Originally Posted by Redskin (Post 741736)

I have no objection to Mr Khan taking the club, but to allow the club to be run by a Committee is an absolute receipe for further disaster....IMO

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 741739)

The way I understand it, it wouldn't be run by a committee - the ASSF would appoint its own directors who would work with the existing directors (including the D'on).

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 741744)

Don owns 52% of a nominal 100k worth of shares. If we need to put in 300k then we need to create three times as many shares (minimum). So Dons share of the issue would be worth only a quarter of what it is now (13%) - as would everybody elses.

Do we need to discuss this on every page? If Ilyas used his money to bail out the club (52% Dons business) then what would be to stop him selling his 52% to someone else at a vastly inflated price as the company was now solvent? The 'company' would now be worth the share price of £400k and he could sell his 52% at market value and 'possibly' make a killing from his original purchase price (that nobody knows or needs to know).

Yes he deserves the chance to make a success of the club.

Yes many of the committee are fully behind his tenure

but no, he is not more important than Accrington Stanley and he has acknowledges so.

There is an offer on the table that is not to his liking because it is not in his best interests (only at face value) But it is in the best interests of Accrington Stanley and is funded by someone with the best interests of Accrington Stanley at heart and was delivered and sanctioned by 12 people with the best interests of Accrington Stanley at heart.

If anyone comes up with a better solution in the meantime then they have the backing of me, the ASSF, the OSC, the Ultras and ASFC.

Originally Posted by VALAIRIAN (Post 741741)

Nobody at A.S.S.F. has ANY thoughts of running Stanley!!! Controlling stake, not running the club, 2 very different things. :)

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 741744)

Don owns 52% of a nominal 100k worth of shares. If we need to put in 300k then we need to create three times as many shares (minimum). So Dons share of the issue would be worth only a quarter of what it is now (13%) - as would everybody elses.

Do we need to discuss this on every page? If Ilyas used his money to bail out the club (52% Dons business) then what would be to stop him selling his 52% to someone else at a vastly inflated price as the company was now solvent? The 'company' would now be worth the share price of £400k and he could sell his 52% at market value and 'possibly' make a killing from his original purchase price (that nobody knows or needs to know).

Yes he deserves the chance to make a success of the club.

Yes many of the committee are fully behind his tenure

but no, he is not more important than Accrington Stanley and he has acknowledges so.

There is an offer on the table that is not to his liking because it is not in his best interests (only at face value) But it is in the best interests of Accrington Stanley and is funded by someone with the best interests of Accrington Stanley at heart and was delivered and sanctioned by 12 people with the best interests of Accrington Stanley at heart.

If anyone comes up with a better solution in the meantime then they have the backing of me, the ASSF, the OSC, the Ultras and ASFC.

Originally Posted by Redskin (Post 741751)

Same thing!

Originally Posted by Nickelson (Post 741754)

No its not, a controlling share means that they ultimately dont need to have a board decision on any issue.

Originally Posted by Redskin (Post 741758)

Exactly!!!!!!...they own 50%, therefore control the club!!!!...which was my original point!

Originally Posted by Redskin (Post 741786)

Committee's organise Coffee Mornings!.............LMAO

Originally Posted by ukcowboy (Post 741789)

Very helpfull, now go away and come back when you have something of value to add :mad: