They refused to answer that question. Said it isn't fair on anyone at the club to comment on their position.
(Impression I got was they may have someone else in mind).
The Chinese takeover may well have happened; the chairman at the time (can't think of his name) said he thought he could get the deal done (the deal on un-headed paper), however after a confidential meeting down in London someone from the meeting ran straight to the Sun newspaper, who gave an exclusive on Allardyce being involved etc. The trust with the Chinese was at that point lost, and they walked away.
That would be a shame. I think Pressley will be good for us.
Was at meeting, did have question about debt being 60million but they couldn't/wouldn't give definite answer due to protocol. I asked one of the just men two on their own if the Golden Share was with ccfc ltd and sisu or anyone bought ltd do they have to pass the "fit and proper" test, with what i detected to be a little glint in his eye he said yes. The whereabouts of this Share seems very crucial.
He also said there is no way that it should be taking this long to find out where the golden share lies and how the rest of the structure is laid out.
Correct, it shouldn't take is long. Surely to find the golden share is a 5 minute phone call.
On yeah - also the indication was that a chunk of the debt owed was in fact owed from the outset, as the rights to the debts owed by CCFC to Directors was transferred to SISU's ownership as part of the deal.
Makes sense I guess. So close to admin at the time that the Directors would lose most if not all of what they were owed, so for a small sum they could pass that debt over - and SISU could try and reclaim it at a later date.
How would a deal have worked if SA was a director of the company?
How would a deal have worked if SA was a director of the company?
On yeah - also the indication was that a chunk of the debt owed was in fact owed from the outset, as the rights to the debts owed by CCFC to Directors was transferred to SISU's ownership as part of the deal.
Makes sense I guess. So close to admin at the time that the Directors would lose most if not all of what they were owed, so for a small sum they could pass that debt over - and SISU could try and reclaim it at a later date.
Yes in answering my question and all i can say it is just moving debt around from one business to another, it hadn't just vanished into thin air as we perhaps thoughtWhen he stated that we were building a good team under Ranson, did he say why Ranson claimed the club was debt free?
When he stated that we were building a good team under Ranson, did he say why Ranson claimed the club was debt free?
He mentioned SA, but didn't go into detail as people's rights to confidentiality have to be respected etc. Am I right in thinking at the time that Big Sam was out of work?
When he stated that we were building a good team under Ranson, did he say why Ranson claimed the club was debt free?
Ranson very occasionally explained that he was talking about "external debt" i.e. excluding that owed to the owners. Too often though, he just used the phrase "debt free" which was simplistic and frankly a bit silly.
No, I am pretty sure he was the West Ham manager?
Pretty simple.
The deal would have been done with a condition precedent i.e. SA would have resigned from the company before the deal was concluded so as to meet the relevant regulations.
I am not sure I remember him explaining it!
Maybe I am a little more cynical than you
Did they mention if there was a Plan B if Plan A wasn't going to work?
Sad that seemingly Deleui indicated a deal could be done based on the offer on non-headed paper, but that someone ran to the press straight from the meeting with the Chinese investors.
I remember the fuss about the lack of headed paper at the time.
Always thought that as excuses went it was the biggest pile of *****
They said that if it turns out that the golden share is in CCFC Holdings rather than Ltd (where the Football League think it is), then the whole thing will be off, as that company isn't in admin.
Does that matter? If u want to buy something you speak to the owners, or is that not what you would do....
Now, you won't believe this, but I'm sure people will come along and back me up who have been; but Gary Hoffman told us that he comes on this site because he's a fan and wants to hear people's views. He also said that Grendel, Torch, and LordSummerisle seem to make unfounded allegations against him.
(He's got a point there; and they are clearly arseholes).
Does that matter? If u want to buy something you speak to the owners, or is that not what you would do....
You know, I'm trying to think what "unfounded allegation" I've levelled at Hoffman. :thinking about:
You speak to the owners if you believe they are (seems appropriate to quote Mrs T on her funeral day) "people you can do business with".
It seems clear that whatever the rights and wrongs of the situation, there are a number of people who do not believe that our owners fall into that category.
id still lick to no why he got involved with sisu at all if there as bad as sum people here seem to think
id still lick to no why he got involved with sisu at all if there as bad as sum people here seem to think
We would be back to square one though as SISU would still be owners of the club. They will request their money back (or some other unrealistic proposal) and I'm assuming Haskell is not willing to do that as JE has said they have been taking to him for 2 and a half years! (Correct me if I'm wrong on that last bit Rich).
He said SISU were an entity he knew nothing of actually!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?