[Archived] Rovers Might Have Been Sold?

[rebelmswar]

Surely the events of the last couple of years are evidence enough that big financial institutions can screw up royally.

Normally when they are making serious coin for themselves. What would they have to gain from screwing up a sale for one of their very good clients.

We have to remember we are basing this on photos of a high end dorm room, the word of a landlord, lack of personal information, and a numpty journalist.

This smells like Obamas election.

I am scared to death now.

[JoeBlueWhite]

As many have said he obliviously does have a serious bank roll. There is noway he would have got to this stage if it was all BS. Rothschilds and the Trust will have gone over his own personal financial details and were happy enough to proceed.

His team do need to be on damage control tomorrow though if they hope to fix their public image to Rovers fans.

Its weird as there is still no major new sites bothering with this other than the BBC. Nicko can't even be arsed writing a story on it. Does that not ring a few alarm bells with the doom mongers ?

[47er]

I would think Syed will respond to the allegations once the programme has been aired.

One thing has emerged quite clearly from the Five Live investigation, Syed is one messy pup, look at the state of that flat!

I wonder how many ardent Rovers fans are a) messy and are way behind with their Council Charges? Welcome Mr Syed-------you said you wanted to be regarded as a fan!

[deryck guyler's spoon]

If somebody publically made these kind of allegations about me and they were false or the result of mistaken identity I would very quickly and loudly be issuing denials and consulting lawyers.

The "no comment" from Mr Syed's people has alarm bells clanging very loudly for me.

[tony gale's mic]

I would suggest the only thing of any genuine concern is the fact no-one seems to have previously heard of mr. Ali Syed.

1) If the alleged unpaid bills relate to another person, our Mr. Syed woudn't have mentioned them and Rothschilds would have had no cause to investigate them. Conversely if they did relate to him surely Rothschilds would have picked them up. Even if they do relate to him, we don't know if they were disputed and I'm not sure how relevant they are if indeed he is worth billions now. If the reason he didn't pay them was because he has no money it's a different matter from Rovers viewpoint.

2) Whilst I have often wondered if the McCabe / Australian deals are genuine equally I have seen no suggestion that these deals haven't gone through either. Surely if Mr. Syed was not genuine NDA's would not be applicable and the other parties would deny being in negotiations.

3) If he didn't go to LSE as the Beeb claim, why was he in London at all during the relevant period?

4) Dormant Companies are no evidence of anything one way or another and the alleged infringement in Bahrain seems of a very technical nature - that's if indeed it did occur. WGA have denied it thus far.

You're right to point out the biggest concern.

However:

1) I don't get this mistaken identity theory that so many on here think is plausible. We have photographs of Mr Syed freely available. If he didn't live in that flat then we'd get a very swift denial followed by legal action by Mr Syed. The people on 5 live have put this stuff to him and he, worryingly, has refused to give any kind of statement. Would Rothschilds have uncovered this in due diligence? I'm not so sure - I would have thought more of the process would be focused on Western Gulf Advisory AG rather than Syed's personal history. Is it part of due diligence to ask previous landlords about someone's record? Maybe it is since my knowledge on this isn't the best, but I'd be surprised.

2) The 5 live investigates team have said in response to questions on their facebook page that to their knowledge the deals haven't gone through yet. Hardly incontrovertible proof, but the first mention of the Ireland sale on the internet is on 30th July and McCabe has a confidentiality agreement where he's not allowed to talk about it. Dubious to say the least, though it may be above board.

3) The show has said that even Syed, when pushed, has admitted he didnt go to LSE though his spokesmen had earlier said he did. There's many other things someone can do in London except go to LSE.

4) Dormant companies aren't definitive proof of anything but it's yet more unusual business dealings - why set up companies repeatedly that don't file returns? It's all very, very odd.

[RevidgeBlue]

If somebody publically made these kind of allegations about me and they were false or the result of mistaken identity I would very quickly and loudly be issuing denials and consulting lawyers.

The "no comment" from Mr Syed's people has alarm bells clanging very loudly for me.

Bloody hell the programme only aired three hours ago and it was Sunday evening.

Give them until tomorrow at least.

[47er]

Too much smoke in my view, time to ditch Syed. Though he has the right to defend himself. The jury waits to hear his statement.

That's fair enough------he must have a fair trial before we hang him!

[deryck guyler's spoon]

Bloody hell the programme only aired three hours ago and it was Sunday evening.

Give them until tomorrow at least.

Hasn't there already been a "no comment"? If the allegations are untrue then all that needs to be said is that there is no substance in them and we will release a detailed statement soon. Apparently Mr Syed's people have suddenly become shy having previously been keen to talk. It isn't good.

I desperately want a takeover but to not be increasingly concerned about Mr Syed is surely naive in the extreme.

[RevidgeBlue]

You're right to point out the biggest concern.

However:

1) I don't get this mistaken identity theory that so many on here think is plausible. We have photographs of Mr Syed freely available. If he didn't live in that flat then we'd get a very swift denial followed by legal action by Mr Syed. The people on 5 live have put this stuff to him and he, worryingly, has refused to give any kind of statement. Would Rothschilds have uncovered this in due diligence? I'm not so sure - I would have thought more of the process would be focused on Western Gulf Advisory AG rather than Syed's personal history. Is it part of due diligence to ask previous landlords about someone's record? Maybe it is since my knowledge on this isn't the best, but I'd be surprised.

2) The 5 live investigates team have said in response to questions on their facebook page that to their knowledge the deals haven't gone through yet. Hardly incontrovertible proof, but the first mention of the Ireland sale on the internet is on 30th July and McCabe has a confidentiality agreement where he's not allowed to talk about it. Dubious to say the least, though it may be above board.

3) The show has said that even Syed, when pushed, has admitted he didnt go to LSE though his spokesmen had earlier said he did. There's many other things someone can do in London except go to LSE.

4) Dormant companies aren't definitive proof of anything but it's yet more unusual business dealings - why set up companies repeatedly that don't file returns? It's all very, very odd.

1) I doubt due dilligence would have picked up the alleged unpaid rent if the alleged landlord didn't pursue it but it would surely have picked up the alleged County Court judgement. Like I say at 9.30 p.m. on a Sunday night I'm happy to wait until Monday daytime for a detailed and measured reply.

2) It's not dubious at all really is it? There has been no whiff of impropriety attached to these deals prior to tonight's programme.

3) I would have thought it was more pertinent that he claims to be a qualified lawyer. I'm not sure in which jurisdiction but I'm sure it's easily verifiable.

4) Slightly odd behaviour maybe, again if it's indeed him, but largely irrelevant if he's indeed worth the money he says he is.

[rebelmswar]

That's fair enough------he must have a fair trial before we hang him!

No! Burn him now whilst we have the angst to do it.

[RevidgeBlue]

Hasn't there already been a "no comment"? If the allegations are untrue then all that needs to be said is that there is no substance in them and we will release a detailed statement soon. Apparently Mr Syed's people have suddenly become shy having previously been keen to talk. It isn't good.

I desperately want a takeover but to not be increasingly concerned about Mr Syed is surely naive in the extreme.

We don't know if the allegations have previously been put to Mr. Syed in their entirety.

Now that they have I would expect a detailed and comprehensive rebuttal or explanation tomorrow if he is on the level.

[jim mk2]

Rothschilds are in it for their fee, no more no less.

Exactly. Financial institutions of supposedly the highest repute are not to be trusted a shown by events in the City over the past 3 years. Lehman Brothers and RBS anyone ?

Rothschilds have been on this case for some considerable time and presumably will only earn their very fat fee if the deal goes through.

Who knows what they have deliberately left uncovered in order to ensure the sale goes ahead ? Perhaps the Trustees will be asking them some tough questions on Monday morning.

