by Extended-Phenotype » 18 Jul 2014 16:34
by melonhead » 18 Jul 2014 16:42
Extended-Phenotype Not really. Plenty of people who want to keep their integrity resign when their position is made untenable due to conflict of interest. Not saying I agree it would have been the best move but it's an understandable one when your ship is sailing in a direction you disagree with.
.
by Extended-Phenotype » 18 Jul 2014 16:48
by gazzer, loyal royal » 18 Jul 2014 16:48
gazzer, loyal royalblythspartan Do we know if the takeover with Samrit is still happening?
I would have thought that if it was off CW and JF would have picked up on it.
I hope it's just a case of the money getting here from Thailand. Albeit that could take a while.
Apparently there was a delay to the intended schedule with proof of funds and the first payment, so this may have pushed all the other formalities like fit and proper owners submission etc
Due diligence was being done around 4 weeks a go, so guessing there are a few minor hiccups etc
by West Stand Man » 18 Jul 2014 16:52
gazzer, loyal royalblythspartan Do we know if the takeover with Samrit is still happening?
I would have thought that if it was off CW and JF would have picked up on it.
I hope it's just a case of the money getting here from Thailand. Albeit that could take a while.
Apparently there was a delay to the intended schedule with proof of funds and the first payment, so this may have pushed all the other formalities like fit and proper owners submission etc
Due diligence was being done around 4 weeks a go, so guessing there are a few minor hiccups etc
by From Despair To Where? » 18 Jul 2014 17:01
Extended-Phenotype Not really. Plenty of people who want to keep their integrity resign when their position is made untenable due to conflict of interest. Not saying I agree it would have been the best move but it's an understandable one when your ship is sailing in a direction you disagree with.
As for leaving AZ's decisions unchecked - make up your mind! You were saying JM had no say or control just a minute ago.
by Royal Biscuitman » 18 Jul 2014 17:02
Most only have the loss of their income to worry about in those circumstances, not a 49% stake in the company supposedly worth £ Millions, He may not be able to stop if plummeting down to £Zero but at least he'll get a heads up by being there and can attempt to influence things, even if it proved futile.Extended-Phenotype Not really. Plenty of people who want to keep their integrity resign when their position is made untenable due to conflict of interest.
by Royal Rother » 18 Jul 2014 17:34
by JIM » 18 Jul 2014 17:48
by paddy20 » 18 Jul 2014 17:48
Royal Rother Indeed - it would absolutely NOT be normal process without hiccups along the way.
Daft to think everything just goes through smoothly in these transactions - both have to establish a mutual trust in initial discussions and then accept the fact that there will be challenges along the way but that the inherent trust established early on will see it through to a mutual conclusion where ground was given on both sides.
Anything else is tortuous.
by Ian Royal » 18 Jul 2014 18:01
by sandman » 18 Jul 2014 19:06
Royal Rother Indeed - it would absolutely NOT be normal process without hiccups along the way.
Daft to think everything just goes through smoothly in these transactions - both have to establish a mutual trust in initial discussions and then accept the fact that there will be challenges along the way but that the inherent trust established early on will see it through to a mutual conclusion where ground was given on both sides.
Anything else is tortuous.
by Royal Rother » 18 Jul 2014 19:07
by RG7Fan » 18 Jul 2014 19:20
Extended-PhenotypePepe the Horseman Which Nando's? What did you have?
Wokingham
1/2 Chicken, fries, cob. Hot strength. Bottomless coke.
by USA_Loyal_Royal » 18 Jul 2014 19:25
sandmanRoyal Rother Indeed - it would absolutely NOT be normal process without hiccups along the way.
Daft to think everything just goes through smoothly in these transactions - both have to establish a mutual trust in initial discussions and then accept the fact that there will be challenges along the way but that the inherent trust established early on will see it through to a mutual conclusion where ground was given on both sides.
Anything else is tortuous.
Especially with all the prog you put on the "what the devil are you listening to?" thread.
by FridaysGhost » 18 Jul 2014 19:28
by Royal Ginger » 18 Jul 2014 20:01
RG7FanExtended-PhenotypePepe the Horseman Which Nando's? What did you have?
Wokingham
1/2 Chicken, fries, cob. Hot strength. Bottomless coke.
Only Hot? You wuss. If you'd had Extra Hot Chicken Wings then I'd think about maybe believing you.
by Nameless » 18 Jul 2014 20:03
by paddy20 » 18 Jul 2014 20:17
Ian Royal I think you may have misunderstood RR, paddy.
by Royal Ginger » 18 Jul 2014 21:43
Dave-Royal SB is our new onwer
Users browsing this forum: Ascotexgunner, bcubed, From Despair To Where?, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], John Madejski's Wallet, LUX, retro royal, Richard, Royal Ginger, Royal_jimmy, Snowflake Royal, stealthpapes, Sutekh, tidus_mi2, WestYorksRoyal and 416 guests