Milan Mandaric has targeted leicester!

[davieG]

Be a right turn up for the books if Mandaric has found hidden/undisclosed debts at this end of the deal. What will all the anti-Mandaric baiters use to beat him with after this? Quite honestly, I've found most of the anti-Mandaric brigade (although there's not that many) distasteful in their unjustified criticisms of his takeover plans. Why don't you just call him a liar?....because that's what you are all insinuating.

Questioning the validity of this kind of gossip/rumours that could only have come from MM is not calling people liars it's maintaining an objectivety that a vast number of people seem to find it impossible to do.

I find it distasteful that people can be so dimissive of the current board over this takeover without one iota of evidence that they are doing anything other than what is in the best long term interests of LCFC football club.

And who are prepared to view MM as the next Messiah even though he has singularly failed to say publically what he is prepared to put into this club.

Having said that I'm not against his take over at all, I'm against the sychopantic slobbering of an unknown suitor who by his secretive approach has done nothing to deserve this idolatory.

[l444ry]

What is distasteful is the willingness to completely disregard the facts, the current playing staff, the board who put £6m of their own money and any concerns over the future of the club in order to dream about premiership football.

What "facts"? Insinuations and character assasination I'd call it. As for the shareholders £6million....Birch and Gary Lineker have both stated publicly that they didn't expect to ever see the money come back to them. I lost a five figure sum when the club last went tits up as many others did, why don't we get some back as well then? What happened to all that supporter bullshit they rode in on? Where are those "mystery" bids that emerged when Mandaric first showed interest? And some call Mandaric dishonest because he'd borrow money.....that's a laugh. This board have put in jeapordy perhaps our only golden hope....the prats.

[surrifox]

It won't be a simple matter of omitting liabilities from the accounts. The Companies Acts require directors to maintain accurate financial records showing amounts owed to and by a company at any moment in time. Failure to do so would be a criminal offence. The board are not going to risk that let alone trying to pull the wool over the eyes of a potential investor by material misstatement of the value of the club .

The due diligence might have raised issues regarding assumptions of values and provisions which unless covered by an appropriate accounting standard might be subjective. Since the due diligence process is an adversarial one and the accountants undertaking this examination on behalf of MM are wide open to getting sued if they get their deliberations wrong this sort of difference can be expected. This is exactly the line reported by the BBC site where MM has spoken out to provide reassurance that this is all part of the process and the bid is still on.

[davieG]

What "facts"? Insinuations and character assasination I'd call it. As for the shareholders £6million....Birch and Gary Lineker have both stated publicly that they didn't expect to ever see the money come back to them. I lost a five figure sum when the club last went tits up as many others did, why don't we get some back as well then? What happened to all that supporter bullshit they rode in on? Where are those "mystery" bids that emerged when Mandaric first showed interest? And some call Mandaric dishonest because he'd borrow money.....that's a laugh. This board have put in jeapordy perhaps our only golden hope....the prats.

Where is your evidence?

[davieG]

It won't be a simple matter of omitting liabilities from the accounts. The Companies Acts require directors to maintain accurate financial records showing amounts owed to and by a company at any moment in time. Failure to do so would be a criminal offence. The board are not going to risk that let alone trying to pull the wool over the eyes of a potential investor by material misstatement of the value of the club .

The due diligence might have raised issues regarding assumptions of values and provisions which unless covered by an appropriate accounting standard might be subjective. Since the due diligence process is an adversarial one and the accountants undertaking this examination on behalf of MM are wide open to getting sued if they get their deliberations wrong this sort of difference can be expected. This is exactly the line reported by the BBC site where MM has spoken out to provide reassurance that this is all part of the process and the bid is still on.

Thanks SM it's nice to breath in some fresh air amongst all the bull shit now and again.

[l444ry]

Where is your evidence?

I don't know what constitutes "evidence" DavieG but Sky Sports and the Mercury are reporting stories to that effect. Therefore something is amiss here. That much is certain.

[davieG]

I don't know what constitutes "evidence" DavieG but Sky Sports and the Mercury are reporting stories to that effect. Therefore something is amiss here. That much is certain.

Well if there was any truth in the interpretaion of this:

"The ongoing due diligence into the affairs of the club has raised certain legal and financial issues which merit further investigation.

as being "hidden/undisclosed debts" then the only person who could benefit from such a leak, which I understand is illegal is MM. Certainly it wouldn't be the LCFC board or shareholders would it?

As I've said previously a more likely interpretation would be it's a bit of brinkmanship on behalf of MM to get himself a better deal, no harm in that it seems to be normal business practice but for it to result in this ongoing castigation of the current board is uncalled for. It's just bloody gossip after all.

[Shipman Out]

When the Shareholders bought the shares they didnt see it as an INVESTMENT! more of a rescue package!

The money invested has GONE! id happily hand them to MM for nowt.

