David-Copenhagen

I think that if the club remains a PLC thenhe is very lmiited in what he can do Therefore I think if he doesnt get the 75% he will walk away as I understand this is also part of the soft condition See now this makes it confussing again :-) I have just looked though the offer and the interessting part is this As I read this, it only says that he intends to take the club private again. The bold part has to do with the offers to JP and Ellis - not the 75%. Do all agree? If we agree on that he will own 58% and can't leave but will have to sell again. Result Doug is 100% out. AV06 can then try a hostile takeover unless RL walks.

To clarify - I got the impression that RL wants 75% or the offer is off - is that true?

Which one is it - a condition or not? Richard can you link me to the relevant doc. so I can see for myself?

No I am confussed, is it not a condition for the RL deal to go through that he gets 75%? If so why - since that can't be the LSE forcing him to do that.

So that leaves us with a situation were RL has to get his hands on more than 8.580.000 shares. He now has around 6.4 mill of those. He needs more than 2.1 mill aditional shares and we all agree that there are no other major shareholders. This is why the AV06 quotes are so bad - some shareholders might decide to hold on to there shares - and we need all that can be bothered to react. Why did he insert the 75% clause? does it give him any speciel options? He controls the club with 56% so why the need for 75%. I know that if he gets to 90% he can get the rest - but 75% - does someone have a clue?

Great bizz for NTL......?, to bad it all went to the stand.

When you say missing, is that because people have moved? If that is the case how can you disregard them? They are still shareholders, even if they are not registered. if they arent registered then they cant vote, as such they have to be discounted. at least, this is my understanding That does not make any sence - did RL not want 75% of the shares? if so that will have to include all shares, even those that are not registered, since they can be "reregistered".

When you say missing, is that because people have moved? If that is the case how can you disregard them? They are still shareholders, even if they are not registered.

I think when the plc bought the shares back, they were dissolved weren't they? I guess that makes sence.

Then the offer is off. He can stay if he want, but his is not forced to.

PB did Villa buy back the NTL shares? and if so are they under the same deal taht JP and Doug have?

i was just thinking actually. If 10% are AWOL. then 75% is harder to reach isnt it? and how may do you think will be held by small institutions? 75% might sound quite a lot, but in reality, it is only another 18.2% or thereabouts. I would suspect this figure has been arrived at knowing that some of the larger shareholders are happy to sell. For example I do know NTL had just under 10% and if sold, they are already well on their way to that figure (I don't know if NTL still do own their shares btw but this is for example) - So I would imagine Lerners advisors have already spoken to the other main holders to reach agreement. The odd one or two shares we hold is in fact peanuts - a mere drop in the ocean when you consider nearly 21% of shares are over 2.25 million in number! Ultimately I suspect that while those of us with a very very small stake sending them back might help, its the larger holders of shares who really make the difference and you can bet they have already been sounded out somehow. Now this is something I forgot - did Villa not buy back the shares from NTL? And if so does does the board acceptence of the bod include the shares owned by Villa or is that a matter for the shareholders? As a reply to Rune, I don't think there are any other major shareholders than JP and Doug. As I understand it JP got his shares from the few institutions that held shares in Villa - correct me if I am wrong.

I am woried about reaching the 75%, especially if most of the shares are held by fans in small scale - ie. 1 or 2. I suspect a lot can't be bothered filling out forms for just 1 share. Do any of you have an idea of how many shareholders there are?

Does anyone know what Villa Matters is??? the only thing I could find about them was this: Clicky

Laudrup is quite wealthy, but I think they are in the consortium qua their experince as players and contacts in the game.

Michael Laudrup and John Faxe. Not as manger and coach, but investors.

I don't know about Still and Padfield, but I know for a fact that AV06 has Danish people in there - so how they can be considdered British is strange?

AV06 have been refusesd access to the books as they won't sign a confidentiality agreement. And you know that for a fact? I know it has been in the papers that they have not signed a confidentiality agreement, but is that still the case and was that the truth to beging with?

Good point, since randy is willing to bid 62, they can just use his valuation as a gudieline, but it does seem kind of strange that they have not gone through due dilingence - or have they, do we really know what is going on. As far as the AV board goes - their obligation is to recommend the best offer for the shareholders - not the future of the business. So money talks. As I understand the AV06 consortium, it consists among others of former top players one of them Michael Laudrup - my info tells me that they are for real. What I think they want is to take over a club and Villa is a good prosepect and a very low valued one at that. A lot of people seem to think that the value of Villa could be more than doubled in a few years time, that makes room for a lot of investment in the club.

Yes you are right he can sell to whom ever he wants, but he is clearly interessted in the money based on history - would you not agree?

Since it seems that the fat lady has been on stage yet, we need a take over thread. Unless we can open the old one! I think this latest bid of 70 mill is very interessting and we can not discard it. As I see it we are in no rush after it is clear that Doug is gone, we need to build from the buttom at if it takes a month or 2 to get this sorted I will not mind - we are not going to make an impact this season anyway. Clicky

So if a bid comes in for Villa that is better for the future of the club, you think O'neill would walk just because it wasn't Lerner? Why would he do that? Dont know, ask Robert Chase why he walked on Norwich. MON is a man of considerable honour. Now it may be that he has spoken extensively with Lerner and has developed a working relationship with him based on trust. It may be that he knows he can achieve with Lerner what he wants to achieve. It may also be that he may feel he could not have the same relationship with other bidders. Or it may be that other bidders have their own ideas of where they want to go. All I am saying here is that any new bid must have the confidence of Martin Oneill. If it doesn't and he walks as a result then it is not a better bid. This is only true if MON is the only man taht can lift Villa - if/when we get a seroius backer I am sure a lot of this worlds best managers would love to work for us.

I agree MON will not be able to do much in this transfer window anyway and I want long term success not a quick fix - I can wait for the best man/consortium.

You might be right, but badwill never stopped Ellis and I can't see any serious money being given to MON untill after the 3 weeks time - but then again one can hope he might be.

A Villa world free of Ellis, just imaging. Who ever takes over now will not be Doug - THANKS