What can /will happen if JP is found to be guilty of everything he is accused of?
Will the small shareholders get any reparation?
Will Our club get any money?
What about capital punishment?
Who benefits who loses and by how much?
Cannot pretend to even understand the general issues, let alone how ethical or legal his actions were, but will somebody please try to explain for me in words of three syllables or less what the expectations might be regarding the outcomes of this case.
I think that S4A are trying to prove a point with Peace. The purpose of the £3.7m loan from WBAFC to the Peace company is under question. Peace denies he used it to buy shares for himself, instead selling it as an 'arms length arrangement with favourable interest rates above the base rate'. S4A do not believe this, and neither does anyone else.
I cannot see how there will be any reparation to the small shareholders; its not about that.
WBAFC are owed £3.7m plus interest, and it is currently estimated to be £5m overall. Apparently this debt can be called in at any time, but with Lai the major shareholder and with a foot in both concerns, he would effectively be asking himself to pay the money over to the club, which is unlikely to happen any time soon.
In respect of capital punishment I assume you mean an FA fine and not the death penalty, which would be a bit harsh. I don't know to be honest. This could be a case of 'be careful what you wish for'. If Peace and the club broke any rules there could be a financial penalty, and any penalty will almost certainly be on the club, not the Jersey boy. I don't think it will come to this though, this is just a questionable internal business transaction.
The potential loser at the moment is the club and Lai. WBA are £3.7m down and Lai owns the debt. You will know who the big time winner is.
It is like me borrowing £10 from you to put on a horse at 10/1. The horse wins and I don't give you your £10 back.
S4A are trying to prove a point of principal as far as I can see. I wish there was an S4A forum member who could contribute to this discussion.
I can understand that some are not that bothered about Peace and the loan as it is history. However, we still constantly go on about the lack of investment and lack of ambition. From the moment Peace joined the board he could see the big picture. I came across the following statement the other day by Clive Stapleton and Barry Hurst, who were forced to resign on 13/06/2002.
http://www.baggies.com/news/?id=449&pag=18Knowing what we now know you can see that Peace was always one step ahead of everyone else. You can also see the chaos that was going on in the boardroom at the time. I met Stapleton and the others, good honest businessmen who were lifelong WBA fans who wanted to do the best for the club, not themselves. For me the Stapleton statement was sad reading, as it marks the time when the club went into a different direction that could never be reversed.
Peace did a lot of good for the club. He was shrewd and astute and has kept us financially solid. We now know why. I was particularly impressed with the way he stood up to Levy over Berahino. There is no doubt he left us in a better position than where we were in 2002, but at what cost? Where would we be had Peace not have gained control? Impossible to say really, we could have been a top 6 side, or we could have been looking forward to trips to Barnet, Wycombe, Rochdale etc. However, what the Peace sale has done is land us with an inexperienced owner, no investment, and a sale price that no one in their right mind is ever going to match. So we are stuck with this for a long time, and this is all down to the greed of one man.
I like S4A, they are chipping away and asking questions. Personally I think that the meeting they have with Ken next week will be a futile exercise, but at least they are having a go. As BB74 said, perhaps they should spend more time trying to find investors to buy Lai out.
Personally I am just looking forward to getting back to the ground and watching the team, hopefully exciting times ahead with VI, but we have been here before