Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
BlyBlyBabes

Read Barry Skipper in EDP - time for hostile takeover.

Recommended Posts

It seems that DWJ and MWJ are reluctant to either sell or re-capitalise the club. They still prefer to err on the side of prudence over ambition.

Seems that a hostile takeover by either the Turners or Peter Callum  or ????????  is the only option. In any event we shall see if the Turners have real ambition or are in bed with the moribund and ruinous DWJ/MWJ approach.

We need a groundswell of support for ambition that sweeps DWJ/MWJ out of power. Isn''t it amazing how many people are simply unable to handle power when it is gained.

Thank you Barry Skipper for starting to take the lid off.

OTBC

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hostile takeovers only apply to companies where the shares are traded publicly. Private shareholders are under no obligation to sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

It seems that DWJ and MWJ are reluctant to either sell or re-capitalise the club. They still prefer to err on the side of prudence over ambition.

Seems that a hostile takeover by either the Turners or Peter Callum  or ????????  is the only option. In any event we shall see if the Turners have real ambition or are in bed with the moribund and ruinous DWJ/MWJ approach.

We need a groundswell of support for ambition that sweeps DWJ/MWJ out of power. Isn''t it amazing how many people are simply unable to handle power when it is gained.

Thank you Barry Skipper for starting to take the lid off.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Well a couple of days ago a poster (who knows Cullum well, apparently) said Peter isn''t going to invest in us (at least not soon anyway). We can only take their word for that but we don''t know how reliable that is. I will however give them the benefit of the doubt and say hes definately not coming to the party. So thats him out.

That leaves the Turners atm. Nothing more has occured from their end so we can only assume they aren''t prepared to take over Delias shares or they haven''t got the capital.

What is it about us - is it the area (Norfolk) that scares investors? Is it the people who live here? the relative remoteness of Norwich? There has to be at least one other Norwich fan with a ton of cash out there who''d jump at the chance of taking us out of this mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Delia and MWJ cannot be "forced" to sell their shares by any means, hostile or otherwise. Especially at this "bargain" price everyone now seems to think they should sell them for!

I wouldn''t, and not may of you, would sell your shares for anything other than a realistic price and one which reflects their current value, so why the hell should they?

...and no, I think that the club should be attracting new investment but I think the word "investment" is not really relevant.

Investment infers a return and profit made on the money put in. So, how much  money do you think someone, somewhere, is going to have to fork out to (a) purchase all of Smith and Jones'' shares, PLUS pay off the debt PLUS provide a decent -say £10 Million?- "kitty" on top of that for new players?

Thats going to be near enough £30 Million for starters and with little prospect of ever recouping that, as, any money made will be expected to be put back into the footballing side of things to ensure continuity and Premiership survival. To go the next step up from that would need even more money put in! So can we please stop calling it "investment" because whoever does put money in to the extent we are all demanding, is going to have to have rather more of a benefactor with a love for the club rather than someone looking for a return.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="paint_me_yellow"]

Well a couple of days ago a poster (who knows Cullum well, apparently) said Peter isn''t going to invest in us (at least not soon anyway). We can only take their word for that but we don''t know how reliable that is. I will however give them the benefit of the doubt and say hes definately not coming to the party. So thats him out.

[/quote]

The word "invest" could be significant.  GPB quoted Peter Cullum as saying "men in white coats would have to take him away before he''d invest in football".  If he meant that you''d have to be mad to go into football with a view to making money out of it, who could disagree?  That does not rule out the possibility of him becoming a benefactor at some stage, along the lines of the Wigan chairman.  A couple of days ago a poster on another thread posted an email reply he''d received from Peter Cullum stating that "in many ways I''d love to be involved" but his current commitments prevented it.  The word "investment" was conspicuous by its absence. 

In my opinion we''re still in the dark about Mr Cullum''s future involvement - and so, quite possibly, is he.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If life was made uncomfortable for them as it was for Chase they''d soon be looking to sell up, not saying they deserve to be abused but if someone was trying to take over and they resisted it may be the only way to make them change their minds. The fact is they either haven''t got or aren''t prepared to put the money in that''s needed and are holding the club back if they resist a takeover, they must go by whatever means if there is someone willing to put in money to move us forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Old Shuck"]

Delia and MWJ cannot be "forced" to sell their shares by any means, hostile or otherwise. Especially at this "bargain" price everyone now seems to think they should sell them for!

