Gené and Tonic Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 From another forum: 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? I'd love it to happen, but I doubt any of it is true. Just wishful thinking on the part of some supporters.
Jimmy Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 he has a point though, maybe if 1 majority share holder had a clear direction cl might get more transfer funds
Jon the Hat Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 he has a point though, maybe if 1 majority share holder had a clear direction cl might get more transfer funds Yes indeed! Just look at Hearts!!
TAFKA Castroneves Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 Damn I was hoping to win the lottery and buy City myself I guess we'll have to wait and see how this unfolds, it at the moment seems the way forward for most clubs.
davieG Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 This was aired on the Foxfanzine site about a month ago (well I assume it's the same one) the conclusion was it was rubbish, if i remember rightly for this to happen the whole club constitution would have to be changed as it's specifically set up to prevent this type of take over. Remember not all takeovers are good ask Brighton, York and many more clubs brought to the very edge of existence by one money mad man in charge.
Nationwider Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 We are skint, but stable, and that's good enough for me at the moment. A co-operative of like minded shareholders and the FT doesn't exactly mean Abramovich-type happenings are around the corner, but considering where we were 2 years ago, its a good place to be for now. The last thing we need is some cash-rich crackpot/arms-dealer/porn baron getting hold of the the club, or worse, a Ridsdale, Richmond or even a Bates (*shudders at the thought*). We can grow from this point on, but it's going to be slow. The club is based in one of the largest cities in the UK, and the fan base is there, even if it's a bit fed-up and is wondering about redecorating the living room rather than going to Burnley on Saturday. We are OK. Say no to crackpots.
Head Honcho Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 Damn I was hoping to win the lottery and buy City myself I guess we'll have to wait and see how this unfolds, it at the moment seems the way forward for most clubs. Just hope to get lucky on a scratch card that should be enough to buy City
Sly Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 Just hope to get lucky on a scratch card that should be enough to buy City £2 might be a bit light......you'd only get half the squad.
Thracian Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 This was aired on the Foxfanzine site about a month ago (well I assume it's the same one) the conclusion was it was rubbish, if i remember rightly for this to happen the whole club constitution would have to be changed as it's specifically set up to prevent this type of take over. Remember not all takeovers are good ask Brighton, York and many more clubs brought to the very edge of existence by one money mad man in charge. The voice of sanity. We want a football club not a speculators plaything.
SilverFox Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 From another forum: I'd love it to happen, but I doubt any of it is true. Just wishful thinking on the part of some supporters. Just for the sake of debate I also said... 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' Davie G is right, to buy LCFC the club would have to change its constitution. To do so would probably require a 75% special resolution from the shareholders, however that is the standard position. The club could have a different formula agreed. I am personally in two minds. On the one hand it prevents frivolous spending, but on the other hand it ties our hands with respect to the decisions we can make, which can also be counterproductive and as I have said above in some respects equally as damaging.
SilverFox Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 The voice of sanity. We want a football club not a speculators plaything. Thats why you wouldn't sell to speculators.
davieG Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 Thats why you wouldn't sell to speculators. Trouble is they are, like good/bad managers not easy to spot, I doubt other clubs that have ended up with a speculator in control thought that's what they'd sold out to. Besides they don't all start off as blatant speculators it's only when they realise the only way to get their investment back is to sell the ground they become one, the by products being they make much more then they ever expected (the temptations are great) and the club all but disappears.
The People's Hero Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 The voice of sanity. We want a football club not a speculators plaything. Damn right!
SilverFox Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 Trouble is they are, like good/bad managers not easy to spot, I doubt other clubs that have ended up with a speculator in control thought that's what they'd sold out to. Besides they don't all start off as blatant speculators it's only when they realise the only way to get their investment back is to sell the ground they become one, the by products being they make much more then they ever expected (the temptations are great) and the club all but disappears. There are bad examples yes, but look at Wigan. I think it is Dave Wheelan who owns them, and he is a Wigan fan, who has ambitions for Wigan football club. A lot of what he has put in isn't simply because he can smell money. Equally I would not dismiss a real Leicester fan investing in Leicester city. The trouble I suppose is that you just can't tell, and the risk is that we could again find trouble.
Foxes_Trust Posted 15 November 2005 Posted 15 November 2005 This was aired on the Foxfanzine site about a month ago (well I assume it's the same one) the conclusion was it was rubbish, if i remember rightly for this to happen the whole club constitution would have to be changed as it's specifically set up to prevent this type of take over. Remember not all takeovers are good ask Brighton, York and many more clubs brought to the very edge of existence by one money mad man in charge. Yes the rumour is still rubbish, we attended the LCFC Board Meeting on the morning of the Saints game & the clubs AGM after the game. No takeover was mentioned at either meeting. As DavieG has said the shareholders would have to pass any takeover with a high % in favour for it to go through (would need to re-read to confirm %, it would at least be 75%) Silver Fox copied this quote "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!)" That isn't true, the shareholders appoint a board, the board decides who to hire & fire although any hiring (as in the case of CL) would be done via an interview committee who would make a recommendation to the board. Most day to day decisions are taken by the Chief Exec, so there is no slowness in the process, only more major ones would require board approval
Tomassi Posted 16 November 2005 Posted 16 November 2005 Yes the rumour is still rubbish, we attended the LCFC Board Meeting on the morning of the Saints game & the clubs AGM after the game. No takeover was mentioned at either meeting. As DavieG has said the shareholders would have to pass any takeover with a high % in favour for it to go through (would need to re-read to confirm %, it would at least be 75%) Silver Fox copied this quote "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!)" That isn't true, the shareholders appoint a board, the board decides who to hire & fire although any hiring (as in the case of CL) would be done via an interview committee who would make a recommendation to the board. Most day to day decisions are taken by the Chief Exec, so there is no slowness in the process, only more major ones would require board approval Was that the one in the directors lounge which i accidently walked in on??
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.