club statement on official website

[sonic youth]

not read the statement properly yet - printed it off to make some notes on it, nerrrrrrd - but the accusations relating to potentially libellous comments were a little over the top. undoubtedly there are a few individuals who are very outspoken about diamandis, but these are the minority.

[red macca]

im not saying this is my opinion but what if and its a big IF that it becomes clear that this is actually power and devlins fault.i only say this as its a scenario no one else has mentioned yet.the board have been poor in recent years but this might not actually be their fault

[larwood]

Have to say its good to see the board issuing a statement at last.One of the problems with the board is the lack of communication between them and us fans,which means rumours start and we believe the worse.
I really do think now that Power has pulled out due to his injuries,to me that makes sense,the poor bloke has probably reassessed his life and figured he can't be bothered with the hassle,not good for us but understandable.

[STFC Bart]

If you believe it more fool you. Turn up to tomorrows meeting i urge you

[Bushey Boy]

is bart meeting the wycombe massive tomoz?

[Boeta]

Have to say its good to see the board issuing a statement at last.One of the problems with the board is the lack of communication between them and us fans,which means rumours start and we believe the worse.
I really do think now that Power has pulled out due to his injuries,to me that makes sense,the poor bloke has probably reassessed his life and figured he can't be bothered with the hassle,not good for us but understandable.

and the reasoning behind the sacking the most effective person behind the scenes (other than devlin) in this shambles of a club, other than close ties to devlin and power?

[sonic youth]

Right, so a few things worth mentioning:

"Since the accident there has been no direct contact between the two parties"

The lack of communication was something which many have alluded to, although usually combined with reasons for a fallout.

"Mike Diamandis [...] was taking a step back from being involved with the day-to-day management of the club"

Why has it taken so long for the club to admit that Diamandis has an involvement at the club?

"Several months earlier a memorandum was circulated to the Chief Executive (Devlin) and all senior managers clearly detailing what level of decisions and financial obligations could be undertaken, without prior board approval [...] the club are currently rigorously conducting internal inquiry into these matters"

This would suggest, to me at least, that they're blaming the financial overspend on Devlin. How is this possible when Wills and Gray brokered the Ince deal?

"[...] there are a small minority of individuals who have their personnel (sic) grievances with Mr Diamandis and are putting into the public domain inaccurate and deliberately misleading reports [...]. The Board would urge these individuals to stop misleading the fans of STFC in this way"

Presumably, this is aimed at those who clearly have issues with MD - stfcwoodie and possibly Bart? - and by the sounds of it, there is a veiled legal threat in that extract.

“Bill Power’s lawyer also expressed his understanding of Bill Power’s investment in STFC, which differed from the board’s understanding”

How difficult can it be to identify whether or not an investment was made in the form of shares or not? Again, this is another rumour, which had previously been doing the rounds, and the club have now confirmed. I’m not an expert on financial matters, especially business ones, but if Power has shares in the club he would have a certificate/proof would he not?

”The Board, however, cannot condone the personal insults, slurs and attacks that have been directed towards its members and advisors in recent days. Sir Seton Wills has expressed his personal concern and should the health [...] be compromised in any way then Sir Seton will have to consider his continued financial support for the club, the consequences of which are obvious

Once again, this is open to interpretation but it does seem like a message to the fans along the lines of ‘shut up’. On the other hand, it’s fair enough for SSW to put his personal circumstances first and foremost and some of the stuff that’s been posted has been bordering on libelous.

“One such meeting with a potential investor took place this morning. As has been the case in the past, Mike Diamandis will be at the forefront of these discussions”

I’ve known this since earlier this weekend and to my knowledge, the investor named is a personal friend of James Wills – so it’s hardly external investment along the lines of Power. Whether or not this individual will be making up the deficit, I’m unsure. However, I do think it’s safe to assume that this investor will not have the sort of impact or finances required to take the club forward in the manner, which Power had the ability to do, and had begun to do before his sudden departure.

“[...] trying to find a consensus with the borough council so that STFC can move to a 21st century stadium”

If Diamandis was involved in the submission of the last set of plans, then that is hardly something to be proud of. Anyone who has seen a copy of the plans will know that they resemble a GCSE Geography project and not a worthwhile proposal to take the club forward.

“The Board urges these individuals who have been so vocal in their opinions of Mr Diamandis to stop hiding behind the anonymity of the internet, make themselves known to the board and enter into constructive dialogue”

It’s safe to assume who that extract was aimed at, will you be communicating with the club Bart? It’s equally safe to assume that stfcwoodie won’t be doing that. Again, this almost reads like a threat of legal action. We’ve all seen firsthand how quickly anti-board/Diamandis posts disappear on the Adver forum.

Overall, the statement answers few questions and poses more many more:

Why has Diamandis’ involvement been hidden so far?
Why did the board not make an effort to contact Power or Devlin during his absence?
Why has the club allowed this overspend to happen despite knowing that signing Ince – a luxury signing – would take us over the league specificed 60% wage cap?
Why is there no mention of the sacking/redundancy of Linda Birrell?
What role will Mike Diamandis’ future son-in-law James Lambert be taking on at the club in the forthcoming weeks, whether Devlin and/or Sullivan return to work?

