Sisu

[John B]

Few people thought the SISU deal was good at the time.

 

 

But in hindsight would we be in a better position now and would the shareholders still have some equity.

 

 

Perhaps it may have been the worse decision taken with regards to SFC

 

 

Could sopmebody enlighten me

[John B]

Maybe.

 

But it's in the past and irrelevant now.

 

HTH.

 

A lot is in the past and always will be.

 

 

But I am interested as SISU seems to be the only Investment ever offered or was it not real

[Smirking_Saint]

Bad decision making ?? Equally we don't know what was actually said within the negotiations ?? Could have been that it seriously was not in best interests of the club (though i don't really see how) ? Personally i just believe that we were in a better position at the time and certain people believed we would have been ok. Plus there is the fact that the whole financial world has gone into complete meltdown since then.

 

Something i said earlier but probably more relevant here

[stevegrant]

Their offer would have injected somewhere between £10m and £12m (£12m less various legal fees) directly into the company, in exchange for a "50% + 1 share" shareholding.

 

It would have diluted all existing shareholders' holdings with no opportunity to purchase additional shares to maintain their percentage holding. That, in my opinion, is the main reason why the "big 3" rejected it. I may be wrong, but that's my belief.

[Topcat]

Their offer would have injected somewhere between £10m and £12m (£12m less various legal fees) directly into the company, in exchange for a "50% + 1 share" shareholding.

 

It would have diluted all existing shareholders' holdings with no opportunity to purchase additional shares to maintain their percentage holding. That, in my opinion, is the main reason why the "big 3" rejected it. I may be wrong, but that's my belief.

 

But they would have got £10m and instead got nothing.

[corky morris]

Coventry are still in business, but I am still not sure what a hedge fund gets out of their investment.

If like many other hedge funds they are liquidated then Coventry will have a similar problem to us - clients of hedge fund want cash, hedge fund wants out of football club, forced to sell - big problem.

I for one am not at all convinced that Sisu was the right thing for SFC.

[stevegrant]

But they would have got £10m and instead got nothing.

Lowe, Wilde and Crouch would initially have got nothing, although SISU did have a separate pot with which they were willing to buy out the major shareholders at the same price as their placing purchase (40p per share, which I think was 10p below the market price at the time) if they didn't want to remain as shareholders with little or no control.

 

Whether they'd have been able to sell their shares to anyone else after SISU took over, who knows.

[alpine_saint]

and would the shareholders still have some equity.

 

Could sopmebody enlighten me

 

Yes, you are talking cack.

 

Let's go thru a list of the major shareholders :

 

Lowe

Wilde

Crouch

Cowen

Askham

Richards

Withers

 

Do any of them (with the disputed possible exception of Crouch) actually DESERVE any equity ? Do they f**k.

 

And I am talking as one who has also lost his (somewhat minor) SLH share investment.

[Window Cleaner]

 

 

And I am talking as one who has also lost his (somewhat minor) SLH share investment.

 

 

Commonly known as taking one for the team

[bridge too far]

Well, since it appears that there is going to be a crack-down on hedge funds (by the G20) and hedge funds make as much money by 'betting' on failures as by investing in success, I'm of the view that we were probably best to have turned them down.

 

In any event, I still think we were being used as a lever to pressurise Coventry.