Rambalin Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Has I understand the ownership agreement no matter how much each individual owns they are only allowed to invest the equal amount put in by another member.That is to say if if one member of the group wished to invest 20million and another 2 million the smallest amount is the one at is invested. So you could get 10 members putting in 2 million each but no one could invest 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PistoldPete2 Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Even if his stake has risen to 25% (and I'll believe that only following an official statement,or via evidence given in the next annual return),he can't make a decision on anything major-it would have to be a board decision.No but if you have a significant stakeholder saying he wants a change it may be hard for a business to resist. That's business , for good or bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDeadlySaul Posted May 25, 2015 Author Share Posted May 25, 2015 Even if his stake has risen to 25% (and I'll believe that only following an official statement,or via evidence given in the next annual return),he can't make a decision on anything major-it would have to be a board decision.He will have more influence, he is local so the board will respect his opinion. I'm just guessing here, but Rush was backing McClaren by saying things like "We must avoid a draconian review", but as soon as all these rumours about Mel Morris becoming the new chairmen the rumours about McClaren getting the chop appear.It could all just be nothing, but with Mac specifically mentioning Morris in his statement, then it all seems to add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Has I understand the ownership agreement no matter how much each individual owns they are only allowed to invest the equal amount put in by another member.That is to say if if one member of the group wished to invest 20million and another 2 million the smallest amount is the one at is invested. So you could get 10 members putting in 2 million each but no one could invest 20.Have you seen the articles of association of North American Partners LLC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLACML Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 what about the negative ones?Today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TroyDyer Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 You could have Bill Gates, who is worth billions, but isn't from the area, and isn't a Derby supporter. Or you could have Joe Bloggs who is worth a fraction of that, but loves Derby and grew up watching the club as a boy. What you are worth and what you are willing to invest are two very different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombo Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Mac practically says it here "I have to accept the club’s owner,Mel Morris, wants to take a new direction."And he's got no reason to be upset with the club at all has he? No motive for wanting to cause unrest at the club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Depends how it's diluted, and whether that 75pc want an operational say! The shareholdings within Global Derby (UK) Ltd will be the governing factor.Ignoring SR's holding,if MM's stake has increased to 25%,then NAPD LLC will hold around 75% -there are only 3 shareholders. The individual stakes of the NAP members are contained within that company.These investors don't own individual stakes within Global Derby. I would find it staggering that a grouping that has invested a massive amount of money wouldn't want a major say in operations.After all,there wouldn't be much point in too many board meetings in that kind of environment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Am Sheep Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 I think calling him the owner was just a misnomer. Mel is/will be the new chairman of the board. That title can mean the owner but in reality that's still shared as it was before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDeadlySaul Posted May 25, 2015 Author Share Posted May 25, 2015 And he's got no reason to be upset with the club at all has he? No motive for wanting to cause unrest at the club?He gave this club two of its most successful season in over a decade, he had a 54% win rate, he took a mid table side to the brinks of promotion, his experience meant he could get players like Jordon Ibe, Andre Wisdom, Darren Bent, Jessie Lingard etc. Imo this is a stupid decision and we are taking a massive risk with Paul Clement when we already had a very capable manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rambalin Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Have you seen the articles of association of North American Partners LLC?No........I know there is not ten it was just a pointHowever that was what I was told by more than one party ....one of whom is no longer at the club or any club after events elsewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuitYourJibbaJivin Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Our new scapegoat?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tombo Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 He gave this club two of its most successful season in over a decade, he had a 54% win rate, he took a mid table side to the brinks of promotion, his experience meant he could get players like Jordon Ibe, Andre Wisdom, Darren Bent, Jessie Lingard etc. Imo this is a stupid decision and we are taking a massive risk with Paul Clement when we already had a very capable manager. Well I respectfully disagree. I'll only ask of you that you give the next man a fair chance and get behind the side. Don't judge Clement before you've seen what happens, regardless of how you feel about the decision.And don't judge Morris on what you think you know. Because nobody really knows do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDeadlySaul Posted May 25, 2015 Author Share Posted May 25, 2015 Well I respectfully disagree. I'll only ask of you that you give the next man a fair chance and get behind the side. Don't judge Clement before you've seen what happens, regardless of how you feel about the decision.And don't judge Morris on what you think you know. Because nobody really knows do they?I will, I think Clement is a good choice, plenty of experience and highly rated, Wenger even tipped him as his replacement. My issue is I think its a silly risk to take as we already had a decent manager in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Come on Mel. Time for a new stadium. The Candy Crush stadium. I welcome any new investment. It would not be a waste for him personally. He appears to be a guy that will continue to make money outside of football. As we all know, as soon as we get promoted we begin making a healthy profit anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Mel Morris is about 10 times richer than Lionel Pickering who did take us to the next level .. It depends on how much of his wealth he wants to put up... In pickerings case it was nearly all of it. In Brett wilsons case I doubt he would want to put up more than a fraction. Anyone with any sense knows we are going to get promoted eventually. The club currently only makes a loss of £7m a year. One season in the PL could finance the club for another 10. I doubt he has any concerns at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernow Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Anyone with any sense knows we are going to get promoted eventually. The club currently only makes a loss of £7m a year. One season in the PL could finance the club for another 10. I doubt he has any concerns at all. Why will we? It's not a given we will any time soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptherams Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Why will we? It's not a given we will any time soon.Anyone with any sense knows we are going to get promoted eventually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernow Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 Anyone with any sense knows we are going to get promoted eventually. It's not a guarantee though is it? The PL is increasingly money orientated, and with the new TV deal and probable future deals for more money, the 'core' of the PL will remain there, with those who drop out likely to return. To say we're 100% definitely going to get promoted is not guaranteed so why does that mean I have no sense if I don't know we will eventually.There's absolutely nothing saying we won't get relegated next season. I don't think we will but I doubt Wigan fans did this time last year either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted May 25, 2015 Share Posted May 25, 2015 I've done a couple of quick calculations regarding this unconfirmed uplifting of stake to 25%.As I see it there are 3 ways this could have happened:-1) Buy out existing NAP shares,thus reducing their holding and increasing his own2)Buy new shares to increase his holding.This can only be calculated if others didn't also buy new shares.3) A mixture of the above 2 -impossible to calculate. I reckon that 1) would entail buying out 2,197,575 shares -price unknown,though latest published 'going rate' appeared to be £5.32/share (but no guarantees here).This puts no new money into the club.Given ongoing working capital requirements,I find this unlikely as a stand alone.However,NAP members might like to reduce their exposure.2) would seem to indicate buying c2.3m new shares,again price unknown,but it would seem to indicate new investment of over £10m -could provide working capital and give the others an investment holiday.The 2.3m figure only works if others haven't purchased new shares-if they have,the 2.3m figure rises. I wouldn't see this scenario as particularly unlikely ( though Green Ram thinks SR has upped his stake to 5%,which would throw a spanner in the works) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.