a new offer from C9S

[HarrowbyOwl]

If C9 are coming in with an improved offer and as LS seemed to be backing the CS9 bid according to Bills etc,then it could be that they have agreed that LS returns as part of that deal to be chairman or simply one of their repson the board. They cannot afford to have themembers of the board fly trans atlantic for every board meeting can they...BUT they can get a rep to have all their proxy votes at any board meeting ala LS...the messiah in Gleams msg...

just speculation on my part...

Can't see Lee returning with a C9S hat on myself

[Furious George]

There's negotiating in good faith, then there's 'negotiating' C9S style. Since the bid was rejected they have:

- accused the club of breaking the confidentiality agreement

- said the offer was rejected without board discussion

- tried to blame the club for not returning the required documentation, thereby forcing C9 to make a reduced offer (while at the same time saying they wouldn't have offered the agreed £5m anyway)

- accused the club of being in a distressed situation (trying to sour a deal for any other interested parties)

- going over the head of the board, using the nobody Team to appeal to 'supporter constituencies'

- saying the club doesn't have integrated reporting, controls and performance metrics in place

I was under the impression the board did break the confidentiality agreement when they revealed the monetary amount and the management fees.

Some of those I haven't seen re the accusations. Have the club not denied any of this? You'd have thought if we were entertaining other investors they would be releasing official statements to rebut their accusations.

Not quite sure what you mean by going over the head of the board to appeal to supporter constituencies. Which board? And whilst to me nobody looks like a two-bit outfit, I don't see any issue with C9S seeking supporter approval.

[Brownlad]

I'll be honest

after a year or so, that culminated with a 'derisory' offer.

I'm not holding out much hope.

[shireowl]

We should tell them to do one - forever - negotations are off - period

Talk about jumping from the frying pan into the fire....

this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

would rip my heart out to see this lot of wan kers set foot in my club.............

[O_D_A]

Brownlad we could do with a massive wee wee tail and balls on this thread

[Guest sotonowl]

this ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

would rip my heart out to see this lot of wan kers set foot in my club.............

Well said,they're skint,unproffessional,unconnected to UK football and SWFC and the club would just tread water for years to come whilst they just took their management fees out of the club and out of our pockets.

If this goes through a lack of ambition on their part will soon become apparent and they would want 10 times or more what they actually paid for control.

We all want a change at S6 but a change for the better it must be and not change for changes sake.

We will regret this deal if it goes through.

[HarrowbyOwl]

I was under the impression the board did break the confidentiality agreement when they revealed the monetary amount and the management fees.

Why, because C9S said so? I doubt that anyone on here has seen the confidentiality agreement, so how do we know who 'broke' it.

Some of those I haven't seen re the accusations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/sheff_wed/8683813.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/sheff_wed/8690478.stm

Have the club not denied any of this? You'd have thought if we were entertaining other investors they would be releasing official statements to rebut their accusations.

Hopefully they've got more sense than to get into into a public argument. Obviously all trust has broken down.

Not quite sure what you mean by going over the head of the board to appeal to supporter constituencies. Which board?

Which Board do you think?

And whilst to me nobody looks like a two-bit outfit, I don't see any issue with C9S seeking supporter approval.

Seeking supporter approval for a derisory offer?

[longreach]

Well said,they're skint,unproffessional,unconnected to UK football and SWFC and the club would just tread water for years to come whilst they just took their management fees out of the club and out of our pockets.

If this goes through a lack of ambition on their part will soon become apparent and they would want 10 times or more what they actually paid for control.

We all want a change at S6 but a change for the better it must be and not change for changes sake.

We will regret this deal if it goes through.

Do you actually know what "the deal" is

[Guest sotonowl]

And they aint even mentioned anything about building a hotel so f--k em

[Rustyfunk]

[RUMBELOWS91]

Spicy chicken balls?

[Brownlad]

as requested

[Sonny]

**** off

flipping Boring

[Furious George]

In reply to Harrowby:

I was under the impression the board did break the confidentiality agreement when they revealed the monetary amount and the management fees.

Why, because C9S said so? I doubt that anyone on here has seen the confidentiality agreement, so how do we know who 'broke' it.

Well the timeline of the offer was - offer announced by C9S - Owls reject offer on the basis of two details that were published on the official site - C9S revealed the rest of the offer. So the timeline certainly fits with one party having broken a confidentiality agreement.

