Trust Seeking Answers

[Foxes_Trust]

Latest article on the takeover here

http://foxestrust.co.uk/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=245&Itemid=2

 

[NN Fox]

Latest article on the takeover here

http://foxestrust.co.uk/site/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=245&Itemid=2

Taken from statement.

At the heart of any takeover of primary concern to the Trust, & City fans generally, are issues such as ownership of the Walkers Stadium, securing other assets such as the Belvoir Drive facility, funds available to the manager & the new infrastructure of the non playing side of the club*. We also want to establish how press reports of a £25 million bid reconcile with the actual bid on the table.

While there has been much comment from Mr Mandaric he is yet, to the best of our knowledge, to provide detailed answers to the above questions - either to the club or to fans via the media. Therefore the Foxes Trust has now sought clarification directly from Mr Mandaric’s representatives.


I presume that MM has been talking to the club about these issues or have they just been discussing the time of day for the past two months.

Why would MM discuss these matters with anybody other than the board whilst negotiations were going on and why do the trust seem to think that they should have a priviliged position over and above any other shareholder?

 

[Foxes_Trust]

I presume that MM has been talking to the club about these issues or have they just been discussing the time of day for the past two months.

Talking yes, documenting in bid no

Why would MM discuss these matters with anybody other than the board whilst negotiations were going on and why do the trust seem to think that they should have a priviliged position over and above any other shareholder?

The other shareholders represent themselves as individuals, we represent close to 1,000 concerned fans.

We hope our direct approach may stimulate some direct answers, rather than media spin to build up fans hopes of what MM may deliver.

 

[Durham Fox]

Talking yes, documenting in bid no



The other shareholders represent themselves as individuals, we represent close to 1,000 concerned fans.

We hope our direct approach may stimulate some direct answers, rather than media spin to build up fans hopes of what MM may deliver.

I doubt it to be honest.

 

[fcukcov]

I fail to see how any board in the world would decide to hold an EGM for a vote on whether to sell up or not without first having full details of the bid on the table. I think that maybe the trust do know the answers but are desperately trying to keep the disalussioned part of the memebership on side or they have not been privy to this information.

Which is it???? You decide......

 

[newtonfox]

I fail to see how any board in the world would decide to hold an EGM for a vote on whether to sell up or not without first having full details of the bid on the table. I think that maybe the trust do know the answers but are desperately trying to keep the disalussioned part of the memebership on side or they have not been privy to this information.

Which is it???? You decide......

well said

 

[Melton Fox]

I fail to see how any board in the world would decide to hold an EGM for a vote on whether to sell up or not without first having full details of the bid on the table. I think that maybe the trust do know the answers but are desperately trying to keep the disalussioned part of the memebership on side or they have not been privy to this information.

Which is it???? You decide......

Why has that question or issue never been raised Of course they've got all the fecking facts and details of the proposal, what would be the point of this meeting. MM has already said he won't be at the ground, it's an EGM of the shareholders so i doubt MM's people will even be allowed in to add further points.

Either

a) The FT are lying
b) The FT are being lied to
c) Our board and shareholders are about to make a decision upon which they don't know all the facts.

Good post Leroy

 

[fcukcov]

Why has that question or issue never been raised Of course they've got all the fecking facts and details of the proposal, what would be the point of this meeting. MM has already said he won't be at the ground, it's an EGM of the shareholders so i doubt MM's people will even be allowed in to add further points.

Either

a) The FT are lying
b) The FT are being lied to
c) Our board and shareholders are about to make a decision upon which they don't know all the facts.

Good post Leroy

thanks melts, I dont particularly like the way our board goes about things sometimes but I see it as them doing what any other business would do and for that matter I doubt very much it would be your option c. But i could be wrong.

 

[western road]

Whatever happens we are in for another one of our infamous roller-coaster rides and all we can hope for is that its not a bumpy one.

In Leicesters badge I believe are the words Semper Idem

thats true........... "always the same" :icon_roll

 

[Dour]

I fail to see how any board in the world would decide to hold an EGM for a vote on whether to sell up or not without first having full details of the bid on the table. I think that maybe the trust do know the answers but are desperately trying to keep the disalussioned part of the memebership on side or they have not been privy to this information.

Which is it???? You decide......

Could quite easily be that the board present the bid which we largely know about now: 6 odd million handed over in installments, plus a report of their meeting(s) with MM (which'll presumably be he's said that he will do X and Y - none of which is in the bid). Then the board put it to the shareholders and it's really a question of whether they trust him to do what he's said but hasn't put in the bid.

