Twitter will collapse before the Glazers leave.. everyone will have to re-record their goodbyes for Thread.
Club Sale | It’s done!
- Thread starter JB08
- Start date
- Status
Yes this was in the papers around the time. I remember reading that. I feel this deadlock will continue until the transfer window shuts. Just a hunch and dont know why, but we always feck up under these cretins.
I'm a bit sad he's leaving
Yea its got very depressing. Feels like everyones given up
Which will happen first? GTA 6 is announced or takeover?
Half Life 3 will come before the club is sold.
GTA 6 has already been announced though.
I've had enough of it all mate.Even @Berbaclass has had enough of posting his dodgy ‘sources’ now
PS6 will be announced and released before both of those
I was at a party not too long ago where a "famous people who were born on yer birthday" game got going.
Grand fun.
I won't tell you mine (I'm very paranoid).
Just throwing it out there.
It was Hitler wasn't it?
The United sales prospectus, here:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1549107/000104746912007537/a2210287zf-1a.htm
It refers to the ways in which the company is controlled. It distinguished Cayman Islands Law and Delaware
Law, which applies in the US. The company is subject to the Cayman Islands Law.
The prospectus also refers to United new memorandum and articles of association - ie what is can and can't do, how the board is formed,voting rights - all the mechanics that dictate how the company can operate.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1549107/000104746912007537/a2210287zex-3_1.htm
Surprisingly it includes the following:
Even if a Glazer has only 10% of the shares, they still can control the company (ie have a deemed 2/3 majority).
"14. Weighted Voting Provision
At any time that, and for so long as, the holders of Class B Shares continue to hold in the aggregate at least ten per cent. (10%) of the issued and outstanding Ordinary Shares in the capital of the Company, at any general meeting of the Company convened to consider any Special Resolution of the Company, the voting power permitted to be exercised by the holders of Class B Shares shall be weighted in respect of such Special Resolution such that the Class B Shares shall be entitled to exercise, in the aggregate, sixty seven per cent. (67%) of the voting power of all Shareholders entitled to receive notice of, attend and vote at any such general meeting of the Company."
That the board members can have a conflict of interest as long as they declare the interest
"115. Without limitation to any of the foregoing, a Director may hold any office or place of profit in respect of any competitor of the Company, provided that he shall declare the nature of any conflict of interest at a meeting of the Directors. The provisions of Article 112 shall apply to this Article mutatis mutandis."
"112. A Director who is in any way, whether directly or indirectly, interested in a contract or proposed contract with the Company shall declare the nature of his interest at a meeting of the Directors. A general notice given to the Directors by any Director to the effect that he is a member of any specified company or firm and is to be regarded as interested in any contract which may thereafter be made with that company or firm shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of interest in regard to any contract so made. A Director may vote in respect of any contract or proposed contract or arrangement notwithstanding that he may be interested therein and if he does so his vote shall be counted and he may be counted in the quorum at any meeting of the Directors at which any such contract or proposed contract or arrangement shall come before the meeting for consideration."
Unsurprisingly, the thing is very Glazer orientated.
However Caymans law has the following s238 Company Law Act which refers to fair value, I believe Glazed has previously mentioned this..
Googled articles state that this is a growing area of law. the Class A possible litigators are seeking to assert their claim of fairness.
See article
https://onefootball.com/en/news/man...egal-battle-if-glazers-sell-to-ineos-37647739
Generally, the Class A litigators would have done their due diligence when buying their shares, and subsequently adding to their holding. Similarly they would have done their due diligence when threatening the Board.
It would be fair to say they are being listened to or being dealt with, this no doubt explains some of the current delay.
Given the money no object wealth that these groups enjoy, Sir Jim, Jassim, The Glazers and the Class A groups, you would assume, have received top legal advice.
However you get the feeling that the Glazers and Sir Jim were not expecting the A class holders to revolt in the way they have.
That said , the class A shares, other than for the purpose of capital appreciation during a takeover, appear worthless. No real power, if and when small dividends and that seems about it?
Clearly the Glazers don't have any concern about any other group however they will be wary of litiigation, win or lose, it eats up time and they have 4 members who want out.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1549107/000104746912007537/a2210287zf-1a.htm
It refers to the ways in which the company is controlled. It distinguished Cayman Islands Law and Delaware
Law, which applies in the US. The company is subject to the Cayman Islands Law.
