[Archived] Rovers Might Have Been Sold?

[Hughesy]

What the HELL is that! hahaha

Ha dunno! Just typed in worried smiley into google and it gave me that!

[unclejack28]

Thanks Kamy, it would really suck if the liverpool thing is to believed, you have had more contact with ali's people than anyone here is that the general feeling you get or is there something more that you have heard?

[nicko]

I hear the agreement that is due to be signed tomorrow is 'non-binding.'

This means that even if the due diligence works out OK there are no guarantees that Mr Syed gets his deal.

There is a bit of intrigue behind the scenes on this - as some very thoughtful people around here know.

This is far from straightforward.

Of course, I will not believe any of the above until it is denied by the local paper.

[thenodrog]

Whatever the outcome we are relying heavily on Rothschilds expertise in sorting out the wheat from the chaff.

[RevidgeBlue]

I hear the agreement that is due to be signed tomorrow is 'non-binding.'

This means that even if the due diligence works out OK there are no guarantees that Mr Syed gets his deal.

I understood it to mean simply that Mr. Syed would have a period of exclusivity in which to conduct due diligence and decide whether or not to proceed. During which time no other party could bid.

That is of course assuming we ever get to the point where Mr. Syed signs the agreement. I found it odd that there was a huge splurge of publicity about this and then when you read further down it was a case of "err well actually he signs on Monday"

Bit too Roy Keanish for my liking.

[mogster]

Is this the first non-exclusive period of exclusivity in history?

[Steve Moss]

Is this the first non-exclusive period of exclusivity in history?

I think it is "exclusive" in that the club will only sell to Syed for a period of a month so that they can look at each other's books, etc. It is "non-binding" in that at the end of the month Syed is free not to buy and the club is free not to sell. So it seems fairly staight forward.

Or did I misread what is going on?

[Ewood and I Would]

I hear the agreement that is due to be signed tomorrow is 'non-binding.'

This means that even if the due diligence works out OK there are no guarantees that Mr Syed gets his deal.

Um, isn't that normal? What's the point of being given four weeks of DD if you HAVE to buy at the end of it? It would be like someone selling you a car and saying you can only look under the bonnet if you will definetly buy it.

[philipl]

Why the probability is not 99%.

From my experience in non-football business-

Usually the very best deals for all parties are the ones where there is anguish in getting to agreement with at least one near total breakdown in negotiations/relationships before the deal was struck. A case of no pain no gain....

By contrast, deals which look fantastic on paper sometimes inexplicably fail. Usually because one side has not agreed internally what is fundamentally important to it so when negotiations get tough that side is still debating amongst themselves and doesn't know what it really wants or would be willing to accept. That same side can also forget the world has moved on in the last decade so something it is getting hung up about at the negotiating table really doesn't matter any more now.

Picking up on the exclusivity point,

In business sales, it would be very unusual for an exclusive and due diligence period to be granted without an agreement binding on both parties.

That is because due diligence is a very expensive business in fees and management time. The seller also effectively loses all other possible buyers and of course discloses absolutely everything about its business to the buyer.

Would Rovers really want Syed's people to know everything about all our contracts and then be at risk of him buying another club??? An NDA stops you from telling secrets to a third party, not from quietly using what you learn for your own benefit.

It is similar to buying a player- the medical is done after the fees and contracts have been agreed and the transfer is signed subject to the medical. When the medical comes through OK, the club selling is contracted to sell and the buying club is contracted to buy.

[PAFELL]

Why the probability is not 99%.

From my experience in non-football business-

Usually the very best deals for all parties are the ones where there is anguish in getting to agreement with at least one near total breakdown in negotiations/relationships before the deal was struck. A case of no pain no gain....

By contrast, deals which look fantastic on paper sometimes inexplicably fail. Usually because one side has not agreed internally what is fundamentally important to it so when negotiations get tough that side is still debating amongst themselves and doesn't know what it really wants or would be willing to accept. That same side can also forget the world has moved on in the last decade so something it is getting hung up about at the negotiating table really doesn't matter any more now.

Picking up on the exclusivity point,

In business sales, it would be very unusual for an exclusive and due diligence period to be granted without an agreement binding on both parties.

That is because due diligence is a very expensive business in fees and management time. The seller also effectively loses all other possible buyers and of course discloses absolutely everything about its business to the buyer.

Would Rovers really want Syed's people to know everything about all our contracts and then be at risk of him buying another club??? An NDA stops you from telling secrets to a third party, not from quietly using what you learn for your own benefit.

It is similar to buying a player- the medical is done after the fees and contracts have been agreed and the transfer is signed subject to the medical. When the medical comes through OK, the club selling is contracted to sell and the buying club is contracted to buy.

Unless your name is Dindane. Did he not have a medical at Rovers, yet still didn't join the club?

[Guest Kamy100]

The Lancashire Telegraph story is that Saurin Shah will fight Syed Ali for Rovers.

They have talked to one of his advisors and who has told them that Mr Shah watched the game on Saturday and expects to enter into Due Diligence on Wednesday. The advisor also said that if Mr Shah believes that what Mr Syed is better for Rovera then he will walk away.

