CielosGrises
Player Valuation: £15m
I wonder if a buyer could hand the responsibility for it to somebody else for a lump sum, insured etc.
Blue peter
Player Valuation: £35m
From what I gathered from the Podcast they were expecting some sort of settlement agreement to be reached just over a week ago and by that I mean they were going to undertake a detailed analysis of what assets A-Cap owned (the loan to Everton seemingly being one of them) and then agree a split of the security of those assets amongst secured creditors of A-Cap. No timeline however was mentioned for this to be achieved but there could also be ramifications in the sense that the civil litigation turns into criminal which is why POCA applies.
While you two dance around, is it maybe worth pointing out to the rest of us on here who are not interested in your battle of wills that the club is a legal entity, with a legal personality, but it doesn't have a brain and a hand to sign a legal document, except through its legally appointed officers - who are empowered to commit the club legally.I may sound "insane" to you as you clearly have no familiarity with this topic
Legal person - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
So Moshiri (and others no doubt) are able to commit 'Everton' to a loan through their own personal decision-making.
Can we all agree on that at least?
Blue peter
Player Valuation: £35m
For those that can be bothered listening to the portion of the Podcast that mentioned RMF it is from 5.00 to 5:15. (Just in case I’m going mad). I appreciate that is comes from the Esk who is a divisive character.
While you two dance around, is it maybe worth pointing out to the rest of us on here who are not interested in your battle of wills that the club is a legal entity, with a legal personality, but it doesn't have a brain and a hand to sign a legal document, except through its legally appointed officers - who are empowered to commit the club legally.
So Moshiri (and others no doubt) are able to commit 'Everton' to a loan through their own personal decision-making.
Can we all agree on that at least?
No doubt he’ll be along any minute to dispute this via an excerpt from Wikipedia.
Azza
Player Valuation: £80m
Oh yes another one of those mystery bidders who are just waiting to see how the situation develops. Great.
Dublin blue 75
Player Valuation: £50m
RMF, dating back several years, have stunk to high heaven. There was a very uncomfortably close relationship between BK and RMF in addition to Green etc who had similar credit facilities which the club used. It’s not uncommon for the entity borrowing the money - or someone acting for them - to obtain a commitment fee usually a % of the facility available to be borrowed as a commission up front. Not uncommon at all.
It is absolutely possible the same could apply to the 777 facilities we now owe 200m on. The manner in which 777 were all over the directors box from day one was highly unusual. Perhaps a credible investor undertaking proper due diligence is checking accounts, contracts and side letters and unflushed items are still there to be found.
Blue peter
Player Valuation: £35m
They definitely seem to have us by the short and curlies
Martin Alvito
Player Valuation: £50m
This really isn't the place for an argument about personificiation versus corporate personhood. Yes, you are correct that an English teacher would approve of your usage. He is correct that, at least in the US, our courts have found useful in contract law the fiction that a corporation has the same set of legal rights as a person.
If you want the practical implications for the club in this scenario sorted out, it'll cost you hundreds of dollars an hour for the attorney with expertise in this area. Dan Friedkin didn't like how deep the rabbit hole goes enough to walk. He'll try to recover the money he lent to the club to sort its imminent obligations instead, even though he's at the back of the creditor bus by date in. That should tell you something about how ugly the legal mess could become.
Rights and Media were historically Vibrac and have had their beak in at the club for decades its a murky, murky rabbit hole.
Philip Green, Vibrac and Riverdance: the mystery of Everton’s ‘shadow investor’
An MP’s question in October detailed rumours of Sir Phillip Green’s involvement at Goodison, but is there any connection between the retail magnate and companies who have lent millions of pounds to Premier League clubs?
Looking through some of 777 companies and dealings there are huge questions in terms of legal and regulatory procedure and compliance in regard to their lending practices - i wonder did R&M acted as their agent in the case of our loan.
Last edited:
Most people go into buying something with a number they won't/can't go over.
Maybe it just all became not worth it, this debt, that debt, the next debt, 777's £200+10 etc, etc.
Dublin blue 75
Player Valuation: £50m
Yes. Either RMF or someone(s) very close to home has benefitted from the 777 experience. That’s my take. In either case, it makes a potential takeover by anyone so much more complex. Being a blue is never boring.Rights and Media were historically Vibrac and have had their beak in at the club for decades its a murky, murky rabbit hole.
Philip Green, Vibrac and Riverdance: the mystery of Everton’s ‘shadow investor’
An MP’s question in October detailed rumours of Sir Phillip Green’s involvement at Goodison, but is there any connection between the retail magnate and companies who have lent millions of pounds to Premier League clubs?www.theguardian.com
Looking through some of 777 companies and dealing there are huge questions in terms of legal and regulatory procedure and compliance in regard to their lending practices - i wonder did R& M act as their agent in the case of our loan.
While you two dance around, is it maybe worth pointing out to the rest of us on here who are not interested in your battle of wills that the club is a legal entity, with a legal personality, but it doesn't have a brain and a hand to sign a legal document, except through its legally appointed officers - who are empowered to commit the club legally.
So Moshiri (and others no doubt) are able to commit 'Everton' to a loan through their own personal decision-making.
Can we all agree on that at least?
I'm not engaged in a battle of wills
The club has legal personality. It can obtain loans via contracts. That can be arranged by officers of the company: Directors
How they should act and the legal ability to act on behalf of the company is all governed by The Companies Act 2006.
I don't think interest by investors isn't our problem mate, its the creditors.
Two have scupered, two takeovers so far.
Can't believe you're disputing things. This is based on primary legislation of this country
It's well known anyone owning or running a company should know this stuff