Rumour

[SilverFox]

I heard a rumour at the Southampton game from a few people I know that a wealthy local business man might be considering buying out Leicester. I know this thread sounds like one of those dodgy, 'my best mate told me that...', threads and it probably is, but I felt I had a duty to pass on the info.

It is only a rumour, has no foundation and is simply hearsay! I just thought I should share it with you.

IMO it would be a good thing, because the way the club is currently run resembles a co-operative society, i.e. lots of people with small shareholidngs in the company, and no one with enough power to actually make a decision.

What does everyone else think?

 

[fcukcov]

as long as his name is Mr Abromovich and local covers russian oil fields ill be well chuffed.

 

[Yorkshire Vixen]

im not sure if i would want an abramovich-type owner id rather have someone take over who was a city fan and had the clubs best interests at heart

 

[fosseboy83]

im not sure if i would want an abramovich-type owner id rather have someone take over who was a city fan and had the clubs best interests at heart

i'l do me best but ive only got a fiver in pocket

 

[fcukcov]

im not sure if i would want an abramovich-type owner id rather have someone take over who was a city fan and had the clubs best interests at heart

ok then itll be engelbert

 

[Joe_Fox]

Webbo, can you afford LCFC? That'd be a coup wouldn't it!

 

[SilverFox]

Do you think there might be a comfort zone at Leicester that other clubs don't have. For the manager to lose his position I should Imagine it would require a special resolution of about 75% of shareholders.

If everyone has small shareholdings it is difficult to obtain any decision of this kind. It is probably a similar situation with other major decisions. Arguably it stops people being frivolous and making bad decisions, but on the other hand it stops us making decisions all together, which in certain circumstances can be just as damaging. (for example, imagine having a Peter Taylor that we couldn't get rid of!)

I personally don't think there is anything wrong with a board of directors saying, 'here is your money, here is how long you have to do it...now get on with it or the axe will fall'

 

[Ox Fox]

Leicester's Saviour Revealed

 

[Graz]

I wouldn't mind a rich person taking over and putting money into the club, but I'm not sure I'd want an Abramovich type owner (which I doubt we'd get anyway). Don't want to buy success in the same way as Chelsea.... although of course it would be nice to be able to spend £100m every year. I'd be happy with £10m though

It seems every club is linked with a takeover lately though, so we'll just have to wait and see if it happens

 

[highland fox]

Leicester's Saviour Revealed

Magic our Maurice..

 

[SilverFox]

I wouldn't mind a rich person taking over and putting money into the club, but I'm not sure I'd want an Abramovich type owner (which I doubt we'd get anyway). Don't want to buy success in the same way as Chelsea.... although of course it would be nice to be able to spend £100m every year. I'd be happy with £10m though

The rumour I heard was that it would be more like 3 million (rough figure) put into the team on top of whatever we have to spend for next year. But as I said above, it is only a rumour, and has no foundation at this stage.

 

[SilverFox]

3 million would however go a long way in this league.

 

[Steven]

This was aired on the Foxfanzine site about a month ago. :icon_conf :icon_razz :icon_wink

 

[SilverFox]

Well there you go then. Thanks Sven, Confirmed abosolute rubbish then. Sorry folks!

 

[Steven]

Well there you go then. Thanks Sven, Confirmed abosolute rubbish then. Sorry folks!

No smoke without fire.

 

[SilverFox]

and no fire without oxygen :icon_conf :icon_wink

 

[Brauny Blue]

There are surprisingly quite a few rather wealthy based people in this region besides the obvious. Sadly they are probaly all feckin Tigers fans.:icon_evil

 

[Real Sharapova]

Do you think there might be a comfort zone at Leicester that other clubs don't have. For the manager to lose his position I should Imagine it would require a special resolution of about 75% of shareholders.

The decision would be taken by the board of directors, without reference to the shareholders - they are appointed by the shareholders to run the club on a day-to-day basis.

 

[SilverFox]

The decision would be taken by the board of directors, without reference to the shareholders - they are appointed by the shareholders to run the club on a day-to-day basis.

But big decisions must be met with the approval of the members in a EGM or AGM. The shareholders are the owners of the Co. Nothing goes without their approval. You would have a board meeting in which the directors would decide whether or not to sell, but then you would have to have a general meeting to get the approval of the shareholders for it legally go ahead.

You can't sell without the approval of the owners matey!

Without the approval of the shareholders there is no deal. Trust me I'm a lawyer!:icon_eek:

Why do you think Malcom Glazer bought up the majority of shares at Man U? It was so that he could have the necessary majority of shares to legally complete his takeover. The principle is that if you have the necessary no. of shares to make the decision, everyone else can spin!

 

[Real Sharapova]

But big decisions must be met with the approval of the members in a EGM or AGM. The shareholders are the owners of the Co. Nothing goes without their approval. You would have a board meeting in which the directors would decide whether or not to sell, but then you would have to have a general meeting to get the approval of the shareholders for it legally go ahead.

You can't sell without the approval of the owners matey!

Without the approval of the shareholders there is no deal. Trust me I'm a lawyer!:icon_eek:

Why do you think Malcom Glazer bought up the majority of shares at Man U? It was so that he could have the necessary majority of shares to legally complete his takeover. The principle is that if you have the necessary no. of shares to make the decision, everyone else can spin!

I was talking about sacking the manager - that would be a decision delegated by the board to the shareholders.