Hmmmmm. Mr Shah has four advisors and having talked to them previously have to say that they are not very professional, each one tells a different story and often they contradict each other. As far as I know, Mr Shah had convinced Rothchilds/The trust that he had the finances in place in the short term but not in the long term.

Maybe Rovers will release a statement after the documents are signed by Mr Ali today.

[Bobby G]

How could they go in for due diligence on Wednesday if Ali is going in on Monday? I thought it was an exclusive period where no one else could enter the fray?

This is a bit worrying at the worst possible time.

[Iceman]

I have learned, that i will not get my hopes up on this matter. Shah has funds in place short term only, Syed has funds in place short and long term.

And the winner is: Mr Syed

[alexanders]

Shah means prince.

[Iceman]

Shah means prince.

[vizcaya]

Although I try to remain positive about the prospective of new ownership, I also remain realistic. It would be great if it happens, but also if I doesn't, I'm sure there's a sound reason for that. Mr Syed does of course sound the most attracting alternative, he does have the money in the bank to pull off the deal on his own. Whilst the Shah fellow is relying on other backers to secure the deal, and we do not know what his financial plans for Rovers' future are, other than that having enough money and financial backing from other parties to actually buy the club.

Whatever happens, I trust the club/Rothschilds/JWT to make the right decision for our beloved club.

[Pete1981]

The Lancashire Telegraph story is that Saurin Shah will fight Syed Ali for Rovers.

They have talked to one of his advisors and who has told them that Mr Shah watched the game on Saturday and expects to enter into Due Diligence on Wednesday. The advisor also said that if Mr Shah believes that what Mr Syed is better for Rovera then he will walk away.

Hmmmmm. Mr Shah has four advisors and having talked to them previously have to say that they are not very professional, each one tells a different story and often they contradict each other. As far as I know, Mr Shah had convinced Rothchilds/The trust that he had the finances in place in the short term but not in the long term.

Maybe Rovers will release a statement after the documents are signed by Mr Ali today.

Did you see the quote from Shah where he says Rothchilds has told him no one will get exclusivity

[Iceman]

Why the probability is not 99%.

From my experience in non-football business-

Usually the very best deals for all parties are the ones where there is anguish in getting to agreement with at least one near total breakdown in negotiations/relationships before the deal was struck. A case of no pain no gain....

By contrast, deals which look fantastic on paper sometimes inexplicably fail. Usually because one side has not agreed internally what is fundamentally important to it so when negotiations get tough that side is still debating amongst themselves and doesn't know what it really wants or would be willing to accept. That same side can also forget the world has moved on in the last decade so something it is getting hung up about at the negotiating table really doesn't matter any more now.

Picking up on the exclusivity point,

In business sales, it would be very unusual for an exclusive and due diligence period to be granted without an agreement binding on both parties.

That is because due diligence is a very expensive business in fees and management time. The seller also effectively loses all other possible buyers and of course discloses absolutely everything about its business to the buyer.

Would Rovers really want Syed's people to know everything about all our contracts and then be at risk of him buying another club??? An NDA stops you from telling secrets to a third party, not from quietly using what you learn for your own benefit.

It is similar to buying a player- the medical is done after the fees and contracts have been agreed and the transfer is signed subject to the medical. When the medical comes through OK, the club selling is contracted to sell and the buying club is contracted to buy.

That is the one part of your post Philip, that i was interested in. Surely, if Syed has 4 weeks of due diligence, and Shah thinks he is in the running, then would we have to show Syed everything?

Can you explain this please, as im not sure how we could show Syed everything, if its non binding and he can decline the chance to buy the club. This would be somewhat risky, if he decides not to buy the club. he would surely walk away knowing the ins and outs of Rovers. I also don’t believe Shah and his goons will go into due diligence on Wednesday, as their people have said before that they have already entered into DD. You just cannot take that group seriously, and I hope and pray, that Rotschilds, and the trust see that as well.

[mogster]

I want the guy with the most money and the best long term plan, whoever that is.

Fairly simple.

[Iceman]

Did you see the quote from Shah where he says Rothchilds has told him no one will get exclusivity

what is going on? We have been told, that Syed will have 4 weeks of exclusivity, and now Shah says that nobody will get exclusivity? somebody is lying, and there is somthing i dont like about this Shah guy. Why does he say that, when previously they came out and said that they had entered due diligence stage?

[BuckyRover]

Trying to scupper the deal with Syed? Make out we are untrustworthy?

[Iceman]

i suspect that is the case Bucky, im getting the feeling that Shah is using dirty tactics to put Syed off. I doubt that syed is that stupid, so im still remaining positive about Syed being the best man.

Shah comes out and says he only has funds for the short term, what happens after that? Its crazy to think, that Rotschilds and the trust, are still entertaining Shah.

[Kelbo]

Due diligence as I understand it is exclusive in itself, if Mr Syed has signed then Mr Shah has to wait, they cant both be involved.

[ewoodpo]

Shah means prince.

Shah also means skint

[Majiball]

Why do I get the feeling that our takerover is going to be like our transfers this summer.

Shah, the pauper prince.