 | Forum
Reply | Investment update
at 11:56 21 Apr 2024
I'd be interested to know what "games" people are playing. Some people would rather deal with rumours than fact wouldn't they Kel, or whatever suits their agenda. Its a real shame people don't have a mind of their own. |
| Forum
Reply | Investment update
at 09:24 21 Apr 2024
Those 3 were still poor deals at the time. We should have cashed in on the hype around Adshead and particularly Matheson (yet still didn't get 7 figures). Yes they have struggled since but who could have forseen that when we were selling them. Baah should have been offered a new contract several months before he was and instead of getting half a million we ended up with just over 6 figures. Not good deals! And since then, similar could be said for Morley and perhaps Beesley but cash restraints, even though not visible to us at the time, could well have played a part.
Moral of the story is that we have always sold too cheap and now hopefully that will not need to happen |
| Forum
Reply | The Ogden Family
at 15:59 25 Mar 2024
Excellent news on the face of it. Should stabilise us at least initially, allowing for better decision making and some sort of reset. Hopefully changes at the top from within are high on the agenda as the club needs to be run right going forwards. Fingers crossed. It's brightening up (Carling advert style)!!! |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 19:47 12 Mar 2024
I believe so, but it's the current ones that have took us to the brink and still don't appear to be doing right by us even at this late stage.
I just hope WSH have their own people, if and when the deal does go through |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 16:46 12 Mar 2024
"it’s a fairly safe assumption that he will do the deal that’s best for the future of the club"
🤣🤣🤣 |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 15:13 12 Mar 2024
Correct, similar to 3 years ago. There would have been golden shares purchased which would have given the investor around 40-45% of the club (can't remember the exact %'s) for around £2.5m which would have gone directly into the club. Individual shareholders would then have had to be bought out for them to reach 51%.
The position is much worse now of course, hence the threat of liquidation. We are selling 90% of the club for £1.98m (hopefully more), with around £1.2m effectively owed out next day, and the potential for the new investor to withdraw the remaining £800k, whilst owning a ground valued at £4m-£6m! We are certainly much worse off than we were, but what's gone has gone. Just need to make sure we have long term investment as the £800k remaining will last a matter of 2 or 3 months.
Proposed capital investment is all well and good but the benefits will take several years to come to fruition. How will the club be funded in the meantime? Lots to consider/factor in |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 14:49 12 Mar 2024
Thanks Judd and apologies if I got my wires crossed. It was a conversation I was listening to and must have misinterpreted.
Many thanks for the clarity about the interested parties.
Despite my views about the current board, I do think the release of shares was just as necessary for the club, as it was 3 years ago. I'm just not comfortable, along with many others, that the best interests of the club are at the forefront, and even if there wasn't a huge conflict of interest, the current board have shown that they do not have the knowledge or expertise to run the club, let alone find the best buyer for us. |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 14:09 12 Mar 2024
Apologies Briels, you are correct of course. SG has the casting vote in the event of a tie. In reality SG has two directors in his back pocket though (as long as the hospitality is guaranteed for one of them!!), and so that's 3 of the 6 voting in SG's proposed favour, and with him having the casting vote, it will go in favour of SG as opposed to what the Shareholders actually want.
If a meeting of all Shareholders can't take place, why not say the top 50 at least that can decide on the clubs future/investment. I for one wouldn't be in that top 50 but at least there would be a bit more democracy to who takes over our club.
Unfortunately, I do not trust SG alone to make the best decision for the club based on past and present experience.
You may know the answer to this also please, and I may be going in circles (apologies if I am), if the Trust are to be introduced to the potential investor(s), why not the rest of the clubs shareholders? |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 13:30 12 Mar 2024
I thought TFC at the time but it could have been another. He didn't go as far as disclosing any further info.
What was apparent is that when he was quizzed as to why George (a non-shareholder and no longer Trust chairman at the time) was given information about WSH (which ultimately led to the Trust voting through the proposals made at the EGM), yet this same information had not been shared with actual shareholders, he didn't have an answer!
We, as shareholders, do not have a say! The Directors run the club and make the decisions. SG has two votes as Chairman and so effectively he runs the club. If he doesn't like the answer, he forces them out and threatens legal action. As shareholders, we can change who runs the club on our behalf but must call another EGM to do so before the club is sold and the majority of shares are owned by someone else |
| Forum
Reply | Exclusive period with WSH
at 11:47 12 Mar 2024
Speaking to RK after the AGM, there was an investor that, if it came to fruition, would "blow WSH's proposal out of the water". It sounds like WSH's offer is not the best one on the table (also confirmed by another former Director on the evening) but the one most suited to SG. Unfortunately, whether or not we like it, SG runs the club, and will continue to do so if he gets his way, which is looking all the more likely with each passing day |
| Forum
Reply | Nicholas brayne
at 08:20 9 Mar 2024
Agree. Would you vote to get rid of the full board? How do we call an EGM, does it have to be shareholders with a minimum number of shares, or a certain number of shareholders? |
| Forum
Reply | All 5 resolutions passed
at 21:29 7 Mar 2024
How do we now remove the current board to make sure the correct buyer is found? The conflict of interest is too big to be left to the current board with promises of directors loans being repaid and SG and TP continuing to steer the ship (or aircraft!) that they have almost fully destroyed already. |
| Forum
Reply | EGM + statement
at 15:46 21 Feb 2024
He rejected several interested parties the day he walked through the door in favour of "fan owned", "fan led" because he knew fans would lap it up. Aswell as Morton House, there were 3 or 4 others (Martin Halsall being one of the ones in the public domain) seriously interested in purchasing a majority stake in the club before the barriers were errected by Simon and his band of merry men! In 2021 Graham Morris pushed SG forward, amongst others, thinking that finding another £200k per year would help us survive. That thinking was well outdated and more akin to the 90's! |
| Forum
Reply | EGM + statement
at 08:48 21 Feb 2024
Cash is key to any business, even profitable ones, but when SG decided to repay a low interest loan in excess of £300k, the writing was on the wall. Clear that he had no business sense! |
| Forum
Reply | EGM + statement
at 08:29 21 Feb 2024
Wouldn't trust SG with any vote that he has asked for, and haven't trusted him since the day he walked through the door. Unfortunately there were two people to blame for bringing in someone with no credentials on running a business let alone a football club. One of those people is still miraculously a Director of the club, who has helped oversee some of the most catastrophic decisions in the clubs history including handing the keys over to 'the ego' himself.
Do I thank SG for fighting off all potential investment (not just MH), NO. Do I thank him for putting in £566k of his family's money that he is desperate to recoup, NO, he has cost the club significantly more financially by his actions which now threatens the clubs very existence.
Despite COVID and huge losses as a result the club was on a sound financial footing, until he stripped the club of all cash and got rid of anyone with any experience in running the club, actions only taken to feed the ego.
Well done SG, I applaud you 👏. One man's ego has been allowed to destroy our club, our history, our institution!
Where do we go from here, i just don't know. The horse has bolted and is long gone |
| Forum
Reply | Goldbond
at 12:27 19 Feb 2024
Unfortunately the Goldbond was loss making, at least in the last couple of years before it was closed.
The club would have had to have it as a 'loss leader' if it thought the benefit of having it would create enough goodwill and money elsewhere to sustain it. Sometimes this is an option, for instance with matchday programmes, but then profit will be made from the matchday experience as a whole so still worthwhile IMO. |
| | Down_the_Ale
|
Site Scores| Forum Votes: | 3 | | Comment Votes: | 0 | | Prediction League: | 0 | | TOTAL: | 3 |
|
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.