thegaffer Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Is there any evidence from Mark Fry himself since the Pinnacle collapse that he is actually negotiating with the Swiss? Also why did we give Pinnacle exclusivity ?Why didnt Fry and his colleagues talk to all intersted parties. This would have saved a great deal of time. They would have worked out who were going to be the serious bidders in a matter of days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 They were talking to all parties, including the Swiss, before they went into exclusivity with Pinnacle. I think the main reason they went exclusive is that they needed to pay the wages, and this was the quickest way to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 They were talking to all parties, including the Swiss, before they went into exclusivity with Pinnacle. I think the main reason they went exclusive is that they needed to pay the wages, and this was the quickest way to do it. Exactly right, i'd imagine exclusivity was offered to everyone at that time and Pinnacle were just the quickest off the mark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 They were talking to all parties, including the Swiss, before they went into exclusivity with Pinnacle. I think the main reason they went exclusive is that they needed to pay the wages, and this was the quickest way to do it. BUT as it is now fairly clear that Pinnacle did NOT pay a deposit and it would seem likely that the sale of Nathan Dyer paid them, WHY did they get exclusivity on what now seem better terms than were likely offered to the Swiss OR the original MJ consortium? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 The theory behind the exclusivity was that someone paying that non-refundable deposit was demonstrating that their intentions were serious - they weren't going to be getting that money back. Unfortunately, it appears as though Pinnacle themselves didn't actually pay a penny of that deposit, so a fat lot of good that did... I think Fry said something about being in discussions with "an overseas party", but I don't think he's disclosed any nationality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Is there any evidence from Mark Fry himself since the Pinnacle collapse that he is actually negotiating with the Swiss? Also why did we give Pinnacle exclusivity ?Why didnt Fry and his colleagues talk to all intersted parties. This would have saved a great deal of time. They would have worked out who were going to be the serious bidders in a matter of days. Firstly, we needed to raise money. Secondly, without exclusivity, purchasers are going to be reluctant to incur the costs of full due diligence. Lock-out agreements are common in private acquisitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saints_is_the_south Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Meridian said last night that they'd phoned Fry twice during the day & he confirmed that at both times he was in the middle of negotiations, didn't say who with but atleast he is definatly in negotitations with someone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 BUT as it is now fairly clear that Pinnacle did NOT pay a deposit and it would seem likely that the sale of Nathan Dyer paid them, WHY did they get exclusivity on what now seem better terms than were likely offered to the Swiss OR the original MJ consortium? Phil, unless you're prepared to expand on that, I don't know how to answer. You obviously know more about what's going on than the rest of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 BUT as it is now fairly clear that Pinnacle did NOT pay a deposit I had heard the same but not sure it's "common knowledge" per se....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 I had heard the same but not sure it's "common knowledge" per se....? It's been mentioned by a number of different people on here and on other forums with nobody seemingly willing or able to suggest otherwise - Lynam's released more than enough statements in the last few weeks to have denied it there, but chose not to. Leon Crouch refused to comment when the Echo asked him about his involvement, which - given Leon's usual tendency to talk - suggests there's something in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Phil, unless you're prepared to expand on that, I don't know how to answer. You obviously know more about what's going on than the rest of us. There was a lot of discussion on here and in the Echo about this. Add that to the rumours I heard out of a non-football related finance operation I have friends at in London. Then work out the timings of the Dyer sale, and add in Leon joining in who was alleged to have made a contribution previously. then ask where TL would have found 500k? The evidence in the public eye that Fialka was the backer does not suggest that he or Tony had the cash themselves to pay the 500k. So I do apologise having missed a whole week of reality to sit in the mud and look at Lady Gaga's boobs I possibly forgot to put IMHO on that statement. But I think it is a good question to ask, IF the full deposit was paid, where di it come from and was it worth losing 500k NON REFUNDABLE deposit because of a single piece of paper that the FL wanted signing? Curiouser and curioser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Johnson Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Exclusivity meant that only Pinncle could complete the deal within that 21 day period, it DID NOT stop Fry from talking to other interested partys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Has it been confirmed publicly that Pinnacle did not pay the deposit? I know there has been a few people who were said to have paid it, and as I questioned a few days ago,if Pinnacle couldnt/wouldn't cough up why would Fry have any faith in their bid. To whose end is it that a false/unfunded bid could be given exclusivity? A stalling process that may have well made others disinterested as it seemed their efforts were to no avail and so stop working on the bid.It was seen as a done deal so any work would have been stopped to save wasting more money. It points perhaps to people working to get the club at a snip of a price