ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

[joey13]

If true why would the great local custodians agree to it?

I can’t imagine why the great local custodians would agree to it ££££££££££

[DCWat]

I’d love to know when we might hear of the plans that might aid us in having a little more confidence in this purchase.

There’s a hell of a lot of negative commentary and very little, barring denial via a tweet and some bullish ‘amazing deal’ type spiel, in response.

It’s very early days but the more the noise grows, the sooner some detail needs to be provided.... hopefully!

[KRBFC]

I’d love to know when we might hear of the plans that might aid us in having a little more confidence in this purchase.

There’s a hell of a lot of negative commentary and very little, barring denial via a tweet and some bullish ‘amazing deal’ type spiel, in response.

It’s very early days but the more the noise grows, the sooner some detail needs to be provided.... hopefully!

The point I haven’t seen mentioned on here is who is funding our recruitment?

[arise_sir_charge]

Ah , the head in the sand approach, that always goes well .

What’s wrong with asking questions instead of blindly believing what you are told .

Think I have already said on this thread that there is certainly no head in the sand from me. I am mature enough in both life an business to know that there are risks associated with scenarios such as the one involving ALK.

However, equally I much prefer to deal in facts and allow things develop before deciding if something is good, bad or indifferent.

Finally, it appears that you are the one blindly believing what you've been told bearing in mind you are throwing around unsubstantiated figures and hearsay.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

I can’t imagine why the great local custodians would agree to it ££££££££££

But they wouldn’t just sell the club to anyone would they being local fans of the club?

[CrosspoolClarets]

Matt Slater from The Athletic on the Sensible Transfers podcast today giving his updated view after the furore last week.

Does a bit of explanation of the background of the people, the money (insofar as he thinks he knows it). He has had a lot of back and forth with ALK’s PR company. I don’t want to post my version of what he said, just in case the club take a dim view. One thing he does say is that he is certain that was at least £50m sat in cash at the club before the takeover. The podcast suggests that the club’s cash being part of the deal is what differentiates it from Man Utd.

The thrust of his story seems to be that BFC are a different entity now, not the self sufficient one we were before, and that many clubs have tried it and failed (Bolton, Sunderland, Wigan etc).

In my view nothing really changes - revenue has to grow a lot for this to benefit us as fans. Time will tell but something had to happen because we were punching above our weight and we would have ended up down (probably after Dyche jumped ship). We need a “unique selling point” to maintain our status long term, not just Dyche, so much will depend on if ALK have one.

[Spijed]

Matt Slater from The Athletic on the Sensible Transfers podcast today giving his updated view after the furore last week.

Does a bit of explanation of the background of the people, the money (insofar as he thinks he knows it). He has had a lot of back and forth with ALK’s PR company. I don’t want to post my version of what he said, just in case the club take a dim view. One thing he does say is that he is certain that was at least £50m sat in cash at the club before the takeover. The podcast suggests that the club’s cash being part of the deal is what differentiates it from Man Utd.

The thrust of his story seems to be that BFC are a different entity now, not the self sufficient one we were before, and that many clubs have tried it and failed (Bolton, Sunderland, Wigan etc).

In my view nothing really changes - revenue has to grow a lot for this to benefit us as fans. Time will tell but something had to happen because we were punching above our weight and we would have ended up down (probably after Dyche jumped ship). We need a “unique selling point” to maintain our status long term, not just Dyche, so much will depend on if ALK have one.

That's why those saying "Let's wait and see" have little idea how much debt we have now been saddled with.

[ClaretTony]

I've nothing to add to that other than at a meeting yesterday Peter Mcormick (interim FA chair) used our recent takeover as an example of a process of thorough due diligence while the PL are very comfortable with the new owners and how they are funding it.

[winsomeyen]

But they wouldn’t just sell the club to anyone would they being local fans of the club?