I wouldn''t, and not may of you, would sell your shares for anything other than a realistic price and one which reflects their current value, so why the hell should they?

...and no, I think that the club should be attracting new investment but I think the word "investment" is not really relevant.

Investment infers a return and profit made on the money put in. So, how much  money do you think someone, somewhere, is going to have to fork out to (a) purchase all of Smith and Jones'' shares, PLUS pay off the debt PLUS provide a decent -say £10 Million?- "kitty" on top of that for new players?

Thats going to be near enough £30 Million for starters and with little prospect of ever recouping that, as, any money made will be expected to be put back into the footballing side of things to ensure continuity and Premiership survival. To go the next step up from that would need even more money put in! So can we please stop calling it "investment" because whoever does put money in to the extent we are all demanding, is going to have to have rather more of a benefactor with a love for the club rather than someone looking for a return.

 

I dont agree it needs to be someone with a love for the club, it could be someone who fancies a bit of yellow and green jewellry.

I agreee the word investment would to most of us oiks imply a financial return, but for many of the sugar daddies its about prestige and power, they already have enough money!

[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 paint_me_yellow wrote:

Well a couple of days ago a poster (who knows Cullum well, apparently) said Peter isn''t going to invest in us (at least not soon anyway). We can only take their word for that but we don''t know how reliable that is. I will however give them the benefit of the doubt and say hes definately not coming to the party. So thats him out.

The word "invest" could be significant.  GPB quoted Peter Cullum as saying "men in white coats would have to take him away before he''d invest in football".  If he meant that you''d have to be mad to go into football with a view to making money out of it, who could disagree?  That does not rule out the possibility of him becoming a benefactor at some stage, along the lines of the Wigan chairman.  A couple of days ago a poster on another thread posted an email reply he''d received from Peter Cullum stating that "in many ways I''d love to be involved" but his current commitments prevented it.  The word "investment" was conspicuous by its absence. 

In my opinion we''re still in the dark about Mr Cullum''s future involvement - and so, quite possibly, is he.

 

 

Hi must of missed this return email from peter cullum   I dont know if you can remember on which thread it was posted do you would like to read it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t remember Skipper being very vocal on this issue when he was still at the club, its a bit cowardly to jump on the bandwagon now. Don''t get me wrong, I agree with what he says, just wish he had said it when his voice meant something!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Chase was forced to sell his shares.

The hostility involved came from City supporters.

Learn to think out of the box.

Of course a hostile takeover is possible and feasible.

OTBC

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="yellowngreen"]

 

The word "invest" could be significant.  GPB quoted Peter Cullum as saying "men in white coats would have to take him away before he''d invest in football".  If he meant that you''d have to be mad to go into football with a view to making money out of it, who could disagree?  That does not rule out the possibility of him becoming a benefactor at some stage, along the lines of the Wigan chairman.  A couple of days ago a poster on another thread posted an email reply he''d received from Peter Cullum stating that "in many ways I''d love to be involved" but his current commitments prevented it.  The word "investment" was conspicuous by its absence. 

In my opinion we''re still in the dark about Mr Cullum''s future involvement - and so, quite possibly, is he.

 

Hi must of missed this return email from peter cullum   I dont know if you can remember on which thread it was posted do you would like to read it

[/quote]

I can''t remember what the thread was called yellowngreen, but I''m pretty sure it was salahuddin who posted it.  If he reads this he''ll probably be able to find it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Old Shuck"]

Delia and MWJ cannot be "forced" to sell their shares by any means, hostile or otherwise. Especially at this "bargain" price everyone now seems to think they should sell them for!

I wouldn''t, and not may of you, would sell your shares for anything other than a realistic price and one which reflects their current value, so why the hell should they?

...and no, I think that the club should be attracting new investment but I think the word "investment" is not really relevant.

