|Kat v Gao 10:52 - Oct 9 with 766 views||Capt_Koons|
Lots of rumours going around she's suing him. Possibly because he's failed to invest as promised. Possibly because he's failed to buy her 20% as promised. Hopefully the former, more likely the latter. Anyone heard anything?
|Kat v Gao on 10:54 - Oct 9 with 756 views||Boris_|
Not sure she can sue him for failing to invest. I very much doubt that a) He would commit to that and b) that she would actually be that bothered.
If she is suing him, it will be for breaching a Directors agreement that promised to buy her shares at a fixed price based on certain deliverables being achieved.
|Kat v Gao on 11:06 - Oct 9 with 744 views||DorsetIan|
My son was reporting such stuff from social media on the way back from the match on Sunday and I told him it was likely nonsense.
Kat's 20% was issued to her at the time of the sale. There was a loan outstanding to her (presumably inherited from her father) from the club of about £20m which was simply converted to shares.
Difficult to see how see how she could sue for his failure to invest per se. You don't usually pay £200m for shares and accept 'strings' as to what you then do with them.
The failure to buy back would require her to have an option to sell which she has exercised and which he hasn't responded to.
As a 20% minority shareholder, she does have general rights not to be prejudiced but difficult to think how she might have such a claim there.
All of the above pure guesswork. But until we hear more, I would assume it's not true. That said, would not be surprised at all if all is not sweetness and light between Kat and Gao, as he has perhaps turned out not to be the owner she thought he would be.
|Kat v Gao on 11:10 - Oct 9 with 735 views||kingslandstand1|
Did he ever say he would invest in the club other than just "buy" it?
|Kat v Gao on 11:10 - Oct 9 with 736 views||this_charming_man|
It wont be lack of investment, it'll be because he hasn't bought the rest off her. Still she pushed the deal through, she was the one who assured everyone we were in safe hands, how Goas takeover was in the best interests of everyone.
|Kat v Gao on 11:21 - Oct 9 with 723 views||SonicBoom|
Problem is that it is so easy for any internet weirdo to make up a story. Then everyone repeats it until it becomes "true".
Even if this is true, which I doubt, so what? It's not going to make any difference to who owns the club so I wouldn't get all bent out of shape about it.
|Kat v Gao on 13:16 - Oct 9 with 610 views||Capt_Koons|
If it is true you can understand Gao's reluctance to own 100% of a championship side rather than just 80% . Fit and proper person apparently.
|Kat v Gao on 18:44 - Oct 9 with 484 views||Kennington|
As soon as both of them leave and we get a real billionaire the better.