The Friedkin Group reaches agreement to buy Everton

[DanB90]

I feel somewhat responsible for the events that have unfolded.

Now that I’m fully aboard the Dan Friedchicken express, it inevitably won’t happen.

 

[matty1878]

Not sure, but someone has to and the contract will be on him.

the stadiums paid for?

 

[matty1878]

my insane deluded theory here guys ..

he’s going to be joined by other investors?

and he’s funded the ground?

you don’t just give someone 200 mill

fund a new ground a leg it

 

[ForeverBlue92]

my insane deluded theory here guys ..

he’s going to be joined by other investors?

and he’s funded the ground?

you don’t just give someone 200 mill

fund a new ground a leg it

You need to stop sniffing glue my friend.

The man has loaned the club money, not given it as a gift.

 

[billyblue80]

Just despair I really do two years of limbo, three failed bids, dodgy loans all over the shop, when will this nightmare end?

 

[stamullenblue]

They're not interested and it's not going to happen

Thats Everton. just when you thinks its coming good …

 

[Trublue12]

According to Toffeetv yesterday, the deal to buy Roma was called off then went through later. This may be stratagy to get the price down?

But I hope the eventual byers are actually Football people with a plan.

 

[Damo_1878]

Thats Everton. just when you thinks its coming good …

That was with reference to them being independent non-executive directors

I have no idea what their views are now in relation to ownership. Or at least at this stage.

 

[Hellerad]

I have a question. If i want to buy the club and enter into an exclusivity period with Moshiri.

I then elect to study the 777 contract and see that to pay it off and remove their unfolding situation, I must pay £200mil + £10mil in early repayment penalty fees.

Based upon the contract emblazoned with 777 and there not being any court case to date, what is stopping me from simply repaying 777 -- NOT circumventing and going to the source/origin of funds.

Secondly, what would prevent me from approaching the courts and transferring the repayment to them pending a decision on ownership of the debt -- with the court settling the repayment confitmation quickly due to us following the legal agreement between the club and 777?

It seems incredibly outlandish to me that a debt repayment can be prevented / stonewalled. Some may even say that would be illegal as it would go against the terms of the agreement.



Certainly seems like TFG were unwilling to make said funds available

My first draft of a response was huge and confusing, so I’m going to ignore a lot of complicated twists and turns and hypotheticals and use an over simple analogy:

If “Sam” steals money from “Joe” and loans it to you, “Sam” has not successfully laundered that money simply because there is a contract with you. “Joe” has plenty of recourse to recover that money. Especially if “Joe” wants to also accuse you of wrongdoing.

Even if “Joe” is wrong, enjoy your 18-36 month litigation and attorney’s fees.

 

[Damo_1878]

My first draft of a response was huge and confusing, so I’m going to ignore a lot of complicated twists and turns and hypotheticals and use an over simple analogy:

If “Sam” steals money from “Joe” and loans it to you, “Sam” has not successfully laundered that money simply because there is a contract with you. “Joe” has plenty of recourse to recover that money. Especially if “Joe” wants to also accuse you of wrongdoing.

Even if “Joe” is wrong, enjoy your 18-36 month litigation and attorney’s fees.

It's not just that. There are other liabilities and of course the ever present fear of US courts ordering "punative damages"

This thread gives plenty of information on why US domiciled companies like Friedkin Group would have concerns they get dragged into something that was nothing to do with them. But ultimately inherit liabilities from it

 

[Username.]

So for the more intelligent people on here I have a question, is that definitely it or are the playing hardball?

 

[Toffeeslam]

It's not just that. There are other liabilities and of course the ever present fear of US courts ordering "punative damages"

This thread gives plenty of information on why US domiciled companies like Friedkin Group would have concerns they get dragged into something that was nothing to do with them. But ultimately inherit liabilities from it

Where is the potential proceeds of crime here ?

 

[ashwuk76]

Where is the potential proceeds of crime here ?

yeah i cant see that either, unless I am utterly missing something, no way there is a POCA issue here.

 

[Toffeeslam]

My first draft of a response was huge and confusing, so I’m going to ignore a lot of complicated twists and turns and hypotheticals and use an over simple analogy:

If “Sam” steals money from “Joe” and loans it to you, “Sam” has not successfully laundered that money simply because there is a contract with you. “Joe” has plenty of recourse to recover that money. Especially if “Joe” wants to also accuse you of wrongdoing.

Even if “Joe” is wrong, enjoy your 18-36 month litigation and attorney’s fees.

How can Joe accuse you when you had no idea who Joe was ?

Surely Sam is liable not me in this example

 

[Damo_1878]

Where is the potential proceeds of crime here ?

If the "fraud" allegations by Leadenhall (a UK domiciled company) are proven against 777 Partners and/or ACap (both US domiciled companies) and/or this is proven in the US courts.

These civil case allegations could if fraud was determined to have been committed, could easily then turn into criminal charges in the US etc etc etc