Clarification from Paul Barber on Dick Knight Selling his shares

[Giraffe]

I've just had a quick look through some of the back pages of the book and it is clear there was some wrangling by Dick to get more money for the shares he sold to Tony Bloom.

Haven't the time right now to read it all, but would be interested to work out what Tony has paid per share against what Dick is offering here.

 

[Gritt23]

Dick can do and say whatever he likes as far as I'm concerned. No Dick=No Brighton and Hove Albion. Message ends.

Agreed.

I must say, I am rather concerned that Dick Knight has such a bad view of how things are running now, that he should pull a stunt like this. What is it about the way Bloom runs things that he dislikes so much? Is it purely the majority shareholder thing, or does he have some serious concerns with the management style.

Now we will ALWAYS love Knight for saving the club, and we will ALWAYS love Bloom for the phenomenal investment .... but that doesn't mean we will always agreed with everything they both do. At the moment, I'm feeling a little uneasy about a sour relationship between two people who I would have thought, would both want the same thing.

 

[Giraffe]

Agreed.

I must say, I am rather concerned that Dick Knight has such a bad view of how things are running now, that he should pull a stunt like this. What is it about the way Bloom runs things that he dislikes so much? Is it purely the majority shareholder thing, or does he have some serious concerns with the management style.

Now we will ALWAYS love Knight for saving the club, and we will ALWAYS love Bloom for the phenomenal investment .... but that doesn't mean we will always agreed with everything they both do. At the moment, I'm feeling a little uneasy about a sour relationship between two people who I would have thought, would both want the same thing.

The little extracts I've read of the book smack of a man that feels aggrieved that having done 90% of the work he wasn't allow to finish it. But as others have said, Tony Bloom was stumping up the £100m to pay for the ground, in his shoes I'd want to be chairman and owner too and without him doing that there would be no ground. It just comes across a little bit bitter from Dick to be honest.

 

[Goldstone1976]

Um, this was painfully obvious two days ago, so much so that I didn't bother making the same point. But at least you're snuffing out one angle of criticism

Which was my motivation in the post, since no one else had done so!

 

[soistes]

The little extracts I've read of the book smack of a man that feels aggrieved that having done 90% of the work he wasn't allow to finish it. But as others have said, Tony Bloom was stumping up the £100m to pay for the ground, in his shoes I'd want to be chairman and owner too and without him doing that there would be no ground. It just comes across a little bit bitter from Dick to be honest.

I agree with you to some extent, but what Dick said last night at the book signing was that he would have been quite happy for Bloom to have started as Vice Chairman, and for Dick to hand over Chairmanship to Bloom in due course - he had envisaged a symbolic handover at the first match at the stadium (either Spurs or Doncaster), with Dick them stepping down. But Bloom wanted the chairmanship from day one. Personally, I think that what Dick wanted would have been a reasonable compromise -- let Dick see through the stadium project to completion and then hand over the running of the board and club to the man who'd stumped up the dosh.

 

[Springal]

Agreed.

I must say, I am rather concerned that Dick Knight has such a bad view of how things are running now, that he should pull a stunt like this. What is it about the way Bloom runs things that he dislikes so much? Is it purely the majority shareholder thing, or does he have some serious concerns with the management style.

Now we will ALWAYS love Knight for saving the club, and we will ALWAYS love Bloom for the phenomenal investment .... but that doesn't mean we will always agreed with everything they both do. At the moment, I'm feeling a little uneasy about a sour relationship between two people who I would have thought, would both want the same thing.

Bloom & Knight couldn't be more different. Knight was never a 'corporate' CEO type, a lot of things were run similar to Withdean, very village hall committee style, where as Bloom is a billionaire, investment type, used to deal with massive corporations. He has bought in a management team and bunch of directors from top accountancies, executives from American Express, Paul Barber etc, to make sure things are run well, and his investments are protected, and things run well. I think that is the problem

 

[Farehamseagull]

Agreed.

I must say, I am rather concerned that Dick Knight has such a bad view of how things are running now, that he should pull a stunt like this. What is it about the way Bloom runs things that he dislikes so much? Is it purely the majority shareholder thing, or does he have some serious concerns with the management style.

Now we will ALWAYS love Knight for saving the club, and we will ALWAYS love Bloom for the phenomenal investment .... but that doesn't mean we will always agreed with everything they both do. At the moment, I'm feeling a little uneasy about a sour relationship between two people who I would have thought, would both want the same thing.

