This stinks (to me at least)

[The_Plagiarist]

Stop talking bollocks The_Plagiarist,

No need for that Todd old son :evil:

[The_Plagiarist]

I don't think that, but until he takes over the club and runs it (if ever) then we won't ever know.

Isn't the Fans Consortium made up of other backers (supposedly)? I don't know their identities either.

The FC was made up of Mike Wilks, Phil Emmell, Power and the Trust, as you know as well as anyone.

[TalkTalk]

FWIW I'm with the Plagiarist.

My personal opinion is that it is indeed all time buying horse shit and it is all going to go horribly wrong  

[Simon Pieman]

I don't think that, but until he takes over the club and runs it (if ever) then we won't ever know.

Isn't the Fans Consortium made up of other backers (supposedly)? I don't know their identities either.

The FC was made up of Mike Wilks, Phil Emmell, Power and the Trust, as you know as well as anyone.

I seem to remember talk of other backers from the city? Anyway, it does seem that people have short memories. When the FC was initially created nobody knew their identities, it was all secret. It was only when the club asked the FC themselves who the backers were that it became apparent who the main backers are and rightly so.

I don't like this cloak and daggers situation as much as the next man and it does seem we'll only ever know what happens once the deal's done, which is shit. However, the other consortium which is now undertaking due diligence has not come forth with explanations as to who they are. Maybe it's them and not the club people should be unhappy with.

[Colin Todd]

Stop talking bollocks The_Plagiarist,

No need for that Todd old son :evil:

Well it needed to be said. I appreciate that you are very anti board, but its pretty clear from recent events that there IS an investor in negotiations with the club. Evidence of this includes:

1. The investor apparantly beeing at both friendlies so far
2. Sturrock REPEATEDLY saying he has met them.
3. The appointment of Brevitt

If you still dont think that there is an investor then I think your deluded and need to remove the Bill Power blinkers.

[stfctownenda]

I am a bit split on this and can see points to both sides, if we look at the facts its easy to see why people have there beliefs:

1. The boards failure to name or deliver any of the numerous investors they have discussed this season.

2. The CVA is due and this would be a good way to bide time with the creditors.

But then if we look at things the other way, I feel there must be an investor there as:

1. Sturrock said he has met him and I do not align him with the board he has never lied to us.

2. The Brevitt appointment would be bizarre if there was no investor there as it would be throwing more money away as a smoke screen and I don't think the current regime want to lose money with pointless appointments more concerned with lining there own pockets.

3. It seems the 'investors' are being consulted over many decisions Pook's contract, transfer budgets etc so I think there must be someone there.

Main issue we all have is they refuse to publically state there intentions or what they intend to invest.  I hope the media pressure continues and that answers are forthcoming in the near future.  In the meantime I don't think it does any of us any good to either insult the negative people or the positive people we will find out hopefully sometime soon what the future holds.

[pauld]

I don't think that, but until he takes over the club and runs it (if ever) then we won't ever know.

Isn't the Fans Consortium made up of other backers (supposedly)? I don't know their identities either.

The FC was made up of Mike Wilks, Phil Emmell, Power and the Trust, as you know as well as anyone.

I seem to remember talk of other backers from the city? Anyway, it does seem that people have short memories. When the FC was initially created nobody knew their identities, it was all secret.

That's not actually true, Si. When the FC was first created it consisted of the Trust and Mike Wilks. Together, we were tasked with attracting backers who could secure the future of the club. Obviously our first port of call there was always going to be Bill and Phil who had an existing interest in the club and thanks to considerable hard work and persuasion (mostly from Mike) that this was a viable project they wanted to get involved with, Bill and Phil were persuaded to back the FC. They weren't involved from the outset so it's totally wrong to say that "When the FC was initially created nobody knew their identities, it was all secret" as they weren't involved at that stage.

It was only when the club asked the FC themselves who the backers were that it became apparent who the main backers are and rightly so.