Investment infers a return and profit made on the money put in. So, how much  money do you think someone, somewhere, is going to have to fork out to (a) purchase all of Smith and Jones'' shares, PLUS pay off the debt PLUS provide a decent -say £10 Million?- "kitty" on top of that for new players?

Thats going to be near enough £30 Million for starters and with little prospect of ever recouping that, as, any money made will be expected to be put back into the footballing side of things to ensure continuity and Premiership survival. To go the next step up from that would need even more money put in! So can we please stop calling it "investment" because whoever does put money in to the extent we are all demanding, is going to have to have rather more of a benefactor with a love for the club rather than someone looking for a return.

 

[/quote]

 Of course by cannily converting loans into shares at every opportunity, Delia has ensured that she''s likely to get most if not all of her financial input straight back were somebody to come in and buy her out.

Net input over her period of tenure would be approx £0 if she get''s the kind of amount she''s touted in the past.

She''ll have had our Club as a plaything for a dozen years, stripped the team from an approx value of £15 million to approx £5 million, flogged offf assets left right and centre and established a catering business etc. and still walk away with her "investment all but intact".

There are no loans outstanding which could be written off as in the case of the late G. Watling, oh no, Delias made sure that when she walks her money walks with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Robert Chase was forced to sell his shares.

The hostility involved came from City supporters.

Learn to think out of the box.

Of course a hostile takeover is possible and feasible.

OTBC[/quote]

Robert Chase was bought out of his shares by a group willing to take his place. Do you see anyone willing to stump the money to buy Delia out? The Turners seem to be happy to stay in the position they''re in presently until Delia and co are willing to part with their shares when they''re ready. They''ve made it clear that time isn''t yet.

A hostile takeover is in no way possible or feasible because you need interested parties in order to initiate such a takeover. We don''t have any such party.

Anything of this sort isn''t going to happen. It''s quite obvious yet here you are telling people to learn to think out of the box? I suggest you just learn to think, BlyBly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think Barry Skipper is spot on and this proposal to issue 33,333 new shares is merely to facilitate a further debt for equity swap by Delia and Michael. I have no obhjections to the principle of them doing this, but it clearly limits the Club''s ability to raise new capital and is at odds with their previous suggestion that they''re always looking for new investment[:@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]I think Barry Skipper is spot on and this proposal to issue 33,333 new shares is merely to facilitate a further debt for equity swap by Delia and Michael. I have no obhjections to the principle of them doing this, but it clearly limits the Club''s ability to raise new capital and is at odds with their previous suggestion that they''re always looking for new investment[:@][/quote]

You''re probably on the right track, but it''s more likely to be the Turners who will convert part of their loan.  All D&M''s loans were converted last season. 

The Shareholders Trust apparently have £5,000 that they were unable to spend last season because D&M had hoovered up all the remaining shares.  It will be very interesting to see whether they manage to avoid being shut out this season too.  Will the club turn down new money (albeit only £5,000) in favour of a loan conversion?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Wings"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

Robert Chase was forced to sell his shares.

The hostility involved came from City supporters.

Learn to think out of the box.

Of course a hostile takeover is possible and feasible.

OTBC[/quote]

Robert Chase was bought out of his shares by a group willing to take his place. Do you see anyone willing to stump the money to buy Delia out? The Turners seem to be happy to stay in the position they''re in presently until Delia and co are willing to part with their shares when they''re ready. They''ve made it clear that time isn''t yet.

A hostile takeover is in no way possible or feasible because you need interested parties in order to initiate such a takeover. We don''t have any such party.

Anything of this sort isn''t going to happen. It''s quite obvious yet here you are telling people to learn to think out of the box? I suggest you just learn to think, BlyBly.
[/quote]

Don''t tell me how to think, thankyou Bly Bly. We can agree to disagree but don''t get personal. And if I have, I apologise, I don''t want this to end up being confrontational and just a facility to exchange insults, naive that I am perhaps with the nature of messageboards?

Once we have these interested parties THEN we can see what the reaction of the Board etc is and decide who is hanging whose colours to what mast. Until then its speculation and hypothetical.

