S.A.F.C. - the future

OK manager sorted for a few weeks at least. What about that new investment?

 

Shareholdings out. Pretty grim. 59% owned by People unwilling or unable to properly run/invest in the club.

 

FFS. So, we've been lied to by Louis-Dreyfus all along?

 

Technically no, but misled yes. Bastards

 

I'd say a "controlling share" is 50.1% as a minimum. Not 41% with a gentlemen's agreement you can run the club

Will we never be rid of these Madrox ****s?

 

Actually, aye think we have been lied to.

 

so he owns less than half. But is still the key decision person at the club. Not sure if it even matters

 

How could it possibly not matter?

 

he confirmed himself weeks ago that he was the majority shareholder the lying twat

 

Well that's not a controlling interest

 

This is going to take some PR work to smooth this over, then again who would believe it now !! We’ve been lied to repeatedly for over a year. Never seen this coming, I knew the chancers would still maintain a percentage but not that much.

 

Get the ****ing lot of them out my club. I'd rather have Ellis ****ing Short than these shysters

 

I certainly would not have renewed had I known I was supporting Madrox, particularly Donald and Methven. Will not renew next year with this bunch of liars running things. Disgusting betrayal of trust.

 

Not quite what some of the "ITK's" spouted on here. Looks like every fookers been conned

 

Here was me thinking there would be nowt to talk about until the marvellous match day thread popped up...

 

On a technicality its not a lie -

"
Understanding a Controlling Interest
A controlling interest is, by definition, at least 50% of the outstanding shares of a given company plus one. However, a person or group can achieve a controlling interest with less than 50% ownership in a company if that person or group owns a significant portion of its voting shares, as not every share carries a vote in shareholder meetings."

However i'd say its being economical with the truth - now we know why the NDA was in place to stop the natives from becoming restless if they knew Madrox was still owning a lot of shares.

Interestingly from the same page:

"With the majority of large public companies, for example, a shareholder with much less than 50% of the outstanding shares may still have a lot of influence at the company. Single shareholders with as little as 5% to 10% ownership can push for seats on the board or enact changes at shareholder meetings by publicly lobbying for them, giving them control."

 

Sartori's stake looks to be the key here.

 

Not good, not good at all.

 

Oh, another kick in the bollocks from Sunderland. Lovely stuff.

We've been lied to right? Or is there some technicality they can wriggle out of it with.