Daniel Kretinsky

[BlackDiamond]

They might, but highly unlikely since it would take Gold being in agreement to do so. Sullivan & Gold still own 63.9% of the club shares (Sullivan 38.8, Gold 25.1 and others 9.1 % respectively).

Pure speculation on my part here but the end game could be a scenario involving Kretinsky acquiring Golds' shares at some point in the future maybe? That would give him full control and us a better idea as to where the club - financially at least, is heading.

All speculation of course but I reckon you might be onto something there. Acquiring 27% of a football club seems a very odd business decision unless there are certain guarantees in respect of guaranteed dividend payments or, as you have suggested, future acquisition of more shares.Otherwise quite simply what would be the point?

Acquiring 27% of shares, keeps his business out of the scrutiny of the pesky 'fit & proper' test peeps. If you own 30% or above the test applies.

Let's imagine a scenario where x is a urbane likeable business man, self made with a wide investment portfolio across diverse markets. And lets imagine one of these investments touches on the banking sector and one particular bank, that likes to do strong business in Mexico. In fact the business is so regular there that certain parties mix socially.

And let's just say that the gentlemen on the Mexican side of the business prefer to remain, not under investigation - because they're shy...

...then 27% of the business would be a perfectly acceptable proportion to acquire.

[Dwayne Pipes]

I think he has positioned himself so when we can actually buy the Stadium in 2023 he is in a prime position..
I also have no complaints about anyone investing that much money.

There's certainly no downside to that sort of investment. I wonder what Hammers United's stance on it is, they've been very quiet recently.

As an investor in Sainsburys I’m sure he’ll be able to supply extra shelving.

[Ibbyham]

Kretinsky out.

Moyes out!

[Ibbyham]

Kretinskey has several businesses on stakes including Royal Mail, J Sainsbury's, etc so does that mean a good investment for our club?

[Whiskyman]

There's certainly no downside to that sort of investment. I wonder what Hammers United's stance on it is, they've been very quiet recently.

As an investor in Sainsburys I’m sure he’ll be able to supply extra shelving.

Should be able to negotiate a discount on the half time oranges surely.

[Whiskyman]

All speculation of course but I reckon you might be onto something there. Acquiring 27% of a football club seems a very odd business decision unless there are certain guarantees in respect of guaranteed dividend payments or, as you have suggested, future acquisition of more shares.Otherwise quite simply what would be the point?

Acquiring 27% of shares, keeps his business out of the scrutiny of the pesky 'fit & proper' test peeps. If you own 30% or above the test applies.

Let's imagine a scenario where x is a urbane likeable business man, self made with a wide investment portfolio across diverse markets. And lets imagine one of these investments touches on the banking sector and one particular bank, that likes to do strong business in Mexico. In fact the business is so regular there that certain parties mix socially.

And let's just say that the gentlemen on the Mexican side of the business prefer to remain, not under investigation - because they're shy...

...then 27% of the business would be a perfectly acceptable proportion to acquire.

I get that. But the purpose of an investment is to make money either by growing the value of the business or receiving dividends, preferably both of course But I'm sure you'll agree there are better ways of doing that than investing in a football club. The value of the club will undoubtedly increase if and when the stadium is bought, that is a given, but considering the nature of football I wouldn't imagine there are massive dividends to be earned from a football club.

No doubt time will tell if he aspires to become the majority shareholder, but at the moment his investment can only be positive.

[Dwayne Pipes]

If anything happens to the fucking dwarf then it goes fucking tits up we could then have the KGB out.

[JayK]

If anything happens to the fucking dwarf then it goes fucking tits up we could then have the KGB out.

[Whiskyman]

If anything happens to the fucking dwarf then it goes fucking tits up we could then have the KGB out.

True. But there won't be any mass marches mate. Anyone dissenting will quietly disappear, never to be seen or heard of again.

[Ibbyham]

According to the Wikipedia, in English football owners rich list, West Ham have moved up to 13th since Kretinsky with £5.6B which is £4B increased than the previous £1.6B beforehand and West Ham are 8th in Premier League alone, just 0.1B less than Crystal Palace with Newcastle on top with £430B. I remembered Sheff Utd when they were in Premier League, they were ranked their owner 2nd richest in Premier League but in wikipdia, he only have £200M, not £200B.

NOT all billoinnaire owners are successful, as clubs such as QPR, Stoke, Swansea Fulham, WBA and Bristol City as they only interested in spending money on players but not the foundation or staff such as recruitments, training, Fitness plus facilities which is why they are not the REAL ONE.

West Ham were lucky not to get Tony Fernandez, The Venky and PIA as they dont think about foundation or surrounding area for improvement as they only interested in few spending players and if they failed, they seemed to give up. Hope Kretinsky is the right one and he looked proven owner as he is passionate on improving football club as he did with Slavia Prague and they went to Champions League a couple of times.

Hope things get better but as a good pace.