One thing I think is clear, is that the Turners are biding their time, waiting, waiting, waiting for the right moment....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="mystic megson"]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]I think Barry Skipper is spot on and this proposal to issue 33,333 new shares is merely to facilitate a further debt for equity swap by Delia and Michael. I have no obhjections to the principle of them doing this, but it clearly limits the Club''s ability to raise new capital and is at odds with their previous suggestion that they''re always looking for new investment[:@][/quote]

You''re probably on the right track, but it''s more likely to be the Turners who will convert part of their loan.  All D&M''s loans were converted last season. 

The Shareholders Trust apparently have £5,000 that they were unable to spend last season because D&M had hoovered up all the remaining shares.  It will be very interesting to see whether they manage to avoid being shut out this season too.  Will the club turn down new money (albeit only £5,000) in favour of a loan conversion?

 

[/quote]

Doesn''t really matter if it''s D&M or the Turners, the same principle applies. I can''t make the AGM, but I hope someone asks the question.

I hadn''t picked up that D&M didn''t have any more personal loans outstanding. Where did you get that from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GazzaTCC"][quote user="mystic megson"]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]I think Barry Skipper is spot on and this proposal to issue 33,333 new shares is merely to facilitate a further debt for equity swap by Delia and Michael. I have no obhjections to the principle of them doing this, but it clearly limits the Club''s ability to raise new capital and is at odds with their previous suggestion that they''re always looking for new investment[:@][/quote]

You''re probably on the right track, but it''s more likely to be the Turners who will convert part of their loan.  All D&M''s loans were converted last season. 

The Shareholders Trust apparently have £5,000 that they were unable to spend last season because D&M had hoovered up all the remaining shares.  It will be very interesting to see whether they manage to avoid being shut out this season too.  Will the club turn down new money (albeit only £5,000) in favour of a loan conversion?

 

[/quote]

Doesn''t really matter if it''s D&M or the Turners, the same principle applies. I can''t make the AGM, but I hope someone asks the question.

I hadn''t picked up that D&M didn''t have any more personal loans outstanding. Where did you get that from?

[/quote]

The 2007 Annual Report gazza, p.41 (note 33)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="mystic megson"]

[quote user="GazzaTCC"]I think Barry Skipper is spot on and this proposal to issue 33,333 new shares is merely to facilitate a further debt for equity swap by Delia and Michael. I have no obhjections to the principle of them doing this, but it clearly limits the Club''s ability to raise new capital and is at odds with their previous suggestion that they''re always looking for new investment[:@][/quote]

You''re probably on the right track, but it''s more likely to be the Turners who will convert part of their loan.  All D&M''s loans were converted last season. 

The Shareholders Trust apparently have £5,000 that they were unable to spend last season because D&M had hoovered up all the remaining shares.  It will be very interesting to see whether they manage to avoid being shut out this season too.  Will the club turn down new money (albeit only £5,000) in favour of a loan conversion?

[/quote]

This just about says it all doesn''t it?

Unwilling to let the Shareholders Trust invest even 5000 pounds.

When will the faithful ever learn.

OTBC

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Old Shuck"]

Delia and MWJ cannot be "forced" to sell their shares by any means, hostile or otherwise. Especially at this "bargain" price everyone now seems to think they should sell them for!

I wouldn''t, and not may of you, would sell your shares for anything other than a realistic price and one which reflects their current value, so why the hell should they?

...and no, I think that the club should be attracting new investment but I think the word "investment" is not really relevant.

Investment infers a return and profit made on the money put in. So, how much  money do you think someone, somewhere, is going to have to fork out to (a) purchase all of Smith and Jones'' shares, PLUS pay off the debt PLUS provide a decent -say £10 Million?- "kitty" on top of that for new players?

Thats going to be near enough £30 Million for starters and with little prospect of ever recouping that, as, any money made will be expected to be put back into the footballing side of things to ensure continuity and Premiership survival. To go the next step up from that would need even more money put in! So can we please stop calling it "investment" because whoever does put money in to the extent we are all demanding, is going to have to have rather more of a benefactor with a love for the club rather than someone looking for a return.

