JH Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 He can't afford a full takeover and if he can, then he's been keeping money from us. If he does fully take over, we'll get more into debt and we'll start buying less. There's nothing good about this situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Right. I have been against Shepherd for a long long time now, and have been amongst those calling for his severing his ties with NUFC. However, could it be that should he gain full control of the club, he may actually appoint the right people to run it, and just take a back seat for a change? I'm not defending him or attacking him with this post....just trying to be objective and pose a question. I really dont know about this situation anymore. A takeover would be great if it were the right ppl with the right funds. It could also be disasterous if otherwise. What I do know however is that the status quo cannot continue, and the way Shepherd has been running the club, and continues to do so is utterly unacceptable. Can he change? Are there goings on at the club that we don't know about? Could the Halls actually have been the real culprits in our downfall? So many questions, and I have none for answers. I can't see any evidence that the absence of the Halls would mean FF would make better decisions, though there are undoubtedly goings-on at the club that we don't know about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhatTheFunk Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 He can't afford a full takeover and if he can, then he's been keeping money from us. If he does fully take over, we'll get more into debt and we'll start buying less. There's nothing good about this situation. What if he went through with the takeover with his personal cash? Just because he chairs the board doesn't mean he has to pump his own money into the club right? Did I misunderstand ur point? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 He can't afford a full takeover and if he can, then he's been keeping money from us. If he does fully take over, we'll get more into debt and we'll start buying less. There's nothing good about this situation. What if he went through with the takeover with his personal cash? Just because he chairs the board doesn't mean he has to pump his own money into the club right? Did I misunderstand ur point? He's obviously worth a good few bob more than most of us, but I find it unlikely that FF has £37 million lying around. He's been building up his stake in the club by awarding himself dividends and then investing those dividends in buying more shares... until he got to the maximum shareholding you can legally have before launching a takeover. He might have a few million more to put towards buying out the Halls, but whatever he's got would have to be supplemented by borrowing – and the borrowing would have to be against the future performance of the club that he was using it to take over. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 First of all I doubt whether he has £37 million he needs. I not he needs to find a kind bank to lend him the money in a volatile business in which the company has been making a loss. And if the rumours of his ill health are true I couldn't see him wanting to take on more responsibility. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Kill me kill me now bluedead.gif Love the way he is trying to pass the buck to the Halls, poor Fred the scape goat for the Halls mess. YEAH RIGHT!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Right. I have been against Shepherd for a long long time now, and have been amongst those calling for his severing his ties with NUFC. However, could it be that should he gain full control of the club, he may actually appoint the right people to run it, and just take a back seat for a change? I'm not defending him or attacking him with this post....just trying to be objective and pose a question. I really dont know about this situation anymore. A takeover would be great if it were the right ppl with the right funds. It could also be disasterous if otherwise. What I do know however is that the status quo cannot continue, and the way Shepherd has been running the club, and continues to do so is utterly unacceptable. Can he change? Are there goings on at the club that we don't know about? Could the Halls actually have been the real culprits in our downfall? So many questions, and I have none for answers. I can't see any evidence that the absence of the Halls would mean FF would make better decisions, though there are undoubtedly goings-on at the club that we don't know about. Aye, but it doesn't stop you trying to make out you know everything that's going on, like. The reality is you don't know squat. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montey Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 A full take over would be easy. Shepherd Offshore takes out the 37 million pound loan, as the sole owner it then transfers the debt to NUFC Plc, meaning it effectively costs Shepherd nothing and the club ends up taking a loan to take over itself. Its the same way the Glazers have taken ManU. Surely some locals have to turn his car on its roof and paint "Hands off our Toon!" on the underside!?!?!?!? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Right. I have been against Shepherd for a long long time now, and have been amongst those calling for his severing his ties with NUFC. However, could it be that should he gain full control of the club, he may actually appoint the right people to run it, and just take a back seat for a change? I'm not defending him or attacking him with this post....just trying to be objective and pose a question. I really dont know about this situation anymore. A takeover would be great if it were the right ppl with the right funds. It could also be disasterous if otherwise. What I do know however is that the status quo cannot continue, and the way Shepherd has been running the club, and continues to do so is utterly unacceptable. Can he change? Are there goings on at the club that we don't know about? Could the Halls actually have been the real culprits in our downfall? So many questions, and I have none for answers. I can't see any evidence that the absence of the Halls would mean FF would make better decisions, though there are undoubtedly goings-on at the club that we don't know about. Aye, but it doesn't stop you trying to make out you know everything that's going on, like. The reality is you don't know squat. Aye, me and everyone else. You'll notice that I'm happy to admit that. You perhaps don't notice that this cuts both ways. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 It's in the DAILY MAIL, for fucksake. It's not news until its published in the Times. So everyone just calm the fuck down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 A full take over would be easy. Shepherd Offshore takes out the 37 million pound loan, as the sole owner it then transfers the debt to NUFC Plc, meaning it effectively costs Shepherd nothing and the club ends up taking a loan to take over itself. Exactly. We'd then have to hope that the Halls were the reason for every bad decision over the last ten years, and that an unfettered Fat Fred would suddenly acquire the acumen to appoint and back a manager capable of taking the club to something resembling its full potential. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Jol, that's not funny in the slightest. People will rememeber and piss themselves when your club finds itself back in the also ran position where it has been for the last 15 years. Don't bite, that's what he wants. just ignore him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 A chess move indeed. He's forcing Belgravia to show their hand. