Thetownend.com

SWINDON TOWN: Patey wants a bidding war
           
           


  SWINDON chairman Sir William Patey wants to engage two potential new owners in a bidding war to ensure the club is sold for the best deal possible.

           

http://www.thisisswindontownfc.co.uk/news/headlines/10172725.SWINDON_TOWN__Patey_wants_a_bidding_war/?ref=rss
           
           
           

Hmm, maybe its just me, not overly impressed with Patey in this article (if you take it at face value, though it could have been adver'd I suppose). Bidding war....biggest return....no more Martin or Hollands if a deal isn't done before loan expires...humph.

Was thinking the same Batch. Then I read the some of the comments on thisis. More worryingly I found myself agreeing with some of them.

Patey made a comment in his radio interview the other day that some Swindon fans didn't think he was the right man for the job. I'm personally not sure myself. Depends what his "job" is really. If its to sell the club then maybe he is.

One more thing - why has Black suddenly decided NOW is the time he wants out? Ok he's apparently been trying since the summer but we've still been spending money until the last week or so. Why sanction the signings of Ward, Hollands and Martin and then threaten to pull the plug completely. Just makes no sense to me.

I don't see anything wrong with what he said.

I started by not being terribly impressed by SWP, and things have gone downhill from there.  But to be fair (and I didn't realise this at the start of his tenure), his job is clearly to sell the club.  Once this has happened, SWP will be gone.  This Chairman may be more 'interim' than the last one - who paradoxically was properly titled 'Interim Chairman'.

We are not really meant to like SWP.  I just want him to get his job done now, as quickly as possible, and to ensure that the new owners have a realistic and viable plan for the club's future (that includes a ground redevelopment).  Get the sale completed, hand the club over, move on.

Spot on Ardiles....good post.

When Patey spoke to bbc wilts on his way to the dentist the other morning he didn't sound interested he just sounded like a complete twat.

As I said, maybe its just me, or maybe the way the article is written, but it felt like a "get the most money and get the hell out of dodge" statement. When I wanted nothing but reassurance!

Not sure why he made those noises to the press. I'm all for transparency, sometimes..

 

I explained in an earlier post....men with money are like kids in a sweet shop at time.

Bit like buying those Haeibo,look nice and tasty but after a while they start to make you feel sick.

He probably realised that football wasn't quite as fun as he would have hoped.

I kind of understand that - big boys toys and all that. I was just wondering if he had any actual, proper reasons. I guess not.

None at all....just another thing to tuck into his portfolio.

From a post I read on Twitter the other day Black with other investors is now starting some sort of law firm. Fingers in pies

Can't help wondering if there might be some Italians other than Paolo amongst the potential buyers

Thats a shit name for a law firm, to be fair...

I think the clue WRT to SWP role v JW is that JW interim or otherwise did it for nothing where as SWP is on £60k. Plus a bonus depending on the deal structure. Don't ask me how I know the bonus bit, I'm in sales, trust me that is how it works.

:D

strange name , it's probably all pie in the sky anyway. I hope he get's his just(ice) desserts

Quote from: OOH!  SHAUN TAYLOR on Today at 08:12:41
Stupid question time - Why exactly did Andrew Black buy the club in the first place? Don't get me wrong, I am truly, truly thankful he did, but what was ever in it for him? And what will he actually get out of it?

I'm sorry, but I can't quite grasp this.


If you go back to the dying embers of Diamond Mikes strangle hold on the Wills family, the consortium/investors call them what you like had a 3 year plan to get us up to the championship. Danny Wilson screwed up the season after Millwall, back to square one.

The season we got relegated should have been a promotion season, instead we have in effect been put back to a 5/6 year plan from the start if you like. Paolo has come in on a basis of another 3 year plan, hence 5-6 years however you look at it. The bottom line is this, had everything gone to plan we'd be in the championship but we're not.

Black has probably been honest in his reasons up to a point. The underlying fact is that he and the rest of them saw a money making opportunity with Wilson leading the charge, a quick return on investment and offski. Afterall these money men are exactly that money men, money makes money, simple as.

So Paolo has to start over again only the costings to their original business plan have been shredded by PDC and Big Phil. Remember Fitton would not or did not like or pay agents suddenly we have had to do a 180 here and it's costing us. As did not being on TV v Villa, going out of the QD Paint Trophy early and the FA Cup in the first round. Though as has come to light AB tried to sell the club in the summer so in the grand scheme those little financial set backs are more irritating.

If you thought the consortium/investors were here for the long run the you have been living in a false universe. Wise up folks, the next lot will not be any different.

