Search results

The golden share is with the FL. It will decide who it will be issued to. Limited has first right, but if Limited is being liquidated the share has to be transferred. Otium may then be the natural choice as they have bought all assets and are taking over the players from Limited. The rumors of...

And you did hear Fisher say that the owners already have written off the value of the loans in their books? So no additional loss in converting worthless loans to worthless shares.

Yes, sisu could sell the contracts to new owners, but they will not! Have we not yet learned that they are NOT selling anytime soon? The will play the 'beneficiary ownership' card and nobody fully knows what that means. All everyone know is if the FL decide to ignore it, then they will hear...

I would expect Appelton has established where the contracts are and have reported his findings to FL.

Because if ACL rejects the CVA there is no real option to sisu but liquidation of Limited. Otherwise the administration can be dragged out for ever. So it's really a message to ACL: Take what you can or write off your losses. Choice is ACL's.

You do know that increase in equity counts as turnover in the FFP calculation? This means that the necessary funding can be put in as equity - as opposed to loans. It also means the owners can convert some of the loans to equity to increase the FFP budget. They won't be signing players until...

I am sorry, but you're dreaming. FL cannot transfer players contracts - they are owned by Holdings. The only way FL can be sure the club can fullfill it's fixtures is by allowing groundshare (done already). Then they can do nothing until Limited comes out of administration or is being...

I wouldn't count on a 'sisu-free' future even if ACL rejects the CVA. Holdings still own the players and this 'beneficial ownership' is an unkonwn factor noone should dismiss. I think the outcome of a non-CVA would be that the FL will still grant the golden share to Otium. Limited will be...

It looks like sisu have accepted they will face some heavy 'restructuring costs' over the next 3-4 years and seem prepared to fund this. In that case it is not really about increase of present income but more about damage control. They need to secure and maximize future income by at least avoid...

Well, I think ACL should be part of the club ...

It may be true. I am sure the FL is following their own rules, but it's all quite confusing isn't it? Companies laws. Insolvency laws. And the Football leagues own rules, regulation and guidelines (I am not sure you can classify their regulations as laws).

Didn't I read somewhere that staff was being transferred to Otium ... or did I dream that?

But if they plan to collect all football related activities under Otium then that would be required for FL to issue Otium the golden share ... it should not go to limited ... so the key question is when could that happen? What steps are required for Otium to apply for the Golden Share? Will it...

I am saying they are lining up a few very exciting signings - but to get them would require we get the emgargo lifted soon. As players are cheaper these days and wages are lower it doesn't mean they are spending big. And Bell and McSheffrey are both on higher wages than Bruna is expecting. The...

No, the first two years were pretty uneventful as nothing major happened. But the third year ...

I think you are referring to FFP. Yesterday I suggested they would convert some debts to equity - as equity increase counts as turnover in the FFP calculation.

Well, none of us can be absolutely sure without the written evidence. But the history as it unfolded the first three years of their reign does not in any way contradict my assumption.

Don't be afraid to agree with me - it does happen for others one or two times. But I agree it does put a stain on your reputation. :) Anyway - I think they will try as hard as possible to win back the fans by fielding a surprisingly strong team. They are desperat to get out of embargo as they...

Says ... Hoffman!

Yes, but that is only when there are multiple shareholders. In our case there were effectively only one - sisu, counting Ranson as a sisu partner. In the case of Southampton there would be multiple shareholders, yet the agreement is based on numerical votes and does not include a paragraph of...