[RevidgeBlue]

What a strange programme. Jeremy Kyle with a football scarf.

However Syed MUST have shown proof of funds, so this little irritation will not mater compared to the wealth he seems to have shown.

That's the top and bottom of it which makes the whole thing so strange.

[RevidgeBlue]

Exactly. Financial institutions of supposedly the highest repute are not to be trusted a shown by events in the City over the past 3 years. Lehman Brothers and RBS anyone ?

Rothschilds have been on this case for some considerable time and presumably will only earn their very fat fee if the deal goes through

Who knows what they have deliberately left uncovered in order to ensure the sale goes ahead ? Perhaps the Trustees will be asking them some tough questions on Monday morning.

Blimey jim don't beat around the bush - say what you really think!

I don't share the blindest faith in Rothschilds either especially given they seemingly recommended the Americans to Liverpool but I very much doubt they would deliberately conceal information.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

Blimey jim don't beat around the bush - say what you really think!

I don't share the blindest faith in Rothschilds either especially given they seemingly recommended the Americans to Liverpool but I very much doubt they would deliberately conceal information.

Would it not be more a matter of what Rothchilds might have missed than what they may have concealed?

I didn't know they had put the Mickeys together with Hicks and Gilette. Bloody hell.....

[Rover Down Under]

Oh this is just plain stupid now, I go on Beeb website and see the words "Rovers Takeover..." my heart stops, then falls out my arse when I read the rest; "...man left UK debts."

I'm just switching off and not reading another word on this or paying any attention to takeover talk.

Right now the only important thing happening at Ewood is preparation for Man City on Saturday.

[Iceman]

As i said before, no statement will be made by WGA, because their legal team will be investigating this. If Syed just rushes into a statement, without consulting his lawyers 1st, then he could end up looking stupid. They will get their facts in order, and they will carefully be doing this.

[Iceman]

If Syed went to LSE, then surely he would have a diploma, or certificate, or even the results to show for it.

[philipl]

Metaphorically put my crash helmet on before scanning the press this morning and found ...

nothing

Not that I am complaining but what on earth is going on???

[Bobby G]

A bit weird what's going on. Would be interesting to see what kind of response the man will have.

More importantly, it would be great to know whether the club KNEW about these things. I somehow doubt it.

[tonyoz]

1864 asked for some Australian feedback on WGA's proposed investment in Cubbie Station (huge cotton farm). This seems to be the last reference to WGA:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/property/bahrain-regulator-shuts-down-bidder-for-cubbie-station/story-e6frg9gx-1225913026361

Interestingly the article refers to other Aussie investments. I can find no mention of problems with any of them. Here is a link to the "lifestyle villages" mentioned:

http://www.kantarra.com.au/home.aspx

There is a link to the following additional investments in an earlier article:

http://www.waterbrook.com.au/

In another article we get the quote:

"Allan Keller, through his interest in Landmark, was WGA's first Australian client. He has met Mr Ali "at least a dozen times". He said: "I am happy to confirm that my relationship is very good."

He said his first transaction had been finalised "to my satisfaction", and Mr Keller was in the process of concluding a second."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/property/bahrain-bidder-says-funds-locked-in-for-cubbie/story-e6frg9gx-1225895292101

and from Vanuatu:

Omar Khan explains a bit about how WGA does business.

http://www.dailypost.vu/ArticleArchives/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/5597/WGA-tabs-Australian-Market.aspx

[Iceman]

I have to agree, still nothing else in the media. I know its early still, but if this was big, it would have been in the news by now.

[TimmyJimmy]

I have to say that I agree with almost every poster so far on this matter. It's strange, worrying and damn frustrating. I just want to see us competitive as a football club once again. The machinations and mechanics of the takeover bid are irritating and I wish they were all over, then as fans we can get on with what we do best i.e. turn up on match day, cheer and then kick around Keith, Peds, the fat centre forward, whatever. Football is what I'm interested in.

