Leaderboard

Zoe is paid too much. Attanasio is trying to steal the food from minor shareholders and their heirs mouths. Delia is going to make a massive profit. None of the tawdry business would be happening if Ben Kensell was still here. The away supporters membership scheme is a blatant cash grab. The club will be selling official sticks. Burnley are marvelous. The City elite drummer willbe attending the meeting in order to keep the mood light. And Someone will reply to this thread saying 'do we really need another thread about this subject?'

Sorry but I beg to differ. We have been told the legal bare minimum. There are some extremely intelligent and knowledgeable people on this forum but none of them has any certainty at all. That is worrying, especially when it would have been possible to lay out the long term plan. A few days ago I posted the view that I was concerned that MA is buying control of our club using a shell company in a tax haven. That view was ridiculed by some, one of whom actually stated the opinion that it was a good thing because it would mean that MA would save money that he can put into the club. That's about as naive as you can get. It really is very simple, people who use Delaware for business purposes have something they wish to hide or know that they will have something they will wish to hide in the future. To put things simply, I'm being asked to believe that a foreigner who has no knowledge or interest in football, who has conducted his business through a shell company in a tax haven, has the long term interests of our club at heart. Really? If this was happening to Ipswich Town we would be laughing our heads off.

The old supporters association was an important contributor to club funds in the days before money flooded in from TV worlwide contracts. They paid the fee for Gerry Howshall from WBA (£40000) and contributed to several other player signings. The roof or the corner infill between the South Stand and Barclay was funded (fully or in part I’m not sure) by the NCFSA. Tangible, another brother and I ran the club shop in the rebuilt City stand for quite a few seasons before the club took it over. Dad loved the club and was a good friend of Geoff Watling which gave me the occasional opportunity to travel with the directors to away games. Happy days long lost to the influence of the influx of money in the game.

Do we really need another thread about this subject? You're welcome.

You are overplaying the significance of the Delaware registrations - it is normal commercial practise in the US for the majority of businesses. Companies with relatively high moral values register there to ensure they lower their tax burden to allow more investment in their core business. It is now too well ingrained in the business world to reverse out of it without a significant knock to the economy over there. I don't disagree that some dodgy ones also register there for nefarious reasons, a significant number of the UK's FTSE also have subsidiaries registered within tax havens around the world to ensure they have some shelter from Corporation tax, but it is a blinkered view to say the vast majority are doing it for illegal reasons. It is currently a legitimate business practise, what is offered if you don't take it up sets you at a disadvantage against your competitors. The US government doesn't seem particularly concerned at all, be it run by the Dems or the GOP's, as UK Govt is rarely bothered by similar practise in the UK however much back benchers squeal from time to time. I repeat what I said earlier, in Attanasio's world of investment finance to not register in Delaware would be to disadvantage his operations. It is business as normal, he and his advisers would have never gave it a second thought to register them anywhere else. It does not necessarily make him a bad man, just a shrewd businessman. You may think all the latter are ****, I appreciate that view as well, but someone has to do it.

After the 58/59 Cup Run the South Stand was extended & roofed. For a short while it was known as 'The Supporters' Stand' - see pic - but this title didn't stick.

I haven't got a clue, but from what I can gather; MA and Delia/MWJ want to get to a position of parity (40%) with regards to shareholding. MA acquiring that many shares would, in normal circumstances, force him to make an offer to buy all the other shares at a certain level (I think the highest amount he paid for the ones he acquired?). They want to vote through a waiver that means he doesn't have to make an offer for all the other shares. Essex canary is very cross.

The difference between you and @chickenis that Chicken is looking at this from the perspective of the future of the football club he supports whereas your only concern seems to be making a few quid on your shares. In simple terms, a tiny minority interest in a loss making company that doesn't pay dividends is effectively worthless. But 99 out of 100 people who bought their shares did so with no thought whatsoever as to benefiting financially. For goodness sake put your grubby self interest to one side and concentrate on the long term future of our club.

What is this in English? Do you mean 50,000 supporters/fans? Your constant references back to 2002 are, at best, dull. You weren’t pressured into buying 1000 shares at £25 a piece, you did so because you could and you were starry eyed by the meaningless title of Associate Director. You’ve been bleating and whining ever since, mistaking your meaningless label for some form of importance. You’ve exhausted all lines of complaint apart from posting on here. You haven’t lost anything, you still own what you paid for at a price you found acceptable. Yet at every turn you want to dig at the club, they pay too much but if they took the “cheap” option I’m sure you’d determine that they lack ambition. Couldn’t get favourable treatment for Chelsea away? Whine. Not understanding the difference between being alive and dead? Whine. Birds ****ting on your seat? Whine. You’ve complained and complained and complained and been told you’ve got NOTHING at every turn, yet you still pebbledash this board with your, clearly determined, pointless moaning day after day. Your only goal is self. For all the “helping the club” rhetoric it’s now self evident that you expected a return on your input; a poxy input that bought you a few ties and a title you can put on your Facebook profile. It’s 25k ffs. It’s minuscule. It’s what? A weeks wages for a decent player? You chucked it in over 20 years ago, how often do you think the club can spend your one off input? Cambridge is your level. Not academically, obviously. You are boring.

