Mark Attanasio

[PurpleCanary 6,276]

1 hour ago, Soldier on said:

And were there different prices based on divisional status ? Either way we were pretty my he told it was essentially a done deal and just subject to legal process . Have to assume that remains the case ….

The point is that the club has never said anything about Attanasio buying these new shares. And it certainly has never said it was essentially a done deal.

Many, myself included, have assumed the shares have been created for Attanasio to buy, but there has not been an official statement to that effect. All the club said was that now there shares had been created there were some legalities to be settled. But it never said the legalities were connected to an Attanasio purchase, even though they may well be.

[Kenny Foggo 1,175]

Death by a hundred cuts. 

[Soldier on 273]

9 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

The point is that the club has never said anything about Attanasio buying these new shares. And it certainly has never said it was essentially a done deal.

Many, myself included, have assumed the shares have been created for Attanasio to buy, but there has not been an official statement to that effect. All the club said was that now there shares had been created there were some legalities to be settled. But it never said the legalities were connected to an Attanasio purchase, even though they may well be.

No it did say the shares were being created to ensure healthy finances though which suggested a buyer had been found ?!

[Mello Yello 2,538]

Only taken the best part o' 28 years to supposedly find an almost suitable, prospective, possible and maybe future club owner.....If it all fails and falls at the last fence - or unfortunately in the last minute gets blown out the water?.....Well I'm sure we can all wait another best part o' 28 years for another almost suitable, prospective, possible and maybe future club owner.....

Patience is a virtue.....

[BigFish 2,257]

1 hour ago, Mello Yello said:

Only taken the best part o' 28 years to supposedly find an almost suitable, prospective, possible and maybe future club owner.....If it all fails and falls at the last fence - or unfortunately in the last minute gets blown out the water?.....Well I'm sure we can all wait another best part o' 28 years for another almost suitable, prospective, possible and maybe future club owner.....

Patience is a virtue.....

It takes time, dedication and a lot of money as this little tale tells....

 

[Mello Yello 2,538]

Why aren't we Brighton?.....Do we suffer from pier pressure....

[Indy 3,448]

Are these new shares cat C? what's their sale price was it fixed or negotiable? if it dilutes the shares even more then if the shares are not bought by MA what happens to them now they've been issued ready to sell?

[Davidlingfield 72]

19 hours ago, Harry53 said:

She must have said "kind of.." about 100 times!! . Her earlier comment about having a blank canvas for her role says alot about the lack of Board direction and control of where she takes the club

A blank canvas together with someone out of their depth is a dangerous combination!

[PurpleCanary 6,276]

1 minute ago, Indy said:

Are these new shares cat C? what's their sale price was it fixed or negotiable? if it dilutes the shares even more then if the shares are not bought by MA what happens to them now they've been issued ready to sell?

As Q once said in exasperation: "Oh do pay attention, 007!"  They are Ordinary shares. The ones with the voting rights. Nothing has been said publicly about price. And as I understand it any dilution is at best theoretical until they are bought, because only then can they be voted.

[Indy 3,448]

2 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

As Q once said in exasperation: "Oh do pay attention, 007!"  They are Ordinary shares. The ones with the voting rights. Nothing has been said publicly about price. And as I understand it any dilution is at best theoretical until they are bought, because only then can they be voted.

🤣 Thanks Q! or should that be P. So if they are not bought by MA, could they be bought by the current majority share holder for a token sum as no price has been set and increase their hold?

[PurpleCanary 6,276]

8 minutes ago, Indy said:

🤣 Thanks Q! or should that be P. So if they are not bought by MA, could they be bought by the current majority share holder for a token sum as no price has been set and increase their hold?

Indy, you're overlooking another potential buyer. Me!😍

Yes, they could be bought by S&J. A possibility that some posters here regard as the nightmare scenario to end all nightmare scenarios. For what it is worth I don't for a moment believe that will happen.

[Indy 3,448]

3 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Indy, you're overlooking another potential buyer. Me!😍

Yes, they could be bought by S&J. A possibility that some posters here regard as the nightmare scenario to end all nightmare scenarios. For what it is worth I don't for a moment believe that will happen.

😂 Very good, if you can out bid my £0.000001 per share then you can have them!

So I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Tom buying these for a token sum and becoming the next owner! 😨

[king canary 8,644]

50 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Indy, you're overlooking another potential buyer. Me!😍

Yes, they could be bought by S&J. A possibility that some posters here regard as the nightmare scenario to end all nightmare scenarios. For what it is worth I don't for a moment believe that will happen.

Honestly the fallout if S&J used the new shares to further cement their family control of the club would be quite something to watch.

[GMF 977]

5 minutes ago, king canary said:

Honestly the fallout if S&J used the new shares to further cement their family control of the club would be quite something to watch.

Amusing as it would be, it’s not going to happen. Something’s a brewing… 

[Norfolk Mustard 106]

I've been assuming that MA is waiting for NCFC stock to hit a real low before maximising his potential investment. That would represent good business for him?

