The Farmer

What a bizzare way to look at it. Conversely, we will never know if any other group were even prepared to invest £1m before even owning the club. Am I also right in thinking there wasn't even any bidders coming forward for a worrying time before Pinnacle stepped up to the mark??? I'm sure there is.

Saying and doing are 2 different things. Why did they miss out? The Pinnacle Group have put over £1m where their mouth is - doesn't that deserve respect regardless of the outcome? Who in this financial climate has £1m to throw at a proposed project?

I think it referred to us being in the top flight. Not on his own

I'm as nervous as anyone else. I just feel that individuals who have invested time and money trying to orchestrate this deal in the current climate do not deserve to be shot down by people who do not know all the facts, especially when we do not actually know if any other parties are as serious as Pinnacle with regards putting this club, as Fialka said, 'back to where it was when MLT was playing'.

I am a betting man, but I'm not betting on this one, too tight to call. I am still of the opinion that if the takeover is at all viable, Pinnacle will take charge. Unfortunately, I think current circumstances would make it impossible for anyone, Pinnacle or any other party, to sanction the investment required. Tony just said to me yesterday one of the backers involved with his client would be addressing the fans on Sky later. Also look at some of the comments I made after the interview. Fialka is a well connected businessman with very wealthy associates alongside him. Perhaps the associates weren't comfortable in front of the cameras or indeed are of the opinion they would only like to be quoted in the media if the bid is successful. I think you give Mark Fry too little credit if you think he has allowed a consortium without all the necessary elements to get this far.

I'm not sure I could find anyone who would want to write off a shed load of money to see the club quite possibly relegated in the first season in charge. How much wealth would you need to have, even as a life long fan, to basically throw away £14m plus?

Can't see anyone in their right mind, fan or not, willing to do this.

I hope so.

Yes.

Unlike me and you to disagree John.

Yes he is.

No.

I understand he is fronting the investment side of the bid on behalf of a group of fellow associates, who's total wealth is substantial. Yes.

I understand this was a straight cash payment as well. He is heavily involved in the Jewish community and has an alliance of influential and successful connections.

Yes, it's my understanding that Fialka, although wealthy in his own right, is fronting a group of associates with a shared background that between them have amassed a large of pool of funds to draw from when required.

Wealthy in his own right, but as a big part of the Jewish community he has a network of many wealthy buisiness associates, hence the use of the word 'consortium'.

Yes and No... Michael Fialka is the main backer but, interestingly, he is of Jewish background and has a very extensive, and wealthy, network of associates. Hence why the word 'Consortium' is used with regards his bid with Pinnacle.

That doesn't mean they have to publicise it though. In a world strewn with confidentiality clauses and NDA's, many a detail stays out of the limelight if so wished, as we all know. But then again, with a world full of loose lips on the back of the right inducement, one wouldn't be able to ensure their wishes are upheld with any amount of certainty. If the backer had no untoward reason to stay hidden after the negotiation process is finalised, it would merely be a personal preference for reasons we do need to be privy to.

Tyre Kickers generally don't give large amounts of cash to the salesman upfront, or pay people to inspect the car and do a background check on its roadworthyness over a 6 week period, for cars they never expect to drive away in. Simples really. This could apply to certain people mind, ones that have promised funds would be readily available, but never came back with it.

The shareholders owned SLH, but that is largely irrelevent with regards the running of the club. Well, usually it is, but Askham stitched the club up so badly that the majority of the shareholders had a hands on say as to the running of the club, which is not the standard practice for most PLCs. The board should be answerable to the shareholders, but when the board is made up of major shareholders, well you are gonna have shenanigans. If an individual wanted to own a private company and install a board to manage this company, there is not really any way, or any need, to force him to reveal himself if he deemed it appropriate to put a set-up in place that secured anonimity using a nominee account. We need to look at the personnel running the company and its goals and track record as to whether we support said regime, not the backer that paid the way for them to run the concern on his behalf.

I think there were a few 'grey' areas concerning the FL that were holding the process up. Once they are clear to both sides, its fait accompli. That is the vibe I took from Tony after speaking to him early doors, but I know there were the last couple of details to finalise today.

Just got in from a job and waiting for update from Tony. First thing this morning he gave me a little bit of background with regards the new set up and then said today would be a very important day. With many of the plans already in motion I took it that this was the cue for the completion by tomorrow, but I'm still waiting to hear an official release.

David Defty will be helping the new consortium develop certain areas of the new set up, but he is not part of the actual consortium. In other news, keep your F5 button in sight today folks, it will come handy a little bit later

I have to respectfully disagree. Intermediaries are standard practice in all major corporate acquisitions. Football is kind of different as headline hugging ego's seem to hog the process in preference to good old fashioned business practice. Every Tom, **** or Harry the Arms Dealer (the names have been changed to protect the guilty) can splash their money and their name about in the press by 'buying' PR - but serious, good intentioned, driven individuals would conduct business in the age old fashion of creating a highly skilled team around themselves to achieve their goal, and letting them get on with it whilst overseeing the operation away from the front line. I think the fact the individual's wishes have been respected thus far smacks of a far more professional approach in comparison to previous scenarios we have endured.

There would be a list of 101 reasons why an investor involved in such a high-profile, emotion fuelled, complex and fraught acquisition would utilise the skills of a intermediary to do their bidding and subsequently not court, or indeed even consider, putting themselves on public view at the onset of negotiations, or for that matter, after the fact. The reasons you offer for an individual's motivation to be heard but not seen would be the last, and most obscure, of said list.