When seven women accused David Sullivan of sexual exploitation and predatory behaviour, the fallout did not just shake West Ham United's boardroom — it triggered a seismic shift in who controls one of England's most historic football clubs. Sullivan, the 77-year-old former pornography baron turned football owner, stepped down as co-chair and director last Saturday, before a joint investigation by the Times and BBC Panorama was published. Within days, Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky — already the owner of Royal Mail — agreed to buy enough shares from the Gold family to become West Ham's largest shareholder, with a 43% stake. Kretinsky and co-chair Vanessa Gold released a joint statement saying they were "deeply concerned" by the allegations against Sullivan, and that the full board had only learned of them about a month earlier. The club is now navigating a crisis of governance, financial trouble after relegation from the Premier League, and a possible intervention by the new Independent Football Regulator (IFR).
West Ham United's ownership structure has been dominated by two men for years: David Sullivan and the late David Gold. Sullivan held 38.8% of shares; Gold's family, through his daughter Vanessa Gold, controlled 25%. Kretinsky bought into the club in November 2021, paying £150m for a 27% stake. Now, by acquiring additional shares from the Gold family, Kretinsky's 1890 Holdings will become the largest shareholder. The deal still needs approval from other shareholders and the IFR. Sullivan remains a shareholder, but the IFR could force him to sell if it finds he no longer meets the "fit and proper persons" test — a power the regulator has under new legislation. Meanwhile, Sullivan has denied all allegations and said he will sue the BBC.
“Explains the West Ham ownership crisis, Sullivan allegations, and Kretinsky's takeover.”
The background to this story stretches back decades. Sullivan made his fortune in the pornography industry and later from newspapers and football. The allegations, reported by the Times and Panorama, span the 1980s and 1990s, with seven women accusing him of abusing his power and preying on them for sex, including when some were in their late teens. In 2023, West Ham implemented safeguarding measures that banned Sullivan from contact with the club's women's and youth teams — but the board representatives of other shareholders were only told about these measures this week, according to the joint statement. The club itself was relegated from the Premier League last month, adding financial pressure: West Ham made a loss of £104.2m last year and now faces the challenge of rebuilding while funding an immediate return to the top flight under manager Nuno Espírito Santo.
For UK readers, this story matters because it highlights the power of football's new regulator and the accountability of club owners. The Independent Football Regulator was created after years of fan campaigns for more transparency in club ownership. Its preliminary inquiry into Sullivan could set a precedent for how the regulator handles cases of alleged misconduct by owners. The case also underscores how a club's governance can be opaque — the board was not informed of safeguarding measures for years. And for West Ham fans, the change in majority ownership could mean more financial stability: Kretinsky intends to inject capital to strengthen the squad, but the club's immediate future depends on avoiding further off-field distractions.
Q: Why did Daniel Kretinsky become West Ham's majority shareholder? Kretinsky increased his stake from 27% to 43% by buying shares from the Gold family. The move came after David Sullivan stepped down as co-chair and director following allegations of sexual misconduct. Kretinsky and Vanessa Gold said they wanted to protect the club's future and provide additional financing after relegation.
Q: What are the allegations against David Sullivan? Seven women have accused Sullivan of abusing his power and preying on them for sex, in some cases when they were in their late teens, according to a joint investigation by the Times and BBC Panorama. The allegations date back to the 1980s and 1990s. Sullivan categorically denies all claims and says he will take legal action against the BBC.
Q: What powers does the Independent Football Regulator have in this case? The IFR can force an owner to sell their shares if they do not meet the required standards of honesty and integrity. It has opened preliminary inquiries into Sullivan, and could compel him to divest his 38.8% stake. A nonexecutive director, Tara Warren, was recused from any potential investigation to avoid a conflict of interest, as she was a senior director of West Ham until February.
What happens next is uncertain on several fronts. The share purchase deal is subject to pre-emption rights and regulatory approvals, expected to be ratified in the coming weeks. Sullivan's future as a shareholder may be decided by the IFR's investigation. On the pitch, West Ham must rebuild under Nuno Espírito Santo to try to win promotion back to the Premier League. Off it, Kretinsky and Gold have pledged to stabilise the club, retain key players, and engage with fans — but the cloud of the allegations and the fallout from relegation will take time to lift.