As long as the club has sustainable finances and we go up the all should be rosy in the garden. It won't be i'll bet you it wob't be.

Earlier in the season I posted about ST costs next season and my worry about how we would finance ourselves playing amongst the big boys, you know what? Some of you laughed at me to the point of nearly taking the piss. AB has seen what I alluded to. Fair play to him and them for bailing us out and bank rolling the club so far. In short he can see what's coming over the horizon if he gives paolo enough to get us up and that my friends is a trip to the bank to far.

I think Paolo going public asking for more funds to get out of the 'Mbongo was the straw that broke the camels back with Black.

I heard privately back a few months ago that Black was disenchanted with life as owner and was trying to get in more investors to cover his rising costs and then he would ease out of the club passing control over to the new major investor.

Then Paolo coming out and saying he would personally fund any new signings was a kick in the teeth for Black, almost saying to him....you wont help the promotion push so I will help. In saying that Paolo is basically stating that the board are not 100% backing him so Black has come out and said he is not backing him because he is pulling out.

I also think that many of us guessed at the time that SWP was brought in for the job of using his contacts in the Middle East to find us new investment, this may have worked it may not have worked, only time will tell but either way the club have reigned in Paolos spending for the short term to try and stop the club losing more money in the transfer market before what Black thinks that it is getting out of hand.

Lets hope that whoever does come in is in it for the long run and not a flash in the pan and only in it to make money from the club relocating to new premises, like the last few (previous to Black) boards have been.

And if you thought they were here under the illusion they would make money off the back of a league 1 or 2 club then so are you

The way he's expressed that "there are a bunch of people who want to buy the club" as opposed to "we're looking for investors who may be interested" seems encouraging to me.

Hopefully it gets resolved quickly.

Bit of amateur financial thinking

Our income monthly must be approx £400k from gate receipts on its own - haven't got a clue about other income streams.

Wage bill reported as £250k monthly.

The difference must be anough to cover other costs as we have no bank loans or overdrafts.

So surely the only money AB must be putting in is for any signings. The club isn't dependant on him to keep it afloat month by month.

Or am I missing something here?

Never crossed my mind and I don't believe I alluded to that in my well thought out post. Try to do better than picking holes please. If you read it again you'll see that the promised land of the championship is the backbone of my post along with redevelopment,

A bidding war? Yeah right. The winner gets to fork out millions then has to keep forking out cash to see the club progress.

Stop blowing smoke up your own arse. It never read like that at all.

Name me one club in the Championship which turns a profit for the investors. Any investment in a football club, bar the top 5 in the prem is like pouring sand through a colander

Indeed. Fitton himself thought it may be possible to run at not-quite breakeven with a strategy of home grown keep 1 sell 1 youngsters. I think he conceded it actually might not be later on.

In fact Walsall are probably one of the few clubs that achieve near break even most seasons. Credit to them for maintaining league status while doing so.

edit: Just seen FBs follow up. It didn't read like that to me much either to be fair.

Instead of picking holes mate you put some thought into a post about our current situation. Their primary objective was to take a fucking basket case club turn it around with development and preferably promtion to the championship and fuck off as fast as possible after making some money, as indeed the next owners will try to do. I'm pretty much like every other STFC supporter and don't give a monkey's about other clubs debt problems and wether their owners have made money.

Quote: Name me one club in the Championship which turns a profit for the investors. Any investment in a football club, bar the top 5 in the prem is like pouring sand through a colander.

I can't because I do not have access to individual clubs financial accounts and the personal financial details of the owners thereof. So, I'll ask you something. Why do you think these people invest in clubs in the first place? As you know, in accountancy you can make money out of a loss and a loss out of a profit. You do not have to show a profit on the balance sheet to make money and that is why it is a lucrative industry and hence why these bods show up from nowhere with a scraf held up high proclaiming to be the clubs saviour. Put your money into savings and you'll be lucky to get 3% put it into a club and charge whatever interest rate you like on the loans to it, mortgage the season ticket sales to the bank and pocket the cash are just two ways money men make money out of clubs. Also another good wheeze is a cut of of transfer profits like Redknapp does and so on. Going back to your original question to me, none of them do on the face of it but you know that they do behind the scenes, so in essence all of them. I am happy for you to disagree so I'll leave it up to you to provide me with all the relevent financial details to carry this conversation on if you so wish. Enjoy todays game. 

Some clubs do make a profit/break even.

The money people will do their homework and will know more about running a football club than the rest of us out together. Of course everything has to go right, and that didn't happen for Black et al. WE made a profit one season with the current lot on board but relegation right royally fucked everything up.

