Along with just about every West Ham United supporter I was hoping for the fall out from the allegations aired by the BBC to lead to the demise of David Sullivan as a West Ham shareholder as well as the end of his direct influence as co- Chairman.
Further revelations by West Ham that Sullivan had been barred from contact with the women’s and juniors teams through ‘safeguarding concerns’ only increased the bad smell in the boardroom and the desire for a new era to begin, clean and ‘unsullied’ by allegations of past activities.
So the surprise was genuine when Sullivan increased his shareholding, ’rounding up’ from 38.1 to 40% in the Vanessa Gold shares’ pre-emption allocation. Whilst it is clear the ‘ex Chairman’ is just that and has no ‘power’ as an executive, his shadow still hangs over the club and seeing him in the directors box still rankles with just about every attendee at the London Stadium.
David Sullivan: Still in the Director’s box at London Stadium
Trouble is, he has several hundred million pounds tied up in the club and based on a new report today from footballleagueworld.co.uk, there is no end in sight for the Sullivan era. If anything, the future is less rosy, but the logic behind increasing his shareholding up to 40% seems evident when looking at their report:
“David Sullivan is planning for his sons to take over at West Ham..
Sullivan’s plans for West Ham extend well beyond simply getting the club back into the Premier League. The controversial major shareholder is reportedly preparing to hand his stake in the Hammers down to his sons, Jack and David junior, in time.
Rather than walking away from the club after more than 16 years of ownership, Sullivan is said to be planning a succession which would see his football-mad children eventually inherit his position“
The report quotes well respected journalist Alan Nixon as the source.
“Nixon reports that Sullivan appears to have been grooming his sons for a future role. Both have previously been involved with West Ham, meaning this is not necessarily a completely new idea.”
Which is enough to put most West Ham United fans off their cornflakes this morning, however rosy the league table is looking.
In a previous report, his sons had no interest in the club. I think the most telling thing is that Sullivan and Tripp Smith have a total of 51%, which if someone wanted to purchase them, would have a controlling interest.
This allows them to block Kretinsky from watering down their holding through investment in a shared issue. Don’t expect either to invest in the club .
Well, well. Fancy that. How wrong were we all?
It won’t happen. They know what the fans think of them, and their safety can’t be assured. I don’t condone violence at all, but there’s a big risk of that.
What’s the point of living in fear looking over your (tiny and scrawny) shoulder every day?
The only plausible option is to veer as far away as possible from West Ham and focus on other business ventures (preferably not the creepy and seedy type).
Surely if this were true he would have increased his stake to 49.99%???
Hi Martin, I see the assertion that he has no power and I find it an impossible position to believe. As you say he has hundreds of millions invested and with that comes rights and power, it is certainly true that he is no longer on the board but his sons are on the board and they plainly have an input in everything that happens, even if they don’t have executive powers. If the shares are handed down to his sons they would almost certainly want to be admitted as full board members with full voting rights and executive powers which means the Sullivan family would once again be at the heart of decision making at our club. Cheers and I really hope I’m totally wrong mate
Just for clarity, Sullivan’s sons are NOT members of the board. Sullivan may have voting rights regarding very limited aspects due to his shareholding, but he has no input or power in the day to day running of the club. Also for any shareholder to become a board member, they would need to be appointed to a place on the board by the majority shareholder (Daniel Kretinsky) and not just request it!
Just for clarity his sons are on the board, although they do not have any input to the day to day running of the club. It’s also important to know appointing them or any other person to the board is not at the sole discretion of the major shareholder, that provision is in the articles of association although it’s obvious he has a big say in the decision. There are too many unfounded claims out there about the club at the moment and it’s essential to give accurate information or else we end up going down dead ends
I totally agree with you Dean and again thanks for correcting me, I was sure they were not, but after some research you are 100% correct. Thanks for putting me straight 👍
“Grooming his sons “! This isn’t news, anyone with half a brain new that, no surprises here.
Has reputation for grooming younger generation.