Jump to content
Wanderers Ways - passion not fashion
Sign in to follow this  
Kane57

Take Over

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Sluffy said:

You are wrong in law but probably not in reality.

Put simply whoever can prove title to the shares owns them - and even if someone else has bought the shares in good faith, they will have to hand them back to the true owner once title has been established.

The judge and the clubs Administrator both clearly believe that a sale will go ahead - The Administrator even giving in his statement to the judge that an adjournment would not impact on the sale.

I would guess FV may hold fire and see what happens at the next court hearing on the 2nd September though.

I suggest you read back through the thread at @Escobarp extremely knowledgeable and informative contributions, particularly in respect of the last couple of days and @Matthew1234 reporting of Bassini's SAP consideration that he made (I'm amazed no one else seems to have picked up on this other than @Chris Custodiet ).

Bassini may well not be successful with his claim but if the judge rules for him he will be the lawful owner of Burnden Leisure and as it stands  the club AND hotel (as he would now control 94.5% of the company - which in turn owns them - I was unsure as to exactly what Bassini thought he was buying until Matthew so helpfully reporting on what was said in court today).

It could be viewed however that assets of Burnden Leisure may have to be sold to keep the company solvent and as such the club and hotel could be sold to new owners, the sale used to pay off creditors and Bassini's position as owner (if so determined by the judge) remain the same - namely he bought BL for £200k plus debts (a load of them!) and after sale of assets (say the football club to FV) the money received was used to pay off those creditors - and thus Bassini still has bough BL  for £200k but now with no debts! - although all he would have is a shell company with no assets - and as such he's basically paid £200k for a bunch of worthless share certificates.

The selling of the assets and paying off of creditors would not be detrimental to the value of the shares he bought, and thus Bassini would have no longer any claim on the clubs ownership.

No doubt which would probably trigger a myriad of legal claims and counterclaims.

And being such the book I recommend for tonight therefore is Dickens, Bleak House.

 

So FV or anyone could buy the assets (Stadium / hotel) and leave LB with ownership of a worthless shell company BL?

Why have you not made any mention of THE most important share (Golden share which entitles entry into EFL) ? 

Surely this is or should be what this is all about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Damocles said:

Would you buy a house that had an unsettled but contested charge over it? Sure you can legally purchase it, but there is a tort of law that can reverse the sale, why would you risk it? 

I don’t think anything gets done until there’s a final resolution.

People buy cars like that all the time but often in good faith. Only later do they find out it was stolen or subject to a HP agreement and get it snatched back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/08/2019 at 20:30, Marc505 said:

 

I am sick of this sorry mess all I want is to see my football club survive and play football had enough of all of them Bassini the mooman FV always close to signing KA greedy cunt and both administators.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Court proceedings don't always have predictable outcomes but on the basis of his background and reputation, I'd be surprised if Judge Eyre would order specific performance in favour of Bassini. As for compensation for Bassini's loss, I'd suggest that that would be the difference between the 200K he had offered and the amount the shares were worth. In circumstances where there seemed to be no-one other than Bassini willing to pay anything for the shares and EDT seemingly unwilling to take them on at all, I'd expect any claim of loss to be thrown out.

I'm pleased to see that there is a report on the proceedings in the Grauniad this morning albeit not from my good friend, Mr Conn.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2019/aug/14/bolton-sale-injunction-football

Presently no sign of  any comment from the ST's, Terrence Rigby, though. I've heard a lot of claptrap in my time but the last ST open meeting is right up there with the most memorable. Weren't they supposed to be holding an AGM btw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sluffy said:

You are wrong in law but probably not in reality.

Put simply whoever can prove title to the shares owns them - and even if someone else has bought the shares in good faith, they will have to hand them back to the true owner once title has been established.

The judge and the clubs Administrator both clearly believe that a sale will go ahead - The Administrator even giving in his statement to the judge that an adjournment would not impact on the sale.

I would guess FV may hold fire and see what happens at the next court hearing on the 2nd September though.

I suggest you read back through the thread at @Escobarp extremely knowledgeable and informative contributions, particularly in respect of the last couple of days and @Matthew1234 reporting of Bassini's SAP consideration that he made (I'm amazed no one else seems to have picked up on this other than @Chris Custodiet ).