Some of those I haven't seen re the accusations.

http://news.bbc.co.u...wed/8683813.stm

http://news.bbc.co.u...wed/8690478.stm

Have the club not denied any of this? You'd have thought if we were entertaining other investors they would be releasing official statements to rebut their accusations.

Hopefully they've got more sense than to get into into a public argument. Obviously all trust has broken down.

Well if I were trying to sell something with all these apparent other investors, and someone was bad mouthing it publically - I'd certainly put my side of the story out there. Maybe its the truth though? If they had released a statement - this debate wouldn't be happening would it? So what have they actually gained??

Not quite sure what you mean by going over the head of the board to appeal to supporter constituencies. Which board?

Which Board do you think?

And whilst to me nobody looks like a two-bit outfit, I don't see any issue with C9S seeking supporter approval.

Seeking supporter approval for a derisory offer?

So you're saying its a bad thing that C9S have not asked our board for permission to gain supporter feeling for their bid? Why do they need permission from our board?! And despite your opinion of the derisory offer - not everyone is of the same opinion. If this feedback enabled them to come up with a different bid more suited to the general consensus of supporters - why is this such an terrible negotiating technique???

[O_D_A]

THREAD SAVED BY BROWNLAD

[Spookone]

They've managed to raise another 50 quid.

SiJ

So Called fans like you make me sick!

Havent you got anything better to do with your time

Give the process a chance before pouring scorn on an organisation which could lead to the revitalisation of our once great club - why are you so negative about our American friends?

I have close family across in California and have it on vert good authority it is actually...

£60

[Saxondale]

as requested

[HarrowbyOwl]

In reply to Harrowby:

I was under the impression the board did break the confidentiality agreement when they revealed the monetary amount and the management fees.

Why, because C9S said so? I doubt that anyone on here has seen the confidentiality agreement, so how do we know who 'broke' it.

]Well the timeline of the offer was

- offer announced by C9S publicly on their website 4 days after it was made to our board

- Owls reject offer on the basis of two details that were published on the official site

- C9S revealed the rest of the offer.

So the timeline certainly fits with one party having broken a confidentiality agreement. So going public with the offer when the board were still discussing it was OK then and didn't break any agreement?

Some of those I haven't seen re the accusations.

http://news.bbc.co.u...wed/8683813.stm

http://news.bbc.co.u...wed/8690478.stm

Have the club not denied any of this? You'd have thought if we were entertaining other investors they would be releasing official statements to rebut their accusations.

Hopefully they've got more sense than to get into into a public argument. Obviously all trust has broken down.

Well if I were trying to sell something with all these apparent other investors, and someone was bad mouthing it publically - I'd certainly put my side of the story out there. Maybe its the truth though? If they had released a statement - this debate wouldn't be happening would it? So what have they actually gained??

Not quite sure what you mean by going over the head of the board to appeal to supporter constituencies. Which board?

Which Board do you think?

And whilst to me nobody looks like a two-bit outfit, I don't see any issue with C9S seeking supporter approval.

Seeking supporter approval for a derisory offer?

So you're saying its a bad thing that C9S have not asked our board for permission to gain supporter feeling for their bid? Why do they need permission from our board?! And despite your opinion of the derisory offer - not everyone is of the same opinion. If this feedback enabled them to come up with a different bid more suited to the general consensus of supporters - why is this such an terrible negotiating technique???

No, what I'm saying is they should negotiate in good faith by returning with an improved offer through the proper channels, not try to whip up some pathetic fans rebellion against the board to accept an offer that they may or may not improve.

[Furious George]

How do you know the board were still discussing it?

4 days after the offer was made, and then it was announced, and as I recall it was rejected within the hour. Coincidence? I think not.

And yes, heaven forbid there would be any fans rebellion against a board who have always looked after the best interests of us. Apart from suing us etc.

[steelowl]

For me I am not sure their offer was that off the mark.

we are loss making and are in L1. How much value would you say the club has?

My concerns are:

1) The losing of control; to some yanks that know nothing about the game.

2) The fees they are looking to charge? They would recoup their initial investment in 5 years.

3) The promise of funds going forward? Are the committed to providing the money they have talked about?

IMO these are 3 reasons why it's far off the mark that and the teeniest little add on that they allegedly have no money in place