 

[fcukcov]

Could quite easily be that the board present the bid which we largely know about now: 6 odd million handed over in installments, plus a report of their meeting(s) with MM (which'll presumably be he's said that he will do X and Y - none of which is in the bid). Then the board put it to the shareholders and it's really a question of whether they trust him to do what he's said but hasn't put in the bid.

If that is the case then I would expect them to give a no vote and go back and ask for more detail, in which cae MM will feck off to somewhere else and we will either be back to square one or one of the mystery "other" bidders will come in.

 

[Real Sharapova]

I fail to see how any board in the world would decide to hold an EGM for a vote on whether to sell up or not without first having full details of the bid on the table. I think that maybe the trust do know the answers but are desperately trying to keep the disalussioned part of the memebership on side or they have not been privy to this information.

Which is it???? You decide......

Mandy has said he will not carry out due dilligence until his indicative bid is accepted in principle. Once due dilligence is carried out he will be able to put a formal bid in writing. I would doubt that what is being put in front of the shareholders is anything other than sketchy details of a bid. That's not the way I would do it, I would do my due dilligence first and put in a written bid, but that is the weird and wonderful way Mandy does it. If rumours are to be believed, others have carried out due dilligence, and I would not be totally surprised to see another bid ( in writing! ) or an offer from existing shareholders to pump money in to the club put to the meeting as well.

 

[NN Fox]

Why has that question or issue never been raised Of course they've got all the fecking facts and details of the proposal, what would be the point of this meeting. MM has already said he won't be at the ground, it's an EGM of the shareholders so i doubt MM's people will even be allowed in to add further points.

Either

a) The FT are lying
b) The FT are being lied to
c) Our board and shareholders are about to make a decision upon which they don't know all the facts.

Good post Leroy

Agreed Melton. Either the FT have been observing at the board meetings in which case they do know the facts, which I doubt. Or the board have not been keeping them informed because they are so indiscrete, more likely, in which case they know no more than the rest of the shareholders and they are pi**ed about it.

If c) however, then God help us all!!

 

[fcukcov]

Mandy has said he will not carry out due dilligence until his indicative bid is accepted in principle. Once due dilligence is carried out he will be able to put a formal bid in writing. I would doubt that what is being put in front of the shareholders is anything other than sketchy details of a bid. That's not the way I would do it, I would do my due dilligence first and put in a written bid, but that is the weird and wonderful way Mandy does it. If rumours are to be believed, others have carried out due dilligence, and I would not be totally surprised to see another bid ( in writing! ) or an offer from existing shareholders to pump money in to the club put to the meeting as well.

see post number 11 if that is the case.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Agreed Melton. Either the FT have been observing at the board meetings in which case they do know the facts, which I doubt. Or the board have not been keeping them informed because they are so indiscrete, more likely, in which case they know no more than the rest of the shareholders and they are pi**ed about it.

If c) however, then God help us all!!

See my post above, it's c), and it is because, IMO, Mandy is being, shall I say, rather evasive. Others might say he is being economical with the truth. I'm afraid I would trust Mandy as far as I could throw him, based on how he has conducted his affairs so far in relation to LCFC.

 

[fcukcov]

See my post above, it's c), and it is because, IMO, Mandy is being, shall I say, rather evasive. Others might say he is being economical with the truth. I'm afraid I would trust Mandy as far as I could throw him, based on how he has conducted his affairs so far in relation to LCFC.

how much would you trust the current board though rs? My point is its business and i would never trust anyone who wants to get ahead in business.

 

[Real Sharapova]

how much would you trust the current board though rs? My point is its business and i would never trust anyone who wants to get ahead in business.

I'm in a minority I know, but I trust the current board. They were appointed by the shareholders, the vast majority of whom did not regard their investment as business, more likely a lost cause! However, what happens will happen, what I think will not matter one iota.

 

[Durham Fox]

I'm hoping that the board have had this deal wraped up for ages and have been keeping the FT at arms length, otherwise I dont know what to think.

 

[Real Sharapova]

I'm hoping that the board have had this deal wraped up for ages and have been keeping the FT at arms length, otherwise I dont know what to think.

I think, after having a good look at my tea leaves, that there may be a few rabbits to come out of the hat yet! Sorry, Duzza, I think this one may run for a while yet!

 

[Durham Fox]

I think, after having a good look at my tea leaves, that there may be a few rabbits to come out of the hat yet! Sorry, Duzza, I think this one may run for a while yet!

As long as its genuine investment and not some poxy refinancing I not too bothered. Still favour MM though, he's the only one we know about!