SFM Podcast #6: Dave King & Oldco

By

It had to happen – The Swiss authorities finally start …

Comment on SFM Podcast #6: Dave King & Oldco by easyJambo.

It had to happen – The Swiss authorities finally start criminal proceedings against Blatter

https://www.news.admin.ch/message/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=58891Full

Criminal proceedings against the President of FIFA

Bern, 25.09.2015 – The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (OAG) has opened criminal proceedings against the President of Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) on suspicion of criminal mismanagement as well as – alternatively – on suspicion of misappropriation.

Swiss criminal proceedings against the President of FIFA, Mr. Joseph Blatter, have been opened on 24 September 2015 on suspicion of criminal mismanagement (Article 158 Swiss Criminal Code / SCC) and – alternatively – misappropriation (Article 138 Swiss Criminal Code / SCC).

On the one hand, the OAG suspects that on 12 September 2005 Mr. Joseph Blatter has signed a contract with the Caribbean Football Union (with Jack Warner as the President at this time); this contract was unfavorable for FIFA. On the other hand, there is as suspicion that, in the implementation of this agreement, Joseph Blatter also violated his fiduciary duties and acted against the interest of FIFA and/or FIFA Marketing & TV AG.

Additionally, Mr. Joseph Blatter is suspected of a disloyal payment of CHF 2 Mio. to Michel Platini, President of Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), at the expense of FIFA, which was allegedly made for work performed between January 1999 and June 2002 ; this payment was executed in February 2011.

On 25 September 2015, representatives of the OAG interrogated the defendant Joseph Blatter following a meeting of the FIFA Executive Committee. At the same time, Michel Platini was heard as a person asked to provide information (Article 178 of the Swiss Code of Criminal Procedure). Furthermore, the OAG conducted on 25 September 2015 a house search at FIFA Headquarters with the support of the Federal Criminal Police. The office of the FIFA President has been searched and data seized.

As for all defendants, the presumption of innocence applies for Mr. Joseph Blatter.

easyJambo Also Commented

SFM Podcast #6: Dave King & Oldco
I wonder if we will get a statement from Stewart Regan re his continued(?) support for Michel Platini’s FIFA presidential aspirations, given that Platini is alleged to be involved in receiving a “disloyal payment”.


SFM Podcast #6: Dave King & Oldco
For those who subscribe to the Shareprophets site, there is a suggestion that Worthington and Law Financial will be subject to a first strike-off notice, within the next few days, for failing to submit accounts.

http://www.shareprophets.com/views/15265/worthington-to-face-first-strike-off-notice-in-5-days-reader-post-of-the-day

I’d expect that some party will object to a strike-off should it come to pass.


SFM Podcast #6: Dave King & Oldco
woodstein 24th September 2015 at 5:16 pm #

Homunculus 24th September 2015 at 1:06 pm #
stevo 24th September 2015 at 2:31 pm #

Absolutely

easyJambo 24th September 2015 at 4:44 pm #

Check the witness signature.
=====================
I noticed that but I didn’t wish to comment on the whys and wherefores of any evidence, or sources, re the forthcoming court cases.


Recent Comments by easyJambo

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Allyjambo January 2, 2018 at 14:38
————————
My one overriding memory of the Ibrox disaster was that of the five schoolkids aged between 13 and 15, all from the village of Markinch in Fife, who lost their lives.  I lived just a few miles away and was only 15 myself, at the time.

I remember those losses having a huge impact on the local Fife schools and communities.   


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
HOMUNCULUS DECEMBER 28, 2017 at 15:38
It doesn’t matter if it is paid to a trust or your aunt Agatha, you still have to pay the tax. I have no idea why they use the name Agatha, but they do. 
========================
“Aunt Agatha” was used by the RFC QC Andrew Thornhill during the appeals process when discussing the redirection of earnings to a third party.

On a separate point about the share price.  The sale of Ashley’s shares to Club 1872 and Julian Wolhardt was used by King’s QC at the CoS, as an example of shares trading above the 20p price.

The TOP’s QC, however, countered that by claiming that Ashley wasn’t interested in the share price, but was insistent that he received £2m for his shares. To that end, it was pointed out that the price per share paid wasn’t 27p, 27.5p or 28p, but something to the second or third decimal place that ensured that the sum received was not £1,999,999 but a fraction over the £2m figure.  I can’t recall the exact fraction used, but the counter argument put forward seemed entirely plausible.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 27, 2017 at 22:39
EASYJAMBO DECEMBER 27, 2017 at 22:32
================================
Cheers.
Is there a way of calculating how the issue of new shares reduces the value of the existing ones, or is it not as simple as that. I don’t imagine for a second it is. 
I cannot believe that the sale of new shares does not effect the value of those held by existing shareholders. That would surely be market capitalisation gone mad. 
================================
It’s not as simple as the share price being reduced inversely proportionate to the number of additional shares issued.

The capital value (no of shares x share price) of the club is presently around £16m at 20p a share (80m x 20p), but given that the club also has £16m of debts, you could argue that a debt free club would be worth £32m (or 40p a share).

The value of the shares going forward would depend of the amount of debt written off and the number of shares issued in order to achieve that. e.g. if they double the number of shares to 160m in exchange for writing off half the debt.  The capital value of the club might go up to £24m, as it only has £8m debt, but the value of each shares would probably fall to 15p. (160m x 15p = £24m)

If however, they manage to double the share numbers, write off half the debt, but also raise £4m in new money, then the capital value of the club should go up by £4m (the new money). So you could see the capital value rise to £28m, but still with £8m debt. The share price might then be 17.5p (160m x 17.5p = £28m)

I hope that makes sense. It does to me, but the nuances of share numbers, to debt, to capital raised can easily be lost, if you don’t have an appreciation of where they are at just now, and where they might end up.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
shug December 27, 2017 at 22:05
Great hard fought match tonight.
======================
Sadly, that was two hours of my life I won’t get back.  There was nothing great about it and it was more of a borefest akin to many derbies of yesteryear.  Tom English described it perfectly as “Thud and Blunder”


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus December 27, 2017 at 18:21
I take it all that has happened is that they passed the resolution allowing them to issue new shares. Those new shares have now been created.
This is them simply notifying Companies House that they have done that, Companies House records show how many shares have been issued.
That has to be done before they can actually sell them to anyone.
Purely a procedural matter I would have though. 
=========================
It’s not got as far as creating the shares. It’s merely confirmation that the Board has the authority to issue shares up to the specified limit.  That authority expires on the date of the next AGM.

The allotment of up to a nominal value of £1,086,376.01, means that new shares equivalent to 1.333 times those currently available can now be issued.  I’m sure that there will be a good reason for the number of new shares being set at that specific level, but I can’t think of one. 


About the author