S.A.F.C. - the future

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I am taking the fact that Donald and Methven are hanging on to a stake as a positive. I am sure that they will have been offered the chance to fully walk away for a tidy little sum but they've turned it down because what they've heard from Juan and Kyrill makes them think that they will make serious wonga further down the line. This only happens if we are successful and to my mind they clearly think we will be.

Happy days as far as I'm concerned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ab65, Robref62, Young Ted and 6 others
Riever said:
I am taking the fact that Donald and Methven are hanging on to a stake as a positive. I am sure that they will have been offered the chance to fully walk away for a tidy little sum but they've turned it down because what they've heard from Juan and Kyrill makes them think that they will make serious wonga further down the line. This only happens if we are successful and to my mind they clearly think we will be.

Happy days as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

Good post mate. They'll get a percentage of what they thought they would get,only by a different route. And,if so,as you say,it gives real confidence to the ability of the new owners,given by SD and CM who will no doubt have had some access to their intentions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riever
Wouldn't bother me if Donald and Methven stay on. As long as they don't have a say in matters. We all knew that they saw us as a quick investment. His gamble didn't pay off. The main thing that went against them was last years takeover hysteria. If they eventually leave us in decent hands this time then they have almost done their job. Hopefully a few years down the line, in hindsight, whilst sitting in the Premier League, we will look back at Donald and forgive his failings and appreciate his transitional era.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guy Incognito, Robertson, The Norton Cat and 3 others
Julio said:
5 subs being allowed in the EFL now i see. Will that mean more subs allowed on the bench? would be an advantage to us with the size of our squad if we had a half decent manager who had the ability to change games with substitutions

Might even mean we see Dan Neil in the matchday squad
Click to expand...

That divot will change the back four man for man, and replace Wyke with Graham. Every game, whatever the score, and on 78 minutes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robertson, SAFC2403, Billy Batts and 2 others
Wouldn't it be funny if the new owners didn't buy SD and CM's remaining shares, EVER.
Who could SD & CM then sell there shares to - No one, because no one wants a minority stake in a business

Of course the problem may come when the new owners want to sell us on, but let's assume that they had set up a holding company to hold the shares in Madrox they had acquired from SD and they sold this holding company then the buyer of the holding company would not have to offer to buy the shares in Madrox held by SD & CM.

Yes I know that's why you employ expensive legal types to avoid this situation but the thought did put a little smile on my face, even if it was only for a short time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gillmackem, Robertson, Blond Bombshell and 2 others
OldNewtown said:
Wouldn't it be funny if the new owners didn't buy SD and CM's remaining shares, EVER.
Who could SD & CM then sell there shares to - No one, because no one wants a minority stake in a business

Of course the problem may come when the new owners want to sell us on, but let's assume that they had set up a holding company to hold the shares in Madrox they had acquired from SD and they sold this holding company then the buyer of the holding company would not have to offer to buy the shares in Madrox held by SD & CM.

Yes I know that's why you employ expensive legal types to avoid this situation but the thought did put a little smile on my face, even if it was only for a short time.
Click to expand...


I'm absolutely sure there's no love between the buyers and sellers.

I'm also sure the buyers will have much better advisers and lawyers.

The sellers may find they've painted themselves into a corner when it's all done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mackem49000, Guy Incognito and Random lad
OldNewtown said:
Wouldn't it be funny if the new owners didn't buy SD and CM's remaining shares, EVER.
Who could SD & CM then sell there shares to - No one, because no one wants a minority stake in a business

Of course the problem may come when the new owners want to sell us on, but let's assume that they had set up a holding company to hold the shares in Madrox they had acquired from SD and they sold this holding company then the buyer of the holding company would not have to offer to buy the shares in Madrox held by SD & CM.

Yes I know that's why you employ expensive legal types to avoid this situation but the thought did put a little smile on my face, even if it was only for a short time.
Click to expand...

The fans maybe?
 
Smug in Boots said:
This is a little bit of good info but mostly what I've discerned from it.

The Guardian couldn't leak the story until the deal was agreed.

Until the deal was agreed they couldn't interview people or make decisions.

Until they've chosen people and have something to announce there's no reason to rock the boat.

IMO they'll want to come in with a bang ...

... DOF, manager, staff, vision, new tea lady.

Just because we're in a rush, it doesn't mean they are.
Click to expand...
Oh! My god what’s the tea lady done wrong I bet it’s that Yorkshire tea she was told to use Tetley
 
  • Like
Reactions: Young Ted, Blond Bombshell and Smug in Boots
  • Like
Reactions: Whittylad, Robertson, dyd13 and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back