This takeover has the potential to ruin my Christmas and make me a right mardy git, if the deal falls through i can see me changing into Kevin the teenager for many years and Christmas's to come

[l444ry]

Well if there was any truth in the interpretaion of this:

as being "hidden/undisclosed debts" then the only person who could benefit from such a leak, which I understand is illegal is MM. Certainly it wouldn't be the LCFC board or shareholders would it?

Or Mandaric's.

[davieG]

Or Mandaric's.

Of course it could benefit MM, the pressure that it produces on the board, mostly as a result of impatient, frustrated fans gives MM the extra negotiating muscle to drive out a better deal. It does absolutely nothing for the current board except turn the fans against them even more.

This just shows what a shrewed negotiator MM is but it still isn't justification to crucify the current board, they have a legal duty to get the best deal out of MM on behalf of the shareholders, irrespective of whether fans think the shareholders should relinquish their shares for nothing. If the board are neglectful in the negotiations they could end up getting sued by the shareholders

[Babylon]

When the Shareholders bought the shares they didnt see it as an INVESTMENT! more of a rescue package!

The money invested has GONE! id happily hand them to MM for nowt.

This takeover has the potential to ruin my Christmas and make me a right mardy git, if the deal falls through i can see me changing into Kevin the teenager for many years and Christmas's to come

When someone intends to make money off the back of this deal why should they give up their share for free. How do you know they didn't see it as an investment? Do you speak on behalf of all shareholders?

Just because one or two quite minor shareholders mentioned they didn't expect to ever see the money again, doesn't mean others didn't

[l444ry]

Of course it could benefit MM, the pressure that it produces on the board, mostly as a result of impatient, frustrated fans gives MM the extra negotiating muscle to drive out a better deal. It does absolutely nothing for the current board except turn the fans against them even more.

This just shows what a shrewed negotiator MM is but it still isn't justification to crucify the current board, they have a legal duty to get the best deal out of MM on behalf of the shareholders, irrespective of whether fans think the shareholders should relinquish their shares for nothing. If the board are neglectful in the negotiations they could end up getting sued by the shareholders

You are playing Devil's Advocate very well DavieG. What I fail to see is, though, why would Mandaric want to alienate the people whom he needs to reach agreement with? It is the anti-Mandaric brigade who keep spinning these stories in the futile hope that they can discredit him. Dare I say you have just inadvertently done that yourself, although I'm pretty sure it wasn't your intention.

[DB11]

I have this feeling it will fail.

[fox123]

I have this feeling it will fail.

It will be done or wont be done, when its done or not done!

'And thats all i have to say about that'

[Chimp]

It won't be a simple matter of omitting liabilities from the accounts. The Companies Acts require directors to maintain accurate financial records showing amounts owed to and by a company at any moment in time. Failure to do so would be a criminal offence. The board are not going to risk that let alone trying to pull the wool over the eyes of a potential investor by material misstatement of the value of the club .

The due diligence might have raised issues regarding assumptions of values and provisions which unless covered by an appropriate accounting standard might be subjective. Since the due diligence process is an adversarial one and the accountants undertaking this examination on behalf of MM are wide open to getting sued if they get their deliberations wrong this sort of difference can be expected. This is exactly the line reported by the BBC site where MM has spoken out to provide reassurance that this is all part of the process and the bid is still on.

Though comforting and welcome to many of us, this sort of reasoned and logical commentary has no place on these forums!

More heresay, rumour mongering and reactionism please!

[davieG]

You are playing Devil's Advocate very well DavieG. What I fail to see is, though, why would Mandaric want to alienate the people whom he needs to reach agreement with? It is the anti-Mandaric brigade who keep spinning these stories in the futile hope that they can discredit him. Dare I say you have just inadvertently done that yourself, although I'm pretty sure it wasn't your intention.

Now that is total guesswork and defies all logic, how can a rumour seemingly arising out of the result of due diligence carried out on behalf of MM that implies that not everything is right and in order about the LCFC books be anything other than anti LCFC board and pro-Mandaric. Admittedly the continuing ownership of Portsmouth is anti-Mandaric.

That strikes me as 1-1 in the brinkmanship stakes

[l444ry]

Now that is total guesswork and defies all logic, how can a rumour seemingly arising out of the result of due diligence carried out on behalf of MM that implies that not everything is right and in order about the LCFC books be anything other than anti LCFC board and pro-Mandaric. Admittedly the continuing ownership of Portsmouth is anti-Mandaric.

That strikes me as 1-1 in the brinkmanship stakes

I must be confusing you DavieG. I was originally referring to the Portsmouth "ownership" newspaper stories, which Mandaric, Peter Storrie and other high ranking Pompey officials have flatly refuted.....but some on here are willing to use as a stick with which to beat Mandaric. In other words, calling him a liar. My point was that IF the hidden debt story is true then how would they use THAT to get at Mandaric, given their ceaseless opposition to discredit him and paint the board as looking after LCFC interests.

