New beginnings - 25% Truth, 80% Bollocks

[The Artist Formerly Known as Audrey]

Maybe you’re right. Doing my head in!

Yep. Power and Curran mentioned as having called in the debenture in the AB

[Oaksey Moonraker]

The debenture is a secured debt, a bit like the mortgage on your house.

It looks like what happened here is Power/Curran offered Black £1M for the £2.95M along the lines 'You ain't ever getting that money back or the club might go into admin'.

Black accepts the offer and Power/Curran enforce it because they know it's a secured debt and would legally get priority in admin. It could have been an insurance policy for them to make a quick £2M maybe when the court case was going against them.

It would be like your nice bank selling your mortgage debt to a loan shark. You think you have 25 years to repay it and the loan shark says I want the money next week or I repossess your house.

[STFC_Manc]

Can someone who understands this stuff explain how you can buy £2.95m of debentures for £1m and then call the full amount in at zero notice?

What is likely to have happened is that Andrew Black + Business Partner had a £2.95m debenture that they were unlikely to ever get any money from, unless STFC got into the championship...

Then Power?/AC? offered them a smaller amount but guaranteed, which they accepted.  The terms of the Debenture have been triggered, it looks like by the sale of the club and this meant they could and did ask for repayment of the full amount.

Black could have got all his money back but would of had to put STFC into admin and even then it would be unlikely he would have got it all back.

[Bennett]

For me there continue to be inconsistencies between previous statements and the AB/Trust statements, and what common sense would suggest a successful businessman would do. The AB minutes feels to me as if it's a revision of history to fit the narrative that Clem is our hero.

I hope the Trust are going to continue with this line of questioning

[Nomoreheroes]

For some reason I have this going through my mind when reading this thread:

[Pookemon]

Yes - Standing's wife has an interest in a business set-up for Louie Barry.

But Louie Barry has fuck all to do with anything.   Other than sharing a surname with Gareth they are not related in any way.

Are you sure you aren't getting confused with Louise Barry, Gareth's wife?

[Batch]

yeah, the AB is explicit, the trust statement mentioned 'previous owner' when I read it

We now believe that the obligation to repay the debt had been triggered by the previous owners of the Club

Was as close as the statement got

[Bennett]

yeah, the AB is explicit, the trust statement mentioned 'previous owner' when I read it

Was as close as the statement got

I know it's a small point, but why is there conjecture from the Trust when the AB notes make it explicit that it was the previous owners?

[Mooneyraker]

I know it's a small point, but why is there conjecture from the Trust when the AB notes make it explicit that it was the previous owners?

I thought that was odd. If one was being a cynic you'd say that Clem knows he only has to chuck the Power/Curran names in there to get the 'he saved our club' frothers onside.

This whole charade is so depressing. Nothing will come of tonight. There will be no gotcha or smoking gun moment and we will just stumble on for the foreseeable future with this bullshit hanging over us.

I do think it will be good for fans to see the whites of Clem's eyes if he is forced to say that Michael Standing isn't involved again.

I also hope he is pulled up on the statement that the club put out on 17th August: "While most of the money has been repaid and the majority of the shares reclaimed a small minority shareholding remains to these two individuals. They have had no interest in running the club and want no influence over the club whatsoever."

Both of those sentences need unpacking.

One thing this last month has put to bed is the 'Clem is a good guy' narrative. What he did to Rob Angus was absolutely shameful.

[JoeMezz]

This whole charade is so depressing. Nothing will come of tonight. There will be no gotcha or smoking gun moment and we will just stumble on for the foreseeable future with this bullshit hanging over us.

Honestly, I'd advise tuning out of it. Not a lot we can do and the more you fret (not you personally) the worse it makes you feel.

[Mooneyraker]

Honestly, I'd advise tuning out of it. Not a lot we can do and the more you fret (not you personally) the worse it makes you feel.

Agreed. It is clear that Clem (or 'Clem') has no plans to ever come clean. At least the scales have fallen from the Trust's eyes at long last, which hopefully takes the burden of driving the Mystery Machine off the fans.

[UTR]

How are we still losing that much money with our high gates, severe cost cutting and doing everything on the cheap? What’s the plan then for “sustainability”.

[stfcjack]

How are we still losing that much money with our high gates, severe cost cutting and doing everything on the cheap? What’s the plan then for “sustainability”.

Not too sure but paying off Brand and Morris couldn’t have been cheap, also I know a significant amount has been spent on the CG this summer.

[Frigby Daser]

How are we still losing that much money with our high gates, severe cost cutting and doing everything on the cheap? What’s the plan then for “sustainability”.

This is important. The reason we’re so uneasy about the cabal running the club (other than the inconsistencies in the story) is that the likes of Z Austin, Keily and Co are not here out of their love of football or the club. They are here for money (which would normally be fine, a lot of owners are the same - but if they are taking out a disproportionate amount for a club of our means, it is not right). The absence of an explanation of Austin’s role, and the fact that Michael Standing’s lawyer has a shareholding, may not be entirely disconnected from the disproportionate losses that the club seems to be making. We do not seem to be benefitting in any way from increased gates. Are those individuals the ones filling their pockets? My questions would be:

* what remuneration, direct or indirect, does Zavier Austin receive from STFC, or any company in the group, or in any way connected with his involvement at the club? (If the answer to this is nothing, then what on earth is Z Austin doing here?)

* the same for Keily. If his business is as a data provider, does he receive any cut of any future transfer fee for players he has recommended? (If yes, this somewhat undermines the model).

* if we are cutting costs, and increasing revenue, how are we losing 500k - 1m? Is it 500k or 1m? Those losses can’t be explained by increased utility bills…

[theakston2k]

The problem Clem has now is that no matter what he says tonight or going forwards nothing he says can be believed, his credibility is dust.

He’s now a proven liar who can’t even lie consistently, associated with murky characters and likes to manipulate people/organisations to do his bidding for him. He’s now undoubtedly a dodgy owner following in the long term trend of dodgy owners being attracted to STFC.