I was wondering alright why anyone would buy shares in a company which weren't worth anything on paper ?Originally Posted by Philosophizer
Its not the company he's interested in.
Its the access that the company has which interests him.
Anything Delaney says is a big step forward would seriously worry me
Niall O'Driscoll has a long involvement with Joeys and I suppose by extension will certainly know Mulvey from working together with Bray and, for example, the joint academy in Stepaside. I think you're probably reading too much into things
To be fair to him, he clearly has a very genuine interest in developing young players from his involvement with Joeys over a long period. I'd rather see him taking over a LOI club than a lot of the cowboys we've seen before.
My guess is that Bray will be totally part-time from next season, run similar to Cabinteely. They'll probably recruit the best young players from Joeys who don't go elsewhere. They may not set the league alight any time soon (they never did in the past either) but at least they should be stable and self-sufficient, which seems like a much better situation then the alternative - the club go belly up it's another calamity for the league.
Does anyone know if O'Driscoll is now sole owenr of Bray - or at a minimum has a controlling share ? I'm curious as to whwteh Mulvey and others are still hanging around in there legally.
I believe hes at the very least a big majority. I doubt money actually changed hands I'd say it was a deal where he paid the wages and got the club
According to the Irish Sun - O’Driscoll has bought a majority stake in the troubled club although Gerry Mulvey has retained some shares.
Sounds like Mulvey approached him and offered him the club if he could dig them out of the current ****storm and pay the overdue wages and guarantee the wages for the rest of the season.
More here from the Indo:
unlike his predecessor Gerry Mulvey, who may retain a small stake, the new owner doesn’t have the sale of the Carlisle Grounds underpinning his business plan.
O’Driscoll is fully focussed on generating a connection between the local community in Bray and around the county Wicklow, an essential element markedly absent over the past two seasons.
O’Driscoll is building for the longer-term by planning to hold public meetings in the coming weeks and populating the team with graduates from their underage ranks.
It seems certain that the playing budget, which the club evidently couldn’t afford, will be reduced next season, irrespective of which division the Seagulls are in.
Whatever about the long-term outlook, O’Driscoll wants those who disconnected with Bray to return to the Carlisle Grounds, starting tomorrow
"Majority shareholder" is doubtless a deliberate choice of words here - and is very different from having a controlling share.
I suspect that means that Mulvey and others still have a de-facto veto on what happens with the club.
Just checked the Bray Wanderers website about the takeover and it says - "Niall O’Driscoll has assumed a controlling interest in Bray Wanderers Football Club."
Is "controlling interest" different from "controlling share"??
No. A controlling interest is over 75% of the shareholding in a company. It means that you can call the shots, and the remaining shareholders can't stop you.
A controlling interest is 50%+1 share?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlling_interest
The laws on minority interests in this country are very strong. It is very difficult to run a company unencumbered by other shareholders unless you have a minimum of 80% of the shares.
The penalties for abuse of minorities are such that the tail really can wag the dog.
In the case of Bray that would be a shame if it means the club is still heavily influenced by others but the laws are there to protect "normal" small shareholders.
In this article, O'Driscoll is quoted saying that he has taken over 51%.
Bray Wanderers Supporters Club Facebook page has this from the Sunday Business Post. https://www.facebook.com/18768392505...type=3&theater
All you zombies tweet tweet tweet.
That's just vague and American.
If you own 50% +1 of the shares in any company, you can dominate proceedings. However - you can't have your own way entirely, as there will be certain key decisions which require a 75%+ vote - e.g. disposal of major assets etc. Hence why 50% is not considered a controlling majority - as it doesn't enable you to control everything. With 75%+ (it may differ slightly by company, depending upon their articles and constitution) you have that power/control - hence why it's the controlling interest, rather than a simple majority one.
In which case he doesn't have full control of the club, and can still be blocked/vetoed on certain things.
No doubt it was entirely by design that he was only sold that value of shares.
Yes cause everything to do with Bray recently has been well thought out
The statute books also define - in passing - a controlling interest as at least 50% - http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1...nacted/en/html
You do need a 75% majority for special resolutions to pass, so technically the 49% could hold that up, but I don't think that means the initial use of the phrase "controlling interest" is invalid. And special resolutions aren't as important as they sound; here's an (English) list of examples - https://www.informdirect.co.uk/compa...on-what-is-it/ Some of those don't even apply any more (eg changing the Articles of Association, because that's no longer a thing)
Hmmm. The drama may not be over yet!
#NeverStopNotGivingUp
Especially if this argument over the definition of "controlling interest" escalates.
O'Driscoll gave a very candid interview in the latest LOIweekly podcast...
"Schoolboy football is my passion".
Speaking about taking over Bray - "I didn't particularly want to do it".
At least he's honest in admitting that he took over purely to save the pathway for St Joseph's.
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks