pablopicasso Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 so all of a sudden, speculate to accumulate appears, when it comes to making money for himself.... but still, i just dont buy it.... he will leave in a box and that day cant come sooner for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 If this deal does not go through and I still think it might soon, I wonder whether the Russians might become interested again as I think it was suggested that they would be waiting in the wings for exactly that to happen? If I wanted to buy a house, I would put an offer in. I would not wait for someone else to put an offer in, do their survey and then hope they try to gazunder the seller and the deal falls apart. If a russki wanted to buy a football club, he would walk up with a big chequebook as per chelsea, pompey. He would not sit waiting, hoping for the other persons deal to fall through. And even if he was such a poor businessman that he sits and waits his turn, he would surely by now picked up the odd clue that this deal wasnt going well at all and now would eb the time to strike. However it appears that "now" was a couple of weeks before xmas when it all went rather pear shaped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Yes we will Jez - that's why we have employed Rothchilds... Merchant bankers can be used to defend a company from takeover. What doug says and what doug does are quite often two different things. Why with all the evidence to the opposite are so many willing to give him the benefit of the doubt now, when they havent believed a word he has said for years? Note: manu spent £6m last year on bankers defending themselves from a takeover. Expensive these merchants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 If this deal does not go through and I still think it might soon, I wonder whether the Russians might become interested again as I think it was suggested that they would be waiting in the wings for exactly that to happen? If I wanted to buy a house, I would put an offer in. I would not wait for someone else to put an offer in, do their survey and then hope they try to gazunder the seller and the deal falls apart. If a russki wanted to buy a football club, he would walk up with a big chequebook as per chelsea, pompey. He would not sit waiting, hoping for the other persons deal to fall through. And even if he was such a poor businessman that he sits and waits his turn, he would surely by now picked up the odd clue that this deal wasnt going well at all and now would eb the time to strike. However it appears that "now" was a couple of weeks before xmas when it all went rather pear shaped. exactly Gringo and therefore you wonder if there is any viable deal out there apart from the Comer's interest ? No one disputes Ellis is looking to sell (for whatever reason) it is clear that the Comer's have not put in the bid ellis wants so now he is touting, if after a while it is clear npo-one else is interested and he wants to sell then the deal has to be struck with teh Comer's. the only way Ellis can obtain the maxuium value for his shares (as he sees it) is for him still to be able to do the deal, because once he dies I doubt anyone will pay much more than £50m. everyone is of course naturally sceptical of Ellis and his motives but this goes far beyond a way of simply not buying in hte transfer window, Rothschilds would not be involved if this was the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablopicasso Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 i dont know the ins and outs of the ntl situation, but what was the point in buying the shares back using villas money ian? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiddybloke Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 :yawn: :winkold: The takeover wont happen, ive said it from the start. Ellis will have to die first.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 because Andy, if NTL had exercised their option of 10% of the clubs shares it would have meant teh total number of shares go from 11 million to about 12.5m but Ellis would still own only 3.3 million thus reducing his share % from 33% to about 25% and then imagine the situation now, in an EGM if Petchey went against him Ellis would probably be out. Great move by Ellis securing his own position using the cclubs money !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 exactly Gringo and therefore you wonder if there is any viable deal out there apart from the Comer's interest ? No one disputes Ellis is looking to sell (for whatever reason) it is clear that the Comer's have not put in the bid ellis wants so now he is touting, if after a while it is clear npo-one else is interested and he wants to sell then the deal has to be struck with teh Comer's. the only way Ellis can obtain the maxuium value for his shares (as he sees it) is for him still to be able to do the deal, because once he dies I doubt anyone will pay much more than £50m. everyone is of course naturally sceptical of Ellis and his motives but this goes far beyond a way of simply not buying in hte transfer window, Rothschilds would not be involved if this was the case. I dispute it - what do you think that post says. If he was selling he wouldnt be doing two year kit deals now would he? Ellis is pretending to sell, then creating obstacles to the deal, ie not wanting to sell. Someone who is "willing to sell at the right price" is not the same as someone actively pursuing a deal. He is happy for things tick over until his full super man powers are restored and he can take responsibility for things back off stevie boy. And its simply not true that they would necessarily achieve a lower price once he pops it. Its just something you've made up cos it suits your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 still nothing, what a suprise. i can see what will happen. we dont hear anything until the summer where there will be an announcement saying "we have found buyers over-sea. due to this we will be freezing all transfers until the takeover is complete" then september 1st another annoucement "the party involved in the purchase was not suitable for aston villa football club, we will continue with our search" elies and his dwarfs always find a way of avoiding spending cash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahamaad Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Ellis is in a lose-loe situation. His health is poor, very poor. Time is against him and the clock is ticking away. There is unlikely to be another buyer, Ranson does not have the money the Comers have. Theirs is the only bid on the table, and once Ellis realises there is noone else, despite the fictitious names dropped to the press, he will sell. Quite what an 82 year old will do with all those millions I don't know. If he claims to be Mr. Aston Villa he would give back a large chunk of it after taking it out of the club for years. As my grandad would say, you can't take it with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 spot on ahamaad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pablopicasso Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 because Andy, if NTL had exercised their option of 10% of the clubs shares it would have meant teh total number of shares go from 11 million to about 12.5m but Ellis would still own only 3.3 million thus reducing his share % from 33% to about 25% and then imagine the situation now, in an EGM if Petchey went against him Ellis would probably be out. Great move by Ellis securing his own position using the cclubs money !!!! so thats a previous case of ellis using the clubs money for his own advantage... very much what i think is happening with regards the rothschild situation... i pray im wrong, but as you know, im very cynical about anything that happens at the club as previous experience has taught me to be... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Scenario 1: Doug employs merchant bankers. They set up a deal with the Comers. Doug screws the deal up Bankers want money for all the work they've put into getting the deal as far as it did and they want doug to pay seeing as he was the problem Doug sacks bankers and appoints Rothers on a do-nothing say-nothing retainer til the next AGM Scenario 2: Doug employs merchant bankers. They set up a deal with the Comers. Comers screw the deal up. Bankers want money for all the work they've put into getting the deal as far as it did. Doug thinks about retaining the bankers and promising them a slightly bigger commission when the deal finally goes through but instead sacks bankers and appoints Rothers, a more costly option. Doug won't spend money cos of the takeover. Doug spends money to ensure takeover. Doug wont do player deals cos of the takeover Doug does 2 year merchandising deal in spite of the takeover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 because Andy, if NTL had exercised their option of 10% of the clubs shares it would have meant teh total number of shares go from 11 million to about 12.5m but Ellis would still own only 3.3 million thus reducing his share % from 33% to about 25% and then imagine the situation now, in an EGM if Petchey went against him Ellis would probably be out. Great move by Ellis securing his own position using the cclubs money !!!! so thats a previous case of ellis using the clubs money for his own advantage... very much what i think is happening with regards the rothschild situation... i pray im wrong, but as you know, im very cynical about anything that happens at the club as previous experience has taught me to be... I know Andy and as I have said before I understand this. But the point is that at no point has Ellis ever refuted the club is for sale (Gringo fails to recognise this) and if this is all an elabroate way of not spending transfer money I simply don't buy it, it is too complicated and causes far more trouble than it is worth. Gringo, you seem to place a lot of emphasis on the kit deal but the money involved is small, like the shirt sponser deal and I doubt Ellis was even involved, all we did was to take up an option which if we get new oweners can be rescinded. Basically as NV will confirm if this was renewed we would be in trouble getting a new kit out in the summer, it was a simple option and a way to get good PR. Not a lot shoudl be read into this nor the shirt sponsers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaDave Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quite what an 82 year old will do with all those millions I don't know. If he claims to be Mr. Aston Villa he would give back a large chunk of it after taking it out of the club for years. As my grandad would say, you can't take it with you. Because Ellis, like many of us, has kids, grandkids (I assume) to pass his inheritance onto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I know Andy and as I have said before I understand this. But the point is that at no point has Ellis ever refuted the club is for sale (Gringo fails to recognise this) So cos Ellis has not said it isnt not untrue, then it must most likely be possible? What tosh. tony blur has not said the moon is not made of cheese, cue "blair believes moon is made of cheese" headlines. Laffable. Gringo, you seem to place a lot of emphasis on the kit deal So cos it doesnt support your position it should be ignored. I am not placing any kind of emphasis on it, cos nothing is happening, just surprised that no one had linked the two. but the money involved is small, like the shirt sponser deal and I doubt Ellis was even involved, all we did was to take up an option which if we get new oweners can be rescinded. The deal cannot be easily rescinded, its a signed contract that would have to be paid up. Basically as NV will confirm if this was renewed we would be in trouble getting a new kit out in the summer, it was a simple option and a way to get good PR. Not a lot shoudl be read into this nor the shirt sponsers. And as NV will confirm, kit deals have been done much later in the year than January in the past. Why, with a takeover just around the corner would you rush it through. Or if you were forced, why not agree just a one year deal, allowing the new owners a full 12 months to pick their own suppliers. The answer. Within Villa they don't think a takeover is just around the corner, and this is a way of getting some quick cash in cos cash flow is shite at the moment - we aint broke, plenty of mortgagable assets, but in terms of cash its rather thin on the ground. None of this makes sense if there was a background of takeover activity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Quite what an 82 year old will do with all those millions I don't know. If he claims to be Mr. Aston Villa he would give back a large chunk of it after taking it out of the club for years. As my grandad would say, you can't take it with you. Because Ellis, like many of us, has kids, grandkids (I assume) to pass his inheritance onto. If I had grandkids, I'd rather give them a football club than a trust fund. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b23avfc Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 i wouldn't wish avfc on anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 So cos Ellis has not said it isnt not untrue, then it must most likely be possible? What tosh. tony blur has not said the moon is not made of cheese, cue "blair believes moon is made of cheese" headlines. Laffable. whaat is laffable is your ignorance of Ellis, int he past before his heart op he always denied he wwould ever sell, any time there was a rumour he either dismissed the bid or claimed the box. the fact he has never said he would staay is totally signifcant aand as a friend of mine said who works in PR, if you don't hear anything it is true, in PR it is toally bad practice to allow what you think are untrue rumours float without a denial. None of this makes sense if there was a background of takeover activity. makes perfect sense if you know Ellis is nto in control and you have free reign to do what you like (no costs ot the club) and you are trying to dampen down rumours of a crisis. For once this is good PR, by the club, mainly Ryan I guess and it makes perfect sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis_B Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 If I had grandkids, I'd rather give them a football club than a trust fund. At the moment he..... sorry his wife/Grandkids are looking down the barrel at about £8,000,000 in inheritance tax!...... and thats on his shares alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts