Milky Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 just read a statement on sky sports news. It denied that the deal was on the verge of collapse and that talks were ongoing.
Manwell Pablo Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 We successfully talked the club out of removing the ST discount for 3 years, it would have happened way before now without our influence. One year kit deal, Paul Mace didn't believe in fan consultation therefore the deal was signed before we were aware, we have always spoke against it, wait & see if we have succeeded in persuading the club to switch back to a 2 year cycle next season It's always the same with you lot. You've still not managed to save the ST discount this season and we're still stuck with a one year kit cycle. Stop making excuses and sort it out!
Foxes_Trust Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 I realise the Foxes Trust cannot advise us on specifics, but surely they can confirm or deny the credibility of this story? Most of the Times story is old news, where it makes reference to us comes from well over a month ago. Summary of the situation, the deal is still being negotiated, there are no certainties in any proposed takeover, we will have to wait & see.
Ric Flair Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Excuse my ignorance but I'm not sure what you mean here Ric what have they done in the past? Tried to feed the fans a load of tom tit about the Jo Bucci fiasco and the attempt to get rid of Birch and Andrew Neville, that was until the media got hold of it and they were backed in to a corner. That's just for starters.
brookfox Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 just read a statement on sky sports news. It denied that the deal was on the verge of collapse and that talks were ongoing. It's up on Teamtalk now... http://www.teamtalk.com/football/story/0,1...1782770,00.html Not normally a hotbed of breaking (true) news but I'm happy to plead ignorance and believe it!
Ric Flair Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Most of the Times story is old news, where it makes reference to us comes from well over a month ago. Summary of the situation, the deal is still being negotiated, there are no certainties in any proposed takeover, we will have to wait & see. Can you confirm or deny whether MM's 'interest' in Pompey is the reason for this hold up? Also, have the FA not been involved if there was a problem with this? I believe it's more to do with him not prepared to pay as much for the shares as first thought, given our failures over the past 3 years is it any wonder why?.
Jon the Hat Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Can you confirm or deny whether MM's 'interest' in Pompey is the reason for this hold up? Also, have the FA not been involved if there was a problem with this? I believe it's more to do with him not prepared to pay as much for the shares as first thought, given our failures over the past 3 years is it any wonder why?. He knows all that though, he is paying for the potential. If he wanted a club in a better league position he would have to pay through the nose.
Foxes_Trust Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 I hardly see how the bid failing would be MM's fault, do you? I believe that the shareholders should act in the best interest of the club and not their wallets. Of course it can be either parties fault it depends exactly what the bid contains.
Ric Flair Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 He knows all that though, he is paying for the potential. If he wanted a club in a better league position he would have to pay through the nose. Is this club worth the same as it was 4 years ago considering we've not paid off any of the stadium, our gates have dropped, our wage bill has dropped, we've nearly been relegated 2 seasons on the spin and in a relegation battle yet again. Does that mean this club is still worth what was paid for it? I have my doubts.
Kilworthfox Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 This is old news but relevant still Says he owns now't
Ryanside Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Mandaric says Foxes bid still on Its on the beeb now too
Swedging Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 This is old news but relevant still Says he owns now't He said then that he was no longer connected - much more ambiguous.
Daggers Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 We successfully talked the club out of removing the ST discount for 3 years, it would have happened way before now without our influence. Seeing as you have already posted this: "We have been telling the club for 3 years it was a bad idea to remove the ST discount, but there was a firm determination by the club to remove it and replace it with a scheme that rewarded less (which was true of each scheme proposed), despite our advice on how an unpopular move it would be with what could be termed "the most loyal fans" "We also highlighted the problems with the teamcard scheme prior to them signing up with it based on the knowledge gained from other Trusts, but they went ahead regardless" ...some would see this as you having no real influence over board decisions at all, irrespective of how many shares are held by the Trust.
Lets Be having You Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Mandaric says Foxes bid still on Mandaric is a former owner of Portsmouth Milan Mandaric has denied his proposed £25m takeover of Leicester City is on the verge of collapse. Reports claimed the former Portsmouth chairman was set to pull out or seek a price reduction after an examination of the club's books revealed extra debt. A statement from Mandaric's camp said: "The due diligence has raised certain legal and financial issues which merit further investigation. "The club and Mr Mandaric are working together to address these points." An extraordinary meeting of Leicester's shareholders in November gave Mandaric permission to examine the Foxes books, and a formal takeover bid was expected to be made before Christmas. At that time Mandaric appeared enthusiastic at the prospect of returning to football after his departure from Portsmouth in September. The 68-year-old Serbian-American businessman said: "It should be a matter of time before we can put this together." The Foxes Trust, who are shareholders in the club, claimed £25m was an inflated figure for the takeover as Mandaric was unlikely to pay off the £15.9m loan taken out by the club to fund the building of the Walkers Stadium. The statement from Mandaric said: "Discussions between Mr Mandaric and Leicester City in connection with his interest in the club are continuing."
Ric Flair Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Why do all websites and newspapers keep calling last months shareholder's meeting extraodinary? It amuses me for some reason.