 

[/quote]

 

Sighs........you and Mr T at last.  The shareholders in a non quoted company decide the price for the share (s), not the market, in general the price at which they were last traded I believe (£30 in the case of Norwich).  In general the bidder would be expected to BEAT that price, not match it.

According to the City statement the Board have decided £30 a share.  So that''s the price and it then becomes put up or shut up time.

There are still two options there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="camuldonum"][quote user="Old Shuck"]

Delia and MWJ cannot be "forced" to sell their shares by any means, hostile or otherwise. Especially at this "bargain" price everyone now seems to think they should sell them for!

I wouldn''t, and not may of you, would sell your shares for anything other than a realistic price and one which reflects their current value, so why the hell should they?

...and no, I think that the club should be attracting new investment but I think the word "investment" is not really relevant.

Investment infers a return and profit made on the money put in. So, how much  money do you think someone, somewhere, is going to have to fork out to (a) purchase all of Smith and Jones'' shares, PLUS pay off the debt PLUS provide a decent -say £10 Million?- "kitty" on top of that for new players?

Thats going to be near enough £30 Million for starters and with little prospect of ever recouping that, as, any money made will be expected to be put back into the footballing side of things to ensure continuity and Premiership survival. To go the next step up from that would need even more money put in! So can we please stop calling it "investment" because whoever does put money in to the extent we are all demanding, is going to have to have rather more of a benefactor with a love for the club rather than someone looking for a return.

 

[/quote]

 

Sighs........you and Mr T at last.  The shareholders in a non quoted company decide the price for the share (s), not the market, in general the price at which they were last traded I believe (£30 in the case of Norwich).  In general the bidder would be expected to BEAT that price, not match it.

According to the City statement the Board have decided £30 a share.  So that''s the price and it then becomes put up or shut up time.

There are still two options there.

[/quote]

Cam:  if it is a "put up or shut up" situation then the idea that the board are prepared to negotiate is wrong then surely?  The £30 figure is for shares released by the club but in reality, once they are owned by someone they are worth whatever people are prepared to pay- and lots of people don`t think they are worth £30 given the debt and lack of future profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Old Shuck"]

Delia and MWJ cannot be "forced" to sell their shares by any means, hostile or otherwise. Especially at this "bargain" price everyone now seems to think they should sell them for!

I wouldn''t, and not may of you, would sell your shares for anything other than a realistic price and one which reflects their current value, so why the hell should they?

...and no, I think that the club should be attracting new investment but I think the word "investment" is not really relevant.

Investment infers a return and profit made on the money put in. So, how much  money do you think someone, somewhere, is going to have to fork out to (a) purchase all of Smith and Jones'' shares, PLUS pay off the debt PLUS provide a decent -say £10 Million?- "kitty" on top of that for new players?

Thats going to be near enough £30 Million for starters and with little prospect of ever recouping that, as, any money made will be expected to be put back into the footballing side of things to ensure continuity and Premiership survival. To go the next step up from that would need even more money put in! So can we please stop calling it "investment" because whoever does put money in to the extent we are all demanding, is going to have to have rather more of a benefactor with a love for the club rather than someone looking for a return.

 

[/quote]

AND.................if you read the press,,,,,,,,,,,,the current value of the shares is roughly half what theuy are asking !!! Nice one !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

It seems that DWJ and MWJ are reluctant to either sell or re-capitalise the club. They still prefer to err on the side of prudence over ambition.

Seems that a hostile takeover by either the Turners or Peter Callum  or ????????  is the only option. In any event we shall see if the Turners have real ambition or are in bed with the moribund and ruinous DWJ/MWJ approach.

We need a groundswell of support for ambition that sweeps DWJ/MWJ out of power. Isn''t it amazing how many people are simply unable to handle power when it is gained.

Thank you Barry Skipper for starting to take the lid off.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Forget those bloody useless lackies called the Turners Bly, they''re part of the whole rotten set up themselves!.[:@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

It seems that DWJ and MWJ are reluctant to either sell or re-capitalise the club. They still prefer to err on the side of prudence over ambition.