Again, not quite true. The timing of the disclosure was to some extent provoked by the club's idiotic "Americans" statement, but it was something that was underway anyway and would have been revealed around that time irrespective of what the club said, if only to remove the fog of suspicion that we could be "getting into bed" with dodgy investors/Kassam/Di Stefano or that there actually was no substance behind the whole thing at all and that the "mystery backers" subsequently turned out not to be able to provide the backing required. Fans were quite rightly asking those kind of questions around that time as they are now, which is why it was right to disclose who the backers were then and why people are nervous the board will not disclose who they are now. Let's face it, the track record does not inspire confidence

[Simon Pieman]

Ok thanks for clearing up the technicalities Paul.

I'm under no illusions that the club has played games and could still be playing them. I just think that we can all be a bit repetitive and unconstructive at times.

[DiV]

Sturrocks clearly getting pissed off, he's gonna walk soon I reckon  

[herthab]

You really think so Rich? I'm a bloody investor for fucks sake, we all are. It doesn't mean we're going to pay the CVA though does it? Personally I see this whole facade as another bullshit time buying exercise for that cunt Diamandis. I've not believed any of this shite from the start, and it still looks like a big scam to me. I hope I'm wrong but I can't see any positives coming from anywhere at the moment. Not one.

Erm, no we're not.

We're customers.

We pay x amount to watch the club we support.

I don't think it's a question of whether there are new investors, it's pretty obvious there is. What the real questions are, are how much are they going to invest and what they expect as a return for that investment. Assuming they're still interested after they've completed due diligence.

Sturrock's frustrated and rightly so, but I can't see him walking and even if he wanted to, the club he goes to would have to be willing to stump up quite a large amount of cash in compensation.

[Richard4acre]

im not sure he'll walk, but if the day comes that he does then i dont believe it would be unjustified for full scale protests to occur. It would be at such a stage that the board have lost the confidence of the fans, the council and now its own employees. If the was ever a time to protest then that would be it.

Before any of you mention the Dennis Wise going to Leeds situation i believe he'd have left regardless of any aggravation on the behalf of STFC he's just a little glory shite who fucked up and is now worse of getting leeds relegated than if he had got Swindon promoted.

[janaage]

The thing about Dennis Wise is when offered the leeds job he must have thought, "best" case scenario is I go to leeds have a stormer, get to play offs and who knows.

Worse case scenario we go down, Swindon go up, but what have I lost?  Nothing as the best I could do at Swindon is get promoted and end up in League 1.  Therefore he was in a no lose situation, especially with Ken Bates in charge at leeds.  

This season would be where he can only make a loss, if we do well and leeds do crap  and by that time it wouldn't really matter.

[WorcesterRed]

Why the need for all the secrecy though - I am genuinely asking for what reason?

Someone posted the other day about Man U, Man C, Liverpool - all are much bigger clubs/takeovers but the identities were know much earlier in the process and they stated their intentions BEFORE the takovers. Then again, this is STFC I suppose.



So why the cloak and dagger stuff - something doesn't smell quite right to me. Don't forget, while most people are hoping for the 'miracle once in a lifetime investment/takeover', we could actually turn out to be in a WORSE situation that we are with the current muppets in charge. During the last 15 years or so, has there been one genuine board to run the club for the fans rather than seeing STFC as a vehicle in which to make their millions?
 :shock:

I have stated before that I have no issue with people who want a return on their money - nobody throws good money after bad - but it seems that through the greed of various individuals, we find ourselves where we are currently, through lack of investment in various parts of the business.

£1.5 million in 'admin expenses' should tell you what you need to know.

[janaage]

Manchester and Newcastle Uniteds both had to go public though due to stockmarket rules didn't they???

Not sure about the others.  I agree about Town though there's no excuse for it especially after all the shit the board were spouting back in December.

[Luci]

We could smoke them out of the CG?