perhaps. Carpet baggers and chancers. Fry's judgement in taking Pinnacle into exclusivity must be brought into disrepute IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Exclusivity meant that only Pinncle could complete the deal within that 21 day period, it DID NOT stop Fry from talking to other interested partys Yes BUT We then had a non-stop barrage of PR and media management about how fantastic everything was and how it would all be done. The other bidders would have stopped and sat back and watched. Overseas people would not have started to move money around in accordance with UK regulations, they would have cut back on their costs and activity because it was all a dead set done deal. And ANYONE who was really interested in the health of the CLUB would not have wanted to be talking to Fry during the period IN CASE they could be used as a stick to bash Pinnacle with. Just imagine the rows IF Fry had come out on that Friday and said - Sod off Pinnacle you had your time and I have a cheque from the Swiss.. It took almost a week before "opinion" turned against Pinnacle. Would a NEW OWNER have wanted to come in having kicked MLT and oh so communicative Tony into touch - hell no, they'd have been less popular than Lowe Everyone had to sit back and wait and keep their powder dry because of the way the PR was managed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 was it worth losing 500k NON REFUNDABLE deposit because of a single piece of paper that the FL wanted signing? Curiouser and curioserwell if you are likely to buy an asset for a fraction of its worth ,then of course that would be little to cost in.Add the fact that it seems it wasnt 500k and probably less it is even a bigger bonus. All great conspiracy theories of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 It's been mentioned by a number of different people on here and on other forums with nobody seemingly willing or able to suggest otherwise - Lynam's released more than enough statements in the last few weeks to have denied it there, but chose not to. Leon Crouch refused to comment when the Echo asked him about his involvement, which - given Leon's usual tendency to talk - suggests there's something in it. It's been rumoured that it was Crouch who paid it, but effectively I'd say that made him part of the Pinnacle group. He was supposedly on the list of directors submitted to the FL. What Phil has just seemed to say, is that no deposit was paid and that the Dyer sale paid the wages. Lynam publicly stated on Solent last week that his group paid over half a million for exclusivity. That's a pretty public forum, and you'd think someone would have said if it wasn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 It's been rumoured that it was Crouch who paid it, but effectively I'd say that made him part of the Pinnacle group. He was supposedly on the list of directors submitted to the FL. What Phil has just seemed to say, is that no deposit was paid and that the Dyer sale paid the wages. Lynam publicly stated on Solent last week that his group paid over half a million for exclusivity. That's a pretty public forum, and you'd think someone would have said if it wasn't true. The rumour I heard was that the Dyer sale paid some of it, (weird) and the rest was met by Crouch in exchange for involvement on the board. As for Lynam's statement, it would need to be checked very carefully for ambiguities - there are various ways in which he could have said they received exclusivity which cost £500k without actually saying they paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 It's been rumoured that it was Crouch who paid it, but effectively I'd say that made him part of the Pinnacle group. He was supposedly on the list of directors submitted to the FL. What Phil has just seemed to say, is that no deposit was paid and that the Dyer sale paid the wages. Lynam publicly stated on Solent last week that his group paid over half a million for exclusivity. That's a pretty public forum, and you'd think someone would have said if it wasn't true. As far as I'm aware, from the various snippets that have been floating around, is that the initial down payment from Swansea (somewhere in the region of £150k) was used as part-payment for the deposit, although clearly not strictly paid by Pinnacle - I would suggest that Fry was getting a bit edgy that nobody seemed willing to pay this deposit, and knew he had this lump sum from Swansea coming in and said "right, the price for the deposit has dropped to (£500k - cash from Swansea)", Pinnacle/Crouch then wrote the cheque for the remainder. I'm not convinced Crouch was any part of the Pinnacle deal until very shortly before that deposit was paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry the Badger Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 I had heard the same but not sure it's "common knowledge" per se....? It's just a rumour which has spread but I don't think theres any actual evidence for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evo Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 I don't think it has been confirmed anywhere that it was even £500k. I think it was a case of sloppy journalism at the time and everybody just accepted it. Everything I saw said "non-disclosed amount". Given the spin machine working at the time, I think they would have been repeatedly shoving that figure in our faces if it was genuine. If it was, say £100k, then they would keep that quiet because we'd all think they were cheapskates. Oh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 As for Lynam's statement, it would need to be checked very carefully for ambiguities - there are various ways in which he could have said they received exclusivity which cost £500k without actually saying they paid for it. Unfortunately Radio Solent listen again doesn't go back as far as last Tuesday, but from the take-over updates thread: Radio Solent this morning; Tony Lynam live on radio solent sounded very ****ed off about the football league although he kept stating there was no problem between pinnacle and the football league. he said there are still issues that need to be resolved between pinnacle and the football league and he said he