It's definitely true that there was a stark contrast in our first team recruitment this summer compared to previous years. The main reason for the divide this summer between the first team and youth recruitment is essentially tied to Webber leaving the club, I don't say that in a negative sense but that is why things have happened as they have. Wagner, like pretty much every manager, would rather have experienced players at hand as opposed to young unproven options. With Webber leaving soon he hasn't pushed back on older signings like he had done in previous years (especially ones that came via a recommendation of the first team manager). Last summer Dean Smith floated Hourihane as a midfield option only for that to be shut down pretty quickly and told that Sara was the main choice. Whether sanctioning these moves now is Webber doing Wagner a favour (for handing in his notice 2 months after appointing him) or maybe him looking to leave on a high still and looking more short term than before I'm not sure, it's possibly them factors and more. That brings us onto the youth recruitment side. Webber, in sanctioning these (more) short term moves for first teamers, realised that the shape of the squad doesn't look great 2-3 years down the line. Obviously he could have simply waved away these concerns as he would no longer be here but I think he has always been genuine when he says he wants to leave the club in a good place. As a result the recruitment team were essentially let loose this summer to bring in a number of options who will hopefully be making their way into the side within the next 2 seasons.

60% of (US) Fortune 500 companies are incorporated in Delaware. If the US tax authorities really saw this as a "red flag" wouldn't they do something about it? [The commercial arm of the BBC is incorporated in Delaware, and has been since the mid-1980s] There is a big difference between efficient tax arrangements (e.g being Incorporated in a low-tax state) and cheating the system (e.g. not declaring income)

Not sure of all this sudden distrust of MA. Seems some were happy to let him invest and loan to our club but now he wants something in return he's not to be trusted? It has been clear that ever since he sat in the Directors Box and saw us slaughtered by Spurs it would lead to an eventual takeover. Any objection to this should have been raised much earlier, including when the 194,000 shares were announced, but not now, in my view. What is much more important is how he runs the club going forward. Surely we have to take some encouragement from his 18 years at The Brewers?

You make MA and his crew sound like the devil incarnate. He has an excellent reputation in business and in running the brewers for 18 years. Think he has also represented their league. delia and Michael have always been incredibly resistant to change so maybe they deserve to be trusted in terms of finding suitable people to take the club on? Presumably they think they have found it it MA and his people ?!!!

I think that might be why @jaberry2 was salivating. 😉

I do think mistakes have been made, and also that my alternative plan would have worked, providing S&J and Attanasio were willing to drop what seems to me to be a purely symbolically rigid parity at 40:40. Providing the new figures of, say, 42:38 were then set in stone, and with an agreement to vote in tandem, as I think is the current idea, I don't see what possible difference it would make. But it is not going to happen. Everything will go ahead as arranged, despite any flaws. And if Parma is right that in the longer run the minorities will not lose out, it is even possible that my proposal to allow them to sell out at £25 would leave them worse off. Wouldn't that be ironic?😍

Firstly it was a piece of political chicanery to add these details to a bill that had already passed through some of the stages. Secondly the governments own nature watchdog told them that the rule changes were not necessary and that the current scheme was working to deliver homes and reduce nutrients. And thirdly the costs are being switched from the housing developers to the tax payer.

In my opinion this shouldn’t be viewed as a take it, or leave it situation. All these loans are personal to MA and should be capable of renegotiating if the vote doesn’t go through.

My thoughts are increasingly that the current board have actually got us into a slightly scary financial position with these loans and arrangements with MA and he effectively has everyone over a barrel. Whilst he may well be a good guy so it all turns out ok in the end once this is voted through, I’m far from convinced that what has been going on is good governance.

Always great to write off players before we’ve even seen them kick a ball. Way to go!

Christ are we really now arguing about which road you're most likely to get stuck behind a tractor on?

Just a random photo i found on the internet.

I don't think you are alone. A very brief summary would be that Attanasio has made some big loans to the club, because it has got into significant debt, and is on the verge of buying more shares so he and S&J have the same percentage. S&J stop being the majority owners but Attanasio does not take that role on. Yet. They both have big minority holdings and for the next three years that will stay the situation, with them voting in lock step. After three years? And does Attanasio want all his big loans repaid? Does he want to become owner? Not clear. There are all sorts of questions like that, especially about money. But nothing in what is happening suggests he is cooling on the idea of taking over.

I am pretty sure you are right.

He's carp, naturally.

Scotland were pretty average / verging on sh1te. Their fans were brilliant though - did anyone else hear the rendition of ‘Boogie Woogie’ at HT? Class! The atmosphere at Wembley is embarrassing in comparison.

One thing I am unclear on re the money MA lent us is whether it was additional to the debt we already have or whether it is a replacement for this (I have always assumed the latter). For example, the accounts (page 68) refer to 2 loans repayable in 2024 for about £66 million, at in the context of the current market, quite reasonable interest rates (5.75% and 5.6%). Am I wrong in my present view that MA replaced these loans or are they additional? "Included in the short-term loan totalling £43,914,000 (amount due over one year: £30,830,000) relates to accelerated funds secured on future media rights and fully repayable by March 2024. The interest rate due on the loan is 5.75% per annum. Included in the short-term loan totalling £22,568,000 (amount due over one year: £14,474,000) relates to accelerated funds secured on future contracted player receivables and fully repayable by September 2024. The interest rate due on the loan is 5.6% per annum."