Seems that a hostile takeover by either the Turners or Peter Callum  or ????????  is the only option. In any event we shall see if the Turners have real ambition or are in bed with the moribund and ruinous DWJ/MWJ approach.

We need a groundswell of support for ambition that sweeps DWJ/MWJ out of power. Isn''t it amazing how many people are simply unable to handle power when it is gained.

Thank you Barry Skipper for starting to take the lid off.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Forget those bloody useless lackies called the Turners Bly, they''re part of the whole rotten set up themselves!.[:@]

[/quote]

It may just be me but how can you have a hostile take over of a company whose shares are not publicly quoted?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cam, you''re making the elementary messageboard mistake of letting the facts get in the way of your prejudices.  You''re going to have to do something about that if you want to fit in on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="camuldonum"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

It seems that DWJ and MWJ are reluctant to either sell or re-capitalise the club. They still prefer to err on the side of prudence over ambition.

Seems that a hostile takeover by either the Turners or Peter Callum  or ????????  is the only option. In any event we shall see if the Turners have real ambition or are in bed with the moribund and ruinous DWJ/MWJ approach.

We need a groundswell of support for ambition that sweeps DWJ/MWJ out of power. Isn''t it amazing how many people are simply unable to handle power when it is gained.

Thank you Barry Skipper for starting to take the lid off.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Forget those bloody useless lackies called the Turners Bly, they''re part of the whole rotten set up themselves!.[:@]

[/quote]

It may just be me but how can you have a hostile take over of a company whose shares are not publicly quoted?

[/quote]BlyBlyBabes advocates bullying MWJ and Delia out of town, though that''s just the usual keyboard warrior talk. But actually it''s the only way - "hostile" in a more traditional sense. I still wonder if that''s what Cullum wants - the rabble to do his work for him, to drive the price down. If that happens, how can it not have a bad effect on the team? I''m disillusioned with all parties in this game - I''m just going to support the manager and the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There seems no doubt to me that Cullum''s EDP interview was designed to put pressure on the board, and the hilarious way in which all those who condemn the board''s spin have swallowed his every word as gospel suggests that he has been successful. Whether this is a good thing depends on his intentions for the club. He certainly seems to want to get in on the cheap to me, which doesn''t bode massively well for his commitment to the cause. If people are expecting him to throw billions at the team they are going to be disappointed.The idea that he is the knight in shining armour and Delia is the wicked witch of the west is laughable. It''s obviously much more complicated than that.Poor old Bly: it must be terrible to be substantially less clever than you think you are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="camuldonum"][quote user="1st Wizard"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]

It seems that DWJ and MWJ are reluctant to either sell or re-capitalise the club. They still prefer to err on the side of prudence over ambition.

Seems that a hostile takeover by either the Turners or Peter Callum  or ????????  is the only option. In any event we shall see if the Turners have real ambition or are in bed with the moribund and ruinous DWJ/MWJ approach.

We need a groundswell of support for ambition that sweeps DWJ/MWJ out of power. Isn''t it amazing how many people are simply unable to handle power when it is gained.

Thank you Barry Skipper for starting to take the lid off.

OTBC

 

 

[/quote]

Forget those bloody useless lackies called the Turners Bly, they''re part of the whole rotten set up themselves!.[:@]

[/quote]

It may just be me but how can you have a hostile take over of a company whose shares are not publicly quoted?

[/quote]

Ask Robert Chase.

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Robert N. LiM"]There seems no doubt to me that Cullum''s EDP interview was designed to put pressure on the board, and the hilarious way in which all those who condemn the board''s spin have swallowed his every word as gospel suggests that he has been successful. Whether this is a good thing depends on his intentions for the club. He certainly seems to want to get in on the cheap to me, which doesn''t bode massively well for his commitment to the cause. If people are expecting him to throw billions at the team they are going to be disappointed.

The idea that he is the knight in shining armour and Delia is the wicked witch of the west is laughable. It''s obviously much more complicated than that.

Poor old Bly: it must be terrible to be substantially less clever than you think you are.
[/quote]

Your talent Robby is obviously not to reason why.

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×