[Official Site] CLUB STATEMENT: NEW BOARD OF DIRECTORS

I'm no expert by a long way. But folk are saying nothings changed due to the investors calling the tune. Wrong in my view. Investors appoint nominees/directors to act in their interests. If those appointed fail in their running of a company. they are in effect removed and the investors appoint someone else to take the reins. Given the amount of money lost in revenue. Will mean a change of direction is needed. Hence the new board. I don't think they will throw excessive amounts of money around. But the strategy of Conway and co has failed miserably the last 2/3 seasons. (no player sales of value) That will in my view alter the mindset of the new board. Success is the key on the field. Then finances will improve. Having lost circa £6m. Is in my view a no brainer.

 

Conway has gone. He has little or no financial interest in BFC. Hopefully he lost money with us, but it appears we paid him more as acting CEO (very much acting) than he ever invested. Lee is sat on a 30% interest in a company that must be valued at less than nothing with no say in the direction of that company.

I have no idea if the new board will bring us success, but I f***ing love what they've done.

 

I'd be surprised if Conway didn't have some stake in that investor pot, even if extremely nominal.

I'm glad they are away from the day to day operations of BFC, and hope the new representative is a vast improvement. But they still have a holding in the company that owns the club. Until that is neutralised, there still needs to be room for caution.

 

Who's the club chairman now? Wasn't that role jointly held by Lee and Conway?

 

Chien's an investor in Crypto

https://www.cryptoninjas.net/2017/1...ard-blockchain-p2p-trading-platform-trade-io/

 

Just curious how it worked. I was more thinking if one of the other parties wanted to buy him out to take a Controlling stake.

 

No one owns 80%
There was never an 80%

The more you fixate on the 80% the more confused you will become.

I feel like I’ve typed this every time the subject comes up.

The club is 100% owned by a consortium, the Cryne family held 20% of that. The rest was split between a number of shareholders, the largest of which (we were led to believe) was Chien Lee. This new board have definitely changed that balance, but we’ll likely never know by how much.

However I wouldn’t be at all surprised to learn that the debt owed to the Cryne’s has been turned back into shares, leading to Jean now joining the board. And if that is true, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were now the largest shareholders. Just speculation, but it makes sense.

 

If they wish to offer more shares as an existing shareholder he would have first refusal to take up his rights in any capital raise.

 

I act as a Director on a business within my firm, the role is day to day but strategy is set by the owners. There is a difference between day to day executive decisions and the implementation of strategy determined by the ownership.

 

The interesting thing is going to be what happens/has happened with the legal action. It wouldn't be a good basis of relationship for the Crynes to be suing the investment vehicle given the changes. They were still obviously owed that amount, so some trade off or agreement must have been discussed. I can't envisage given the desperate finances they would endorse BFC continuing to foot the bill in the short term, so an equity swap, if it could be voted through, seems a more obvious course of action and has the kicker of diluting Lee's share. Of course it's all speculation at the minute, but I'm very keen to see some further detail.

 

That’s pretty much my gut feeling.
The Cryne’s; unhappy with the way the club is heading, and at a legal impasse over the outstanding sale fee have reached an agreement to take the debt to repurchase shares in the club (consortium that owns the club more precisely).

 

And I guess the other point, given the Crynes were adamant the HK investment company was due to pay the additional monies, yet £750k was paid from the club... have they agreed a settlement where they can return the £750k to the club, which would very much shore up our finances, or the HK vehicle do so on their behalf?

 

By that token then are you saying PMG set the strategy. They in my view would accept a strategy put forward to them to make them profits. Not the other way round. ?
My thought was that the Billy Beane process was adopted by Conway in the main supported by James Crynes stats programme. and those owners. Saw that as a green light and trusted those involved.

As an ex YW employee. The owners in my view had very little say in the day to day running. And entrusted the decisions to the board made up in most cases, of employees promoted to the ranks of director. In effect those who supposedly know the business inside out. If they fail they will be replaced.
Majority shareholders rarely mess about if someone is failing on their behalf and will get shut.
I believe the new board, now forming the majority will adopt a different strategy and rely more on their employees as guidance. But not give up on prudence. They will not bankroll the club as in for example to the same tune as eg Chansiri. He has now stopped being a cash cow. But if he continues, ffp will bite him on the arse again.

 

~~~~~~~~This~~~~~~~~

The Companies House records have shown up pretty quickly and show removal rather than resignation of the Directors. I also can't see a way back into the club for them, particularly with what has now been said by other board members. We don't know if the court case has settled but the resurgence of the Crynes hints at that. Yes, if new shares are issued an existing shareholder would have rights to purchase more but that doesn't preclude an arrangement that shares be surrendered to settle a Court case. Nareev seems to have been quietly buying up shares and has now stepped forward with a statement and I hope his heart in the right place and we must surely give him the benefit of the doubt.
Is it an end to our problems?
Probably not.
Is it a massive step in the right direction?
Probably Yes
As Churchill said after El Alamein. "It is not even the beginning of the end. but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning"

 

I own shares in several companies, but I have no say in any strategy in those companies. That strategy is set by the Directors/The Board of those companies. If I don't like the strategy the way any of those companies is being run my only options are a) sell my shares or b) vote the Directors out at the AGM

 

If you own a large percentage in a private business it is very different to owning a small position in a plc.

I wouldn’t expect you to be deciding strategy of the companies you hold unless you are a major shareholder.

 

If you owned 50% of a company you probably would have some say in dictating strategy ( not saying that is the case here)