1. He's not sold his Crystal Palace shares
2. He's not a billionaire and people should disabuse themselves of the notion he is
3. He's not defined who these other parties are and so if his personal wealth is as you say, not relevant - how can anyone judge what he says today
4. Friedkins are billionaires
1 . The Palace share thing is a bit of a red herring . You are right to say he has to dispose of them .
But we are not privy to the negotiations or deals he may be concluding.
If he believes he can assume ownership by 30th November we have to assume he is confident the shares will not be an issue .
Unless we can prove otherwise.
I have never commented on his level of personal wealth because it’s irrelevant, what matters is that he can access the finances to purchase and invest in the club, which he clearly believes he can.
Unless we can prove otherwise.
3. We don’t need to know at this point, who the backers are ( it would be nice to know) all we need to know is that they exist and if they didn’t he wouldn’t be confident of gaining ownership, which he clearly his.
4. The personal wealth of any prospective purchaser is irrelevant.
As mentioned despite the wealth of the Saudis they have discovered there are limits to the amount of money you can inject into the club .
Vast wealth is no longer a guarantor of success.
As long as a purchaser has enough to operate up to the constraints that is sufficient.
What is more important is quality leadership and administration.
The Friedkins may have been wealthy but they didn’t want us enough to overcome any hurdles .
I would prefer someone who values owning Everton more than they did.
Personally I think we would have been behind Roma in the pecking order , so I think we dodged a bullet there.
Thanks for engaging