I just think it's two very successful businessmen with ego's that match their success and large personalities used to running things their own way.

 

[Giraffe]

I agree with you to some extent, but what Dick said last night at the book signing was that he would have been quite happy for Bloom to have started as Vice Chairman, and for Dick to hand over Chairmanship to Bloom in due course - he had envisaged a symbolic handover at the first match at the stadium (either Spurs or Doncaster), with Dick them stepping down. But Bloom wanted the chairmanship from day one. Personally, I think that what Dick wanted would have been a reasonable compromise -- let Dick see through the stadium project to completion and then hand over the running of the board and club to the man who'd stumped up the dosh.

I think if I was sitting there at Withdean saying look the banks won't give us any money, I tell you what I'll pay for it all, all £100m, then another £20m on training facilities, then a further £8m per year for god knows how long just to keep the club afloat, all on top of what I'd already put into the club, I would probably want to run the show and make sure it was done properly. You really can't blame Bloom for wanting that. And Dick Knight should have gracefully accepted that, however galling it must have been.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

All falling into place now if the latest snippet from The Argus is correct , DK only got back £400k of the £1.8M he invested during his time as chairman. Selling his shares at £1 each to the fans will get him most of his cash back.

 

[Tooting Gull]

I've just read that 'Et tu, Brute' comment in the Argus story that Knight aimed at Martin Perry.

That is really poor, Perry deserves much, much better than that for all his tireless efforts, work and loyalty.

Someone had to go and tell DK the time had come, he wasn't going to be happy whoever it was, Having had time to reflect, he should have realised that.

 

[Mellotron]

I agree with you to some extent, but what Dick said last night at the book signing was that he would have been quite happy for Bloom to have started as Vice Chairman, and for Dick to hand over Chairmanship to Bloom in due course - he had envisaged a symbolic handover at the first match at the stadium (either Spurs or Doncaster), with Dick them stepping down. But Bloom wanted the chairmanship from day one. Personally, I think that what Dick wanted would have been a reasonable compromise -- let Dick see through the stadium project to completion and then hand over the running of the board and club to the man who'd stumped up the dosh.

Bloom was the one with £100m. I think it's up to him really, and don't see any issue with him wanting control from that point onwards.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

[yt]NlZM_mwIEX4[/yt]

 

[Tooting Gull]

I think if I was sitting there at Withdean saying look the banks won't give us any money, I tell you what I'll pay for it all, all £100m, then another £20m on training facilities, then a further £8m per year for god knows how long just to keep the club afloat, all on top of what I'd already put into the club, I would probably want to run the show and make sure it was done properly. You really can't blame Bloom for wanting that. And Dick Knight should have gracefully accepted that, however galling it must have been.

I agree. And let's not forget, Knight actually mocked people asking questions at some of those open meetings wondering whether the financial crisis would jeopardise funding plans. Of course, they were right. Bloom may always have been in the background but he came to the rescue.

 

[DIFFBROOK]

Shame Dick couldnt see it through and Tony stepped in with hard cash, but thats the way the world goes. I think this in part is behind Dicks Knight motive of selling the shares - a bit of understandable bitterness.

What Dick wanted will never now happen. But, there is a real sense that Dicks efforts, over time, maybe forgotten. The stadium is all Tonys and that is what future generations will see, but without Dick there would never have been a stadium Its this point - the history and all of his hard work and unbelievable patience - that is in danger of being forgotten. Maybe Dick sees this, we all want a legacy, and Dick certainly needs one.

Maybe Tony couldnt see/understand the disappointment that Dick would have felt when taking over the club. Yes Knight was given Life President, but so was Ken Bates at Leeds and that was after he shafted the club. Its a meaningless title. I can see why Tony wanted complete control, so would I, but there was perhaps something better that Tony could have done rather than bestow a title.

I would love a statue of Dick Knight outside the AMEX - and in my opinion a befitting one. Not that it would make up for the dissappintment of not being Chairman when the stadium was being built, but it would at least in part.

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

I do find this whole situation incredibly boring, is it only me that couldn't give a stuff?

 

[sparkie]

I agree. And let's not forget, Knight actually mocked people asking questions at some of those open meetings wondering whether the financial crisis would jeopardise funding plans. Of course, they were right. Bloom may always have been in the background but he came to the rescue.

