The Everton Board Thread (Inc. Bill Kenwright / Blue Union)

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

What are actual ownership prosentages?

Kenwright 9,044 25.84%
Woods 6,622 18.92%
R I Earl 8,146 23.27%
Other Shareholders 11,188 31.97%
Total 35,000

 

[Blackwatch1878]

The only thing i can make from that article is that the Echo and The clubs PR are all Bezzy mates again ... i feel an award or boss scran coming on

 

[davek]

What like they did with Waldorf & Stadler you mean?

The 2 cowboys who 'bought' their club for £7m a piece & took them into administration by proxy?

The kopites did jack ****, it was RBS who saved them from the abyss, not SOS.

It's a nonsense to say that. The fans of LFC didn't sell to them, Moores did for a few hundred quid more per share.

Their campaign against H&G was relentless. It was they who kept the ball in court on that issue. If they hadn't there would have been a normal takeover process stretched out for a lot longer. RBS used the supports cultural capital to continually press their own case. And the judgement given against H&G stripping them of the club was pretty outrageous given they had the ability to keep refinancing their debt with the bank.

The Kopites ran a no-holds barred war against their club owners (no doubt aided and abetted by other factions in the LFC hierarchy or even the incoming FSG group). It's churlish to deny it,.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Kenwright 9,044 25.84%
Woods 6,622 18.92%
R I Earl 8,146 23.27%
Other Shareholders 11,188 31.97%
Total 35,000

ok ta mate,

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

It's a nonsense to say that. The fans of LFC didn't sell to them, Moores did for a few hundred quid more per share.

Their campaign against H&G was relentless. It was they who kept the ball in court on that issue. If they hadn't there would have been a normal takeover process stretched out for a lot longer. RBS used the supports cultural capital to continually press their own case. And the judgement given against H&G stripping them of the club was pretty outrageous given they had the ability to keep refinancing their debt with the bank.

The Kopites ran a no-holds barred war against their club owners (no doubt aided and abetted by other factions in the LFC hierarchy or even the incoming FSG group). It's churlish to deny it,.

I don't deny it, I merely deny that it had any tangible impact whatsoever.

RBS called the tune & the only reason they installed their own Directors, which undermined the Yanks position & was therefore the enabler for the quick sale, was due to their desire to have their capital back asap. That was the sole driver for their actions, not some kopites sending death threats & gobbing on the owners lad......

That said, I think that your original point in relation to us, was on the right lines. Woods or Earl / Green's shares, hold the key to us changing hands. I just think any form of campaign would have to be both well thought out & done in the 'right way'

 

[davek]

I don't deny it, I merely deny that it had any tangible impact whatsoever.

RBS called the tune & the only reason they installed their own Directors, which undermined the Yanks position & was therefore the enabler for the quick sale, was due to their desire to have their capital back asap. That was the sole driver for their actions, not some kopites sending death threats & gobbing on the owners lad......

That said, I think that your original point in relation to us, was on the right lines. Woods or Earl / Green's shares, hold the key to us changing hands. I just think any form of campaign would have to be both well thought out & done in the 'right way'

RBS saw a timely opportunity to press home an advantage to recover debt that was served up to them. It was served up by the pressure that the fans were able to ratchet up. It wasn't the death threats and throwing ale on them in the Sandon; it was the amount of negative publicity they generated amongst a pliant media that led to an amazing decision in a court room. No owners could hope to survive the combined forces of a desperate bank and a media deluge of bad publicity - the courts merely chose to believe that H&G could not finance the debt, ignoring a lot of evidence to the contrary, because they knew it'd be a popular decision. It was a fight between different power groups (including, I'm convinced. the current owners of LFC) that would have followed an entirely different course if the fan campaign hadn't been as prolonged and vociferous.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

RBS saw a timely opportunity to press home an advantage to recover debt that was served up to them. It was served up by the pressure that the fans were able to ratchet up. It wasn't the death threats and throwing ale on them in the Sandon; it was the amount of negative publicity they generated amongst a pliant media that led to an amazing decision in a court room. No owners could hope to survive the combined forces of a desperate bank and a media deluge of bad publicity - the courts merely chose to believe that H&G could not finance the debt, ignoring a lot of evidence to the contrary, because they knew it'd be a popular decision. It was a fight between different power groups (including, I'm convinced. the current owners of LFC) that would have followed an entirely different course if the fan campaign hadn't been as prolonged and vociferous.

What was 'amazing' about the decision reached in the High Court?

The answer to that is - absolutely nothing.

The Court merely upheld the contract that the Yanks had signed when renegotiating their loan extension.

The mistake made was them agreeing to the terms & conditions of that document, once signed & they reached default, then everything that followed was merely grandstanding around the inevitable outcome.

The kopites had been campaigning against them for virtually all of their 3 year tenure & got nowhere. The simple facts are that H&G were undone by the contract clauses inserted by RBS, which was driven by their desire to regain their capital from an extremely precarious company.

 

[davek]

What was 'amazing' about the decision reached in the High Court?

The answer to that is - absolutely nothing.

The Court merely upheld the contract that the Yanks had signed when renegotiating their loan extension.