That said we are a family club with history and values. We have a good name in the game and I believe we are respected. So for me the most worrying aspect of these latest allegations is not the amount of money Mr Syed has or has not, it's about the image he will bring to the club and the effect he will have on our reputation.

For what it's worth I believe that he has the cash to at least buy the club, I guarantee he will not have got this far without Rothschilds being able to poke a stack of his cash with a sharp stick. As for the extra 300M, well who knows, we have to rely on his word. That seems to be the crux of all this then, his word, his ethics, his character in general.

As for the Club/Trust/Rothschilds, well they are not private investigators they check and challenge what they know, if the allegations are off the radar they cannot tackle them. The whole purpose of due diligence is to allow time for these things to emerge, hence why it wasn't sensible to rush things through to a conclusion before the transfer window closed. Everyone has agendas and stuff like this generally emerges over time, reserve any condemnation of the participants in the process until the fat lady sings and people have taken decisions based on all the info available/discoverable. If they take the wrong decision then they should expect to be castigated by the fans, but right now I'd say just let the process unwind, keep calm and carry on.

As said I don't think the cash is the issue here, that's an easy check to run. The real issue is whether Mr Syed is a Walter Mitty or not. Does he have an MBA? Is it from the prestigious LSE? Is he professionally qualified? Has he been disbarred from UK directorships? Does he have CCJs? How recently did he inherit his cash, does he want to appear that he played a part in the wealth generation or did he just receive the cheque in the post one day last year and is looking for something to do with it?

My hunch is that he's as complex a character as the rest of us. He will have embellished bits, he will have a few things he wishes he hadn't done. He's probably going to come out of this with his peccadilloes exposed and a bit of egg on his face. Does he have the cash, yes I think he has. Is that enough or do we want our white knights to be Galahad types or will we tolerate the odd Lancelot excess. As I said on my last post I think we will find that the 'new' bidders are known for their ethics and they will certainly not struggle financially yet on balance and provided that his character is solid I would prefer the wealth of a personal investor rather than that of a group.

Where's there a fat lady when you need one?

[PAFELL]

What a strange programme. Jeremy Kyle with a football scarf.

So Mr Syed didn't pay his rent and bogged off to somewhere in St.John's Wood with or without his degree from LSE and THAT trolley.

Call the cops.

The BBC have got some interesting little titbits but nothing real.

If this guy is a joker then Rothschilds want shooting - or sacking at least.

However Syed MUST have shown proof of funds, so this little irritation will not mater compared to the wealth he seems to have shown.

Whether the investigation matters or not one thing IS certain...there is another bidder around and is being encouraged.

Why is that exactly? Has someone got their doubts about Syed BEFORE the BBC show or are there other issues around this?

I suspect the answer is 'both.'

Anyway, much more pressing matters to concern all in Chez Nicko [where the rent is paid I should add]...like Murray's shocking first serve.

Encouraged by whom Nicko? The club, Rothschilds or others?

[Roversider]

Whilst it is all a little frustrating we need to accept that we do not have any real say in who the Trust sells to or not. It is their choice as they hold the shares. That is the case in football, it always has been since Rovers were founded in 1875.

Our main protection is that the Trust is concerned about Jack's legacy, however I suspect that is based on their own care of his memory rather than any legally binding clauses. I also believe that they will be putting a little more review of Mr Syed than you would if you were selling your house. After all, do most people care what happens to your old property so long as the money is in the bank?

The Trust aren't about to leave and tarnish Jack's memory with their actions.

On that basis if Mr Syed turns out to be a charlatan, well, it wouldn't be the first time this has happened. I reckon that we should not judge that too soon, despite the attempt to get a new 'investigative' programme up and running on 5 Live. There are clearly questions to respond to but that will be down to the Trust and Rothschilds.

Complicated, but as fans we don't have a choice but to settle down and wait - unless any of us have a spare £300 million?

Let's just focus on the pitch.