Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.
I'd be very, very, very surprised if he isn't involved given the new directors. They're not going to say to the press "we are owned by a sheikh" transfer prices would go through the roof
Even if there isn’t a Sheikh involved, there must be plenty of money available. There’s no point paying £50/60m or whatever for a Championship club to then try to make a profit or break even. I’m sure they won’t be as deluded as Roland, they’ll want Premier League football as that’s their only chance of making a profit and/or having any success on the pitch.
Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.
So does this "he" refer to the Sheikh or Nimer? The article also says at one point Southall would become Chairman then in another place that he'll take on the role of CEO.
'Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.'
not sure if this means Nimer isn't investing any of his money or that Sheikh Al Hahyan's money isn't being invested.
Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.
So does this "he" refer to the Sheikh or Nimer? The article also says at one point Southall would become Chairman then in another place that he'll take on the role of CEO.
Christ on a bike. What does it all actually mean ?
That once the initial jubilation of a Roland departure starts to fade, it becomes clear there are quite a few unknowns; Questions relating to this new groups structure, their funding and their intentions
that post from the dark side seems contradictory: on one hand no investment plans on the other £40m, cobbled together: as others have said Aussie thing is just common sense/ speculation, and wrong: its the EFL isn't it, not the FA isn't it?
This is all very confusing but hopefully will become a little clearer in time. I can't imagine that they would have paid what they have and cleared the director loans (if indeed they have) without some serious ambition to take us to the PL. They will also know the investment that requires so must have some major financial backing.
It makes sense to put some distance between the main money man and the directors when you consider that could enable sponsorship deals that assist with 'navigating' FFP rules. As others have said having a little doubt around spending power can also do no harm in transfer negotiations.
It does all seem too good to be true at the moment. Perhaps I have got a little carried away dreaming of Champions League football and should moderate expectations and simply enjoy what has to be a better 6 years coming than those just passed.
Next step is EFL approval then hopefully we will hear more about ESIs plans.
'Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.'
not sure if this means Nimer isn't investing any of his money or that Sheikh Al Hahyan's money isn't being invested.
It isn't the best English, but I read it as meaning that the 'he' refers to Sheikh Saeed.
HH Tahnoun Nimer runs the corporate show for Sheikh Saeed, a pretty big gig and I'm sure Nimer will have a personal financial interest in the Sheikh's commercial activities. Although not a member of the Al Nahyan family (unlike Sheikh Mansour) Nimer will be a very rich man in his own right. He will also have access to significant additional funds from Sheikh Saeed and this would not be a conflict in terms of football ownership rules as Sheikh Mansour is a super rich man in his own right.
To use one of Henry's phrases - I wouldn't mind being a pound behind Nimer!
'Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.'
not sure if this means Nimer isn't investing any of his money or that Sheikh Al Hahyan's money isn't being invested.
Might be worth asking Cawley to clarify but I read that as Nimer is investing his money, but the Sheikh isn't. Could be like Everton where the money comes via another source ultiamtely but technically it looks like it comes from Nimer, i.e. Nimer paid by the Sheikh, then technically Nimer uses that money to invest in Charlton.
This is all very confusing but hopefully will become a little clearer in time. I can't imagine that they would have paid what they have and cleared the director loans (if indeed they have) without some serious ambition to take us to the PL. They will also know the investment that requires so must have some major financial backing.
It makes sense to put some distance between the main money man and the directors when you consider that could enable sponsorship deals that assist with 'navigating' FFP rules. As others have said having a little doubt around spending power can also do no harm in transfer negotiations.
It does all seem too good to be true at the moment. Perhaps I have got a little carried away dreaming of Champions League football and should moderate expectations and simply enjoy what has to be a better 6 years coming than those just passed.
Next step is EFL approval then hopefully we will hear more about ESIs plans.
I'm not convinced that Tahnoon Nimer would have the funds to even purchase the club for 60 mill let alone run it without any backing from Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, so I'd like to think that he is involved and we're just not making it blatantly obvious.
This is all very confusing but hopefully will become a little clearer in time. I can't imagine that they would have paid what they have and cleared the director loans (if indeed they have) without some serious ambition to take us to the PL. They will also know the investment that requires so must have some major financial backing.
It makes sense to put some distance between the main money man and the directors when you consider that could enable sponsorship deals that assist with 'navigating' FFP rules. As others have said having a little doubt around spending power can also do no harm in transfer negotiations.
It does all seem too good to be true at the moment. Perhaps I have got a little carried away dreaming of Champions League football and should moderate expectations and simply enjoy what has to be a better 6 years coming than those just passed.
Next step is EFL approval then hopefully we will hear more about ESIs plans.
Exciting times ahead.
They have not cleared the ex-director loans. Yet.