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GM Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 A chess move indeed. He's forcing Belgravia to show their hand. Wonder if he's aware of such a thing as double bluff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 A chess move indeed. He's forcing Belgravia to show their hand. Wonder if he's aware of such a thing as double bluff. Thinks it's a type of pastry no doubt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Shepherd, however, has often had to leave the big decisions to the Halls and, while they have been spending more time overseas, he has been left in a firefighting role. Now he has decided that if he is going to take the flak for poor results and bad transfer buys, he should be in control. blatantly a back lash at everyone slagging him good move though, quite the chess player it seems He's going to borrow £37 million just because he's piqued at people expecting him to take responsibility for his mistakes? In what sense is it a good move? who says he'll borrow £37mill ? That's the minimum he'd need to buy out the other shareholders. That's the minimum it'll take to buy the Hall's out, to buy up all the shares and take full control of the club would cost him at least £60 million. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 If Shepherd is trying to play 'Chess' against Belgravia(or any other large Financial outfit/individual) he's more stupid than anyone thought - they'll eat him for breakfast. Simply buy up enough shares to prevent him taking control and refuse to sell to him - at ANY price. They would then continue to let him stew in his own juice(as he is now), and watch the club decline week by week. Failure on the pitch WILL eventually mean attendances falling, with attendant financial problems for the club. Shepherd is NOT rich enough to keep bailing the club out, share price will fall , his Investment will be worth NOWT. Eventually, the threat of bankruptcy will arise for the Club - this is what happened to Mckeag & Co back in 92 - the CLUB WAS GOING BUST. That is why SJH was eventually able to take control - he had more bucks than McKeag, and if anyone else IS seriously interested in taking over NUFC, you can bet your bottom dollar they've got more dosh than Shepherd. Big Fish get eaten by Bigger Fish.... In any case , were I still in the UK, there is NO WAY anyone would get me to pay for a Season Ticket if Shepherd DID manage to get control - I'd see him rot first. Many people would eventually take the same position, and the club would become just like it was in the late 80's/early 90s - just another run-of-the-mill Championship team , and maybe worse. Incidentally, if anyone REALLY believes that Shepherd will be a completely 'NEW MAN' if he gets total control, you're living in Cuckoo land. What possible reason would he have to behave any differently ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ_NUFC Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Quotes? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garth Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 I just think it's a ploy for who ever is trying to take over the club to force their hand nothing more Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 :obi: :obi: :obi: :obi: :obi: Don't come back Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest manny Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 get lost u fat git! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kiwi Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 Just to sum up the posts and add a couple of bits: 1. FS has had enough of the Halls. They seem to have taken their dividends and may have been poking their noses in, in some way. 2. The possibilility of Belgravia taking over is unsettling. 3. FS has publicly stated for years he has been building his shareholding. 4. Could be a ploy to force others hands. 5. Belgravia eat FS for breakfast - they rely on investments being profitable and are not movers and shakers. A takeover would likely see a new cheap stadium and St James's redeveloped. 6. FS cant afford it and would transfer debt to the club. Let me state my position. I'm ambivalent regarding Shepherd. All that concerns me is that he does what is best for the club. However I have no time for the Halls as, regardless of their achievements. They built us up, became a PLC and made a lot of money. By selling now they will make even more. Thererfore they saw Nufc a a money making opportunity. Remember the true reason Keegan left. Belgravia and the like exist only to make money. They are not a fairy godmother. If they took over St. James's would be redeveloped and the club moved - opinion. FS, if he buys the shares, has to make the same offer to all parties once he reaches a certain level. Other shareholders do not have to accept. If he held 60% I'm sure he could live with minority shareholders and remain a Plc. Although I believe he will try for 95% (?) and get 100%. FS is worth a lot more than most of you seem to think. Please correct me if wrong but I think I read he is worth about 250 million via Shepherd Offshore and personal wealth. Financially, if he could take over the club, money would be personal or debt against his assets. If the debt can be transferred it would be against the stadium, which does have equity. Personally I would rather see FS take us over. Reasons 1. He puts his neck on the block and if there has been interference it will get rid of that problem. 2. If he has been the problem any further deterioration in performance will cost him. 3. Any further losses will be his. This in turn will be reflected in a reduced squad, wage bill - although we have one of the best ratios. 4. He may bring in quality staff. I realise this is an emotive issue but many of you need to divorce emotion from business. I once had a business partner who I liked but he did less and less. When our mortgage was to be renewed he was offered the opportunity to put his share up to my level but declined so my Family Trust took over the mortgage and the trust financed a new business where, again, he was offered shares. We later asked him to leave as he was playing no usefull part in the business and are now progressing. He is still a friend as far as I am concerned but after that its up to him. I see FS in the same light. The business is what matters regardless of ones feelings for the individual. Feelings are for individuals. Protest by all means, show dissatisfaction but beyond that grow up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest geordieracer Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 'lol' i heard on sky sports news earlier, that FS inherited 5 billion off his father, this is probably why hes taking full control Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ridzuan Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 What? He is trying to rule the club as a dictator? He should be brought to the FA for crime against football rights. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W Posted November 12, 2006 Share Posted November 12, 2006 FFS is a small time local businessman he hasn't teh credit rating to borrow £ 65 million to sink into HIS venture which is going wrong on his watch peopel like Belgarvia buy sinking ships TO GET RID OF THE CURRENT DIRECTORS and turn the club around with a modest investment to resell in 3-5 years they won't build a new ground becasue they can't redevelope SJP as its not owned by the club - the land belongs to the Council - remember? and they don't want to put in another £ 250 million (see the cost of Liverpools new ground) A decent manager and £ 50 million would get us back into contention and maybe a trophy FFS is a dead man walking if Belgravia or similar decide to act Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now