Bassini may well not be successful with his claim but if the judge rules for him he will be the lawful owner of Burnden Leisure and as it stands  the club AND hotel (as he would now control 94.5% of the company - which in turn owns them - I was unsure as to exactly what Bassini thought he was buying until Matthew so helpfully reporting on what was said in court today).

It could be viewed however that assets of Burnden Leisure may have to be sold to keep the company solvent and as such the club and hotel could be sold to new owners, the sale used to pay off creditors and Bassini's position as owner (if so determined by the judge) remain the same - namely he bought BL for £200k plus debts (a load of them!) and after sale of assets (say the football club to FV) the money received was used to pay off those creditors - and thus Bassini still has bough BL  for £200k but now with no debts! - although all he would have is a shell company with no assets - and as such he's basically paid £200k for a bunch of worthless share certificates.

The selling of the assets and paying off of creditors would not be detrimental to the value of the shares he bought, and thus Bassini would have no longer any claim on the clubs ownership.

No doubt which would probably trigger a myriad of legal claims and counterclaims.

And being such the book I recommend for tonight therefore is Dickens, Bleak House.

 

Yes - my point is that ownership or claim of ownership of BL won't be resolved on 2nd of September either way. It will take a longer time for a definitive decision - should Bassini's case proceed. The hearing on 2nd is in relation to Bassini vs ICI. As judge said he could restate his BL after that hearing. 

So given that we know that by the time Bassini could press that claim BL will in all likelihood be liquidated either with the club assets or having transferred them. At that point he has no claim on its assets anymore as I assume the change to the injunction wording makes clear that said assets can be transferred. In reality to get to a point where BL ownership is resolved we're probably talking months maybe even longer. So by that point unless someone is funding administration to the tune of many millions of pounds - the assets are gone. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what I'm taking out of all of this is that there actually is a way for FV to complete the purchase of the club without fear of Bassini having a claim on it further down the line. Full stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hoppy510 said:

So what I'm taking out of all of this is that there actually is a way for FV to complete the purchase of the club without fear of Bassini having a claim on it further down the line. Full stop.

With Bassini you just never know what he might try but in reality - they can buy it with as little risk as they had prior to the injunction. Nothing is completely risk free. I would say that if FV are looking for an excuse to pull out they could use the uncertainty - but it would simply be an excuse masking real reasons at this stage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

With Bassini you just never know what he might try but in reality - they can buy it with as little risk as they had prior to the injunction. Nothing is completely risk free. I would say that if FV are looking for an excuse to pull out they could use the uncertainty - but it would simply be an excuse masking real reasons at this stage. 

I’d think if they don’t get the hotel that’ll be the excuse they need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’d think if they don’t get the hotel that’ll be the excuse they need.

If they don't get the hotel that will likely be because they decided to find an excuse. They have a £5.5M leg up on anyone wanting the hotel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bwfcfan5 said:

If they don't get the hotel that will likely be because they decided to find an excuse. They have a £5.5M leg up on anyone wanting the hotel.

Don't some folk look at things in a strange way? I'd have thought that you would need to have a good reason for throwing good money after bad rather than an excuse for not doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chris Custodiet said:

Don't some folk look at things in a strange way? I'd have thought that you would need to have a good reason for throwing good money after bad rather than an excuse for not doing.

Indeed. But they've been around since January - invested money already - supposedly a couple of hours away from completion a few times....they already had done due diligence. So at this point to pull out now for me would be them covering up a real reason. Had they seen the books and then given up - you'd be right. But given where they are - I suspect the real reason would be down to them not to the situation the club is in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’d think if they don’t get the hotel that’ll be the excuse they need.

They don’t need an excuse. They’ve already spelled it out as clear as day their strategy involves the hotel. No hotel no football club. It’s not an excuse it’s a business decision and led by the desire to make money. 

Apart from MJ they have no tie to the club simple as that. 

They are not making excuses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Hoppy510 said:

So what I'm taking out of all of this is that there actually is a way for FV to complete the purchase of the club without fear of Bassini having a claim on it further down the line. Full stop.

