Takeover Latest !

[Redditch Fox]

Only us and Southampton have not spent any money in the championship, and we have managed to get rid of:-

Out
Low - up to £100k
Sylla - Terminated Contract
Welsh - Terminated Loan Agreement
O'Grady - £65k

In
Cadamarteri - £0 (In December as was out of contract).

So that is wages and and money in. Yet still nothing the current board can sanction to bring in a replacement on an already threadbare squad.

The decline will continue unless the status quo is changed (Pictures of matchstick men anyone?)

As has been said many times we came out of Administration with only the minimum finances. Since then the results and public interest have declined - that's why where we are in this pathetic position without a takeover.

 

[Real Sharapova]

It would have been if I said it :icon_wink

Pedant!

 

[drew]

The current board have had their chance FT. They have tried to run the club without putting any real money in. It doesn't work. FACT

So when MM walks away what's the alternative FT?

 

[Real Sharapova]

The current board have had their chance FT. They have tried to run the club without putting any real money in.

I would call £6 million real money, which is more than most clubs have had put in from outside sources I would have thought.

 

[drew]

They bought the club from the receivers. It wasn't like putting an investment of 6 million into the transfer/wage kitty. all they done is put the profits back in. But now the wheels have come off they need someone to bail them out and pay for the pleasure of doing so.

Come to think of it, since buying the club have any of the shareholders put a substanial amount of their own money in other than to buy more shares?

 

[Boy Genius]

They bought the club from the receivers. It wasn't like putting an investment of 6 million into the transfer/wage kitty. all they done is put the profits back in. But now the wheels have come off they need someone to bail them out and pay for the pleasure of doing so.

Come to think of it, since buying the club have any of the shareholders put a substanial amount of their own money in other than to buy more shares?

spot on drew

 

[Nottingham Fox]

They bought the club from the receivers. It wasn't like putting an investment of 6 million into the transfer/wage kitty. all they done is put the profits back in. But now the wheels have come off they need someone to bail them out and pay for the pleasure of doing so.

Come to think of it, since buying the club have any of the shareholders put a substanial amount of their own money in other than to buy more shares?

Hit the nail on the head.

 

[foxpodder]

All,

These threads are getting too predictable - and IMO too personal and strewn with opinion dressed up as fact.

The only facts we have are .....

1. MM is in Serbia caring for his mother.
2. Both he and the club have NOT said the deal is dead.

As for the opinions and quotes about various issues .. I think;

1. Those saying terrible things and joking about about MMs mother should be ashamed of themselves
2. As for suggestions that Bill Anderson has been paid for his support by MM - thses are beyond contempt. Judge the man on his journalism - don't make unsubstatiated claims about "boosted pension funds"
3. Is the deal dead as some claim - we simply don't know.

Sorry to be a party pooper but lets get some perspective. If my mum was ill it would be more important to me than a business deal. Frankly if MM read these posts he'd be forgiven for walking away from an insensitive load of posters.

Foxpodder

 

[Jeff]

Come to think of it, since buying the club have any of the shareholders put a substanial amount of their own money in other than to buy more shares?

Why single out the shareholders when asking this question?
They've already put a substantial amount of money in.

How many supporters, shareholder or not, have put a substantial amount of their own money into the club (and I'm not talking about buying tickets/merchandise!), since we came out of administration?

If YOU haven't donated your spare cash to the club, why do you expect other people - people who have already put tens of thousands in, to put more in?

 

[1966]

It has been rumoured, as is the case with your comment, that he is looking to pay back some money at some stage. If someone has concrete evidence to the contrary, then that is fine but...

What are the alternatives to MM? If MM was thought to be the best deal on the table at the time, why then the griping now about how much he was putting forward to the shareholders? The board have been working to try and get this deal through, which in my mind speaks volumes of the other options open to us...

I am simply making the point, because most seem unaware, that MM MAY pay back SOME money to the shareholders if we achieve certain goals in a certain period of time.

It is not for me to say wether this is a good deal or not, it is the shareholders, after all it is their money.

 

[drew]

Why single out the shareholders when asking this question?
They've already put a substantial amount of money in.

How many supporters, shareholder or not, have put a substantial amount of their own money into the club (and I'm not talking about buying tickets/merchandise!), since we came out of administration?

If YOU haven't donated your spare cash to the club, why do you expect other people - people who have already put tens of thousands in, to put more in?

Quite simply I don't stand to gain a financial reward from LCFC being a successful club, where as the current shareholders do.

Why would i put money into something when i dont stand to get anything back? If they had invested their 6 million into the club and made it succesful by investing more money in players and wages then fair play, but it appears they haven't all they have done is bank rolled the club on its profits. The first year we lose the parachute payments all hell break loose and they want out. Understandably so but why should they get their money back from something that isn't as successful as it was 4 years ago.

The current board and shareholders are custodians of the club and they are presiding over its slow demise.

Nottingham Forest has a wealthy 'Fan' as a chairman, look where that got them.

 

[Bobby Smith]

Why single out the shareholders when asking this question?
They've already put a substantial amount of money in.

How many supporters, shareholder or not, have put a substantial amount of their own money into the club (and I'm not talking about buying tickets/merchandise!), since we came out of administration?

If YOU haven't donated your spare cash to the club, why do you expect other people - people who have already put tens of thousands in, to put more in?

I don't think the shareholders should be expected to put more money in, but from a business point of view you cut your losses by walking away with a bit of cash in your pocket or you invest. The problem is that the majority of cash that saved the club was not given as a business investment, which is why the club is now going backwards.

 

[Jeff]

Quite simply I don't stand to gain a financial reward from LCFC being a successful club, where as the current shareholders do.

The shareholders have not received any dividends from their share ownership, and I imagine most of them would want this to still be the case if the club is successful. But if any of the existing shareholders do put more in I'd expect it to be in return for shares, rather than as a donation. Just like when you put money into the club you expect to get match tickets, shirts, etc in return.

Why would i put money into something when i dont stand to get anything back?

Because you support the club and want it to be successful?

I'm not saying supporters should just donate money to the club (although supporters of other clubs have got together to provide money for players etc), my point is that the shareholders have already done more (financially) for the club than most fans ever will - yet fans expect the shareholders to keep putting money in, and at the same can't be bothered to turn up for cup matches at reduced prices. If supporters can't be bothered to pay a few quid for a match ticket they shouldn't really have the right to moan because someone else isn't putting hundreds of thousands in.

 

[Ox Fox]

The shareholders have not received any dividends from their share ownership.

You could say TNBD has had a 'dividend' somewhere in the region of 6x his original £100k investment...

 

[Jeff]

You could say TNBD has had a 'dividend' somewhere in the region of 6x his original £100k investment...

He's being paid for doing a job, not for being a shareholder.

 

[SJN-Fox]

If supporters can't be bothered to pay a few quid for a match ticket they shouldn't really have the right to moan because someone else isn't putting hundreds of thousands in.

Maybe so, maybe not, but it's the chicken egg scenario, if you want big crowds and good results you have to be successful, to be successful, you have to constantly re-invest, to attract investment, you have to be successful etc etc.

Whilst no-one expects the shareholders to continually be putting their hands in their pockets, there does need to be money put into the club to keep it going.

Football is not like any other business, if your business is succesful, you can continue to make money, develop new products, carryon making/selling the existing ones, re-invest the profits and pay dividends to your shareholders, however, if your football business is not successful, you lose revenue so you have to sell assets which reduces your ability to compete in the market place, which then lowers your productivity, so your customers start to drop off. and thus starts the decline.

Only successful clubs with a good marketing structure and a name worth selling can compete at the highest level without the shareholders having to inject cash.

 

[drew]

The reason they haven't pulled a dividend because since they took over we have been on a downward spiral, why should they get a dividend for poor performance? I don't know of any loss making organisations that pay dividends, i may be wrong.

Woe betide anyone who wants to invest in the club and make it a success.

The current board have put themselves in this position, it's no one elses fault other than their own. Why should MM bail them out and pay them off at the same time? How about they balance the books and MM pays them the face value of their shares.

If MM's bid was really that poor it should of been dismissed out of hand.

 

[glyn]

All,

These threads are getting too predictable - and IMO too personal and strewn with opinion dressed up as fact.

The only facts we have are .....

1. MM is in Serbia caring for his mother.
2. Both he and the club have NOT said the deal is dead.

As for the opinions and quotes about various issues .. I think;

1. Those saying terrible things and joking about about MMs mother should be ashamed of themselves
2. As for suggestions that Bill Anderson has been paid for his support by MM - thses are beyond contempt. Judge the man on his journalism - don't make unsubstatiated claims about "boosted pension funds"
3. Is the deal dead as some claim - we simply don't know.

Sorry to be a party pooper but lets get some perspective. If my mum was ill it would be more important to me than a business deal. Frankly if MM read these posts he'd be forgiven for walking away from an insensitive load of posters.

Foxpodder

Agreed.

 

[Jeff]

The reason they haven't pulled a dividend because since they took over we have been on a downward spiral, why should they get a dividend for poor performance? I don't know of any loss making organisations that pay dividends, i may be wrong.

They did make a profit, and could have paid dividends - but they chose not to.

Woe betide anyone who wants to invest in the club and make it a success.

I have no problem with anyone who wants to invest in the club and make it a success.
What I don't want is someone who sees an opportunity to buy the club on the cheap, then risk the future of the club by getting into more debt in the hope that we get promoted, in order to make a profit. It's what happens if the risk doesn't pay off and we end up in a worse situation than we are now that worries me. An outsider may not care if the club goes out of business, that's why we need proper guarantees about MM's plans if he isn't successful, and I believe that has been one of the sticking points in the negotiations so far.

 

[drew]

For one year, i'll slap them on the back. However they did know they were heading for a financial black hole this season.

Tell me if i'm wrong but have the current board not ran up huge debts banking on a promotion? Maybe i'm mistaken but the FT did say there was a considerable shortfall this season. Who is going to clear the debts for them?