Big Announcement

[denismcquadeno.eleven 73]

*

Edited Saturday at 02:38 PM by denismcquadeno.eleven

[Woodstock Jag 564]

3 hours ago, javeajag said:

This made me chuckle given the due diligence saga ….. $44bn and no DD……

The doubt introduced by Musk’s tweet is the latest example of the whirlwind manner in which the transaction came together, which even led to Musk waiving his right to carry out due diligence while negotiating terms.

I think that this example neatly makes our point for us!

[javeajag 910]

48 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I think that this example neatly makes our point for us!

Well an alternative view could be….

1. lots of deals get done without formal due diligence

2. deals can get done if your flexible and imaginative

3. you can get the information you need without calling it due diligence 

just a hint

[Lenziejag 463]

46 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Well an alternative view could be….

1. lots of deals get done without formal due diligence

2. deals can get done if your flexible and imaginative

3. you can get the information you need without calling it due diligence 

just a hint

Except that deal isn’t done is it ? 

Regarding point 3 - you are right, it doesn’t need to be called due diligence, but that is what it is. 

 

[Woodstock Jag 564]

50 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Well an alternative view could be….

1. lots of deals get done without formal due diligence

2. deals can get done if your flexible and imaginative

3. you can get the information you need without calling it due diligence 

just a hint

TJF tried to get the information it needs “without calling it due diligence”. That’s why Gavin Taylor was on the Club Board for several months.

The information didn’t get through, as Tom Hosie has testified.

[javeajag 910]

5 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

TJF tried to get the information it needs “without calling it due diligence”. That’s why Gavin Taylor was on the Club Board for several months.

The information didn’t get through, as Tom Hosie has testified.

That was then , this is now …..I suspect going heavy on formal due diligence will be counter productive 

maybe send Gerry a few more emails the last one worked 

[scotty 399]

1 hour ago, javeajag said:

That was then , this is now …..I suspect going heavy on formal due diligence will be counter productive 

maybe send Gerry a few more emails the last one worked 

It worked in as much as it elicited a response. We've still to see if that response is accurate.

[Woodstock Jag 564]

10 minutes ago, scotty said:

It worked in as much as it elicited a response. We've still to see if that response is accurate.

FWIW I trust that the response is accurate (the 2023 typo aside!)

[Tom Hosie 278]

6 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

TJF tried to get the information it needs “without calling it due diligence”. That’s why Gavin Taylor was on the Club Board for several months.

The information didn’t get through, as Tom Hosie has testified.

And just to reiterate I indicated that I didn't know where the 'blockage' in terms of knowledge sharing was. 

To the best of my knowledge there was no issue in terms of Gavin playing a full Directors role with access to all relevant information. 

Yet that information didn't filter down to TJF Board. 

The knowledge sharing approach didn't work. Is that an argument for a more formal Due Diligence approach or an arguement that greater effort should have been made to make it work? 

Thankfully that debate no longer needs to occupy my thinking, and I have a more chilled time of things as a result. Good luck to those that will be tasked with trying to inch us closer to a fan owned Club. I don't envy you.