Likewise, they wouldn't have paid Two Shits yet either with the sale being conditional on EFL approval.
Do you happen to know, Rick, that the intention is to take clean title and pay off the ex-directors' loans?
Or is it to ensure the takeover passes EFL checks i.e. If we admit the Sheikh is involved does that raise alarm bells with the EFL who'll see us and Man City as being owned by the same people
Impressive, quite a few pages without mention of 'taking a haircut'.
I'd stated in private, a long time before the issue of "taking a haircut" came up on this thread, that I was going to have a haircut as soon as the old scrote sold up.
People such as @Leuth and @AshBurton - I hope - can vouch for me (of the CL frequenters I know).
For those of you who don't know me in person, I haven't cut my hair since February 2018 and I haven't shaved (just a bit of tidying) since my birthday this January, so this is quite a proclamation.
So just to confirm, I'm prepared to take a haircut Roland, if that helps expedite the process.
My hair is longer than a Tolstoy novel at the moment. May have to get it tidied up - subject to EFL approval
Or is it to ensure the takeover passes EFL checks i.e. If we admit the Sheikh is involved does that raise alarm bells with the EFL who'll see us and Man City as being owned by the same people
But even it that were the case it would not run contrary to the multiple ownership rules. Sheikh Mansour has his own wealth, separate from Sheikh Saeed.
No different for example my two sons each owning a football club as long as there were clear audit trails as to the separate sources of the funds.
Christ on a bike. What does it all actually mean ?
That once the initial jubilation of a Roland departure starts to fade, it becomes clear there are quite a few unknowns; Questions relating to this new groups structure, their funding and their intentions
But people laugh at the six questions still, especially the last one.
Or is it to ensure the takeover passes EFL checks i.e. If we admit the Sheikh is involved does that raise alarm bells with the EFL who'll see us and Man City as being owned by the same people
But even it that were the case it would not run contrary to the multiple ownership rules. Sheikh Mansour has his own wealth, separate from Sheikh Saeed.
No different for example my two sons each owning a football club as long as there were clear audit trails as to the separate sources of the funds.
This is all very confusing but hopefully will become a little clearer in time. I can't imagine that they would have paid what they have and cleared the director loans (if indeed they have) without some serious ambition to take us to the PL. They will also know the investment that requires so must have some major financial backing.
It makes sense to put some distance between the main money man and the directors when you consider that could enable sponsorship deals that assist with 'navigating' FFP rules. As others have said having a little doubt around spending power can also do no harm in transfer negotiations.
It does all seem too good to be true at the moment. Perhaps I have got a little carried away dreaming of Champions League football and should moderate expectations and simply enjoy what has to be a better 6 years coming than those just passed.
Next step is EFL approval then hopefully we will hear more about ESIs plans.
Exciting times ahead.
They have not cleared the ex-director loans. Yet.
Likewise, they wouldn't have paid Two Shits yet either with the sale being conditional on EFL approval.
Do you happen to know, Rick, that the intention is to take clean title and pay off the ex-directors' loans?
I guess so, but haven’t been told that explicitly.
Comments
The article also says at one point Southall would become Chairman then in another place that he'll take on the role of CEO.
'Nimer is the majority shareholder in ESI. He is chairman of Abu Dhabi Business Development – the private office of Sheikh Saeed Bin Tahnoon Al Nahyan, although he is not investing any of his money in the venture.'
not sure if this means Nimer isn't investing any of his money or that Sheikh Al Hahyan's money isn't being invested.
It makes sense to put some distance between the main money man and the directors when you consider that could enable sponsorship deals that assist with 'navigating' FFP rules. As others have said having a little doubt around spending power can also do no harm in transfer negotiations.
It does all seem too good to be true at the moment. Perhaps I have got a little carried away dreaming of Champions League football and should moderate expectations and simply enjoy what has to be a better 6 years coming than those just passed.
Next step is EFL approval then hopefully we will hear more about ESIs plans.
Exciting times ahead.
HH Tahnoun Nimer runs the corporate show for Sheikh Saeed, a pretty big gig and I'm sure Nimer will have a personal financial interest in the Sheikh's commercial activities. Although not a member of the Al Nahyan family (unlike Sheikh Mansour) Nimer will be a very rich man in his own right. He will also have access to significant additional funds from Sheikh Saeed and this would not be a conflict in terms of football ownership rules as Sheikh Mansour is a super rich man in his own right.
To use one of Henry's phrases - I wouldn't mind being a pound behind Nimer!
Do you happen to know, Rick, that the intention is to take clean title and pay off the ex-directors' loans?
i.e. If we admit the Sheikh is involved does that raise alarm bells with the EFL who'll see us and Man City as being owned by the same people
No different for example my two sons each owning a football club as long as there were clear audit trails as to the separate sources of the funds.