Farhad Moshiri

7+ Years On... Your Verdict On Farhad Moshiri

  • Pleased

    Votes: 107 7.7%
  • Disappointed

    Votes: 1,287 92.3%

  • Total voters
    1,394
Yes because they are solely responsible for the lower away tickets aren't they?, they are starting a moshiri out campaign already with that time for change hashtag, they are gimps

No I didn't say that but one of their officers is an officer of The FSF and they played a big part in the campaign.

They also organise food banks etc. They want rid of Kenwright not Moshiri. To say they've never done any good for fans is just folly really especially when you consider Kirkby.
 
Not something that could be used at a future point (when we're successful) to pay dividends and take money out of the club?
From a dividend perspective the IOM company doesnt achieve anything that a UK company cant- you can pay dividends out of the football club tax free in either case.

The tax reason is more like to be how he is taxed on a future sale of shares in the club (no tax in IOM).
 
Incorporating a company in the Isle of Man has certain advantages for an investor, and in the case of Mr Moshiri:

  • Legal system based on English common law
  • no general capital gains tax, turnover tax or capital transfer tax, and there are no stamp duties
  • no requirement to audit accounts as turnover in the holding company will be less than £5.6 million and has less than 50 employees
  • nominee directors allowed, single director also allowed
  • compared to other offshore jurisdictions IoM is cheap
  • he has existing assets inside other IoM Holding companies
There is no disadvantage to Everton at all in him holding his interest in Everton in an IoM company.
 

Incorporating a company in the Isle of Man has certain advantages for an investor, and in the case of Mr Moshiri:

  • Legal system based on English common law
  • no general capital gains tax, turnover tax or capital transfer tax, and there are no stamp duties
  • no requirement to audit accounts as turnover in the holding company will be less than £5.6 million and has less than 50 employees
  • nominee directors allowed, single director also allowed
  • compared to other offshore jurisdictions IoM is cheap
  • he has existing assets inside other IoM Holding companies
There is no disadvantage to Everton at all in him holding his interest in Everton in an IoM company.

Could you educate the Blue Union's twitter account?
 
Check out @TheBlueUnion's Tweet:

Hmmm... not getting this at all like.

Think its far far far too early for any sorts of statements from Blue Union on this questionning what is going on.

Suggest they go and read some company law before commenting further. As there really is nothing to be worried about at this stage.

I think there's a lot of edgy people wondering just what Moshiri's game is, tbh.

Cant blame people for wondering out loud...they're just filling the gaping vacuum where a plan should have been announced in the first week or so after he took effective control.

First rule of control: manage the message or have it managed for you.

I think it's a nudge in the ribs of Moshiri to remind him that we've had enough of being kept at arms length at this club.
 
I think there's a lot of edgy people wondering just what Moshiri's game is, tbh.

Cant blame people for wondering out loud...they're just filling the gaping vacuum where a plan should have been announced in the first week or so after he took effective control.

First rule of control: manage the message or have it managed for you.

I think it's a nudge in the ribs of Moshiri to remind him that we've had enough of being kept at arms length at this club.

Jesus Christ Dave.
 

Personally I think the inference from The Blue Union is that a Board containing Bill, Jon Woods, Mr Moshiri's representative and our CEO Robert Elstone does not represent sufficient change, or at least the change they expected when Mr Moshiri's purchase of shares was announced.
 
Personally I think the inference from The Blue Union is that a Board containing Bill, Jon Woods, Mr Moshiri's representative and our CEO Robert Elstone does not represent sufficient change, or at least the change they expected when Mr Moshiri's purchase of shares was announced.

That was my thought as well. Kenwright out...and all that.
 
Personally I think the inference from The Blue Union is that a Board containing Bill, Jon Woods, Mr Moshiri's representative and our CEO Robert Elstone does not represent sufficient change, or at least the change they expected when Mr Moshiri's purchase of shares was announced.
And one can understandably justify their concerns
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Back
Top