Liverpool Echo & Everton

[nikom court]

I just saw this on NewsNow;

View attachment 10813

Clicked it - but Bluekipper have removed/deleted the article: http://bluekipper.com/news/misc__news/8164--.html?

Odd. Anyone know what it said?

bluekipper were in the clubs arse pocket for a while as well.

 

[Moomin]

I just saw this on NewsNow;

View attachment 10813

Clicked it - but Bluekipper have removed/deleted the article: http://bluekipper.com/news/misc__news/8164--.html?

Odd. Anyone know what it said?

It linked to this article.

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/journ...argets-after-job-cuts-trinity-mirror-midlands

 

[ToffeeDan]

OK bizzle I will accept the humble stand down. I do it loads too so it's cool. We cool here.

Everton on the other hand could be perceived as doing some mad commercial stuff as usual. I'd love to know the amount Kenyon Fraser make off deals associated with Everton, with one of their own acting in the key position of Commercial Director, which was never announced like.

That must be the same Kenyon who couldn't make the latest Walton Park Development meeting.. you know the place where we're supposedly putting up a new ground..or send a representative.

 

[BoysInBlue]

The Echo pushing an article by LFC crying fan Kristian Walsh on how Deulofeu 'must prove he's not a one season wonder'.

Must have missed the article they did on Danny 'one season wonder' Ings' move to LFC.

Funny how 2 players with the same amount to prove get covered differently. Oh yeah, and Deulofeu scored as many goals for us (3) as Lambert & Balotelli combined scored for LFC last season. And he's significantly younger, cheaper and not even a striker.

 

[The Esk]

That must be the same Kenyon who couldn't make the latest Walton Park Development meeting.. you know the place where we're supposedly putting up a new ground..or send a representative.

He was too busy mate, he's already holding down two jobs at Goodison and owns the majority of shares in a very successful marketing/PR agency. You can't expect him to project manage Walton Hall Park as well....

 

[Bluesnapper]

I would if its his job to do so, if cant/wont then bin him.

 

[nil satis]

bluekipper were in the clubs arse pocket for a while as well.

Yeah dead right , some of snowdens papers from Russia will confirm this soon.

 

[bizzaro]

He was too busy mate, he's already holding down two jobs at Goodison and owns the majority of shares in a very successful marketing/PR agency. You can't expect him to project manage Walton Hall Park as well....

Did he ever officially declare to the shareholders of EFC that he was benefiting from transactions from the club whilst still a shareholder in the other business?

Because it is my contention:

That the Companies Act says he has to.

As a 'Shadow Director' of EFC

 

[bizzaro]

The Echo pushing an article by LFC crying fan Kristian Walsh on how Deulofeu 'must prove he's not a one season wonder'.

Must have missed the article they did on Danny 'one season wonder' Ings' move to LFC.

Funny how 2 players with the same amount to prove get covered differently. Oh yeah, and Deulofeu scored as many goals for us (3) as Lambert & Balotelli combined scored for LFC last season. And he's significantly younger, cheaper and not even a striker.

Dunno mate. The ECHO is banned in my house now as they are anti Everton

 

[The Esk]

Did he ever officially declare to the shareholders of EFC that he was benefiting from transactions from the club whilst still a shareholder in the other business?

Because it is my contention:

That the Companies Act says he has to.

As a 'Shadow Director' of EFC

Difficult to say as we no longer have shareholder meetings!

It's safe to assume that the Board are aware of his interests, and that they have approved those interests. Given that the Board owns a majority of shares the scope to change matters is extremely limited.

 

[bizzaro]

Difficult to say as we no longer have shareholder meetings!

It's safe to assume that the Board are aware of his interests, and that they have approved those interests. Given that the Board owns a majority of shares the scope to change matters is extremely limited.

Yes but as a I mentioned earlier this week.

The companies Directors (and 'Shadow Directors') have to - under the Companies Act - act on behalf of and in the interests of ALL SHAREHOLDERS - not just the major shareholders or their own interests.

The minor shareholders - who are being rejected AGMs and the like would have serious legal grounds to demand a meeting and to force said disclosures.

It is my contention. What do you think ?

 

[bizzaro]

@the esk

i.e. they have a fiduciary duty to their company and ALL the shareholders.

Thats the law!

 

[The Esk]

Yes but as a I mentioned earlier this week.

The companies Directors (and 'Shadow Directors') have to - under the Companies Act - act on behalf of and in the interests of ALL SHAREHOLDERS - not just the major shareholders or their own interests.

The minor shareholders - who are being rejected AGMs and the like would have serious legal grounds to demand a meeting and to force said disclosures.

It is my contention. What do you think ?

If a minority shareholder thought that they had suffered damages from the arrangements, they could (i) try and force an EGM to discuss matters, or (ii) failing that take action in the Courts to seek redress.

 

[bizzaro]

@the esk

How can the minor shareholders know if the fiduciary duty and the trust that went with it - were being maintained?

The question a decent lawyer could ask.

Who's interests would a director be following. The principals or their own?

Interesting thought.

 

[The Esk]

@the esk

i.e. they have a fiduciary duty to their company and ALL the shareholders.

Thats the law!

They would only be in breach of that fiduciary interest if it could be proven that shareholders had been damaged by the arrangements.