Ignore the moron Al, it is abundantly clear that the majority shareholder (the c???) had 92% (along with his sister) of the shares and therefore he took at least 92% of the dividends.

I wouldn't be surprised if the shares in the company had different categories of shares giving differing voting and dividend rights.

He acquired the shares of fans who saved the club in its hour of need in the mid 90's by concocting one scheme after another to acquire them for the least amount of money.

Those 8% of shareholdeds who still have their shares stood firm to his bullying tactics and I doubt very much that they got 8% of the 27m dividend.

But, for the sake of clarity the c??? Took at least 92% of 27m.

It can be argued the money was moved there and here but, it cannot be argued who would take the dividend, THE SHAREHOLDER.