Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

The Friedkin Group reaches agreement to buy Everton

What do we reckon?

  • 👍

    Votes: 791 72.2%
  • 🤷 | 🧀🥪

    Votes: 265 24.2%
  • 👎

    Votes: 40 3.6%

  • Total voters
    1,096
Reading more about the 777 situation, you could quite easily soil yourself.

It could take months if not years to resolve the 777 legal case in the US.

No credible buyer will touch us until this is resolved.

How long can we survive without new investment? Maybe a year if we sell Branthwaite?
I wonder if a buyer could hand the responsibility for it to somebody else for a lump sum, insured etc.
 
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.
 
I may sound "insane" to you as you clearly have no familiarity with this topic

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? 🙄
 
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.
 

Listened to the Talking the Blues podcast and what I wasn’t aware of is that the loan from 777/A-Cap came via RMF Ltd. Does anyone know why?
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.
 
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.
They definitely seem to have us by the short and curlies
 
Please explain to me who spoke to these lenders and agreed to take these loans out.
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.
 
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.

Rights and Media were historically Vibrac and have had their beak in at the club for decades its a murky, murky rabbit hole.


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:

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
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.
 
Rights and Media were historically Vibrac and have had their beak in at the club for decades its a murky, murky rabbit hole.


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.
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.
 
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.
 

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Back
Top