Wow

[fatboy47]

I get the need for positivity felt by a good few clarets on here...I really do.. Hopefully we're all clarets who desperately want success for the club.

But the lines separating positivity, naievity and pure whistling in the wind can be very fine.

I desperately want my instincts to be wrong about this takeover.

[cblantfanclub]

So it’s like this to us non-financial ordinary Joes going off the above?
The current owners have trousered a nice profit (which may be ok) and moved on (yet still on the board)
Surprisingly if ALK fail to pay their instalments they get the club back ( not sure if this shows little confidence in the future by new owners or lots of confidence and maybe why MG and JB are on the board till they get fully paid up.)
The deal is financed in a way that sees the club in debt, which without a lot of good fortune it may not be able to service and in a way that has seen Bolton, Sunderland, Wigan etc. collapse.
Our famous dry powder store was £50,000,000 but has now been used up in some obscure financial dealings that gives it either to our ex directors or new ones. No one’s sure but it’s gone
This is before we invest in any playing staff.
The new owners have so far not shown any credible business plan to give an indication of how this can work out. (most media and fans reaction is why the hell have they bought Burnley)
There have been vague suggestions we are going to develop young talent as part of the business plan as new owners are into data driven recruitment. Yet people saying their product is simple, crude and not up to purpose, in fact they’d be better checking the player ratings thread on here
So we’re running up massive debts before going broke, have owners with no credible business plan and a useless sports data company, had £50,000,00 taken out of the club and disappeared and most neutral/informed journalists and other clubs are open mouthed at our stupidity.
Rovers fans must be ******* themselves and after the points deductions for going into admin. Etc. we will be lucky to end up in league one. Stockport back to “local” derby.
Well at least I’ve been warned.

[jojomk1]

The point I haven’t seen mentioned on here is who is funding our recruitment?

What recruitment ?

[Mala591]

It would seem reasonable to expect Alan Pace to write to/e-mail ALL Burnley Football Club shareholders with a summary of the business plan especially the part of the plan relating to player recruitment and how it is to be financed.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

Wow

Funny I’ve read for years on here comments on how great the board of directors were and how they only had the best interests of the club at heart. So selling out to an investor firm with some alleged dodgy financing would surely to against their principles!

[NewClaret]

I've nothing to add to that other than at a meeting yesterday Peter Mcormick (interim FA chair) used our recent takeover as an example of a process of thorough due diligence while the PL are very comfortable with the new owners and how they are funding it.

Good to hear.

[claretspice]

I've nothing to add to that other than at a meeting yesterday Peter Mcormick (interim FA chair) used our recent takeover as an example of a process of thorough due diligence while the PL are very comfortable with the new owners and how they are funding it.

I'm not going to get involved too greatly in the pros and cons of the takeover. One point I would make, though, is that I have seen a few references to the PL due diligence process, suggesting that this provides us with real comfort that this won't end badly.

I don't agree with that, for the simple reason that the PL test is, as I understand it, quite focused. It is undoubtedly more robust than the Football League test, but its purpose is simply to ensure that the club is sustainable as a Premier League entity - i.e. to avoid a repeat of the Portsmouth situation where the club threatened to go bust mid-season and damage the integrity of the competition. It isn't some altruistic test of whether the club will be safeguarded for supporters for the foreseeable future.

I posed three key questions on a different thread last week relating to the takeover that it would be nice to see answered transparently in order to give us all a measure of reassurance for the future. One of those was how the new owners intended to keep Burnley viable in the event of relegation. All those questions remain, for me, unanswered, but the one about relegation remains the big one - because if *any* of the reports about how the takeover is being financed are remotely accurate, then its possible to see how the club remains solvent in the Premier League, but it's very tough to see how the debt (which is secured against the club's assets, including Turf Moor) is serviced if we go down and don't bounce back immediately. That's why I take no great comfort on the Premier League's due diligence.

