By Kris Gonzo | Senior West Ham Columnist (Follow on X)
Former West Ham chairman David Sullivan could be preparing to dig his heels in and frustrate Daniel Kretinsky’s ambitions for the football club.
Sullivan resigned from his executive position last weekend as he prepared for the fallout from the BBC Panorama investigation into his history during his time at the Sunday Sport.
However, despite stepping down as chairman, Sullivan has retained his shareholding and remains West Ham’s largest shareholder with 38.8% of the club.
Daniel Kretinsky is attempting to gain control of West Ham and the simplest route would be for Sullivan to sell his stake.
But now, in an explosive interview with Hammers News, Sullivan appears to have hinted he may be having second thoughts.
Sullivan Suggests He Regrets Resigning
Speaking to Hammers News , Sullivan was asked whether stepping down had been the correct decision.
His response was as eye-catching as it was disturbing.
“Who knows?” Sullivan said.
“I’ve had hundreds of e-mails saying I shouldn’t have resigned.
“I did as I thought it was best for the club, whether it was the right decision I do not know.”
They are remarkable comments given the fallout from the Panorama documentary and the further scrutiny which has followed in recent days.
More Questions Than Answers
Since resigning, Sullivan has faced renewed criticism over safeguarding issues following reports that he was subject to internal restrictions at the club while the FA conducted a separate investigation into historical allegations.
The Independent Football Regulator is now understood to be examining the situation following reports that Sullivan was required to stay away from women’s and academy football activities during that period.
Against that backdrop, the suggestion that he may regret stepping down is a surprising development.
Kretinsky Still Has Options
One suspects Sullivan’s position will not come as a complete surprise to Kretinsky.
The Czech billionaire still has alternative routes to strengthening his grip on West Ham.
Most notably, he could acquire Vanessa Gold’s shareholding, which would take him beyond the 50% threshold and give him majority control of the football club.
Whether that is his preferred route remains open to debate.
What is becoming increasingly clear, however, is that the ownership situation at West Ham remains far from resolved.
And Sullivan’s latest comments have only added another layer of uncertainty to an already complicated picture.
This man may have had hundreds of e-mails telling him he made the wrong decision,but there are tens of thousands of fans who say he made the right decision.Typical of the man that he’s now trying to derail the plans to rebuild the club he ruined.
Only 10 percent of gold shares are up for sale , I understand 15 percent were to remain in gold family hands to protect David golds legacy?
Some things never change lies and delusion.
Who has actually seen all these begging emails to put doubt in his mind.
He is a man clinging to a mountain side by his finger nails.
Time for Kretinsky to step on them.
If Kretinsky has made up his mind no way Sullivan will be an insurmountable object.
Things maybe delayed but the end is almost certainly going to be end of Sullivan.
A 51% majority does not give you control of the club, only at board/operating level.
You need 75% of shareholders agreement to do things like inject cash by issuing shares, borrowing or restructuring debt.
All the while Sullivan has more than 25% shares he has effective control, although he can’t interfere with the operations or board decisions anymore.
On the face of the report it looks to me that Sullivan is in a last ditch attempt to protect his share value by offering vague roadblocks to give the illusion that he has control of the situation. His finances will
let him down though and Kretinsky will know that.
If true it shows a staggering arrogance, the pattern is not one of success but one of continuous underperformance under Sullivan’s leadership, we have had a few good seasons which can be attributed to managers and not the board who have continually recruited poorly, lacked ambition and have had zero strategy or idea about how to build the club despite massive annual payouts from being in the PL.
He should go, he is a toxic influence and incompetent for as long as he is associated to the club we will struggle not thrive.
Gonzo, does Kretinsky still have the option to buy another 15% of WHU shares from the Gold family, and thereby making him the major shareholder?
Gonzo this tells you all you need to know about Sulivan. He doesn’t care what’s best for the club he wants what’s best for him , whatever it does to the club. Before anyone says, well he did step down, it’s what’s best for him as it gives him a chance to stay in control of the club. Said it once and I’ll say it again. If you really love the club move on and give it a fresh start. I’m sure he would then be welcome to come back and watch the home games
He cares nothing about the club as these comments prove. He is truly deluded if he thinks stepping down may have been the wrong decision. He has destroyed our club from within and not one single supporter wants him around. He was an embarssment to this good club before the allegations. Nothings changed.
The key issue is West Ham future is still controlled by Sullivan unless he drops down to less than 25% shareholding.
You need 75% majority support from shareholders for:
– Issue new shares to raise equity capital
– Restructure the holding company
– Change articles of association
– Any formal scheme of arrangement on debt
– Bring in a new major investor via equity
– Formally wind up or merge any entity in the structure
– Change voting rights or share classes
The 51% majority gives you operational control at board level, not shareholder level. So he can do these things:
At shareholder level — ordinary resolutions only
– Appoint and remove directors
– Approve annual accounts
– Approve dividends
– Routine business approvals
At operating company board level — full control
– All football operations
– Transfers, manager, staff
– Commercial decisions
– Debt and working capital management
– Player sales
So all is well if West Ham is a profitable business, with no cash flow problems. But it isn’t so 51% well allow Kretinski to ensure Sullivan doesn’t re-join the board.
Cheers Graham W – Also profit is shared out according to share holdings. My concern has been that current shareholders would look to ride on the coat tails of any DK management & investment that would elevate the club and greatly increase its profits in the future.
In other words, if I am right, DK needs to have a substantial share holding now
( > 51%) for it to be worth his while to first put money in right now and secondly, to then plan ahead over the next 3,5, 10+ years.
Unless other family shareholders also put in money in proportion to their current share holding. This has not happened in the past and maybe DK is the only one willing/able to put enough money in to keep main players, offset debt, bring in a new structure, bring in good players,…
Ideally family share holdings would be proportionate to the money they are now willing to invest
Maybe only a proportion of family shares will be made available, because they’ll also want a share of future profits. Guess these are the terms and decisions taking place: Gaining/ceding control + more/less, share of future profits.
Graham, thanks so much. This is precisely the information I was looking for
If Sullivan truly cares about the future of the club he should sell up his shares and step away so everyone can move on.
If David Sullivan was genuine in claiming that he resigned in the best interests of the club, then please sell your shareholding asap, so that we can all move on and hopefully salvage what’s left of the clubs finance’s and reputation.
Do we even know that Kretinsky wants to own the club, or are we relying on speculation from the Times ?