by melonhead » 02 Jun 2014 11:44
by Stuka » 02 Jun 2014 11:47
multisync1830StukaStuka So sorry to recap, so Anton Zingarevich has walked, what happened to his share of the club? Forgive my ignorance here I'm struggling to keep up.
Can somebody answer above?
it has been my understanding az offered the shares back to sjm for one pound if the club had not been sold by june. I wrote this here 8 months ago. Come june and tsi resign.
by genome » 02 Jun 2014 11:48
by multisync1830 » 02 Jun 2014 11:49
melonhead ITK MUTHA FUKKAS!
by Elm Park Pasty » 02 Jun 2014 11:50
VisionHoneyRoastHoax H8 to break it all to you (again) but TSI still have 51% shares which gives them the deciding vote.
The reality though I suspect is that all they're interested in is getting their loan money back. Regardless of whomever takes over it's still a pretty dead cert that it will be at a cost of taking over the debt and nothing else. It's the current board JM and IWS who will decide which bid would be more suitable for the club going forward. TSI won't give a shit either way as long as they're purchasing for the same amount.
That's how my rather crude head sees it anyway.
by Stuka » 02 Jun 2014 11:54
by Royal Lady » 02 Jun 2014 11:55
Stuka But I thought TSI hadn't finished paying for their 51% yet?
by HoneyRoastHoax » 02 Jun 2014 11:57
VisionHoneyRoastHoax H8 to break it all to you (again) but TSI still have 51% shares which gives them the deciding vote.
The reality though I suspect is that all they're interested in is getting their loan money back. Regardless of whomever takes over it's still a pretty dead cert that it will be at a cost of taking over the debt and nothing else. It's the current board JM and IWS who will decide which bid would be more suitable for the club going forward. TSI won't give a shit either way as long as they're purchasing for the same amount.
That's how my rather crude head sees it anyway.
by PieEater » 02 Jun 2014 11:58
multisync1830 Whilst no actual confirmation I am reasonably confident this is a direct result of the offer az made last year to return the shares to SJM in June if no sale had been completed. (As I reported here last year)
I still do not believe CS & AO was given the shares by AZ and again no actual evidence has been offered by anyone that this was the case.
TSI were the majority shareholder and the only way they could be removed would be to resign. Again this aligns with the share return. This is also backed up by the report that the Indian is flying in on wednesday to discuss with SJM as they both knew the 1st June deadline...
by Norfolk Royal » 02 Jun 2014 11:58
by PieEater » 02 Jun 2014 11:58
by PieEater » 02 Jun 2014 12:01
Norfolk Royal Surely if the two pantomime villains are no longer on the board there must have been some agreement on it, whether that be paying up their share or whatever.
It's not as if SJM would just say to them 'Would you mind leaving the board?' and they say: 'Ok.'
by Elm Park Pasty » 02 Jun 2014 12:03
PieEatermultisync1830 Whilst no actual confirmation I am reasonably confident this is a direct result of the offer az made last year to return the shares to SJM in June if no sale had been completed. (As I reported here last year)
I still do not believe CS & AO was given the shares by AZ and again no actual evidence has been offered by anyone that this was the case.
TSI were the majority shareholder and the only way they could be removed would be to resign. Again this aligns with the share return. This is also backed up by the report that the Indian is flying in on wednesday to discuss with SJM as they both knew the 1st June deadline...
So does that mean that SJM is the 100% owner, and AZ is just a creditor?
by Norfolk Royal » 02 Jun 2014 12:09
by jellytot » 02 Jun 2014 12:12
by Norfolk Royal » 02 Jun 2014 12:23
jellytot SJM had better not screw the next sale up. He needs to sell all the club not a bit this time.
Hope we can sell the club so NA can rebuild.
by Elm Park Pasty » 02 Jun 2014 12:27
Norfolk Royal Maybe SJM has played a blinder on it, refused to answer his phone over the last few days then just given them the fist-pumping 'bye, bye' on June 1st when the so called deadline was reached.
by CholseyRoyal » 02 Jun 2014 12:34
by PieEater » 02 Jun 2014 12:34
Elm Park PastyPieEatermultisync1830 Whilst no actual confirmation I am reasonably confident this is a direct result of the offer az made last year to return the shares to SJM in June if no sale had been completed. (As I reported here last year)
I still do not believe CS & AO was given the shares by AZ and again no actual evidence has been offered by anyone that this was the case.
TSI were the majority shareholder and the only way they could be removed would be to resign. Again this aligns with the share return. This is also backed up by the report that the Indian is flying in on wednesday to discuss with SJM as they both knew the 1st June deadline...
So does that mean that SJM is the 100% owner, and AZ is just a creditor?
I read it that AZ is more of a silent partner. When SJM sorts out a sale, it has to be agreed by TSI as major shareholder, but as long as it meets their criteria for paying back their debt they will probably rubber stamp. I may be wrong, but I don't actually recall seeing it wirtten anywhere official that AZ has handed back the shares.
by winchester_royal » 02 Jun 2014 12:35
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Purley Bichance, Royals and Racers, Snowflake Royal, WestYorksRoyal and 443 guests