Takeover update

I don't know what they were exactly but I somehow doubt the new owners will countenance any changes which do not contribute to the bottom line.

With regards to capacity, as mentioned, this would be a challenge. Maybe, as in other countries, safe standing could be an option.

That's with the new safe-standing terraces.

The Friedkin Group probably would have difficulty getting their head round that, with what is available as standard in the States.

I'm still thinking it will be difficult to obtain tickets for occasional match goers like myself. More fans will want to go the new stadium with much better facilities and no restricted views.

Safe standing? In the Gwladys Street, we seem to have been standing during the match for a couple of seasons!

As the recipient of a new knee recently it's been a bit….awkward! 😁

But the German club I follow, Schalke have a stadium that holds over 54,000 for international matches when all seating is implemented.

But for League games, when they can have safe standing, the capacity goes up to nearly 64,000.

Don't ask me how it works. Above my head.

He said a future expansion of around 6.000 extra seats had been factored in, meaning we could fit in 58,000 (max) in the future.

Dan Meis use to have sleepless nights worrying wether the stadium would fit the space it's in as it is.

According to the gossip, the current manager Ivan Juric could be sacked. His replacement might be Daniele de Rossi who was sacked last month. De Rossi replaced Mourinho who was sacked in January.

It has been said Friedkin will bring stable if boring governance. Things look anything but stable or boring at Roma.

Let's hope that we don't end up with another owner who has a revolving door for his managers. Juric is the 3rd manager of Roma in 2024 and, after being beaten 5-1 at the weekend, rumour is that Friedkin may make yet another change at managerial level.

The football side is something else again. The previous president's decision to sack De Rossi inflamed the ultras, and she left under death threats. That the new interim president -- Friedkin's son -- might recall De Rossi would be no surprise.

Incidentally, the chief instigator of that 5-1 Roma loss at Fiorentina was Moise Kean, who scored two first-half goals.

What's going on with the takeover and this Leadenhall case?

I tried to set out what we know currently in the first three paragraphs up top.

Please let me know if that is unclear or you have further questions and I'll try to answer them.

Some of the options will become clearer after Man Utd fill their vacancy.

But for Roma, the brief seems to be to hold Roma in the top 6 ish on a shoestring budget - which possibly works because other clubs in Serie A are very weak financially. They don't need to spend to stay ahead (or avoid falling behind).

It's different for us. I can see why they would like Dyche since he'll do a reliable job with a tiny budget relative to his peers. That buys them time while sorting out a financial mess.

Buy does a different sort of manager and a different style of football help generate more commercial revenue? Possibly yes. But only if it succeeds. A few years ago we'd have viewed Ten Hag as an excellent managerial option. Now… not so much.

I said all he needs to do is make a representation to the judge and raise the issue. Friedkin got several deals done before the money to take Everton under Textor. I predicted it was Thursday and then Slater confirmed what I was thinking. The loan owed to 777 Partners is now A-CAP's as they are principal to the 777 Partners agreement.

I provided my opinion on all risks based on points of law for all remedies by A-CAP, 777 (including bankrupt remedy if bankrupt, on trust), and Leadenhall against Everton, even potentially criminal liability (criminal proceeds). All these issues were raised by Slater and Quinn.

My view was and is, in all probability there is very little chance of Friedkin being liable and thus he could have sealed ownership of Everton. This was all before Friedkin come back to the table.