[winsomeyen]

Funny I’ve read for years on here comments on how great the board of directors were and how they only had the best interests of the club at heart. So selling out to an investor firm with some alleged dodgy financing would surely to against their principles!

Lets wait and see.

[Devils_Advocate]

Time will tell what the reality is with this takeover however some of the discussion has been very interesting with several posters knowledgeable in the area of finances who have different perspectives analysing and surmising over the bits of info available.

I really dont understand the posters who on a football messageboard which is specifically a place for people to come and discuss football and share their views and opinions are trying to stifle discussion and telling people to just wait and see. Its almost like they are the ones scared of something and if we dont talk about it then it will just go away

Ive not really had much of a view on this either way (but enjoyed following the discussions) but there is one thing I would say. For the last 4 or 5 years as other clubs have struggled the one thing the majority on here have been quite proud and defensive about is that we have run the club so if the worse case scenario happened and we went down then we would have a wage bill and cash reserves that could adapt to being a debt free Championship club that could sustain itself (even have a go at getting back up for a year or two)

The majority view seemed to be that we are on the ride of our lives and whilst we know it will come to an end at some point when it does it wont be in disaster like some of the other teams we laughed at.

I dont know how or when it happened but it seems the majority view has shifted a little in that people are now of the opinion unless we get investment we will go down sooner or later (this hasnt changed from the day we got promoted) and now seem happy to take a risk (or are oblivious to the risk) of having outside investors who in some way or another will need to gamble a little with our finances if they want to try and keep us as a Premier League club, improve us and make some money.

Whether it works out for the best or not I have absolutely no clue and im not going to get worried yet but dont be in any doubt we have joined the rest of the premier league pack in chasing the pot of gold. As we've seen time and time again if there's one way to chuck your money away no matter how talented a business person you are then a football club is that way and when that happens the club and its fans normally come crashing down with it

[claretonthecoast1882]

I'm not going to get involved too greatly in the pros and cons of the takeover. One point I would make, though, is that I have seen a few references to the PL due diligence process, suggesting that this provides us with real comfort that this won't end badly.

I don't agree with that, for the simple reason that the PL test is, as I understand it, quite focused. It is undoubtedly more robust than the Football League test, but its purpose is simply to ensure that the club is sustainable as a Premier League entity - i.e. to avoid a repeat of the Portsmouth situation where the club threatened to go bust mid-season and damage the integrity of the competition. It isn't some altruistic test of whether the club will be safeguarded for supporters for the foreseeable future.

I posed three key questions on a different thread last week relating to the takeover that it would be nice to see answered transparently in order to give us all a measure of reassurance for the future. One of those was how the new owners intended to keep Burnley viable in the event of relegation. All those questions remain, for me, unanswered, but the one about relegation remains the big one - because if *any* of the reports about how the takeover is being financed are remotely accurate, then its possible to see how the club remains solvent in the Premier League, but it's very tough to see how the debt (which is secured against the club's assets, including Turf Moor) is serviced if we go down and don't bounce back immediately. That's why I take no great comfort on the Premier League's due diligence.

The purpose of the test is also to protect the brand and image of its product

[Chester Perry]

Matt Slater from The Athletic on the Sensible Transfers podcast today giving his updated view after the furore last week.

.... One thing he does say is that he is certain that was at least £50m sat in cash at the club before the takeover.....

I find that entirely reasonable - it is a point I have argued for a while, last season didn't kill our cash reserves. it stalled their growth in probability, we were on target for a sizeable operational profit before the pandemic (possibly over £15m) as the impact of the new TV cycle kicked in. The reserves would have been used to cover costs (without loans, through to the end of the season when prize money and the first payment (the biggest) from the Premier League were paid in short order and quickly replenished the bank balance - since that point it has been a case of carefully managing the outgoings while remaining cautious about the ongoing impact of the pandemic on revenues.

[winsomeyen]

Time will tell what the reality is with this takeover however some of the discussion has been very interesting with several posters knowledgeable in the area of finances who have different perspectives analysing and surmising over the bits of info available.

