CumbrianRam Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Man City feeder team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perky1106 Posted July 19, 2011 Share Posted July 19, 2011 Asked if he is confident that he knows who the true owners are of every club in the Football League, he added: "No I'm not. There's a process of validation that lets the Football League know who the owners are. Who the owners of the owners are gets more difficult. And who the owners of the owners of the owners are gets even more difficult." The Football League aren't to blame for this. Football's been heading this way since 1992. The Football League is such an amazing league that any of team, even Derby, or Burton, or Accrington Stanley could be no less than three years from the £60m jackpot of the Premier League. Wealthy businessmen have caught wind of it since Sky money has become astronomical. So buying these clubs is like putting a massive bet on basically. With so many loopholes, offshore accounts and registrations and transactions being carried out in foreign countries, regulating it is like sweeping leaves on a windy day. Sir Alex Ferguson's friendship with that guy is very shady and needs to be investigated, particularly as people are touting for him to be promoted to the house of Lords. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted July 20, 2011 Author Share Posted July 20, 2011 True, look at Barnsley. All their shares are owned by 1 man but when dispatches asked him if he was the owner he said no and refused to tell them who was. Southampton's owner is dead, according to the programme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted July 20, 2011 Author Share Posted July 20, 2011 There's nowt sinister about this ABU Derby County company. The registered address is occupied by a chartered accountant specialising in Contractor & Consultant tax solutions. He will have set this company up for use by a private contractor, hence the 'joke' name. http://www.dsonline.co.uk/ All Barnsley's shares are owned by a Solicitor but he isn't the owner if the club according to the programme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsdubs Posted July 20, 2011 Share Posted July 20, 2011 Sensationalist journalism in parts, Barnsley are owned by the stated chairman. The company in Manchester who own the shares are a trustee of the chairman due to some legal reason with the chairman. Our name was mentioned and we aren't even for sale, i appreciate they want to show how the system is being taken advantage of but when the cash jackpot is so high are we really surprised? If the FA did their jobs correctly it would never be a problem. On a side note i love how florist fans think because they were not mentioned it makes them proud, the fact they are heaped in debt to a single owner and don't even own their own ground No one would touch them that is why. I would say it was time for a reform of the football league but the beautiful game has been taken from us by this money grabbing idiots, i wonder who the top 4 in the prem will be next season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 it was sensationalist in parts, however there are similarities with what they were proposing and g.s.e market plans, the pr, the investment, the front men e.g. g.s.e. not the actual big players not millions of miles away, also the sensationalist journalism wasn't the undercover parts of which we must have been a part of to an extent, it was to add gloss at the end i think the son of the ex southampton owner took over as well, might be wrong though, also how do you know we aren't for sale? the owners haven't stated this, only the management company, indeed not even them, the pr man for the management company has stated this, again who knows if we were up for sale or not, or if they were considering putting money in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsdubs Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 it was sensationalist in parts, however there are similarities with what they were proposing and g.s.e market plans, the pr, the investment, the front men e.g. g.s.e. not the actual big players not millions of miles away, also the sensationalist journalism wasn't the undercover parts of which we must have been a part of to an extent, it was to add gloss at the end i think the son of the ex southampton owner took over as well, might be wrong though, also how do you know we aren't for sale? the owners haven't stated this, only the management company, indeed not even them, the pr man for the management company has stated this, again who knows if we were up for sale or not, or if they were considering putting money in. Because we were listed under good prospects but not in the names they used as being available. We aren't for sale, why would GSE walk away without achieving anything or gaining any real profit? Would be a real waste of time and money otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 gse aren't in charge, if the investors pull out then there is nothing they can do, have you spoken to the investors? or are you just listening to g.s.e.? g.s.e. and the owners are different, unless you have spoken to the actual owners and heard from their mouths how do you know that they haven't considered selling up or selling some of their shares? G.S.E receive a substantial management fee for what they do, they probably have gained a profit already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomsdubs Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Who has made the profit then? The management took a wage i know that but what return do they get from a club that is running at a loss? Just simple logic that we wouldn't be for sale. That's like just buying a load of shares and selling them for the same price or less, pointless. They'd sell us once we went up i wouldn't doubt that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perky1106 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 It was oversimplified accusations I guess. I believe it is happening in Bangkok bars but it isn't as simple as it sounds though. Getting a handful of youngsters on loan as a favour from Sir Alex isn't going to guarantee promotion. But it is wrong and all ownership details of clubs and the people involved should be transparent and made public documents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Who has made the profit then? The management took a wage i know that but what return do they get from a club that is running at a loss? Just simple logic that we wouldn't be for sale. That's like just buying a load of shares and selling them for the same price or less, pointless. They'd sell us once we went up i wouldn't doubt that. again they could claim that they ended our debt and that we were near enough breaking even, they take the wage and that is it, I don't think they take any money if we were running at a profit. They don't get a say in if the club is for sale or not as the only shareholder in that group is appleby and he is reported to have a small stake, the owners might have decided to sell depending on how much the offer was therefore we might have been for sale at a certain price. If you buy a business for 30 million, put 30 million into it and sell it for 70 million you have made a profit. That is the type of deal they might have been looking at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 again they could claim that they ended our debt and that we were near enough breaking even, they take the wage and that is it, I don't think they take any money if we were running at a profit. They don't get a say in if the club is for sale or not as the only shareholder in that group is appleby and he is reported to have a small stake, the owners might have decided to sell depending on how much the offer was therefore we might have been for sale at a certain price. If you buy a business for 30 million, put 30 million into it and sell it for 70 million you have made a profit. That is the type of deal they might have been looking at. Glick has a stake in the club too, he confirmed he had put some of his own money in in an interview towards the end if last season. Ever thought they make the statements regarding the club isn't for sale after meeting and or discussing it with the investors? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 I hadn't realised that Glick had a stake, well yes that much is obvious however what they talk about and what they tell us is a different story. G.s.e. as an entity have very little if any say and i wouldn't take their word as gospel in matters such as this, if the club was up for sale would they really say? that wouldn't make much business sense and g.s.e. seem to be on the money when it comes to business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Doesn't matter if Glick has a stake or not. He fronts the management company who obviously want to stay in employment. The last thing GSE would do is try and sell the club, they would be out of work.....unless we're in the PL and a big offer comes in. No doubt they'll receive a percentage of the profit.....but now, i can't think why they would want to sell. The investors on the other hand..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davenportram Posted July 22, 2011 Author Share Posted July 22, 2011 Doesn't matter if Glick has a stake or not. He fronts the management company who obviously want to stay in employment. The last thing GSE would do is try and sell the club, they would be out of work.....unless we're in the PL and a big offer comes in. No doubt they'll receive a percentage of the profit.....but now, i can't think why they would want to sell. The investors on the other hand..... That include Glick and Appleby...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcfcdavecov Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 That include Glick and Appleby...... Wouldn't be suprised if the only reason Glick has invested in us is to show his employers he believes in the model (he probably does tbf). Makes GSE and his own job alot safer. I mean, if Glick is thinking about changing manager, or appointing a DOF because the reults aren't there, then you would have thought the investors have thought about getting a different managemnet comapany. Can they even do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SillyBilly Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Every club is for sale at the right price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeds Ram Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 exactly that is my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.