The prospectus also refers to United new memorandum and articles of association - ie what is can and can't do, how the board is formed,voting rights - all the mechanics that dictate how the company can operate.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1549107/000104746912007537/a2210287zex-3_1.htm
Surprisingly it includes the following:
Even if a Glazer has only 10% of the shares, they still can control the company (ie have a deemed 2/3 majority).
"14. Weighted Voting Provision
At any time that, and for so long as, the holders of Class B Shares continue to hold in the aggregate at least ten per cent. (10%) of the issued and outstanding Ordinary Shares in the capital of the Company, at any general meeting of the Company convened to consider any Special Resolution of the Company, the voting power permitted to be exercised by the holders of Class B Shares shall be weighted in respect of such Special Resolution such that the Class B Shares shall be entitled to exercise, in the aggregate, sixty seven per cent. (67%) of the voting power of all Shareholders entitled to receive notice of, attend and vote at any such general meeting of the Company."
That the board members can have a conflict of interest as long as they declare the interest
"115. Without limitation to any of the foregoing, a Director may hold any office or place of profit in respect of any competitor of the Company, provided that he shall declare the nature of any conflict of interest at a meeting of the Directors. The provisions of Article 112 shall apply to this Article mutatis mutandis."
"112. A Director who is in any way, whether directly or indirectly, interested in a contract or proposed contract with the Company shall declare the nature of his interest at a meeting of the Directors. A general notice given to the Directors by any Director to the effect that he is a member of any specified company or firm and is to be regarded as interested in any contract which may thereafter be made with that company or firm shall be deemed a sufficient declaration of interest in regard to any contract so made. A Director may vote in respect of any contract or proposed contract or arrangement notwithstanding that he may be interested therein and if he does so his vote shall be counted and he may be counted in the quorum at any meeting of the Directors at which any such contract or proposed contract or arrangement shall come before the meeting for consideration."
Unsurprisingly, the thing is very Glazer orientated.
However Caymans law has the following s238 Company Law Act which refers to fair value, I believe Glazed has previously mentioned this..
Googled articles state that this is a growing area of law. the Class A possible litigators are seeking to assert their claim of fairness.
See article
https://onefootball.com/en/news/man...egal-battle-if-glazers-sell-to-ineos-37647739
Generally, the Class A litigators would have done their due diligence when buying their shares, and subsequently adding to their holding. Similarly they would have done their due diligence when threatening the Board.
It would be fair to say they are being listened to or being dealt with, this no doubt explains some of the current delay.
Given the money no object wealth that these groups enjoy, Sir Jim, Jassim, The Glazers and the Class A groups, you would assume, have received top legal advice.
However you get the feeling that the Glazers and Sir Jim were not expecting the A class holders to revolt in the way they have.
That said , the class A shares, other than for the purpose of capital appreciation during a takeover, appear worthless. No real power, if and when small dividends and that seems about it?
Clearly the Glazers don't have any concern about any other group however they will be wary of litiigation, win or lose, it eats up time and they have 4 members who want out.
Getting to a point where I am starting to question if the Glazers ever wanted to sell? Or do they just want to see what the club is worth?
Looks like they beginning to piss off the buyers, SJR has come out publicly and SJ via his sources.
Looks like they beginning to piss off the buyers, SJR has come out publicly and SJ via his sources.
I checked mine. Nobody. Bloody typical.
Lets add George R R Martin finishing The Winds of Winter in to the mix. Originally expected to be published in 2016.
A lot to make sense of. Does this mean even if the Glazers take Ratcliffe's offer(assuming it's workable) they'll still have a huge say at the club?
Winds of winter? He will finish a dream of spring before we get a decision on this takeover. And let's face it, that book will never be finished.
No it doesn't because Jim is not going to pay 3+ billion to own over half the club but not control it.
Didn't say he wouldn't but are we taking about a significant voice despite a minority stake? (Glaziers)
Every cloud…Even @Berbaclass has had enough of posting his dodgy ‘sources’ now
Same here mate, it's not even fun anymore. The BS sources have even gone into hiding.
Yeah know exactly what you mean
Its quite frustrating as fans, they had the intention to sell, had deadlines and now it seems like its gone cold.
We get the random chancer on Twitter who thinks he knows what's happening. Most of the reliable journalists still maintain that the buyers are not sure if Glazers want to sell, now we have the buyers coming out saying they are not sure.
It almost seems that they have been told, its not happening anymore.
Wouldn't Surprise me if we are in the same position come December.