Wait until you see the video on youtube of him doing the fozzy flick *salivating here.

Do Carteret get paid money for that? If so, I’ve got a bridge for sale.

Seems a better general stamp of young players too, with the likes of Lima / Ogwaru / Reyes / Adegboyega should all be pushing for first team starts later this season

Add Kellen Fisher to that list too. I don't think it's an unusual amount but up on last season. It's just only few make it so the rest get forgotten about. The season we signed Omabamadele there was also Barden, Soto, Mumba and Josh Martin. I can also remember Melvin Sitti, McCallum was 20 when we signed him, Rocky Bushuri, Simon Power, the lad from Peterborough who's now out on loan but the name escapes me. Daniel Adshead was another.

Ironic indeed. Exactly right. Parma

Perhaps I should have used an emoji with a wink.

Half of my family including my wife are Irish. They are far from exotic.

Is there anything the government does that Barbe won't stick up for, ffs.

As I’ve said Purple I have no issue with taking on manageable debt finance. However, I do think that for us to have gone from no debt, to debts of the scale revealed in the last accounts and in the background papers to this, in such a short time and whilst selling tens of millions worth of players at the same time, is somewhat alarming, especially under the watch of people who are (in some cases) being paid very, very, well. I also think it has effectively tied the hands of shareholders with this vote. It is what it is. Let’s hope once it’s all played out this deal stabilises things with all debts being to MA and therefore hopefully with little or no threat of being called in!

Jim, you would have to say that, since as Hoggy points out for years you called for S&J to take a calculated risk, which as I seem to remember saying at the time meant in practical terms potentially getting into serious debt if it didn't work out, and probably wasn't the kind of gamble you would take with your own finances... More seriously, yes, it has mainly all happened, but then it would have happened that way anyway, without consultation.. All that info is only there because it is regarded as necessary background to what is on the face of it a much smaller decision about Attanasio spending £5m on buyng some more shares. In practice, of course, there might well be consequences concerning those big loans and even Attanasio's long-term plans if shareholders don't play ball to allow him the waiver he wants, so that is certainly added pressure.

The lies relate to ministerial statements, made on multiple occasions. Not that there is anything unusual about that under this Government or its Tory predecessors, per se. But when they start to get called out for their lies by conservative charities like the RSPB and peers in the HoL then I think you can be re-assured that they have taken their lying to a new level. Thank goodness there are still a few, if isolated, voices that are prepared to push back against this set of corrupt b*****ds!

If you mean the notice from Carteret it is the other way round: The Independent Directors have confirmed that they are happy with the contents of the final version of the Circular which was forwarded to us on 24 August 2023, and Carteret Group Limited (as the Company’s Financial Advisor) hereby gives its consent to the issue of this Circular and the inclusion of its name in the form and context in which it appears. In other words Smith and Webber have finalised the report, which is in their name, and on that basis Carteret are satisfied with it and content to let it be published as such. It is the ID's report and recommendation to vote for the waiver rather than Carteret's.

My issue is not with incurring loans/debt per se. If shareholders were being given a vote of a takeover based partly on loans to be converted into equity with all the risks explained properly then fine. The issue here is it’s all already happened six to eight months ago and members are being asked to vote to sanction it after the event knowing that if they vote against it (and let’s me honest against their own interests as shareholders) then it could, based on the info we have available, cause the club financial issues due to the need to repay the loans. I won’t vote against it. I think we need change at the top and I am placing my faith in the fact that the owners have judged MAs character well. But I do not think that the background details to this deal laid out in the terms document are a glowing endorsement of the current board and executive team because the way it has been done gives shareholders little option.

Hope Webber signed the right Hwang , there is four in the team

If I was so minded to bring in inconvenient facts I would mention that ten years ago McNally was paid a basic salary (so not including any bonuses) of around £700,000. To be fair he was the fully fledged CEO whereas with the splitting of that role into two Zoe Webber’s job is not entirely comparable, but she is the nearest thing to a CEO. And taking wage inflation into account if she now, ten years on, is getting a basic salary of less than £500,000 then, again, if I was so minded, I would suggest she is if anything being underpaid…

I think it is done to highlight the cultural damage that brexit has done to the music industry in particular. Music lovers know that musicians are suffering because of new restrictions placed on them by the brexit government. The fact it winds up the more gammonry types is nothing but a bonus.

I cant really see that happening although personally seeing how angry posters on here would get over such a thing, I'd welcome it.

Some kind of rival or relative to the Wealdstone Raider?

Luxury? In Ipswich?

Somebody in politics needs to state this. Can we please hold Israel to the same standards we hold the Russian's to in occupying foreign lands. Let's not be hypocrites. We need to make the two state solution happen and frankly largely remove the 'settlers' from their smash and grab if we are to ever have a just peace.