Mark .Y. 352 Posted January 11, 2009 [quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Mark .Y."][quote user="PurpleCanary"]My New Year resolution is not to post on Cullumgate, but since this is purely a matter of fact...It is an established fact that Cullum never made an offer for NCFC plc. If he had made an offer, or even formed the "firm intention" to make an offer, then under UK takeover rules he would have had to have made an announcement to that effect, and NCFC plc would have had to have informed its shareholders as well.Cullum made no such announcement and NCFC plc never informed me or any other shareholders of any such offer or intention to make an offer. The reason for those two non-events is simple - Cullum never made an offer. If you want further proof then it is supplied in the letter Cullum sent to the plc recently stating that he had no intention of making an offer. Such a letter would make no sense if he had already made an offer.[/quote] Oh dear, I had forgotten UK company law, bit similar (and treated in exactly the same way) to the law in football where you are not allowed to make contact with another manager/player who is under contract unless they have permission from that person''s club.Cullum may well have made an initial informal offer, in polite conversation, for the club as a means of establishing a ballpark figure Delia/MWJ would want. It may have been quite unacceptable and he could have been told that in a perfectly friendly manner. This would be a perfectly usual way to conduct business at any level. Of course, none of this might have happened but neither you nor I know that. Mark .Y.[/quote]Mark Y, you said - and are still saying - that it is not known whether Cullum made an offer. That is not true. Words have meanings, and particularly in business (where the Takeover Code IS taken very seriously). An offer, which is the term you originally used, is a precise term. Your attempt to recategorise it as an "initial informal offer" is meaningless. An offer is an offer is an offer. Cullum did not make an offer, and the fact that he did not make an offer is known, to me and to anyone else who has been paying attention.If you want to continue to believe those people who have been paying attention know as little as you do then you are welcome to that erroneous belief.[/quote]Well done then Mr pedantic............. a formal offer in accordance with the takeover code was never made, I can agree with that. I remain of the view though that this does not mean an "informal/implied" offer could never have been discussed or made.Mark .Y. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barclay_Boy 0 Posted January 11, 2009 [quote user="City Turn Around 2009"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="City Turn Around 2009"] We feel it would more than likely take the form of a hostile takeover, so we need your support.[/quote]CTA2009, NCFC is not a listed company, so many of the usual mechanisms used in hostile takeovers cannot apply. Given that, could you explain what you mean by a hostile takeover and how it would be achieved? Your answer might well help clarify whether this is a serious proposition or a bit of Friday fun. Thanks.[/quote]Hostile is meant in the sense of Delia and Michael would have to be forced into giving up the club (by fans pressure etc), its not all going to be handshakes and toasting success with glasses of champagne type deal.[/quote]Great, then you would have the support of most fans in my opinion. Supports the view that maybe they are not quite so keen to hand over the reigns as has been suggested. As with other posters though I remain to be convinced that this isn''t a wind up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barclay_Boy 0 Posted January 11, 2009 [quote user="Darren Butt-Head"]12 pages of utter shiite[/quote]intelligent and good quality post. from someone whose signature is "kiss it fart knocker". Well done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Prudence 0 Posted January 11, 2009 I would wholheartedly support any consortium. However, i would not support any stupid twat on a wind up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
William Darby 0 Posted January 11, 2009 [quote user="Barclay_Boy"][quote user="Darren Butt-Head"]12 pages of utter shiite[/quote]intelligent and good quality post. from someone whose signature is "kiss it fart knocker". Well done.[/quote]A signature goes underneath btw. There you go, that''s your bag if you get taken in by shiite. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr.Carrow 380 Posted January 11, 2009 [quote user="Mark .Y."][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Mark .Y."] [quote user="PurpleCanary"]My New Year resolution is not to post on Cullumgate, but since this is purely a matter of fact...It is an established fact that Cullum never made an offer for NCFC plc. If he had made an offer, or even formed the "firm intention" to make an offer, then under UK takeover rules he would have had to have made an announcement to that effect, and NCFC plc would have had to have informed its shareholders as well.Cullum made no such announcement and NCFC plc never informed me or any other shareholders of any such offer or intention to make an offer. The reason for those two non-events is simple - Cullum never made an offer. If you want further proof then it is supplied in the letter Cullum sent to the plc recently stating that he had no intention of making an offer. Such a letter would make no sense if he had already made an offer.[/quote] Oh dear, I had forgotten UK company law, bit similar (and treated in exactly the same way) to the law in football where you are not allowed to make contact with another manager/player who is under contract unless they have permission from that person''s club.Cullum may well have made an initial informal offer, in polite conversation, for the club as a means of establishing a ballpark figure Delia/MWJ would want. It may have been quite unacceptable and he could have been told that in a perfectly friendly manner. This would be a perfectly usual way to conduct business at any level. Of course, none of this might have happened but neither you nor I know that. Mark .Y.[/quote]Mark Y, you said - and are still saying - that it is not known whether Cullum made an offer. That is not true. Words have meanings, and particularly in business (where the Takeover Code IS taken very seriously). An offer, which is the term you originally used, is a precise term. Your attempt to recategorise it as an "initial informal offer" is meaningless. An offer is an offer is an offer. Cullum did not make an offer, and the fact that he did not make an offer is known, to me and to anyone else who has been paying attention.If you want to continue to believe those people who have been paying attention know as little as you do then you are welcome to that erroneous belief.[/quote]Well done then Mr pedantic............. a formal offer in accordance with the takeover code was never made, I can agree with that. I remain of the view though that this does not mean an "informal/implied" offer could never have been discussed or made.Mark .Y. [/quote]Cullum basically said as much with his "friendly arm-wrestle over valuations" comment. If the majority shareholders demands were deemed excessive then no offer would have been made as there was absolutely no chance of it succeeding. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bringbackchippy 51 Posted January 11, 2009 what about Darren Eadie? very successful in business after retirement Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