The argument between Bassini and Anderson shouldn't hold the sale up, unless someone is looking for an excuse not to complete - Burnden Leisure were struck out of the injunction, so that's a green light to sell. What's left is an argument between Bassini and Anderson about that alleged deal and whether any damages arise. The injunction was hurried and unprepared, and it seems like a last ditch attempt to sabotage the takeover so he could step in and get the deal. Like I say, I don't think is anything to do with the club, he/Sullivan want the assets as they've identified an opportunity. Ironically, this may actually have bought FV a bit more time to navigate on the hotel. Plus, if they had completed, we wouldn't have had the Coventry experience!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

They don’t need an excuse. They’ve already spelled it out as clear as day their strategy involves the hotel. No hotel no football club. It’s not an excuse it’s a business decision and led by the desire to make money. 

Apart from MJ they have no tie to the club simple as that. 

They are not making excuses. 

Precisely.

It seems unlikely that any funding is going to come only from MJ and SB so there will be other parties with their view of proceedings.

Its my understanding that, before contentious matters get to court at all, lawyers are expected to make very effort to attempt mediation first. I don't know if that happened in this case but it does seem to me that the judge did all that could have been expected of him yesterday to allow the FV deal to proceed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Okocha10 said:

Didn't do a job against Wycombe looked the worst player on the pitch

Who managed the team at Wycombe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pricey said:

Who managed the team at Wycombe?

Wasn't even the fact Parky managed the team, his natural basics of him passing the ball & his first touch was awful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Matty said:

Isn’t it mentioned somewhere that he couldn’t pay the £199,999 due to the accounts being frozen? Not sure if this plays any part in it. I assume not. 

I think you are getting a bit mixed up.

Bassini was buying the shares in Burnden Leisure from Ken's company ICI Ltd.

ICI Ltd has not had it's accounts frozen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Escobarp said:

They don’t need an excuse. They’ve already spelled it out as clear as day their strategy involves the hotel. No hotel no football club. It’s not an excuse it’s a business decision and led by the desire to make money. 

Apart from MJ they have no tie to the club simple as that. 

They are not making excuses. 

Absolutely correct 

We need the decision on the hotel 

Quantuma have no excuse for not announcing a decision as bids are already with them  and the deadline for bidding has passed 

Once they make an announcement we will know whether FV are able to make a decision to proceed or whether they are denied that opportunity 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Okocha10 said:

Wasn't even the fact Parky managed the team, his natural basics of him passing the ball & his first touch was awful.

Fair point and I agree, he was turd in that game, but still think he could've done a job for us

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Benny The Ball said:

Absolutely correct 

We need the decision on the hotel 

Quantuma have no excuse for not announcing a decision as bids are already with them  and the deadline for bidding has passed 

Once they make an announcement we will know whether FV are able to make a decision to proceed or whether they are denied that opportunity 

 

 

Hang on - why should Quantuma announce anything until they've done a deal? The club administrators have chosen to make announcements along the way but a normal administration would not be like that. I'm sure FV know the score with the hotel. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that Quantuma had already contacted FV as preferred bidder last week especially if speculation is true that FV were an hour away from signing.

Maybe this is what prompted Bassini to get the injunction, because he knew he wasn't getting the hotel. He had ample time to get the ball rolling with the injunction. The timing of it can't be a coincidence. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, anthonyj said:

So FV or anyone could buy the assets (Stadium / hotel) and leave LB with ownership of a worthless shell company BL?

Why have you not made any mention of THE most important share (Golden share which entitles entry into EFL) ? 

Surely this is or should be what this is all about.

It might be all about it to you and most other fans of the club but I expect it is all about making money/not losing money to most of the people involved in owning/claiming ownership of/Administering/purchasing/funding/investing/being paid/etc, etc.

The EFL' golden share will be awarded to the new company who buys the club from BWFAC Ltd (provided its owner/s meet all relevant EFL checks).  If FV do go on to become the owners then the golden share would go to their snappily named company for the club - FVWL Football Limited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah nice one, thank you for explanation. Wasn't sure what happened to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.