Barnsley profit/break even. Google is your friend

Can't be bothered to search through the rest but Barnsley was the first on the list (alphabetical)

Complete bollocks

I bet, like me, you have been hailing them as our saviours for the last few years. And rightly so because that's exactly what they have been.

I understand that you are obviously very upset at Black's withdraw and I think this has jaundiced your views a little

Anyone expecting to "make a quick buck" out of STFC is quite frankly deluded, and not the astute business men that the consortium were, and indeed still are

I always got the impression the consortium took over with Black providing the financial supports for his mates, all of whom have cleared off now. Not surprised that he wants out, but the timing is very odd given recent suggestions of no money in January, money subsequently being given to finance permanent signing of Ward and extensions of Martin/Hollands and our recent form.

Burnley are in the black

Like I said instead of attacking my posts you take some to write something thought provoking and "Bollocks" says more about you than it does me if you have to resort to abuse to get a point accross, hey ho.

Yes.

No, been expecting it actually, SWP appointment was a givaway.

Depends on what you mean as a time frame for "quick buck" doesn't it? They are astute businessmen and that's why they (black) wants out, he's carrying the can after the others effectively bailed out.

I'm sure they thought we'd be in the championship now with money pouring in and development well underway.

Leeds were making a profit up until 2011. I don't know about after that though.

Thought they were in Claret and Blue.

As it stands, there is no chance to make any cash, we only take money on match days. I think potential buyers will want to look at development of the CG or a new stadium that can generate additional income and business.

History proves that there are too many brick Walls to break through to achieve this. Until somebody does manage to achieve the unachievable, we are stuck in a rut

anyone know how this might impact on the lease that is up for renewal?

Badoom tsch

Wednesday's last financial thingamywhat showed they made a profit of 15m in one season. There could well be others that I'm unaware of.

It can be done. Just takes the right plan, a wad of cash and perhaps a big slice of luck. (Like not getting relegated when promotion is the aim)

Hey Flashheart, are you looking at single seasons or trends? Just asking because there will always be clubs with one season profits, but didn't think there would be so many over say a 5 year span.

Fb's pretty much right about their objective, just a little cynical about the motive and/or how naive the Fitton consortium was. They took it on primarily as a challenge, both on the pitch and more so off it, to turn round a basket case as he quite rightly puts it. They thought they could do that, they thought they could have some fun doing that. The aim was Championship and a redeveloped ground, mainly so they could leave it self-funding and pass on to someone who'd be able to do the level of investment required to kick on from there.

They never expected to make money, certainly in the early years they expected to plough it in. They hoped to make good on some of those losses when they sold it on, but that did require a redeveloped CG as an asset. Black will know he's unlikely to achieve that now, hence the background wrangling about writing down debt so he can at least make it more attractive to sell it on.

So fb and fred are both right I think :)

Just what I can find really. Barnsley showed overall profit over a number of seasons, don't know about their overall balance. Burnley claims to be in the black overall.  Wednesday was only for one season and that 15m profit still leaves then heavily in the red overall but that shows a huge turnaround since Mandaric took over and more profits similar to that would see them in the black before long.

So like a special Olympics, everybody wins.


If Barnsley have had multiple years in the black it is interesting. Wonder how they managed it.  Yes they have a new ground, but last seasons average gate was 10,300 ish. So not massively different to our own, I think its achievable to match that if we went up. That said, is it going to be enough to provide sustainable Championship football. Can we ever achieve that without a willing benefactor?

Yes - the club loses £1m to £2m a season, which Black is covering at present.

SWP is knob!

Very special indeed

There is a difference between being in the black and making profit-being self sustaining. Lets not kid ourselves STFC will not make people money without a sideline development and i'm doubtful we made any profit for as long as i can remember. We can be someones plaything that they throw money at or maybe a self sustaining stuggling team going nowhere.

Other clubs ARE making profit. It can't be said it can't be done because it is being done.

It's not just about running profits and losses either though.

Look at Mandaric.... Wednesday were over 40m+ debt when he took over, how much of the debt he actually acquired I don't know. While it will be unreasonable to expect Wednesday to make 15M profit, or even any profit, every year there is definitely real potential for him to break even overall.

Not only will he have got his money back...... he will also still own the football club.

I know I've probably over simplified it but there's not a lot to go by.

Blackpool made a nice tidy profit and Oyston pocketed the lot!

Wednesday are a bit different given their fanbase size.

Barnsley are more comparable. As I said earlier I'd be interested in how they arrived at sustained near-profitability. Obviously they are struggling on the pitch, just like Bristol City who have spunked > £40M in 4 years (which shows pumping in money isn't the be all and end all).