Mort Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Mandaric says Foxes bid still on Its on the beeb now too We've just got to hope and pray... coz if it all falls through there isnt much of a future for the current board, shareholders and potentially the club itself ...this statment may suggest these reports about talks collapsing mean that in the last few days there was a crisis of some kind in the talks (could be related to the abortive talks between MM and Wolves taht was mentioned on the radio) and that perhaps the shareholders have finally had some sense hammered into their skulls at the prospect of MM pulling out altogether... the club and MM may have just been "eye ball to eye ball" and the shareholders may have blinked... at least i hope this is the case.
Ric Flair Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Mandaric says Foxes bid still on Mandaric is a former owner of Portsmouth Milan Mandaric has denied his proposed £25m takeover of Leicester City is on the verge of collapse. Reports claimed the former Portsmouth chairman was set to pull out or seek a price reduction after an examination of the club's books revealed extra debt. A statement from Mandaric's camp said: "The due diligence has raised certain legal and financial issues which merit further investigation. "The club and Mr Mandaric are working together to address these points." An extraordinary meeting of Leicester's shareholders in November gave Mandaric permission to examine the Foxes books, and a formal takeover bid was expected to be made before Christmas. At that time Mandaric appeared enthusiastic at the prospect of returning to football after his departure from Portsmouth in September. The 68-year-old Serbian-American businessman said: "It should be a matter of time before we can put this together." The Foxes Trust, who are shareholders in the club, claimed £25m was an inflated figure for the takeover as Mandaric was unlikely to pay off the £15.9m loan taken out by the club to fund the building of the Walkers Stadium. The statement from Mandaric said: "Discussions between Mr Mandaric and Leicester City in connection with his interest in the club are continuing." No mention of the problem being to do with his ties with Pompey. Interesting. RL did say that they thought the problems were to do with our finances and not MM's previous business encounters.
Hullfox Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Seeing as you have already posted this: "We have been telling the club for 3 years it was a bad idea to remove the ST discount, but there was a firm determination by the club to remove it and replace it with a scheme that rewarded less (which was true of each scheme proposed), despite our advice on how an unpopular move it would be with what could be termed "the most loyal fans" "We also highlighted the problems with the teamcard scheme prior to them signing up with it based on the knowledge gained from other Trusts, but they went ahead regardless" ...some would see this as you having no real influence over board decisions at all, irrespective of how many shares are held by the Trust. Spot on DiscoDaveBob. At the end of the day, LCFC are a business and will run (succesfully or otherwise) as they see fit. FT rather like you or I have no influence over any decisions.
Fox in a Box Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Does anyone think that Jon Barber and Chris Egerton have fed on some words "a precarious position." they are just trying to make a name for themselves as reporters. Just because MM didnt get the full go ahead on the 15th as planned they are trying to squeeze blood out of a stone. (reporters are usually gutter fodder) Mandaric bid "precarious" Sources have told BBC Leicester, Milan Mandaric's deal to take over Leicester City Football Club is in "a precarious position." Listen to our report to find out more... The Serbian businessman offered £6.4 million to the 50 or so shareholders of Leicester City Football Club, who helped keep the club survive in the aftermath of its going into administration. But it's thought that the conditions attached are where the sticking points lie. **** It seems that MM conditions are slighty different to those what the board expected. The Solicitors/law firms would be ironing this out, I would be a shame if p*ss poor reporting put of a potential investor, mind you the board really need to make sure that everything is in place correctly and that includes the FT being gagged. I cant for the life of me see any wrong doing with the books after the administration debacle, so its more a case of dotting the eyes and crossing the tee's. Milan is a shrew business man and would explore all avenues to get the best deal available to HIM. Good luck and come on Board and MM a want a nice xmas! .. BARBER OUT
Babylon Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Spot on DiscoDaveBob. At the end of the day, LCFC are a business and will run (succesfully or otherwise) as they see fit. FT rather like you or I have no influence over any decisions. So why do so many on here continue to say it is their fault if things go wrong? If they hold no sway over the board they can't influence the takeover in any way.
Phlashman Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Why do all websites and newspapers keep calling last months shareholder's meeting extraodinary? It amuses me for some reason. Because everyone turned up in Drag.
Hullfox Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 So why do so many on here continue to say it is their fault if things go wrong? If they hold no sway over the board they can't influence the takeover in any way. I think the criticism of them is as much about conduct as anything else. I'm probably not the best person to ask as I have absolutely no time for them any more and would probably struggle to be completely objective.
Louise Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 Why do all websites and newspapers keep calling last months shareholder's meeting extraodinary? It amuses me for some reason. Because it was an EGM
Ric Flair Posted 18 December 2006 Posted 18 December 2006 So why do so many on here continue to say it is their fault if things go wrong? If they hold no sway over the board they can't influence the takeover in any way. Well technically they are shareholders so they could sway the decision but only if it was pretty much even on who wanted the take-over to go ahead and who didn't and The Trust's vote happened to vote in favour of it not going ahead. All hypothetical of course, but i've never thought The Trust are powerful enough to cause problems with this. I just don't like them claiming to be the voice of the fans, yet not representing their voice. However, I do think The Trust have acted fairly well in the past couple of weeks.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.