-   Lost Password?   -   Register
  -   Lost Password?   -   Register

members do not see advertisements

Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
Author Message
thetruth1953 Online
Registered User

Posts: 2,334
Joined: Jul 2014
Post: #91
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
Smuggs I don,t think they have 300 million
17-06-2017 10:33
Find Posts Quote
Magic147 Offline
Not a penny more

Posts: 13,878
Joined: Sep 2012
Post: #92
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
They don't have much in liquid assets, compared to someone like Val at least. The majority of their net worth is tied up in businesses and commercial property, and I doubt Val would see much use for a wedding venue.

If Belokon wins and the award is anything approaching £20m, then I don't think it's far-fetched to think that Owen's BFC shares could be sold to Belokon as part payment of that award.
17-06-2017 10:37
Find Posts Quote
smuggs2006 Offline
Registered User

Posts: 122
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #93
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
thanks guys so when you see this daliy mail Oystons worth 2016 300 odd million its in business's and company's, so they might have 2m in the banks so 20m could be sweet outcome in that they will have to do some major shuffling around and would be a true pain in arse. So magic your idea sounds about right leave th other assets alone and just lose a touch of control of Blackpool FC
17-06-2017 10:58
Find Posts Quote
AndrewDuncanSmith Offline
Registered User

Posts: 1,177
Joined: Apr 2012
Post: #94
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
Val might like a nice country estate something like Claughton Hall
a place to retire to
17-06-2017 11:44
Find Posts Quote
Magic147 Offline
Not a penny more

Posts: 13,878
Joined: Sep 2012
Post: #95
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
Will we get the result of this case at the end of the evidence and statements etc.?

Or will there be a break for the judge to consider everything first?
17-06-2017 11:46
Find Posts Quote

members do not see advertisements

smuggs2006 Offline
Registered User

Posts: 122
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #96
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
i was thinking just that magic , surely with the huge size of the case they will have a 48 hrs or something at the end to get a correct result. When is the estimated finish date again
17-06-2017 12:47
Find Posts Quote
seasider Offline
Administrator

Posts: 55,396
Joined: Feb 2012
Post: #97
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
Day 6 - stolen from Justice4fans

NOTE This is a BFC fan's summary of their understanding of the legal arguments presented to the court today
Any inaccuracies in their reporting is a reflection of that

ROLLS BUILDINGS

COURT 1

AM SESSION

KV confirms his statement.

Steinfeld QC (SF) suggesting KV not qualified to be director of BFC etc No previous experience. KV made clear his previous experience in financial sector etc. Production/manufacturing/finance sectors etc

SF asks why VB appointed him KV didn't ask (SF surprised) Suggest it was to make life difficult and to be a thorn in side for Oystons etc. "Wanted someone more aggressive than NM". KV Appointed Dir March 2013. Aim to bring O's to the negotiating table to buy VB shares at increased price.

SF asks did KV speak to NM KV says yes and was told about 'problems' dealing with KO. Said he spoke to NM about his time in Blackpool but wanted to get own understanding about why investments were not performing - references to investment agreement 2008 - not achieving return.

SF asked was KV

1. aware that VB had written to the Club to appoint 2 people to oversee the Board KV not aware.

2. NM had official position as Fin Dir, KV not immediately aware of that but discovered. NM shared office with KO.

3. Why did you not takeover official FD position. We're you aware the NM had electronic access to accounts by dongle?. KV No.

4. Were you expected to fulfil the role. KV No just attend BM. Not in any case possible because things had got bad with the relationship (i.e. KO)

SF asked what he KV thought his role was. He said budget planning but they (O's) did not appear (were not) interested. Working at BFC entirely different to any other company's KV involved in. No collaboration, meetings held for sake of them. SF said not shown in Board Meeting (BM) minutes KV offers to help the club.

KV before 2015 made suggestions to help Club as it was performing badly on pitch. Club should invest more in players. SF says is this not the managers job, Club had spent 60 million from 2010-2015 on players and wages. Otherwise get dud players KO seems to have controlled this (my assessment). KV said KO vetoed Managers proposal for players. SF asks was KV aware that VB was accepting of Blackpool business model and said all clubs should be run like this.

SF asked if KV has read the Club's Articles Of Association (AA). He said yes. SF went though various articles and asked

1. Article 20 provision for Dir to hold number of shares

2. Article 30 restriction on dividends.


3. Did VBFA have a UK registered office (said no) was he aware that Article 31 no entitlement to receive notice if no UK Registered office (must be in place). KV said not aware although he read AA briefly.

SF then went to BM 20 Sep 2013 Minutes apology from VB but KV was present. Rod Dyer to send copy of AA to KV.

KV said these were given to Lawyers (Latvia) who said unfair to minority shareholders, not to adopt them. Limit our right as shareholders to appoint directors and influence other decisions. Lawyers to redraft not accepted by KO accepted AA may need looking at if issues then they should meet.

Then onto Subscription Agreement (SA) Sect 6B shows that minority subscription of 20% would not be diluted if more shares issued. KV refer to legal as not sure Minority SH provisions were fair.

SF asked did you want VBFA to be treated differently to other minority shareholders. KV said didn't have sufficient legal expertise and wanted to give to legal.

? meeting? Letter? 5 Dec 2013 SA that VBFA could apply for shares. (SF reading verbatim a lot blah blah blah)

15 Jan 2014 email refers to BM Conference call with Club and VB lawyers. AA not accepted and not drafted in spirit of cooperation

5 Feb 2014 BM under AOB never a willingness to make changes or listen ref to Rod Dyer correspondence.

At this stage then went to UK lawyer (Field Fisher). They agreed with VBFA.
KV said AA should be amended as out of date review Sep 13 to July 14 protracted dealings alleging undesirable to minority shareholders.

O's not willing to collaborate SF said O's "were bending over backwards" to accommodate. KV said his objections were not being taken into account.


SF said CC legal team had (words to the effect) set him KV up to snipe at O's Mr Green not happy and asked for retraction (my words)


KV stated that letter of comfort (loc) mentioned to alleviate minority shareholder fears AA still felt to be detrimental.

SF suggested that VB side were trying to build up a case of unfair prejudice. Challenge KC on Sept 13 - Jul 14 on no objection to AA raised


BM Mar 13 last time VB attended and KV voted in as new Dir.


Reference to BM and approval of accounts and submitting to FL. KV seeking clarification on Accounts and of KO bonus. But agreed that 'draft' could be submitted to FL to comply (and allow transfers etc) but they did not constitute approved and fully audited accounts.


PM SESSION


KV Relations were very bad within the Club. SF mentioned SISA and asserted that Team VB were stirring up fans etc. by engaging with them . KV said no it was to engage and get fans on board because things were so bad, SF mentioned boycott affecting revenue etc. Less attractive club/value etc


SF mentioned who paid expenses for fans trip to Riga KV said he didn't know what the arrangements were. Were you meeting them (fans) to further success of club Yes, gauge their thoughts on situation at Club (toxic etc my words).


SF alleges preparing to start litigation and dealing with the press Gazette and Jack G Daily Mail mentioned by SF and who paid his expenses to visit Riga. SF clearly painting picture of putting pressure on O's to increase the payment to VB for his shares.


SF blah blah blah for a while.


SF refers to provocative letter re £24 million channelled "unsecured and unjustified" loans to your company's, large sum loaned to other things but not football related.

Another £22 million spent south stand and SW corner. This was open letter for the press Gazette and Daily Mail. SF accuses KV of leaking conf information to the press despite saying and agreeing confidential nature , KV denies and refutes this.


Moving to 26 Nov 14 email between Cherry and Dyer re financial report. KV asking for detail re list of debt rots and amount of debt. Judge clarified that this was the first time KV had seen financial report / draft accounts before hand.