I really dont understand the posters who on a football messageboard which is specifically a place for people to come and discuss football and share their views and opinions are trying to stifle discussion and telling people to just wait and see. Its almost like they are the ones scared of something and if we dont talk about it then it will just go away

Ive not really had much of a view on this either way (but enjoyed following the discussions) but there is one thing I would say. For the last 4 or 5 years as other clubs have struggled the one thing the majority on here have been quite proud and defensive about is that we have run the club so if the worse case scenario happened and we went down then we would have a wage bill and cash reserves that could adapt to being a debt free Championship club that could sustain itself (even have a go at getting back up for a year or two)

The majority view seemed to be that we are on the ride of our lives and whilst we know it will come to an end at some point when it does it wont be in disaster like some of the other teams we laughed at.

I dont know how or when it happened but it seems the majority view has shifted a little in that people are now of the opinion unless we get investment we will go down sooner or later (this hasnt changed from the day we got promoted) and now seem happy to take a risk (or are oblivious to the risk) of having outside investors who in some way or another will need to gamble a little with our finances if they want to try and keep us as a Premier League club, improve us and make some money.

Whether it works out for the best or not I have absolutely no clue and im not going to get worried yet but dont be in any doubt we have joined the rest of the premier league pack in chasing the pot of gold. As we've seen time and time again if there's one way to chuck your money away no matter how talented a business person you are then a football club is that way and when that happens the club and its fans normally come crashing down with it

Short of sending Mr Pace an email demanding he explain his motives I fail to see any other option but to wait and see.

[Chester Perry]

Time will tell what the reality is with this takeover however some of the discussion has been very interesting with several posters knowledgeable in the area of finances who have different perspectives analysing and surmising over the bits of info available.
....

great post

[NottsClaret]

I dont know how or when it happened but it seems the majority view has shifted a little in that people are now of the opinion unless we get investment we will go down sooner or later (this hasnt changed from the day we got promoted) and now seem happy to take a risk (or are oblivious to the risk) of having outside investors who in some way or another will need to gamble a little with our finances if they want to try and keep us as a Premier League club, improve us and make some money.

Yeah, agree on that. Like everyone else, I've no idea how this pans out, hopefully all is good. But it's a bit disconcerting how quickly so many people have jumped from shouting from the rooftops about how 'we're the only club in the Prem to run itself properly', 'we're debt free', 'locally owned and cared for' to this embracing of a US hedge fund behind a leveraged takeover, shifting a huge debt onto the club with our own ground as collateral.

Did they not mean it before, or do they not mean it now?

[Chester Perry]

Matt Slater from The Athletic on the Sensible Transfers podcast today giving his updated view after the furore last week.

Does a bit of explanation of the background of the people, the money (insofar as he thinks he knows it). He has had a lot of back and forth with ALK’s PR company. I don’t want to post my version of what he said, just in case the club take a dim view. One thing he does say is that he is certain that was at least £50m sat in cash at the club before the takeover. The podcast suggests that the club’s cash being part of the deal is what differentiates it from Man Utd.

The thrust of his story seems to be that BFC are a different entity now, not the self sufficient one we were before, and that many clubs have tried it and failed (Bolton, Sunderland, Wigan etc).

In my view nothing really changes - revenue has to grow a lot for this to benefit us as fans. Time will tell but something had to happen because we were punching above our weight and we would have ended up down (probably after Dyche jumped ship). We need a “unique selling point” to maintain our status long term, not just Dyche, so much will depend on if ALK have one.

the link to that is here - from 3 minutes in

https://theathletic.com/podcast/197-the ... episode=78

[Rileybobs]

Time will tell what the reality is with this takeover however some of the discussion has been very interesting with several posters knowledgeable in the area of finances who have different perspectives analysing and surmising over the bits of info available.

