• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Daniel Levy - Former Chairman

metalgear said:
you know how he took loans for thfc using the club as collateral? the 30 year loans at low rates? Well he could have done the same with his equity - pledged sufficient shares against a personal loan.

after the stadium was built and everything settled, thfc valued themselves at 4bn so Levy's 25% was 1bn. easily he could take a loan for say 50m and the lewis trust match with 150m to maintain the original proportions.
Click to expand...

Why do that when the whole business model was to increase spending via the commercial set up, which he did and the club have? 50m isn't anything in football terms to invest.

The majority owners who are cash rich, beyond cash rich and they hadn't shown any interest to do it, not sure then for that reason is should have fell at Levy to put his shares up to lend the club money?? Just seems abit of a silly expectation TBH, especially when with his removal his position was not even that secure?

He couldn't have done that before the build because the value of the club didn't increase till the build and the asset value went through the roof
 
Last edited:
Bedfordspurs said:
I know what you mean, of course
But it’s not a real reflection on his stake
Click to expand...

I'm all ears.

What is/was his real stake then? I just assumed that he was operating like a Chairman of the Board and CEO at the same time with a 30% financial share. I was then anticipating that he would give up the CEO role and stay as Chairman on behalf of the bigger model. Then he lost both roles to Charrington and VV.

You obviously see something I don't right?
 
SirPercyHotspur said:
Even if he did which he hasn't what difference would it make, he couldn't hold on to his job holding just under 30% of the shares because he was ousted by the desicion of the majority owners who decided his time was over, the Lewis's would still be in total control even if someone acquires 25% of ENIC shares.
Click to expand...
Was just asking a question…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back