[The Old Fox]

If those investing are not finalised, then the Football League would not ratify the deal.

If they have ratified, then the investors are known & should be revealed

Please believe that this question is not meant to be as rude as it comes across in print;

Why is this important: if the deal is ratified and the League are happy that this person is a fit owner, what are you going to do with the name when it comes to light?

 

[Filthy Rich]

Please believe that this question is not meant to be as rude as it comes across in print;

Why is this important: if the deal is ratified and the League are happy that this person is a fit owner, what are you going to do with the name when it comes to light?

Not rude at all. Perfectly valid point.