I really dont understand the posters who on a football messageboard which is specifically a place for people to come and discuss football and share their views and opinions are trying to stifle discussion and telling people to just wait and see. Its almost like they are the ones scared of something and if we dont talk about it then it will just go away

Ive not really had much of a view on this either way (but enjoyed following the discussions) but there is one thing I would say. For the last 4 or 5 years as other clubs have struggled the one thing the majority on here have been quite proud and defensive about is that we have run the club so if the worse case scenario happened and we went down then we would have a wage bill and cash reserves that could adapt to being a debt free Championship club that could sustain itself (even have a go at getting back up for a year or two)

The majority view seemed to be that we are on the ride of our lives and whilst we know it will come to an end at some point when it does it wont be in disaster like some of the other teams we laughed at.

I dont know how or when it happened but it seems the majority view has shifted a little in that people are now of the opinion unless we get investment we will go down sooner or later (this hasnt changed from the day we got promoted) and now seem happy to take a risk (or are oblivious to the risk) of having outside investors who in some way or another will need to gamble a little with our finances if they want to try and keep us as a Premier League club, improve us and make some money.

Whether it works out for the best or not I have absolutely no clue and im not going to get worried yet but dont be in any doubt we have joined the rest of the premier league pack in chasing the pot of gold. As we've seen time and time again if there's one way to chuck your money away no matter how talented a business person you are then a football club is that way and when that happens the club and its fans normally come crashing down with it

Pretty much exactly reflects my thoughts.

[aggi]

Matt Slater is on for about twenty minutes here (from about 5 minutes in). https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/t ... 0505041030

It doesn't give much over what has already been written but fleshes it out a little and he appears very sure of his sources.

Personally I suspect the story is, in the main, true. The figures may need a bit of tweaking but the denials haven't been too convincing and, even in them they've confirmed elements.

I'm not sure if it hugely changes things. Whilst we're in the Premier League we should be OK, if we go down we could be in trouble. We may be in more trouble than previously thought if we don't go straight back up again but relegation was always going to hit harder the longer we spent in the Premier League.

[Burnley Ace]

It would seem reasonable to expect Alan Pace to write to/e-mail ALL Burnley Football Club shareholders with a summary of the business plan especially the part of the plan relating to player recruitment and how it is to be financed.

Why? Small shareholders have had no input into how the club has been run for years.

[Mala591]

Why? Small shareholders have had no input into how the club has been run for years.

Thank you for your thoughts Mr Garlick. Might I remind you that Mr Pace is the chairman now.

[KRBFC]

Do ALK even have the capital to buy a football club? I’d suggest not given the club is now effectively buying ourselves new owners at the cost of £150M plus the interest on top.

So ALK have acquired 84% of the shares but who are ALK? surely it’s not just Pace and the other two people mentioned? because they don’t appear to have the personal wealth.

Is Pace driving the ALK bus for wealthy private investors?

I was hoping Pace and ALK were just the front men with a team of wealthy backers behind them, funding the operation.

The more it goes on the more it appears Pace is the front man and money man without the money and just pay day loaning against the club.

[joey13]

Think I have already said on this thread that there is certainly no head in the sand from me. I am mature enough in both life an business to know that there are risks associated with scenarios such as the one involving ALK.

However, equally I much prefer to deal in facts and allow things develop before deciding if something is good, bad or indifferent.

Finally, it appears that you are the one blindly believing what you've been told bearing in mind you are throwing around unsubstantiated figures and hearsay.

The new chairman can easily stop the throwing around of unsubstantiated figures and hearsay , he hasn’t , that’s a fact .

[aggi]

Do ALK even have the capital to buy a football club? I’d suggest not given the club is now effectively buying ourselves new owners at the cost of £150M plus the interest on top.

So ALK have acquired 84% of the shares but who are ALK? surely it’s not just Pace and the other two people mentioned? because they don’t appear to have the personal wealth.