SF asked KV why he didn't speaks to Rod Dyer for a print out of debtors. KV said he was not happy that BFC always precluded financials accounts at last minute.


SF asked KV did he know on 31 May 2014 he would need all detailed information. Unclear answer from KV. But KV stated that all detailed information was on paper and locked away in a room! And probably only Rod Dyer knew we here it was.
19-06-2017 20:33
Find Posts Quote
Magic147 Offline
Not a penny more

Posts: 13,878
Joined: Sep 2012
Post: #98
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
£22m for the South sand and SE corner?
19-06-2017 20:37
Find Posts Quote
Nobber Offline
Closet Lasher

Posts: 391
Joined: Jul 2013
Post: #99
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
(19-06-2017 20:37)Magic147 Wrote:  £22m for the South sand and SE corner?

It was £21.5million over priced Smile
19-06-2017 21:19
Find Posts Quote
smuggs2006 Offline
Registered User

Posts: 122
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #100
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
not really over priced 1990 ish leicester paid 15.7m for there carling stand at filbert street and ive read loads of clubs paying silly money
also think MkDons paid 45-52 million just to go to 30k from 22k
(This post was last modified: 19-06-2017 21:24 by smuggs2006.)
19-06-2017 21:22
Find Posts Quote

members do not see advertisements

tangerinejezza Away
Pottys stalking victim

Posts: 22,637
Joined: Jun 2012
Post: #101
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
(19-06-2017 21:19)Nobber Wrote:  It was £21.5million over priced Smile

An absolute bargain compared to that "invincibles" stand. Still unfinished lol
19-06-2017 21:23
Find Posts Quote
Nobber Offline
Closet Lasher

Posts: 391
Joined: Jul 2013
Post: #102
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
(19-06-2017 21:23)tangerinejezza Wrote:  An absolute bargain compared to that "invincibles" stand. Still unfinished lol

Nothing 'temporary' in our stadium matey. How can you even begin to mock, we're superior in all avenues. Must be hard for you poor souls.
19-06-2017 21:25
Find Posts Quote
tangerinejezza Away
Pottys stalking victim

Posts: 22,637
Joined: Jun 2012
Post: #103
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
(19-06-2017 21:25)Nobber Wrote:  Nothing 'temporary' in our stadium matey. How can you even begin to mock, we're superior in all avenues. Must be hard for you poor souls.

The " tv studio" is a building site ffs . And I'll excuse your stupidity it not knowing which stand is which.
Also because of your blind stupidity I won't even go into why we have a temporary stand. As you love the guy responsible.
19-06-2017 21:28
Find Posts Quote
smuggs2006 Offline
Registered User

Posts: 122
Joined: Oct 2016
Post: #104
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
do they have to keep paying to get a saftey checks and insurances on a temporary stand. And is there no measures to sort it out. Or is it really a knock down and start a fresh. Sorry for my thickness ??
19-06-2017 21:33
Find Posts Quote
Nobber Offline
Closet Lasher

Posts: 391
Joined: Jul 2013
Post: #105
RE: Blackpool FC high court battle with Belekon - thread
(19-06-2017 21:28)tangerinejezza Wrote:  The " tv studio" is a building site ffs . And I'll excuse your stupidity it not knowing which stand is which.
Also because of your blind stupidity I won't even go into why we have a temporary stand. As you love the guy responsible.

Only guy I love is me dad ta.

I'm just saying that comparing stadiums is once again laughable. Ours is great, yours isn't. Simple.
19-06-2017 21:35
Find Posts Quote

members do not see advertisements





User(s) browsing this thread: Bally, Bloomfieldcat, Clever Trevor Sinclair, louise_a, seasidefox, 20 Guest(s)

Contact Us | Back Henry Street | Return to Top | Mobile Version | RSS Syndication | Forum Rules