The mistake made was them agreeing to the terms & conditions of that document, once signed & they reached default, then everything that followed was merely grandstanding around the inevitable outcome.

The kopites had been campaigning against them for virtually all of their 3 year tenure & got nowhere. The simple facts are that H&G were undone by the contract clauses inserted by RBS, which was driven by their desire to regain their capital from an extremely precarious company.

The fact that these people were mega rich and had the wherewithal to cut deals to refinance the debt with a financial institution like Blackstone and keep control from passing to the Liverpool board - who then sold at a knock down price to FSG - thus blocking H&G from sorting out a sale for the club in excess of that and where they could have walked away with a profit.

It was a stitch up of epic proportions.

In your haste to deny the Kopites of any credit you're forgetting all this.

 

[Coach]

Ha ha. Heard it all now - the High Court reached it's decision not based on the facts of the matter but on the wishes of a pressure group instead.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

The fact that these people were mega rich and had the wherewithal to cut deals to refinance the debt with a financial institution like Blackstone and keep control from passing to the Liverpool board - who then sold at a knock down price to FSG - thus blocking H&G from sorting out a sale for the club in excess of that and where they could have walked away with a profit.

It was a stitch up of epic proportions.

In your haste to deny the Kopites of any credit you're forgetting all this.

Oh behave Dave, do you really think they'd have re-financed with RBS with the amount of clauses that existed in the revised contract, if there'd have been viable alternative funders queuing up to take over the debt?

Or post the appointing of the stooges, do you not think that they'd have used their 'massive wealth' & supposed alternative funders, to pay off RBS & close the book? The facts are that they only ever put in £7m a piece to buy the cesspit......

You're also missing the salient point - it was ONLY as a direct result of the clauses installed in that contract, that LEGALLY ALLOWED RBS to install their own stooges & left the shareholders with no power of veto - that then allowed the new board to sell from under their noses.

All of which was driven by 1 thing & 1 thing alone - RBS's desire to get their cash back via any the quickest route possible, without risking a massive devaluation of the asset, that would have happened should formal administration have been required after a default on the loan. They therefore devised the contract clauses to cover themselves should the loan repayment dates not be met. It had to by this route, otherwise as the main creditor, they'd have had to have forced administration, which would have created a fire sale & maybe not have covered the debt value.

If you want to think it was 'fan power' that was the driver then carry on mate, but imo you're deluding yourself.

 

[davek]

Ha ha. Heard it all now - the High Court reached it's decision not based on the facts of the matter but on the wishes of a pressure group instead.

Was that what I claimed? Or did I claim instead that there wasa combination of forces (supporters reach into the media; desperate bank; alternative ownership group lurking in the background)?

I think it was defo the Latter. Something that's being forgotten here conveniently because some others want to just leave decisions of this nature at the level of high finance and ignore the fact that this is a large cultural institution with stakeholders that also need to be factored into the equation when reckoning outcomes.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

This Thread

FFS This thread

*Pulls out hair*

 

[Groucho]

WOW, a list of failures that gone for over 10 years and yet it,s still someone elses fault.

Dear oh dear.

What are actual ownership prosentages?

Kenwright 9,044 25.84%
Woods 6,622 18.92%
R I Earl 8,146 23.27%
Other Shareholders 11,188 31.97%
Total 35,000

Which suggests to me that, if Kenwright is in for criticism, then so should the others listed in the shareholders list.

Dear oh dear?

 

[davek]

Oh behave Dave, do you really think they'd have re-financed with RBS with the amount of clauses that existed in the revised contract, if there'd have been viable alternative funders queuing up to take over the debt?

Or post the appointing of the stooges, do you not think that they'd have used their 'massive wealth' & supposed alternative funders, to pay off RBS & close the book? The facts are that they only ever put in £7m a piece to buy the cesspit......

You're also missing the salient point - it was ONLY as a direct result of the clauses installed in that contract, that LEGALLY ALLOWED RBS to install their own stooges & left the shareholders with no power of veto - that then allowed the new board to sell from under their noses.

All of which was driven by 1 thing & 1 thing alone - RBS's desire to get their cash back via any the quickest route possible, without risking a massive devaluation of the asset, that would have happened should formal administration have been required after a default on the loan. They therefore devised the contract clauses to cover themselves should the loan repayment dates not be met. It had to by this route, otherwise as the main creditor, they'd have had to have forced administration, which would have created a fire sale & maybe not have covered the debt value.

If you want to think it was 'fan power' that was the driver then carry on mate, but imo you're deluding yourself.

The deal with Blackstone was there to be done...then it wasn't a few days later. All parties would have known the obvious clauses prior to talks. Blackstone weren't going into that with their eyes closed. There was enormous pressure placed on them - no doubt institutional and from the big capital sources already alluded to...but they also got a sh*tload of unwanted negative publicity on this side of the pond - orchestrated by fan groups - and they sh*t a brick and walked.

I must say I'm delighted there's someone out there more irrational in their hatred of the RS than me, but to deny any impact for their campaign as providing the environment that H&G were being snookered in is maybe a step beyond reason too many.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Which suggests to me that, if Kenwright is in for criticism, then so should the others listed in the shareholders list.

Dear oh dear?

totally agree mate