And on here. People were saying there was no money coming out of the banks, but in the face of all the evidence some were insisting the finances were watertight ( although maybe they actually knew of Tony's investment plans, and couldn't mention them, so decided to argue under the smokescreen of bank funding being available ).

 

[symyjym]

Shame Dick couldnt see it through and Tony stepped in with hard cash, but thats the way the world goes. I think this in part is behind Dicks Knight motive of selling the shares - a bit of understandable bitterness.

What Dick wanted will never now happen. But, there is a real sense that Dicks efforts, over time, maybe forgotten. The stadium is all Tonys and that is what future generations will see, but without Dick there would never have been a stadium Its this point - the history and all of his hard work and unbelievable patience - that is in danger of being forgotten. Maybe Dick sees this, we all want a legacy, and Dick certainly needs one.

Maybe Tony couldnt see/understand the disappointment that Dick would have felt when taking over the club. Yes Knight was given Life President, but so was Ken Bates at Leeds and that was after he shafted the club. Its a meaningless title. I can see why Tony wanted complete control, so would I, but there was perhaps something better that Tony could have done rather than bestow a title.

I would love a statue of Dick Knight outside the AMEX - and in my opinion a befitting one. Not that it would make up for the dissappintment of not being Chairman when the stadium was being built, but it would at least in part.

Agree with this, and DK was certainly not helped by his CEO at the time.

From the Argus:

Dick Knight felt “really let down” by Martin Perry as he lost his grip on the chairman’s seat at Albion.

Knight appointed Perry as chief executive in July 1999 and they worked together on the stadium project.

Knight was visited by Perry at his Hove flat in May 2009 after he had agreed to step down as chairman and was negotiating with Tony Bloom a settlement for his shares.

Knight, writing in his autobiography, said: “I got the impression he (Perry) was trying to let me down lightly. He started by saying ‘This was always going to happen, Dick. It has been coming for some time. As you know, Tony has been putting money in and helping us....’ “I thought ‘Et tu, Brute?’ (even you Brutus)."

 

[Tooting Gull]

There's no danger of Knight throwing his shares on the floor and saying 'You're not worth that', is there?

 

[Giraffe]

Agree with this, and DK was certainly not helped by his CEO at the time.

From the Argus:

Dick Knight felt “really let down” by Martin Perry as he lost his grip on the chairman’s seat at Albion.

Knight appointed Perry as chief executive in July 1999 and they worked together on the stadium project.

Knight was visited by Perry at his Hove flat in May 2009 after he had agreed to step down as chairman and was negotiating with Tony Bloom a settlement for his shares.

Knight, writing in his autobiography, said: “I got the impression he (Perry) was trying to let me down lightly. He started by saying ‘This was always going to happen, Dick. It has been coming for some time. As you know, Tony has been putting money in and helping us....’ “I thought ‘Et tu, Brute?’ (even you Brutus)."

Dear Lord, he really needs to get over this doesn't he. Clearly Perry was trying to be kind and let him face up to reality. He shouldn't be having a pop at him now.

 

[Giraffe]

I started this thread on 7th November 2008 If I knew there was no alternative then, he sure as hell did.

http://www.northstandchat.com/showth...hlight=finance

Lots didn't believe me but this is what I said:

"Really worried about Falmer finance now
I work for a company that regularly raises finance for a variety of reasons, and projects. We never have a problem doing this and even in the current economic climate are considered a very safe bet.

However today our bank have told us they are no longer offering finance, not just to us but anyone. Basically it wouldn't matter what we did the finance would not be available.

We are a safe bet. Arguably a football club is not. Yes they will have an income generating asset once completed but its not exactly something a bank could easily sell if repayments were not forthcoming.

Basically I believe the whole one year delay thing is in preparation for not being able to CURRENTLY raise the funds. Unless a private investor stumps up all or a large part of the cost there is no way they will finance it in the current climate.

I am not normally scaremongerer and up to now believed finance of the stadium would not be a problem but sadly the world is a very different place now and thanks to Lewes District Council the club are trying to raise finance at probably the worst time in financing history.

It doesn't mean it won't be built but can't see how they can raise the finance through banks for some while. This may change in the new year or they may have a significant private investor waiting in the wings, but if not then don't expect the financing to be announced anytime soon."