will be in talks with them today to resolve these issues. he also said he is 100% committed to buying sfc and also the figure of 500,000 is actually incorrect and pinnacle actually paid more, mainly to finance the ajax game I listened to it live, and that statement is in line with what I heard him say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Channon's Sideburns Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 There was a lot of discussion on here and in the Echo about this. Add that to the rumours I heard out of a non-football related finance operation I have friends at in London. Then work out the timings of the Dyer sale, and add in Leon joining in who was alleged to have made a contribution previously. then ask where TL would have found 500k? The evidence in the public eye that Fialka was the backer does not suggest that he or Tony had the cash themselves to pay the 500k. So I do apologise having missed a whole week of reality to sit in the mud and look at Lady Gaga's boobs I possibly forgot to put IMHO on that statement. But I think it is a good question to ask, IF the full deposit was paid, where di it come from and was it worth losing 500k NON REFUNDABLE deposit because of a single piece of paper that the FL wanted signing? Curiouser and curioser Haha..you were looking at Gaga's boobs Phil? On the TV coverage she was filmed from some lovely angles... ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 As far as I'm aware, from the various snippets that have been floating around, is that the initial down payment from Swansea (somewhere in the region of £150k) was used as part-payment for the deposit, although clearly not strictly paid by Pinnacle - I would suggest that Fry was getting a bit edgy that nobody seemed willing to pay this deposit, and knew he had this lump sum from Swansea coming in and said "right, the price for the deposit has dropped to (£500k - cash from Swansea)", Pinnacle/Crouch then wrote the cheque for the remainder. I'm not convinced Crouch was any part of the Pinnacle deal until very shortly before that deposit was paid. So it is possible to speculate that Crouch was alleged to have paid a sum to cover the wages some time back... It is then not a huge leap of faith or logic to suggest that his "loan/donation" could have been re-worded to strangely exactly match the missing amount. The conspiracist could actually type the entire conversation - well I already lent you x and I am now in the consortium so we don't need to pay the deposit. I'd like to be proven to be wrong in my assumptions and analysis as then i could feel some pity for TL et al having lost 500k. Until then I stay highly suspicious and oh boy are those growing by the second... just recieving a nice new one for the conspiracy crew back in mo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 If Pinnacle didn't pay the dosh requested why would Fry have given them exclusivity? I thought it was a fixed fee for the chance to have first strike at the target. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 If Pinnacle didn't pay the dosh requested why would Fry have given them exclusivity? I thought it was a fixed fee for the chance to have first strike at the target. its hard to say why. Misjudgement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Is there any evidence from Mark Fry himself since the Pinnacle collapse that he is actually negotiating with the Swiss? Also why did we give Pinnacle exclusivity ?Why didnt Fry and his colleagues talk to all intersted parties. This would have saved a great deal of time. They would have worked out who were going to be the serious bidders in a matter of days. LOL. Weren't you trumpeting the virtues of the Pinnacle bid because your brother had told you that it was a winner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 LOL. Weren't you trumpeting the virtues of the Pinnacle bid because your brother had told you that it was a winner? To be fair WSS..I was with MLT all the way on that bid....Blind Faith as they say on the other fred... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 and oh boy are those growing by the second... just recieving a nice new one for the conspiracy crew back in mo! Breath duly baited.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thegaffer Posted 2 July, 2009 Author Share Posted 2 July, 2009 LOL. Weren't you trumpeting the virtues of the Pinnacle bid because your brother had told you that it was a winner? Mike didn't have a scooby doo who had the money at Pinnacle. He probally knew less than you Weston. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordonToo Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 its hard to say why. Misjudgement? Or favouritism? I remember Fry saying at the outset that there was one bidder that was very good for the long term outlook of SFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Until then I stay highly suspicious ... just recieving a nice new one for the conspiracy crew back in mo! No word from DP since 1140hrs, this conspiracy thing could of just got really serious, best the Forum home team start looking for a new manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 No word from DP since 1140hrs, this conspiracy thing could of just got really serious, best the Forum home team start looking for a new manager He's been on since, revealing that the bank manager at Barclays who pulled the plug on Saints, is now working for Begbies Traynor, who coincidentally are the administrators for SLH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 He's been on since, revealing that the bank manager at Barclays who pulled the plug on Saints, is now working for Begbies Traynor, who coincidentally are the administrators for SLH. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 best the Forum home team start looking for a new manager Is it true that the away team are recommending they take me, in fact begging that they do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Is it true that the away team are recommending they take me, in fact begging that they do Don't put yourself down Nick, there are too too many people out there that can do that !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now