Is Pace driving the ALK bus for wealthy private investors?

I was hoping Pace and ALK were just the front men with a team of wealthy backers behind them, funding the operation.

The more it goes on the more it appears Pace is the front man and money man without the money and just pay day loaning against the club.

I'd say the answer to this is unequivocally yes.

[claret54]

Matt Slater is on for about twenty minutes here (from about 5 minutes in). https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/t ... 0505041030

It doesn't give much over what has already been written but fleshes it out a little and he appears very sure of his sources.
........

This is really interesting . Thanks for the link. Something all fans should listen to.

[scouseclaret]

Time will tell what the reality is with this takeover however some of the discussion has been very interesting with several posters knowledgeable in the area of finances who have different perspectives analysing and surmising over the bits of info available.

I really dont understand the posters who on a football messageboard which is specifically a place for people to come and discuss football and share their views and opinions are trying to stifle discussion and telling people to just wait and see. Its almost like they are the ones scared of something and if we dont talk about it then it will just go away

Ive not really had much of a view on this either way (but enjoyed following the discussions) but there is one thing I would say. For the last 4 or 5 years as other clubs have struggled the one thing the majority on here have been quite proud and defensive about is that we have run the club so if the worse case scenario happened and we went down then we would have a wage bill and cash reserves that could adapt to being a debt free Championship club that could sustain itself (even have a go at getting back up for a year or two)

The majority view seemed to be that we are on the ride of our lives and whilst we know it will come to an end at some point when it does it wont be in disaster like some of the other teams we laughed at.

I dont know how or when it happened but it seems the majority view has shifted a little in that people are now of the opinion unless we get investment we will go down sooner or later (this hasnt changed from the day we got promoted) and now seem happy to take a risk (or are oblivious to the risk) of having outside investors who in some way or another will need to gamble a little with our finances if they want to try and keep us as a Premier League club, improve us and make some money.

Whether it works out for the best or not I have absolutely no clue and im not going to get worried yet but dont be in any doubt we have joined the rest of the premier league pack in chasing the pot of gold. As we've seen time and time again if there's one way to chuck your money away no matter how talented a business person you are then a football club is that way and when that happens the club and its fans normally come crashing down with it

Not often I "Like" your posts, DA, but that seems to be an excellent summary.

What really bothers me is that we appear to have gone from a position of financial stabilty to one of significant indebtedness before any money has been invested in improving the Club (team or infrastructue) - the "lost value" having been transferred to the pockets of the previous owners. I've asked before (and it was also asked in the aforementioned twohundredpercent article): how does that leave the Club and, by extension, us fans, in a better position?

It also bothers me that although Alan Pace has said a lot of what has been written is inaccurate, he hasn't said how or why it is inaccurate or made any attempt to better explain the financial structure. So much for his pledge to be "open" with us.

[jrgbfc]

So to summarise if things go well ALK can make a hell of a lot of money from the club without putting much in themselves or taking any real risks?
But if things go wrong it won't affect them too much as its the club thats been saddled with debt?

[KRBFC]

I'd say the answer to this is unequivocally yes.

What is that based on? Have the 3 names mentioned got £150m between them?

[Burnley Ace]

Thank you for your thoughts Mr Garlick. Might I remind you that Mr Pace is the chairman now.

Lol and you think Pace will be any different? You think we will start having AGMs again? A shareholders newsletter? When was the last time minority shareholders had a say at BFC?

[aggi]

What is that based on? Have the 3 names mentioned got £150m between them?

It's based on them having bought a football club.

[scouseclaret]

It would seem reasonable to expect Alan Pace to write to/e-mail ALL Burnley Football Club shareholders with a summary of the business plan especially the part of the plan relating to player recruitment and how it is to be financed.

I've said before (and was widely derided for it) that any rights we had as shareholders were stripped away in the 2013 restructuring, although it would have made a great deal of difference anyway.