[davieG]

I must be confusing you DavieG. I was originally referring to the Portsmouth "ownership" newspaper stories, which Mandaric, Peter Storrie and other high ranking Pompey officials have flatly refuted.....but some on here are willing to use as a stick with which to beat Mandaric. In other words, calling him a liar. My point was that IF the hidden debt story is true then how would they use THAT to get at Mandaric, given their ceaseless opposition to discredit him and paint the board as looking after LCFC interests.

My ceaseless effort is to remain objective, I have not criticised MM at all unless you view calling him a shrewd business man critcism, incidently something which this club could benefit from. What I have done is criticised those who use unfounded gossip to blame the board for perceived delays in the negotiation process, I would also criticise those that use similar gossip to blame MM but I've rarely if ever seen any.

I'm not against MM in principle or practice.

[gilesyboy]

I have this feeling it will fail.

Oh well that's that then

[Daggers]

Unless you believe that MM only has around £5million and no way of getting hold of more.

I didn't say anything about his access to further funding - but if you are giving money to shareholders it is not available for team development. It's not rocket science.

[Swedging]

I must be confusing you DavieG. I was originally referring to the Portsmouth "ownership" newspaper stories, which Mandaric, Peter Storrie and other high ranking Pompey officials have flatly refuted

Well, they've denied it is an issue.

This is something that could have been wrapped up by Storrie, Gaydamak and Mandaric quite easily. All they would have had to say is that Miland Developments 2004 still owns all the shares in Pompey and all the shares in Miland Developments 2004 are now owned outright by Gaydamak's company. If that were the case, that would nail it completely and anyone who argued differently could face a battle with the lawyers.

Instead, they've all come up with partial statements that seem designed to obscure - and let down by Mandaric then saying he still does have a financial interest in Pompey.

Against the rhetoric, there are only a couple of verifiable facts here. The most awkward is that the annual return submitted to Companies House in October reporting events up to mid-September still recorded ownership split 50-50 between MM's trust and Gaydamak's company. That was 2 months after MM had said that he had sold the second half of his interest in Pompey.

[Swedging]

I didn't say anything about his access to further funding - but if you are giving money to shareholders it is not available for team development. It's not rocket science.

No, it's not rocket science, where you might have to balance the weights of payload and propellant.

It's business. And one of MM's back-of-fag-packet calculations might be:

Money realised by flogging of the club in the Prem

- Cost to get there

- Cost to buy the club

= Benefits to MM's pension

Now, in that picture, money given to shareholders comes out of benefits to MM's pension, primarily. And this latest bout of press activity is just a clumsy attempt to bang those costs down. Nothing particularly to worry about, in itself.

[step]

MM is not buying city for £25 million as the media keep telling us. MM is buying city for about £6.3 million which is the bargain of a life time, we know that and MM definatly knows it.

Everyone talks as if he is going to strugle to make a profit from the sale of the club, which is rubbish.

We owe nothing.

We have a brilliant ground which MM could buy for £16.5m (half price)

Our fan base is in the top twenty in the UK

Once we are promoted the club will recieve a least £25m per season

in a few years time he will sell city for £40-50 million and make a massive profit.

[reynard]

Just got back from a long day on the road and have to say that every radio station of note has been reporting the following

1 the deal is in a delicate position because of financial matters arising from the period of due diligence.

the question is what are the financial matters arising and why have they only been brought to light by a period of due diligence carried out by a prospective buyer.

my suspicion is that the finances must be worse than we think and this would explain the recent rush by the current board to overtly seek external investors and would explain why they are reluctant and have been reluctant to stup up any more cash.

2 the only reasons listed by the media for a hold up in the takeover are matters discovered during the period of due diligence and thus have nothing to do with mm himself. we can only presume that the problems lie at our end of the deal.

i hope this can be worked out but the longer matters drag on the more chance it will not. without outside investment i fear that players will have to be sold and our squad size reduced and in line with current thinking our academy could well close.

[step]

Just got back from a long day on the road and have to say that every radio station of note has been reporting the following

1 the deal is in a delicate position because of financial matters arising from the period of due diligence.

the question is what are the financial matters arising and why have they only been brought to light by a period of due diligence carried out by a prospective buyer.

my suspicion is that the finances must be worse than we think and this would explain the recent rush by the current board to overtly seek external investors and would explain why they are reluctant and have been reluctant to stup up any more cash.

2 the only reasons listed by the media for a hold up in the takeover are matters discovered during the period of due diligence and thus have nothing to do with mm himself. we can only presume that the problems lie at our end of the deal.

i hope this can be worked out but the longer matters drag on the more chance it will not. without outside investment i fear that players will have to be sold and our squad size reduced and in line with current thinking our academy could well close.

It is illegal for either part to discuse the situation with anyone other than each other. so I dont believe a word of what the press is saying. they are making assumptions.

Also MM is not buying the club for £25m he has offered about £6.3m so they have not even got the basic facts right and you are forgetting we made a £1.5m operating profit last year