| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) 13:15 - Mar 4 with 8996 views | Reuser_is_God |
|  |
| |  |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:33 - Mar 5 with 1117 views | Metal_Hacker |
I am looking forward to seeing R_i_G back again though for some more defined insight [Post edited 5 Mar 2021 12:33]
|  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:35 - Mar 5 with 1088 views | Ryorry |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:24 - Mar 5 by ArnoldMoorhen |
The American Consortium's approach to building clubs at the heart of the community is very ambitious. It would require a lot of support from the Council, and possibly the Government, as well as Marcus Evans. It may take a long time.
It is quite likely that after a lot of research and discussions either the American Consortium or Evans could decide that it just wouldn't work for them, and pull out. It's also possible that Evans may like what they are saying and want to be a part of it. If that were the case then that would require a lot of negotiation.
Nobody can say any more than: there is evidence that an American Consortium is looking into the possibility of investing in Ipswich Town. Marcus Evans' statement says that no firm bid for his shares has been made to him yet, and he can't lie about that as he is not the only shareholder. So there is interest, research is being carried out on behalf of the American Consortium, but it is not close to being finalised. Anyone claiming to know more than that is either a senior professional who is leaking information that they shouldn't (and that isn't likely) or is someone like you and I who is putting things they have heard on the internet together and indulging in slightly wishful thinking. Or they are deliberately making things up to get a reaction. |
"It would require a lot of support from the Council, and possibly the Government"
Can you explain why, please? And in any case, if that is so, why their bid has gone to the EFL for ratification first, before the "support" you mention has been given?
Also, if other similar approaches for other clubs have happened before in the UK, did those also follow the same pathway of going to the EFL for ratification *before* the "support from the Council, and possibly the Government" that you mentioned, were given?
Thanks in advance. |  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:38 - Mar 5 with 1065 views | SomethingBlue |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:24 - Mar 5 by ArnoldMoorhen |
The American Consortium's approach to building clubs at the heart of the community is very ambitious. It would require a lot of support from the Council, and possibly the Government, as well as Marcus Evans. It may take a long time.
It is quite likely that after a lot of research and discussions either the American Consortium or Evans could decide that it just wouldn't work for them, and pull out. It's also possible that Evans may like what they are saying and want to be a part of it. If that were the case then that would require a lot of negotiation.
Nobody can say any more than: there is evidence that an American Consortium is looking into the possibility of investing in Ipswich Town. Marcus Evans' statement says that no firm bid for his shares has been made to him yet, and he can't lie about that as he is not the only shareholder. So there is interest, research is being carried out on behalf of the American Consortium, but it is not close to being finalised. Anyone claiming to know more than that is either a senior professional who is leaking information that they shouldn't (and that isn't likely) or is someone like you and I who is putting things they have heard on the internet together and indulging in slightly wishful thinking. Or they are deliberately making things up to get a reaction. |
Or they are privy to other information about how far down the track it is. |  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:41 - Mar 5 with 1032 views | Darth_Koont |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 13:22 - Mar 4 by Ryorry |
I'm a shareholder & have received 0 communication. |
Ditto. |  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:46 - Mar 5 with 994 views | SouperJim |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:28 - Mar 5 by ArnoldMoorhen |
However it does mean that Evans can't directly lie about things. He has said in plain language that he hasn't received a firm bid, so he hasn't. |
Actually, what he said was:-
"I have had detailed offers for the club past and present ... there is nothing that is currently acceptable to me or the club ... if I feel there is something to say officially on the matter, you the supporters will be the first to hear from me.".
Sounds like he has had many "firm bids", just that as of Wednesday evening, he hadn't sold the club and any offer is not going to be acceptable to him until it's been ratified. He'll let us know, if a deal has been agreed in principle and is with the EFL for ratification, he's not going to tell us before it actually goes through, is he? |  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:58 - Mar 5 with 941 views | wkj |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:33 - Mar 5 by Metal_Hacker |
I am looking forward to seeing R_i_G back again though for some more defined insight [Post edited 5 Mar 2021 12:33]
|
TBF He never actually said what the shareholders had been informed of - he has a get out of jail free card here |  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 13:02 - Mar 5 with 908 views | Metal_Hacker |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:58 - Mar 5 by wkj |
TBF He never actually said what the shareholders had been informed of - he has a get out of jail free card here |
I believe the creation of the thread was to suggest shareholders had been informed ... when they haven't and wouldn't like to be either
Or again am I being a little thick ? | |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 13:27 - Mar 5 with 852 views | ArnoldMoorhen |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 12:35 - Mar 5 by Ryorry |
"It would require a lot of support from the Council, and possibly the Government"
Can you explain why, please? And in any case, if that is so, why their bid has gone to the EFL for ratification first, before the "support" you mention has been given?
Also, if other similar approaches for other clubs have happened before in the UK, did those also follow the same pathway of going to the EFL for ratification *before* the "support from the Council, and possibly the Government" that you mentioned, were given?
Thanks in advance. |
If you look at the interview about Johnson's plans for Pawtucket, then it is all about creating a coalition of interest between outside investors and the City authorities. The Club drives regeneration and jobs. There can be no such plan at FPR without not just planning consent from the Council, but a deal being done as to how the Council as landowners at FPR and the Car Park opposite obtain fair value for that land (whether they sell it, or allow development of it and lease). The Council is legally obliged to seek fair value.
Re Government. Similarly, Johnson's group look to utilise investment zone tax breaks. A Government in a post-industrial town with a vulnerable sitting MP may well be up for some speedy investment zone designation. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 15:19 - Mar 5 with 762 views | BlueWorldOrder |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 13:31 - Mar 4 by Kieran_Knows |
For crying out loud. |
But the poster said the shareholders have been informed. Surely they would know? |  |
| |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 15:21 - Mar 5 with 759 views | Ryorry |
| Shareholders have now been informed (n/t) on 13:27 - Mar 5 by ArnoldMoorhen |
If you look at the interview about Johnson's plans for Pawtucket, then it is all about creating a coalition of interest between outside investors and the City authorities. The Club drives regeneration and jobs. There can be no such plan at FPR without not just planning consent from the Council, but a deal being done as to how the Council as landowners at FPR and the Car Park opposite obtain fair value for that land (whether they sell it, or allow development of it and lease). The Council is legally obliged to seek fair value.
Re Government. Similarly, Johnson's group look to utilise investment zone tax breaks. A Government in a post-industrial town with a vulnerable sitting MP may well be up for some speedy investment zone designation. |
OK, thanks for that explan - but you haven't answered my other 2 Qs! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