The statement itself comes across as condescending and hostile, a very bad idea when dealing with people who are undoubtedly more passionate for the club than the board. It’s also rather poorly written, which is unfortunate.

I urge people not to take this statement as gospel, there is far too much at stake to simply rest easy because the club have moved to release a statement. Whilst I accept that everybody wants to see some proof and will remain skeptical until such time that events become clear, this is not a black and white area.

I know some of those who will be at the meeting with the board tonight, so it should be interesting to discover what comes of these discussions over the next few days.

[Batch]

How difficult can it be to identify whether or not an investment was made in the form of shares or not? Again, this is another rumour, which had previously been doing the rounds, and the club have now confirmed. I’m not an expert on financial matters, especially business ones, but if Power has shares in the club he would have a certificate/proof would he not?

Pretty sure contracts can be verbal yet legally binding. Maybe this is where the club are coming from. I'm no expert but the law isn't always clear cut. Either way not protecting the investment through legal contract is an expensive mistake, IF that is what happens.

I'd still like to know (Can somebody meeting with the club tonight please ask.)
a) why the board didn't ask to see the Ince even figures before the deal was done. Given our history (Razor) surely they should have looked at budget regardless of who signed off on it. We all asked "can we afford it?"
2) Why they stated Sandy G and James Wills took credit for the deal (through Holts statement), only to seemingly blame Devlin.

Not that I think this is what happened but the only way I can see the club having a point is if the deal was done by Devlin long before it was announced (pre-crash) and the club had to scramble around covering it or get their arses sued for not fulfilling a contract.

[Frasier3]

Para 3 says "When Bill Power provided funds at the end of last season, it was the first time in 5 years that funds have been raised externally from someone new rather than the existing board."

So as Diamandis is not on the Board and never has been, is this an admission that he has not raised any funds other than from existing board members.

Para 6- An understanding was arrived at with regards the forthcoming seasons expenditure. Mike Diamandis was not present as he was taking a step back from day to day in management of the club.

At the board meeting which included Diamandis, (if I have read the statement correctly)several days before the air crash attempts were made to clarify the understanding, but the matter was not resolved.

Is the lack of resolution linked to the appearance of Diamandis as they themselves say they had previously reached an understanding. What problems came up in the interim and who raised them?

[STFC Bart]

And going back to it, Sandy Gray said last year at a fans forum that Mr D had regularly got investors to make up shortfalls, more lies

[Panda Paws]

Why don't we compile some questions and email them to the club?

It says at the bottom if we want clarification to email in.

[sonic youth]

Not that I think this is what happened but the only way I can see the club having a point is if the deal was done by Devlin long before it was announced (pre-crash) and the club had to scramble around covering it or get their arses sued for not fulfilling a contract.

The timing doesn't fit, Ince was still in the running for the Wolves job when the crash happened, unless I've got my dates mixed up. Even so, it would have been very early days in the deal if true so there's no reason why the club couldn't have pulled the plug?

I'd like to ask some questions of my own tonight, but I'm not important enough to be invited   I'm sure we'd all like to be there, but, alas, I don't think the board could handle everyone at once.

[pauld]

Para 6- An understanding was arrived at with regards the forthcoming seasons expenditure. Mike Diamandis was not present as he was taking a step back from day to day in management of the club.

At the board meeting which included Diamandis, (if I have read the statement correctly)several days before the air crash attempts were made to clarify the understanding, but the matter was not resolved.

Is the lack of resolution linked to the appearance of Diamandis as they themselves say they had previously reached an understanding. What problems came up in the interim and who raised them?

Good point - it reads like Power and the Wills family reached an amicable understanding over the summer as to spending budget etc, then when Diamandis did get involved at the board meeting held to confirm it, it fell apart. By which time, presumably, those spending plans had already been put in place (given that it would be a bit much to expect Dennis to not start assembling his squad, training staff, facilities etc until after a board meeting held three days before the start of the season). So is that the "unauthorised overspend" Mark D's being hung out to dry for? If so, sounds like he was acting within plans agreed by the club's two major investors.

And you'd have to assume that it was at that board meeting that the offer (referred to later in the statement) for Power to buy the current regime out came. Which all sounds like, erm, well, a rift - agreements fall apart, followed by "Well if you can do better, then buy us out, smartypants", followed by then ceasing all contact. Not even, apparently, a visit to the hospital to say hello Bill how are you, have some grapes. Sounds like a rift to me - if this statement is meant to squash "rumours" of a rift, I'd say (welcome tho the lengthy statement is) it's actually gone a long way towards confirming that that's exactly what happened.

[sonic youth]

I'm probably reading too much into it, but the word rift is used in quotation marks throughout the statement - that must be deliberate? In which case, perhaps whoever wrote the statement refuses to deny there is/was a problem but not neccesarily a rift.

Or I'm just being a student.

[pauld]

I'm probably reading too much into it, but the word rift is used in quotation marks throughout the statement - that must be deliberate? In which case, perhaps whoever wrote the statement refuses to deny there is/was a problem but not neccesarily a rift.

Or I'm just being a student.

Hmm, given some of the grammar and syntax issues throughout the statement, I don't know that it'd stand up to that level of textual analysis