S.A.F.C. - the future

It's all nonsense isn't it.

EFL: if we sanction this takeover will you fund the club?

Buyer: Errr, yeah.

EFL: Great, that's that then.

 

Scenes from the EFL Xmas Party!

 

Can I open my cans yet ?

 

You certainly can ...

... after can after can.

 

I haven’t drank since new year, I’m hoping I have an excuse soon haha

 

Thats me anarl, I've said to mself I'll not drink over Jan and Feb but I'd break that when this takeover is announced

 

Put way too much clem on over December so I’ve cut it out for a while, probably til the pubs open back up, but I can make acceptions

 

KLD is in the North East?

 

Sort of my resolution as well, first lockdown drank far too much...trying not to do the same

 

Aye? Where have you heard / seen this mate?

 

On this thread about 5 posts back haha

 

Looks like William Storey is there on the right. Probably explains the delay.

 

Kieran Maguire is the expert who the echo are asking and he knows his stuff. He is suggesting a legal obligation for all significant shareholders to individually commit to fund the full club in the event that others pull out. In other words Donald has to say that he will fund everything if KLD and Sartori stop funding. That sounds like him having to say that he will fund club for 2 years if he has to, not just his %. This is not something that has occurred to me as necessary before.

It may turn out to be a good thing if ultimately KLD just buys the whole thing now but I cant get my head around why this hasnt been sorted right at the beginning. It cant be a new thing.

 

Queer thing this, but it still looks like this to me: We go forward with the takeover by KLD, or we go under without it.

Even the incompetent blazer wearers at the EFL will be able to see this, so unless there is something no one knows and is causing problems, they should be getting a wiggle on if the delay - which it is fair to call it now after the Christmas Eve announcement - is down to them.

 

I think Kieran McGuire has put 2 and 2 together there and got 5. Joint and several liability is used to ensure that partners in a business are responsible for paying out any claims brought against them regardless of who has the deepest pockets. If KLD pulled out or refused to pay his part the others are required to pay up and if need be can sue the one who didn’t pay to even out the costs. That, I’m sure is the case in any partnership.

What the EFL are asking is can you pay the bills if KLD goes bump. The reality of it is, if he did lose his billions and the others couldn’t pay the bills, the club would enter administration and there’s nowt the EFL can do about it. Either way the EFL are just asking the question to cover their arses, so if we went tits up they can say that they were told that the other shareholders could cover the costs. Ticking boxes that’s all. IMO.

 

That's a given for all shareholders in every business, doesn't mean they'll do it.

Louis-Dreyfus is making the same commitment and the EFL are obviously expecting him to fund the club.

What they're saying is that if he doesn't do that, and walks away, they'll simply expect the remaining shareholders to stump up.

Why the f**k would they believe their wishes would respected by the minority shareholders when the majority shareholder has just walked away.

It's ridiculous.

 

How is that legal, if someone owns 10% of a company they’d be under no obligation to find the whole thing if the other shareholders walked away.

 

It mostly applies to moneys owed by the business. Whoever is left standing is obliged to pay what’s owed but they can sue the other non paying partners to recover their share of the costs. If SD didn’t have the money if that scenario ever arose then the club would be put into administration.

 

The shareholder, who's walked away, is equally liable.

 

That seems about right mate. I cant really see the EFL being able to get to bent out of shape as this is company law stuff which trumps there process. Cant see why the late fuss though