Although debt has increased and profitability was achieved through player sales/wage reduction:

http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/yorkshire/82535-player-sales-help-barnsley-fc-score-small-profit

The Championship        :    75% of the clubs are significantly bigger than us in terms of support and branding (or history if you prefer) or in terms of massive 5 year parachute payments from the PL.  Not sure how we will attract players of the right calibre or how much long-term fascination a relegation dogfight with Posh and Barnsley and one or two basket case bigger clubs will hold for us.

New owners       :       will probably pay lip service to the Championship dream and a new stadium and sustainability but will be interested, on the back of STFC's status within the town, in planning gain for themselves, building work for their building companies, profits for their player agency companies before plonking us back into admin.

As far as I am aware, AB has done none of this so fair play to him!

It's interesting they have other parties interested in buying the club, there was interest back in October also. I wonder how much a debt free club the size of Barnsley would for for? Quite a bit I would imagine, no doubt the exit strategy would be a strong motive for many investors.

Nice to see in that article that buying a football club is like buying a house  :)

As long as the new owners / investors are here for the good of the club, ok we all know that most will see the potential of a ground redevelopment or a move away and see that they can make money but we will hopefully not just be sold to the first person that waves a few quid in the air.

We also dont want any new owners splitting the football club and the ground into seperate companies so profits from a new ground can help the football club and not line investors pockets.

I also hope we can keep away the likes of Ken Bates and people like the Venky's that obviously have no clue about football and should have stuck to their chickens

Whilst I understand the concerns regarding the potential motives of the future owners, you could argue they couldn't be much worse than the Black consortium who have; increased our debts by £5m, failed to redevelop the stadium and then pulled the plug mid season and threatened administration.

Unless we find someone who is rich and mad that wants to piss away their money on the club, the chances are it will be someone else looking to make a quick buck, failing and then leaving the club in even deeper shit.

On the face of it, we're in the same division we were at the time of the takeover in 2007 - and I am sure that, at that time, the consortium fronted by Andrew Fitton would have envisaged that by 2013 we would be a Championship level club playing in a redeveloped/relocated stadium.  But that is simplistic in the extreme, because it ignores that:

• we were on our way out of business in 2007;
• crowds/engagement with the local community are well up on what they were in 2007;
• the football is better than it was in 2007; and
• importantly, the debt - which I agree has increased - is soft debt.  We do not owe the taxman, or any other external bodies, a penny.

The task of selling the club in 2013 should be somewhat easier than it was 6 years ago.

@SamMorshead_SA: It's my understanding that one of the parties who originally discussed taking over at Town has withdrawn interest #stfcadver

Sam Morshead @SamMorshead_SA

It's my understanding that one of the parties who originally discussed taking over at Town has withdrawn interest

...and then there were 6.

Yes, you could characterise the Fitton/Wray/Black consortium that way, but you'd have to be a bit of a dick or have a massive axe to grind - that's the most incredibly one-eyed summary I've ever read.

Anyone who did make that arguement is quite frankly clueless

To be fair jonnys comment could be true. Time will tell. Flogging the club and  the true reasons for doing so are not fully known. Something deffo not right though imo.

I think the reasons are pretty self-evident - three friends got in it together, it didn't work out, now the one bankrolling it all is left holding the baby and it's an expensive headache he can do without. But even if "time will tell" on the reasons for wanting out, jonny's assessment was an incredibly myopic summary of their time in charge.

Yarrrp

I'm sure relegation was never on the agenda and threw a spammer in the works, among some other things.

A spammer? So Andrew Black's behind all those dodgy emails? The bastard!

Yep, fucking spammers. The scourge of football club consortia.

I hope it's that simple. Still raises questions though. Why sell up something that's moving forward? Why not get other friends involved and keep the club? Is it anything to do with ground redevelopment or sbc not playing ball? Etc, etc.  

Because Black was never the prime mover in terms of the football side. That was never his main interest, he was the backer. They've turned the business round as far as they can without the ground redevelopment (although that stalling probably doesn't help) and he's got no real interest in the football, his mates have fucked off/fallen out with him, where's the fun in it for Black? Just a money-pit and a headache he can do without. Yeah, maybe if the redevelopment was going full steam ahead, there'd be more reason for him to stick around, but as it is, he's got no incentive to stick around.

They've rescued a basket case that was on the brink, set it back on the straight and narrow and if their time is finally up will leave us in fantastic shape. Worth a vote of thanks in my eyes. Certainly doesn't merit the snide jonny posted.

i thought it was said yesterday he was leaving for health reasons , depending on how long this has been causing him issues  ( at least since the summer ) he obviously just want s out as soon as possible

Stress is a health reason I suppose.

sure is , ive taken many a week off work with it  :beach: . I not sure whats wrong with Mr Black tho

I still wonder why he couldn't carry on like he did previously and bring in others to front the board.