[NewNestCarrow 279]

41 minutes ago, king canary said:

Honestly the fallout if S&J used the new shares to further cement their family control of the club would be quite something to watch.

Can any of the 'truth seekers' answer these two simple Qs?

1) If S&J wanted to "further cement their family control" then why not just buy Foulger's shares?

2) Why go to the trouble & expense of creating brand new shares when you already have full & total control?

 

Edited April 21, 2023 by NewNestCarrow
Not enough caffeine

[shefcanary 2,901]

13 minutes ago, GMF said:

Amusing as it would be, it’s not going to happen. Something’s a brewing… 

Do tell us what new information you have heard. I'm thirsting for knowledge! ☕

[nutty nigel 7,870]

17 minutes ago, GMF said:

Amusing as it would be, it’s not going to happen. Something’s a brewing… 

To make totally joyous it should be Delia buying them in her own name. The reaction on here would awesome. We could probably play 'Delia Out' Bingo for the CSF and raise thousands. I think I want it to happen...

[king canary 8,644]

4 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Do tell us what new information you have heard. I'm thirsting for knowledge! ☕

But did you study sculpture at St Martin's College?

[essex canary 601]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

😂 Very good, if you can out bid my £0.000001 per share then you can have them!

So I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Tom buying these for a token sum and becoming the next owner! 😨

Given that he bought 100 shares for £100 no reason why he couldn't buy 194,512 for £194,512 other than perhaps he hasn't got that kind of money. The true meaning of Delia's socialism is starting to unravel.

[essex canary 601]

35 minutes ago, NewNestCarrow said:

 

If D&M wanted to "further cement their family control" then why not just buy Foulger's shares direct from him?

Foulger's wouldn't have been for sale at £1 each

[shefcanary 2,901]

27 minutes ago, king canary said:

But did you study sculpture at St Martin's College?

Nah, but did spend time with Jarv in Sheffield during the 80's before he went there - I taught him some of my best moves! 🙂 

[NewNestCarrow 279]

6 minutes ago, essex canary said:

Foulger's wouldn't have been for sale at £1 each

You know neither the offer / trade price.

[Indy 3,448]

2 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

Can any of the 'truth seekers' answer these two simple Qs?

1) If S&J wanted to "further cement their family control" then why not just buy Foulger's shares?

2) Why go to the trouble & expense of creating brand new shares when you already have full & total control?

 

1, Foulgers shares would have cost a lot of money which Delia probably doesn't have to buy these shares.

2, Because with the excitement of MA getting the additional shares accepted was easy and as I mentioned these are open value and could be bought by the current owners for a fraction of the cost of Foulgers shares

Just being pessimistic not saying this is why...but! 😉

[essex canary 601]

15 minutes ago, Indy said:

1, Foulgers shares would have cost a lot of money which Delia probably doesn't have to buy these shares.

2, Because with the excitement of MA getting the additional shares accepted was easy and as I mentioned these are open value and could be bought by the current owners for a fraction of the cost of Foulgers shares

Just being pessimistic not saying this is why...but! 😉

Exactly. And why not increase your percentage to 64% rather than 53% especially when you can kick the Attanasio can down the road and there are so many supporters with the delusion that their shares are in Norwich City rather than Smith and Jones United.

[GMF 977]

I do love a good conspiracy theory…

Anyway, the price MF paid for the majority of his shares is actually in the public domain, for those who know how to look. He converted debt for equity at the equivalent of £25.00 a pop.

If the shares to be allotted were issued at the same price, it would raise less than £5m. IMHO, that’s not happening, not least because it would be completely inconsistent with the likely conversion price of the C-pref shares (which isn’t a valid measure unless, or until the conversion happens).

Despite the conspiracy theories, this option really is about raising capital, rather than soft deals to existing shareholders…

Something’s a brewing…

[shefcanary 2,901]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

1, Foulgers shares would have cost a lot of money which Delia probably doesn't have to buy these shares.

2, Because with the excitement of MA getting the additional shares accepted was easy and as I mentioned these are open value and could be bought by the current owners for a fraction of the cost of Foulgers shares

Just being pessimistic not saying this is why...but! 😉

Just to add re. 2, Smith & Jones only currently have c.52% of shares (if they haven't already snaffled up the 194,814 new ones) which isn't technically total control - they'd need at least 75% for that, if not 90.1% if there is a particularly well organised minority. 

[shefcanary 2,901]

2 minutes ago, GMF said:

Something’s a brewing…

Come on, what do you know that I don't? 😉 

[essex canary 601]

6 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Come on, what do you know that I don't? 😉 

Indeed and why shouldn't those who are shareholders in an individual capacity know first. Anything else is an abrogation of responsibility. Besides it is difficult to reconcile that last posting of @GMF with a previous suggestion from him that the new issue price reaching the 30% threshold would be the basis of a settlement to minorities.

Edited April 21, 2023 by essex canary

[Soldier on 273]

Bailey in his post match q and a in relation to the hold up…

 

”I thinks it’s just background stuff”