[scouseclaret]

So to summarise if things go well ALK can make a hell of a lot of money from the club without putting much in themselves or taking any real risks?
But if things go wrong it won't affect them too much as its the club thats been saddled with debt?

That's pretty much how private equity works!

[dsr]

So to summarise if things go well ALK can make a hell of a lot of money from the club without putting much in themselves or taking any real risks?
But if things go wrong it won't affect them too much as its the club thats been saddled with debt?

I'd say that just about sums it up.

[Nonayforever]

So to summarise if things go well ALK can make a hell of a lot of money from the club without putting much in themselves or taking any real risks?
But if things go wrong it won't affect them too much as its the club thats been saddled with debt?

That is exactly right, but it must be emphasised that if things go wrong they will go drastically wrong for BFC as they will no longer own the Turf or the training ground.

[Spijed]

So to summarise if things go well ALK can make a hell of a lot of money from the club without putting much in themselves or taking any real risks?
But if things go wrong it won't affect them too much as its the club thats been saddled with debt?

There doesn't seem to be anything positive about the deal, does there?

Basically we'll be buying players with money we could have used anyway, but without being millions in debt!

[dandeclaret]

There doesn't seem to be anything positive about the deal, does there?

Basically we'll be buying players with money we could have used anyway, but without being millions in debt!

There are positives. There's new business acumen, there's a modern approach to technology, there's fresh ideas. There's potential that the figures of debt quoted are high, and the rest is truly sustainable, and we may have people who can elevate the club, plus the unique way that pace thinks the deal is structured could be amazing, and may be a truly cutting edge way of developing the club.

It's not all or nothing, it's not everything's rosy, or everything's problematic. There are opportunities, and there are risks. The discussion on here polarises, as ever, for the majority, as to whether you want all rosy or all problematic.

The big change here is that the club no longer has directors running it for free. If ALK invest £55m cash reserves well, to generate increased revenues, above the interest payment, then the club will do well.

[aggi]

I've said before (and was widely derided for it) that any rights we had as shareholders were stripped away in the 2013 restructuring, although it would have made a great deal of difference anyway.

I don't think it was anything to do with the restructuring, there was no real change in shareholders rights from one company to the next.

[dandeclaret]

The TIFO podcast is actually a really good, balanced listen, and the Atheltic Journalist, Matt Slater gives a very balanced view on his concerns, and some of the opportunities, and the thoughts behind his piece. It's a very good listen, and there appears to be plenty of reasonable logic in his argument.

[scouseclaret]

I don't think it was anything to do with the restructuring, there was no real change in shareholders rights from one company to the next.

Except for the small matter that we could no longer attend company meetings and vote! I agree though that it wouldn't have made any difference to this takeover.

[joey13]

The TIFO podcast is actually a really good, balanced listen, and the Atheltic Journalist, Matt Slater gives a very balanced view on his concerns, and some of the opportunities, and the thoughts behind his piece. It's a very good listen, and there appears to be plenty of reasonable logic in his argument.

unsubstantiated figures and hearsay , surely

[dandeclaret]

unsubstantiated figures and hearsay , surely

They talk in some certainty about things they believe to be true, and ranges of funds. I know you were being sarcastic, but it's a really balanced discussion in my view.

[aggi]

Except for the small matter that we could no longer attend company meetings and vote! I agree though that it wouldn't have made any difference to this takeover.

That wasn't to do with the restructuring though, that was due to an updated Companies Act which changed the rules on whether an AGM was required.

[Chester Perry]

They talk in some certainty about things they believe to be true, and ranges of funds. I know you were being sarcastic, but it's a really balanced discussion in my view.

nothing less than expected from Matt Slater, he has a good reputation built up from years of solid investigative work - the respect he is held in by his peers only serves to underline he is a voice worthy of being listened too - it should also be noted that he definitely wasn't scaremongering just noting how substantially the model has changed.