The difference between a profit and a loss at this level is selling a player for big money.

I wonder what brought on the urgency. I know he wanted out in the summer, but I can't quite see why he sanctioned the budget only to pull the plug. I say pull the plug, I've still no idea what that really means. Are all our permanent players to budget (money in the bank) and therefore we'd be OK with just those players for the remainder of the season even if he did walk? Or what?

no idea? I share your confusion.far too much we don't know for me to make any kind of guess to what is going on. We can only speculate imo. I hope pauld has it right

Depends what our income levels are. We have 3 weeks now without a home game. That can help in terms of the wage bill.

Going back to the original article, I'm uneasy with Patey's desire to see a bidding war.

Surely the aim has to be finding the most suitable new owner (paying a fair price), not the one who has a few extra shekels.

Naive?

Or the aim is to simply try and net Black the most money possible from any sale?

Indeed, but he wants out ASAP. The longer a bidding war goes on, the longer Black ceases to put cash into the club and the greater possibility of administration.

Coca fola is often the giver of irrelevant eastern european news, but in this instance is BANG on the money. Don't look too much into what clubs do what in one specific year. Even our year of profit was a Simon cox fueled anomaly

Patey is their to represent black end of. A big part of the buyout will be how much of the debt the new owners take on as this equate to how much black and co get back. So a bidding war would suit Patey and black but not Swindon. The more money it costs the new owners the less there could be to reinvest back into the club. Sod Patey. I can't say Afghanistan worked out great so I got no confidence in Patey getting this right. And to think he walked out onto our pitch giving it the big one waving, w****r

Yep the mess in Afghanistan is his fault

Staggering

 :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:

[url width=200 height=150]http://i.imgur.com/doD2W.gif[/url]

Fair play. That's the funniest thing I've ever read in my life.

It really is a gem, I just had to read through it again.

It's good to laugh better that than crying.  Lets hope the ownership if the club is sorted ASAP. what's this about debt being paid back in 2015, that could be a tricky period for us. I think paolo is the only 1 taking sense and giving me hope as he normally does not bother with the politics and says it how it is. He seems to be very positive about potential bidders and excited about 1. Lets hope this is concluded in a non typical swindon fashion and goes smoothly.

Maybe he has a point? Afghanistan isn't exactly a success is it? And the bloke has nothing to do with football. Some of you seem to have alot of faith in things we have no idea about. Jury is out for me

I don't think that has anything whatsoever to do with Patey.

In all fairness the SWP, he was an ambassador, basically doing what he's told by the foreign office and No.10 in conjunction with our NATO and European allies, a figurehead if you like. Pretty much what he's doing now. Black says jump, SWP says how high? A messenger and mediator pretty much.

Don't you repress Arriba's views. This is exactly how Nazi Germany started.

;)

Omg from administration to Shrewsburys bitterness to a debate on Afghanistan. About administration anyone?

you were the one to mention Afghanistan, numbnuts.

:Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:

Yes I mentioned it but if I had wanted to debate wether Patey was responsible for Afghanistan I would have started another thread.

Numbnuts back at ya

In fairness, you said you had no confidence in Patey on the basis that "I can't say Afghanistan worked out great". On that basis, it's a fair debate to have isn't it?

Administration anyone?

No thanks.

In fairness and for the record and just for those who take things literally. Patey was not responsible for Afghanistan but put in his job as puppet for those he represented and that is why I have no confidence in him as he is a pupet put in place to represent mr black and has no interested in our club that is what worrys me He just wants to get the best for mr black.

Why are stupid people allowed opinions? I think there should be a minimum IQ limit before you are allowed to have one. Say 125.

For our amusement?

this would be a quiet forum then, and I include myself within those banned

Not really selling your skills as an author to me yet.

Rules you out then ;)

I would be a tad amazed if there are enough bidders for a 'bidding war' - I hope to stand corrected  :-[

Well at the last count there were 6.

You never know.  Depending on the number of interested parties, I believe that a 'bidding kerfuffle' should be perfectly possible.

Hardly.

:fishing:

I love the idea of a "bidding kerfuffle" :)

A bidding war would be rubbish – means a buyer would pay a higher price, therefore less inclined to invest and more likely to remove money from the club.
I hope Black shows some social responsibility when choosing who he sells to.

:nod:

I'm hoping this simply means the bidding war will be how much of the £13m they will be willing to pay Black back and how little they're expecting him to write off. Might just be wishful thinking though.