We need Rothfuss to get Doors of Stone finished first!!
This doesn't say what you think it says.
All class B shares aggregate to 67% of voting power if the class B holders hold 10% of the total shares in the company. In other words, every single class B share gives a total of 67% of voting power. You don't have 67% voting power if you only have 10% of class B shares.
Well, yes.
But I'd like to keep that private if you don't mind.
(He was good with railways, as I've always said, but let's be honest: you just can't use that a selling point these days.)
Maybe some of us like the misery?
The rumours have always been that Joel and Avram want to keep their shares, or at least a fair percentage of 'em (presumably because they think the value of the asset will rise considerably in the coming years), and thus would prefer selling to someone who's fine with that scheme.
(Whereas the other siblings just want to sell right now to the highest bidder.)
However, if that scenario is even remotely likely, it obviously won't play out like the nightmare visions some people keep posting, where the Glazers actually remain in charge of the club. INEOS/Ratcliffe won't pay billions only to have that pair remain in a meaningful/executive position (of any kind).
Basically this.
Personally, cutting down on coffee, I am now more committed to the misery of making tea more than ever.
It is probably misguided. But I do fully embrace the misery (of making tea, I mean, not the misery of this thread).
Empty stadium would send such a strong message, but it's simply not possible. You cant account for everybody's different circumstances, it's a big ask to expect everybody to give up 1 match for the long term good of the club.
Therefore, I know it's been tried before, but if all fans could unite and stop spending money on shirts, MUTV, megastore purchases, food and drinks inside the ground, these stupidly overpriced experienced packages, official merchandise, memberships if you're not going to apply for tickets, amongst other things - it would be a start. If we actually said we were going to do something, and did it properly, I think it would scare the Glazers to death.
The only language the Glazers understand is finances. The only time Glazers have ever addressed the fans, was over that European Super League fiasco. They shit themselves at the thought of their greed being exposed to the world and it being so universally condemned, that they did something they never do, wrote a letter addressed to us fans.
Sure, this is not new idea, and it has been tried in 2005, but back then people were anticipating, rather than knowing for certain, that the debt loaded on the club was the road to ruin. All the talk back then of the club not having to be successful on the pitch to be successful off it, gave the false impression that the club was successfully run, when now there is just so much evidence to show how bullshit this was.
Every single penny of income the club has, is coming either directly or indirectly from us fans. Money is the only thing that Glazers understand, if they don't leave, this is how we hurt them.
It could be worse mate you could share a birthday with David Blaine and Graham Norton.
I may be mistaken, however if class B shares represent only say 11% of the ordinary share capital, then that 11% whether held by one or a multitude of Glazers would represent 67% of the voting rights, the aggregate of the remaining class B shares being 11%?
That would just be horrendous and needs us to kick up a bigger fuss than getting that game postponed with the scousers. Will be sickening if all they have done is play with our emotions for the last 8 months.
If not changed it would mean that if all the Class B shares are converted to class A (normally would happen if Glazer siblings sell individually), except for a minimum of 10% of all issued shares in the club (A and B) remaining B shares, it would mean that whoever has those B shares (Glazers or anyone else) would always have a 67% voting majority for all matters.
It's to prevent 4 (or even 5) of the siblings selling off the club and its control without everyone of them agreeing to do it together.
They can change this rule at any time if they all agree to it. Heck, if some of the Glazers stick around in some capacity they might even introduce a Class C share or something to ensure whoever buys the club do get voting majority, but that the remaining Glazers still have some value to their shares beyond the basic public Class A shares.
That would be my reading/misreading.
Sir Jim would have to ensure that structure is changed before handing over the purchase price.
"Father, I LOVE the whole tea-making thing! You know, the playful 'splash' of the tea as it hits the bottom of the cup; the thrill of adding the milk, and watching it settle for a moment, before it filters slowly down through the cup, changing the colour from dark brown to...a lighter brown. Perching an optional Jaffa cake on the saucer, like a proud soldier standing to attention beside a giant...cup of tea."
Not following you here?
Class B shares represent roughly 68% of total shares. Class A make up the remaining 32%.
In the case of all class B shares equaling 11% of the total shares, you would need 100% of the class B shares to maintain 67% voting rights. It's basically a way to prevent a hostile takeover.
To me, take to them. Protest in Tampa -- outside their house or at the Buccs games. A lot of embarrassment mixed in with a little intimidation.
- Status