|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
well my reading of it says its utter tripe, the Don says he won't resign unless ilyas plans are in stanleys best interest! yet he did not attend Tuesday cos of his objection to proposals, he says he has not seen.:rolleyes: that to me is a pathetic cop out n says much about the Don to anyone with any sense.:(
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
Why should anyone pay them off. The club was bust and their shares (and mine) worth ****** all the day that Ilyas stepped in and rescued the club. If Ilyas wants his money back, ALL OF IT, we are bust again, and our shares, again, worth ****** all. If this goes through, and I cant believe that Ilyas was not correct when he said it had been agreed, legally, then at least the club, and the shares are worth something again. EW and / or DON must be bigger idiots than it has been suggested if they refuse the proposal, UNLESS, they are taking the pee eye double ess and trading on the fact that Ilyas also said (and he is probably as good as his word) that he WILL fund the club for as long as it takes. From what I recall at other clubs, where there has been a takeover (like the unpopular real United of Manchester (not FCUM) and their friends from USA) if Ilyas (or the trust) had 90% they could make anyone else sell their shares anyway. I have not got a clue how much money is owed to Mr Khan, but maybe, with the ground issue, he could get 1,000,000 shares issued, and then force anyone else out of any share ownership. BUT, call me synical if you want.... why would they hang around owning 51% of nothing if the trust doesn't go ahead ?????????????????/ |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
O'neill comes across as a very desperate man. Pathetic words from a man with no credibility.
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Just had a word with our legal department, and it depends on the company constitution.
If the board have the right to pass the resolution to increase share capital, then the deal is done. If the constitution claims that it needs a special resolution, and voting by the share holders, why were the shareholders not invited to the meeting (which couldnt actually take place, probably without a required number of shreholders (in percentage) being there). Simples - isn't it??????? However, the good thing, is that all this is worth remembering for when the Members Trust Constitution is written..... |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
just sum things to point out
1. don pay up to ew. job dun. 2if no then ew is back on. the we need to do a sos for the club get a lone off sum one then we pay it . how much are 51% in cash i will go to bank 2 moz for lone deatals. sorry for the spelling if its good i deer pm me |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
However who really said it, the MD or a Lancashire telegraph reporter with a grudge ? |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
I'd be willing to bet it was the former, & it wouldn't be the first time he's said it - at the time of the SOS he stood in the reception area at the club & when my mum (yes Dave - Brenda) asked why they would not accept the help being offered by Ilyas replied that Ilyas's proposed new share issue was nothing but a short term fix for the club & therefore not in the club's best interests
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
ACCRINGTON Stanley managing director Dave O’Neill has expressed concerns about proposals for a supporters’ trust to own the club – and says he will not resign unless he is certain that Ilyas Khan’s plans are in the Reds best interests. ...........................The man who said that is the ONE who don't have the clubs best interests at heart, Ali Baba.:mad:
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
today/tomorrows Observer has a reasonably in depth (full page) bullet point account of what happened at the meeting.
basically Ilyas can do what he wants as far as the share issue is concerned because (and I can't remember the jargon and aint got the paper in front of me) the loans he made to the club were agreed and signed off as 'convertible' to equity. It is (apparently) legally binding and he can convert the loans (thus making the club free of its debt to him) into the agreed (at a Directors and shareholders meeting) 200,000 shares at the drop of a hat. That would make him the 66% major shareholder and Eric/Don would own 51% of the remaining 33%. Peter Marsden has also agreed the same. That will be why the club wont make a statement until their legal team has formally told them that they have sold themselves down the river (allegedly). Just to clarify the extra points raised somewhere in this thread; at the point where Ilyas and Peter legally own the 66%+ they will donate them to the Community Trust that is to be set up. My understanding of that is that if only I sign up to be a member of that Trust I will be the sole trustee (for the princely sum of 1yr membership) of the whole 66% - if a million people sign up then I would own a millionth of 66%. The Trust would be the principal shareholder but as no one person would be a member of that then the status quo of no single major shareholder would remain. I think that's it ... |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
Thanks Rob, :) Any one got a Scanner.............. |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Found this on a website somewhere......
Why does he dislike Illyas so much.....? Why such contempt for a man who saved ASFC....? Why dismiss a guy who offers to buy us a new ground....? I really don't get it! Other clubs would be snatching the guys hand off & bending over backwards to please him. Yet the D'On slags his vision off in the paper.... I don't know the right way the club should go but please, slagging him & his ideas is suicidal! O'Neill .... I have always stood up for him but really, what is the underlying motive? This is from a chap who - in my opinion - really loves the club and used to really like The DON!!!!!!!!! |
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
|
Re: Tuesday Meeting
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:54. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1
© 2003-2013 AccringtonWeb.com